Minutes of Meeting of
Committee on Negro Work

Held July 8, 1930

Present: Messrs. James Marshall, Roger N. Baldwin, Louis Gannett, Arthur B. Spingarn, James Weldon Johnson, Walter White.

Mr. Johnson read the following Synopsis for Program for Expenditure of the $100,000 Fund released to the N.A.A.C.P. by the American Fund for Public Service:

"The field which we intend to cover is already familiar to the national office of the N.A.A.C.P. and the points for attack have been specifically stated in the report adopted by the Fund in releasing the $100,000 that is to be expended by the Association with the advice and approval of the Joint-Committee.

"Some special machinery will be needed for the execution of the plans in view. The part of that machinery which is necessary for a start is a full-time, competent lawyer with a stenographic assistant attached to the national office of the Association to work in conjunction with the executive secretary and under the general supervision of the Joint-Committee in preparing for the successive steps that are to be taken.

"The first offensive would best be launched against the unequal and inequitable distribution of public school funds as between the races. The obvious and sole remedy in this matter lies in action through the courts. Cases should be brought, as nearly simultaneously as possible, in three or four sections of the country. Sound cases may be found, say, in South Carolina, Virginia and Tennessee; and perhaps in Indiana or southern California or New Mexico. We should, however, be careful not to confuse unequal and inequitable distribution of public school funds with separate schools; they are identical in most of the Southern States, but in some other sections they may be distinct issues.

"If an attack is to be made on separate schools, it should be made in those sections where there is no deep foundation in law for the institution; for example, south New Jersey, parts of Pennsylvania - notably Philadelphia - southern Ohio, Indiana, and certain sections of the South West. It would be worse than futile to launch such an attack in Mississippi or Georgia or Alabama.

"Between these two there is no question that "Equal distribution of public school funds without regard to race, creed or color" is the more important issue.

"The second offensive should be launched against Disfranchisement. As we know, this line of action has little or no bearing on voting at general elections, but applies to the barring of Negroes by law or rules or regulations from voting in primaries; and to the preventing of them from registering through the

Committee on Negro Work - 2

arbitrary and illegal practices of election officials. These cases will, of course, be limited to the Southern States. It would be well if a case could be brought in each state where disfranchisement exists.

"The third offensive should consist in cases brought to compel equal accommodations on all public carriers. In states where the conditions are worse the ground for these cases is already laid; for in each case, the law states specifically that accommodations shall be separate but equal. It is through these very laws that the hardest blow can be struck the whole JIM CROW system.

"In the matter of the disbarment of Negroes from juries; the groundwork must here be laid in cases - preferably cases involving capital punishment or life imprisonment - from their inception, so that the question can form the bases for appeals to higher courts.

"It seems that the first step to be taken embraces the securing of a competent lawyer, the making of a survey of the public school situation, and the bringing of cases at the most vital, strategic and advantageous points."

This synopsis by Mr. Johnson was unanimously approved.

### EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC SCHOOL FUNDS:
There was discussion as to the advisability and possibility of federal or state action against unequal apportionment of school funds by race. It was recommended that careful attention be devoted to consideration of means of insuring unequal expenditure by race of funds for education, appropriated by the federal government.

### PRELIMINARY LETTERS TO COLORED AND WHITE LEADERS OF OPINION:
It was decided that a letter should be drafted to go to white and colored persons interested in and informed upon the race question, informing them that a substantial sum had been made available for the purpose of legal action to secure and protect the Negro's constitutional rights; that the first step contemplated is the matter of public school funds and the next and succeeding steps to be determined by the exigencies of the situation. In these letters, to be written by the N.A.A.C.P., comments and suggestions on the program are invited.

It was voted that an appropriation of $7500 be made for a lawyer, stenographer and other necessary expenses.

Mr. Spingarn reported on conversation he had had with Albert Levitt and Nathan Margold. Professor Felix Frankfurter of Harvard University and Dean Smith of the Columbia Law School are very enthusiastic with regard to Mr. Margold, with whom Mr. Spingarn is to confer further.

Mr. Marshall read a letter from William T. Andrews asking that he be considered for the task of briefing. The committee discussed Mr. Andrews' name among others. No action was taken on any of the names discussed.

