Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-01-14
Davis Report


present student transfer poll
cies in order to permit children
to be moved from one school
to another in accordance with
the needs of the child and the
desires Of the parents" Many
Of the citizens of the District
of Columbia. including the
Federation of Citizens Associa-
tions, have urged this policy
from the beginning.
Opponents to this recon-
mendation, including many Of
the school board members.
claim that this policy, which
has worked in Louisville, KY,
and Baltimore. Md. would not
be feasible" in the District
Of Columbia and would result
in chaos"
What they really mean is
that if they permit enough
fiexibility in boundaries to af-
ford relief for some little
children caught in extremely
integrated schools, they are
taking a chance of allowing
a few Negro children to enter
the protected schools in re-
stricted sections of Washington
where they themselves live.
In other words, they prefer
to create a 95 per cent problem
for the rest of the city rather
than run a risk of allowing
a 5 per cent problem for
themselves.
Refugee From Washington.
AS both q parent and q
teacher may I be permitted to
comment on the Davis re-
port?
First, l might say that the
storm of adverse criticism is
not unexpected. The truth
usually hurts someone. I be-
lieve 1t was unfortunate that
the committee was composed
in just the way it was. on ac-
count Of the charges Of bias
to which it laid itself open.
However. ! submit that the
committee was no more biased
than its critics.
One of the most annoying
things about the integration-
lists is the way in which they
place themselves on such a
high moral pedestal. They
righteously brush off OPPOSE
ton arguments as immoral.
unethical, un-Christian, and
what-have-you. Now they are
trying to brush off and mini
mize the facts about integra-
ton that the committee in
vestigation has revealed.
In fact. this whole subject
Of indignation VS.. segregation
has been shot through with
hypocrisy. I wonder why it is
that Negroes aside) some Of
the most ardent proponents of
indignation are those who will
be personally least affected by
1t? It's an easy thing to adj
vocate integrated swimming
pools if you and your family
swim at a country club; it's
also very easy and noble to
plump for integrated schools
If you yourself have no chill
dren or don't teach in one
Of these schools.
Especially good were the
Davis committees recommen-
dations. The suggestion to
liberalize school coming so as
to allow for more parent or
pupil choice as to school at
tended is a very sensible one.
AS a matter Of fact, such
choice is more or less implied
in the Supreme Court decision
itself. For, although the de-
cision said that no colored
child was to be denied admis-
sion to any school ON account
of his race, it most assuredly
did not say-at least insofar
as / understand it--that a
white child must go to any
particular school. Possibly a
concrete example might clarity
this point. A white child and
a colored child may live, let
us say, each a block from a
certain school. What the
Supreme Court decision says is
that the colored child cannot
be kept out of that school on
the basis Of his color. But 1t
does not say that the white
child must necessarily be as
signed to that school.
The late lamented decision
Of the SUPP eme Court, as
nearly everyone now realizes,
was based neither on legal
precedent nor even the Con-
stitution itself but, rather. on
certain psychological consid-
erations. Specifically, it was
felt that colored children
would be damaged psychology
ically by not being allowed to
mingle in school with white
students. What of the re-