Mr. Abram L. Harris was discussed as a possibility in doing

Minutes of Meeting of
Committee on Negro Work - 3

the economic and factual study.

Mr. White was asked to write Will W. Alexander regarding Professor Mercer B. Evans of Emory University.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned.

December 8, 1955

Memorandum to members of the Budget Committee,
Members of the Board present at the November
meeting; Mr. White, Dr. DuBois, and Mr. Pickens

From Mr. Wilkins

I see by the written report of the Budget Committee that it is
laboring under the impression that an additional amount of $240 annually
is being paid me for 1954 in return for the work which I am expected
to perform on The Crisis.

I am sending this memorandum in order to correct that impression,
because the $240 so-called "addition for Crisis work" has been paid me
during 1955 for my handling of the publicity work of the Association.
This small sum of $20 a month was recommended by the Committee on Ad-
ministration in March, 1955. The Budget Committee's recommendation,
therefore, means that I am being asked to assume certain duties and
responsibilities in connection with the editing of the Crisis, without
any additional remuneration.

In connection with this whole topic, it might not be amiss to
cite, as a matter of information and not as one of complaint, that I am
now performing the duties formerly performed by three salaried execu-
tives. At the beginning of 1952, I took over the office work done up
to that time by Mr. William T. Andrews, who was being paid at the rate
of $1000 a year, part-time. At the beginning of 1955, because of the
sudden resignation of Mr. Herbert J. Seligmann, I took over the pub-
licity work of the Association, work for which Mr. Seligmann was being
paid at the rate of more than $2500 a year. Neither of these two
gentlemen whose work I took over did any night or week-end speaking
engagements for the Association, but maintained strict daytime, part-
time office hours.

This work has been done cheerfully to the best of my ability,
and often at personal sacrifice of comfort and convenience, especially
in filling evening engagements as far from New York as Philadelphia,
necessitating return the same night and appearance at the office as
usual the next morning. The publicity was assumed by me because I
have had long training in newspaper work and like it, and because the
Association apparently could not afford to engage a publicity man on
its 1955 budget. The $20 monthly which was allowed for this work I
consider merely an honorarium and in no sense a return for the skill,
time and hard work involved in the various publicity duties.

Although I am deeply interested in The Crisis and its future,
I feel that I am now doing about as much work as one man can do. I
am not doing this work to my own satisfaction and I feel certain that
if I should take on any more, all of my work would suffer. Especially
do I feel this, since conferring with Dr. DuBois, who has suggested
that I assume a definite task on The Crisis with a definite responsibi-
lity: the preparation monthly of five pages of news and pictures under
the caption "Along the Color Line". I feel that both The Crisis and
I would find shortly that such an arrangement could not be continued.
Therefore, I have no desire to enter upon it and ask the budget com-
mittee and the Board members to devise another method of caring for the
needs of The Crisis.

May 10, 1937

SPINGARN MEDAL RECOMMENDATIONS

BRAWLEY, Benjamin J - Historian.

**Recommended by:**

Mr. Arlie B. Evans, Fayetteville, N.C.

**Qualifications:**

Author of several books and contributor to literary and religious journals.

DELANEY, Mrs. Sadie Peterson - Librarian

**Recommended by:**

Charles B. Austin, Los Angeles, Calif.

Mrs. Alexander J. Brickler, Wilberforce, Ohio.

Mr. Joseph H. Cole, Chicago, Illinois.

Atty. C. E. Corbett, Muskogee, Okla.

Dr. Melville J. Herskovits, Evanston, Ill.

Abner E. Lee, Atlanta, Ga.

Ambrose A. Page

Ellis B. Outlaw

Allen Desmike

Rexford W. Outlaw

Gora Mae Outlaw

Hazel Outlaw

St. Louis, Mo.

Mr. R. C. W. Perry, Atlanta, Ga.

William Jay Schieffelin, New York City

Dr. A. D. Stone, Baltimore, Md.

Miss Ella Woodyard, New York City.

Anonymous.

**Qualifications:**

Her outstanding work in the field of library science, particularly at U. S. Veterans Service Hospital No. 91, Tuskegee, Alabama; for her teaching Braille to the blind Negro soldiers; organization of Bibliotherapy units in Veterans Hospital at Tuskegee; selection in 1932 as "One of the Principal Women in America" by the Mitre Chamber of London, Eng.

GORDON, Prof. William H. - Principal, Coweta County Training School, Grantville, Ga.

**Recommended by:**

George Franklin Matthews, Grantville, Ga.

**Qualifications:**

Has added one grade to the school, raising it from the ninth to the tenth grade, and is working to carry it to the twelfth; work as President of the Atlanta M. E. Conference Laymen's Convention; he is a "silver tongue orator by profession"; is now conducting a four-teacher school and has plans under way for a large brick building, supported by the Government mostly.

#2 - Spingarn Medal Recommendations.

5/10/37

RASTIE, Hon. William H. - United States Federal Judge, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands.

**Recommended by:** Hon. Nathan R. Margold, Washington, D.C.
Walter White, New York City.

**Qualifications:**

Graduate of Amherst College magna cum laude, and elected to Phi Beta Kappa; received from Harvard University Law School degrees of LL.D. and S.J.D.; is one of the two Negroes to be elected an editor of the Harvard Law Review; his outstanding work in attacking educational inequalities practiced against Negroes in tax-supported institutions of the United States; brilliant record as Assistant Solicitor in the Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.; was moving spirit in organizing the New Negro Alliance which has done notable work in the District of Columbia especially in the matter of employment; recent confirmation as Judge in the District Court of the Virgin Islands.

HINTON, Dr. William A. - Pathologist at Boston Dispensary and Instructor in Bacteriology at Harvard Medical School.

**Recommended by:** Carl Murphy, Baltimore, Md.

**Qualifications:**

Study of the treatment of Syphilis, published by Macmillan Company.

JONES, Eugene Kinckle - Executive Secretary, National Urban League.

**Recommended by:** William Pickens, Springfield, Ill.

**Qualifications:**

His unprecedented executive record over a period of years; has done one of the most effective social jobs in the country.

LAWLESS, Dr. Theodore K. M.D. - Dermatologist, Chicago, Illinois.

**Qualifications:**

Outstanding physician and distinguished scientist; recognition by various medical societies and universities of his accomplishments, especially in the field of Dermatology.

**Recommended by:**

Dr. Numa P. G. Adams, Washington, D.C.
Atty. Raymond Pace Alexander, Philadelphia, Pa.
Mrs. Mary McLeod Bethune, Washington, D.C.
Dr. M. O. Bousfield, Chicago, Ill.
Dr. George W. Bowles, York, Pa.
G. D. Brantley, St. Louis, Mo.
Atty. Henry D. Brown, Chicago, Ill.
Atty. Clarence Darrow, Chicago, Ill.
Rev. Howell D. Davies, Chicago, Ill.
Prof. Alex. A. Day, Chicago, Ill.

New York, June 22, 1937.

To the Trustees of the American Fund for
Public Service, Inc.:

The Joint Committee of the American Fund for Public Service, Inc., and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People earnestly recommends to the Trustees of the American Fund for Public Service, Inc., a renewal of the annual grant of $10,000 from the American Fund for Public Service Inc., which was made in the fiscal years 1934-1935, and 1936-1937, for further prosecution of the fight against discrimination on the basis of race in public education and transportation; and to launch an attack against race discrimination in labor under the national and state collective bargaining acts.

Down to the present time the work of the Joint Committee has concerned itself chiefly with race discriminations in public education. Since 1935 it has opened one state university to Negro students (the University of Maryland), and caused five states to pass scholarship acts providing for graduate and professional education of Negroes beyond the state borders where the same courses are offered to white students in the state university at home but from which qualified Negro students are excluded on account of race. These five states are Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, Oklahoma and Tennessee. A scholarship bill was introduced in the Texas legislature in 1937 but failed to pass before the session closed. It will be introduced again at the next session.

The Joint Committee does not accept these scholarship acts as the

constitutional equivalent of full admission of qualified Negro students to the state universities on the same terms as any other students. But when it is considered that prior to the beginning of the Joint Committee campaign not a single Southern or border state admitted Negro students to the state university, and only two had scholarship acts: West Virginia and Missouri, it is easy to see what results have been accomplished by the Joint Committee within two years.

At the present time the question of the scholarships as a constitutional equivalent is squarely raised before the Supreme Court of Missouri in the case of Lloyd L. Gaines vs. Canada, Registrar of the University of Missouri, et al., which was argued before the Supreme Court of Missouri May 18, 1937, with decision now pending. Gaines was excluded from the law school of the University of Missouri on account of race, and one of the defenses of the University of Missouri was the fact that the State of Missouri has provided a scholarship for professional work for Negroes which pays the differential between the cost of tuition at the University of Missouri and the cost of tuition at the University where the Negro student is matriculated. The Joint Committee's staff counsel, acting in the premises as Gaines' attorneys, have challenged the constitutionality and adequacy of this scholarship act, and plan to carry the case to the United States Supreme Court for an authoritative determination if the Supreme Court of Missouri rules against Gaines. This is one of the specific justifications for a renewal of the annual grant.

On the lower levels of education, the Joint Committee has challenged the failure to accord Negro children adequate high school facilities in Maryland in the case of Williams vs. Zimmerman, et al. This case was decided against the Negro child by the Maryland Court of Appeals May 26, 1937;

but the incidental results of the case have resulted in a general
improvement of Negro education in Baltimore County where the case
was started.

A further significant case being conducted under the auspices
of the Joint Committee is a suit brought in Montgomery County,
Maryland, which seeks equal pay for Negro teachers having the same
qualifications, experience, and assignments as white teachers. This
suit, styled Gibbs vs. Broome et al., argued on demurrer June 9, 1937
and decision pending in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, has
implications of vast importance both to education and labor. It is a
traditional and firmly fixed policy of the South to impose a wage
differential on Negros regardless of qualifications and ability: a
Negro is simply not supposed to get as much money as a white man for
the same work. This is true not only in private industry but also in
official public work. If the Joint Committee can break down this
differential as regards the salaries of public school teachers, it has
made a great contribution toward removing the economic foundation for
the perpetuation of race prejudice in the South. The payroll for
education is the largest payroll of any single industry in the country.
The precedent of the Gibbs case would have direct application on all
public employment, which would incidentally have its effect on the
standards of private industry. This is the second specific justifi-
dation for the renewal of the grant, to carry the Gibbs case to the
United States Supreme Court if necessary.

An additional most significant activity of the Joint Committee
during the present fiscal year was its work in fighting for amendments
to safeguard against race discrimination in the Harrison-Black-Fletcher
bill to aid the states in public education (Senate Bill No.419, House

Bill No. 2286, 75th Congress, 1st Session). This bill provided an initial grant of $100,000,000 to the states in aid of education to be divided among the states according to total school population. The initial grant was to be increased by $50,000,000 annually until an annual maximum of $300,000,000 was reached. The States were given the exclusive control over the money and its disposition. Obviously, the Southern states would count the Negro children in to swell their school age population when it came to applying to the Federal Government for the money, and overlook the same Negro children when they came to disbursing the money received. The fight of the Joint Committee was interesting and hard; but with the aid of other interested groups it was able to obtain practically all of the amendments it proposed, changing the bill to such an extent that before hearings were held before the House Committee on Education Congressman Fletcher abandoned the old bill (H.R.2288) and introduced a substitute bill, House Bill No. 5962, incorporating the amendments. The Joint Committee's Counsel, Charles H. Houston, testified both before the Senate Committee on Education and Labor, and the House Committee on Education. It is safe to say in view of the nationwide interest in the Harrison-Black-Fletcher bill that the inequalities in public education between whites and Negroes were given nationwide publicity to a degree hitherto unprecedented.

Investigations are still going forward in North Carolina, and the Joint Committee is advised that if the Texas legislature does not pass an adequate scholarship bill at the next session, a Negro student is going to apply for admission to the University of Texas, and that the Joint Committee's aid will be solicited to bring and try the court case which will inevitably result.

-4-

Lack of personnel has prevented the Joint Committee from doing as much as it should have liked to do on discriminations in transportation. One case of bus transportation (Edna Reed, ejected from bus in Virginia for refusal to take a Jim Crow uncomfortable seat) is now active. One case of Pullman accommodations has recently been settled for Dr. Leon A. Hanson of Howard University, and two cases of Pullman accommodation involving the Joint Committee's counsel, Charles H. Houston.

During the coming year—without spending any large sum of money on the matter because it does not yet affect the mass of people—the Joint Committee wishes to challenge the complete exclusion of Negroes from airplane service in the South. Not only will the Southern ticket offices refuse to sell a Negro space, but instances have occurred where Negro passengers have been grounded enroute in spite of their having thru tickets from Coast to Coast.

A primary job for the coming year, if the grant is renewed, is a fight to safeguard the rights of Negro workers under the collective bargaining acts. Under the Railway Labor Act the Negro transportation workers are gradually being eliminated by the shop workers voting for their own union to represent all the workers in the shop. The union workers are generally in the majority. The union refuses to admit Negroes to membership on account of race. As soon as the election is over, the union proceeds to arrange working conditions so that no new non-union men can be employed or promoted—which in substances means the elimination of the Negro worker.

Now that the National Labor Relations Act has been held constitutional, it becomes of utmost importance to see that it is not used as a weapon to

exclude Negroes from jobs. In Pennsylvania a Negro representative, Homer S. Brown of Pittsburgh, was successful in getting an amendment tacked on to the Pennsylvania act prohibiting an organization from representing the employees of an industry where that association or organization excludes any worker on the ground of race. There is a constitutional question whether the national government can authorize and impose collective bargaining on an industry where the effect of the same is to drive out workers on account of color.

It is probable that this labor question will have to be fought not only in the courts but also in the legislatures. It furnishes a third specific, and in itself a sufficient, justification for the renewal of the grant.

At the present the work of the Joint Committee is geared so that the entire sum of $10,000 does not have to be made available immediately if the same is not convenient or agreeable to the Fund Trustees. With the assurance that the money will be forthcoming the Joint Committee can arrange its commitments and program so that it can operate, if necessary, on $2,500 per quarter. But the Joint Committee would emphasize the importance of appropriating the entire sum at once, as the present appropriation expires and will be exhausted by the end of the current month. Regardless how the payments are arranged, the entire sum should be appropriated in order that the year's activity may be definitely programmed.

Respectfully submitted,

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 1933
AND ENDING DECEMBER 31,
1933.

To The Board of Directors of The National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People:

The Committee appointed by the Board on November 14, 1932,
to prepare and submit for its consideration a Budget of estimated
income and authorized expenditures for the fiscal year of 1933,
submits the following report:

The Committee is firmly convinced that the very future
existence of the Organization is dependant upon a budget for 1933
adopted as a result of the most careful consideration and there-
after strictly adhered to. We have estimated the amount of the
income reasonably to be expected within the period in question,
and have reached the conclusion that any hope of a balanced budget
must be based upon a most drastic reduction in expenses of every
charagter. It is also clear that the Association can not possibly
afford as large a staff as it has carried during the past year. As
is always the case, in such circumstances, we are faced with the
difficulties which personnel considerations present. In the
recommendations following, we have tried to meet these difficulties
fairly and at the same time with an approach sufficiently objective
not to lose sight of the vital interests of the Association.

Reduction in Personnel

The income of the Association from all sources for the first
ten months of the current year conclusively demonstrates that to
continue the present staff is to incur a ruinous deficit. Even a
forced reduction, however, presents its embarrassments, and only at

the behest of downright necessity does your Committee, with very great reluctance, recommend that Mr. Robert M. Bagnall and two clerks as indicated in Schedule "A" be dropped from the staff. In the case of Mr. Seligman, the Committee recommends that the Association command so much of his time as is represented in three one-half days per week, at the salary shown in the schedule. We express the hope that the Association may be able, in addition to this, to secure Mr. Seligman's services for publicity work when special occasions arise.

In the cases of none of those recommended to be dropped is there the slightest implication of unsatisfactory service. It is simply a case of selecting those positions which under the tremendous pressure of present conditions we can first spare. We may be forced to go still farther in this direction, although, of course, we hope not.

We recommend that Mr. Bagnall be paid three months' salary, in the usual installments, after the termination of his services on December 31, 1932. In like manner we recommend that each of the clerks dropped be paid one month's salary. We further recommend that notice of the Board's action be given on or before December 15th, 1932, to each of the persons dropped.

## Further Cut in Salaries

The salaries as indicated in Schedule "A" are a cut of sixteen per cent over those actually paid in 1932. The Committee was faced with the alternative of a still more drastic reduction in personnel or else a lateral cut in the pay of the force as left. We took what seemed the more humanitarian course, viz, a lateral cut affecting every remaining salary. The recommended salaries represent the limit which the resources of the Association will permit so far as can be ascertained at the present time.

The Committee recommends that the scale as proposed be

adopted on a six months' basis, and with the understanding that it
will be subject to further revision in either direction as the
exigencies may require.

Amortization of Debts

The proposed budget reflects a most conservative estimate of
income. The Committee believes that the income actually received will
exceed estimates by a substantial sum. We recommend that such excess,
if it shall materialize, be applied first to the amortization of the
accumulated debts.

Legal Defence Fund

Instead of the monthly withdrawal of a fixed sum from this
Fund, we recommend as a future policy that withdrawals be on the
basis of expenditures and services properly apportionable to same, as
and when such expenditures are made or such services are rendered.
Withdrawals even on this basis to be made on the approval of the
Finance Committee.

The Crisis

The financial situation of _The Crisis_ was included among the
matters committed to us. This situation has been so extensively and
so recently set forth in the meetings of the Board that a restatement
of it is wholly unnecessary. It is sufficient to set down the three
fundamental conclusions reached:

1. The continuation of an effective organ of the Association is essential to its welfare.

2. The editorial and business departments of _The Crisis_ should be separated in conformity with best and soundest practices in magazine publication, always making due allowance for the peculiar and unique character of our particular problem.

-3-

3. The finances of _The Crisis_ should be carefully budgeted, and the budget strictly adhered to.

These results can probably be best accomplished through the incorporation of _The Crisis_ by the Association, in accordance with the recent suggestion of the Editor. We recommend that this be done at once.

## The Budget for 1933

We recommend the adoption of the following Budget for the fiscal year of 1933.

RULES FOR ADMINISTERING BUDGET

1. The Budget may not be exceeded nor any unauthorized expense incurred without the approval of the Board of Directors, first obtained.

2. The items of expenditures represent the limit authorized; but it is intended that savings, except in approved salaries, be effected wherever possible.

3. Transfers from one expense item in the Budget to another which do not increase the total, may be made on the approval of the Finance Committee.

4. Expenditures, although authorized, should be made with reference to the actual receipt of estimated income, as nearly as possible, to the end that a large amount of bills payable may not be accumulated too far in advance of anticipated moneys to meet same.

5. Exclusive of salaries, no checks may be drawn for expenditures under the Budget except upon presentation to the Treasurer of a requisition in the following form, drawn by the head accountant and approved by the Secretary, or, in his absence, the Assistant Secretary:

N.A.A.C.P.

Requisition for Budget Expenditure

To The Treasurer:

Please draw a check for $ payable to order
of

Chargeable against item in Budget.

Authorized Appropriation in this item for year $

Total drawn against same including this requisition $

Balance remaining in this item $

Date 1983

-8-

(Suggested Form of Treasurer's Monthly Report to the Board)

N.A.A.C.P.

Treasurer's Report for Month Ending

1933.

Receipts

| Budget Item | Total Estimated | Received to Date | Received this Month |
|---|---|---|---|
| Donations and Membership at large | | | |
| Memberships through Branches | | | |
| Contributed from Capital Moneys | | | |
| Benefits, entertainments, etc. | | | |
| Miscellaneous | | | |
| **Totals** | | | |

Disbursements

| Budget Item | Total Authorized | Spent to Date | Spent this Month |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rent | | | |
| Light | | | |
| Telephone and telegraph | | | |
| Postage | | | |
| Printing | | | |
| Travel | | | |
| Clippings | | | |
| Salaries | | | |
| Sundries and supplies | | | |
| **Totals** | | | |

-10-