FACTS IN BLACK AND WHITE Edited by FRIENDSHIP HOUSE • Chicago, III. Published by AVE MARIA PRESS Notre Dame, Ind. NIHIL OBSTAT John Tracy Ellis Censor Librorum IMPRIMATUR ® Patrick A. O’Boyle Archbishop of Washington March 20, 1954 All rights reserved. This pamphlet may not be reproduced by any means in whole or in part without prior permission. Copyright, 1955, AYE MARIA PRESS INTRODUCTION We hope that this pamphlet will scatter some of the haze that makes Negroes seem “strange” to white people, and vice versa. We dedicate it to the truth, believing that the truth alone can make us free, free with the freedom of the children of God, free to love God and to love all men as He loves them. We have tried to answer only the questions that have come to us most frequently. We believe that most Americans have inherited racial prejudices, that these prejudices thrive on ignorance and fear, and that the fruit of prejudice is in- justice. We are here challenging the injustice by nipping the fruit in the bud. We believe that we as Catholics and Americans can no longer afford to be ignorant of the chal- lenge prejudices offer to our Faith and our democracy, which they always defy at least secretly, and often with open de- rision. We dedicate this effort to Christ who brought good news. Through it we hope to increase peace among men and glory to God in Heaven. The world is in danger of sinking back into paganism through the smugness and in- difference of Christians. Only by living courageously can we restore it. Chicago Friendship House 4233 S. Indiana Ave. Chicago 15, 111. OTHER FRIENDSHIP HOUSES Friendship House of Harlem 43 W. 135th Street—Box 16 New York 37, N. Y. St. Peter Claver Center 814 7th St., S. W. Washington 4, D. C. Blessed Martin Friendship House 3310 N. Williams Ave. Portland 12, Oregon. Shreveport Friendship House 1525 Milam Street Shreveport, Louisiana Facts in Black and White Aren’t some races superior to others? No. All groups of men are basically equal. The differences that exist between human groups are merely differences. They do not imply essential human inferiority and superior- ity of one group in relation to others. All groups are human. Can you prove this? Scientific studies bear it out; democratic societies are founded on this fact; religion proclaims the doctrine of the brotherhood of all men under God’s Fatherhood. Let’s take science first. Does it say all races are equal? Benedict and Weltfish, in The Races of Mankind (Public Affairs Committee, 1946) have answered that well: “The races of mankind are what the Bible says they are—brothers. In their bodies is the record of their brotherhood.” Another social scientist, Franz Boas, states: “If we were to select the most intelligent, imaginative, energetic, and emotionally stable third of mankind, all races would be represented.” How does science account for the differences between the races? It tells us that the differences among men, such as skin color, are accidents of geographic, climatic, nutritional, and other conditions which over a long space of time influenced the development of different human types. 5 What is the physical factor causing the difference in skin color? Skin color is caused by two chemical substances—melanin, a brown pigment, and carotene, a yellow pigment—which are found in human types in varying degrees. In the Cauca- soid (or white) man, the genes produce a relatively small amount of melanin. In the Mongoloid, the melanin is so mix- ed with the carotene as to cause the yellowish toned skin of the Asiatic, the Eskimo, and the American Indian. In the Negro, all of the skin color genes are at work, producing a darker colored skin than in the others. Then the Negro’s dark skin is not the result of Ham’s Curse? “Ham’s curse” as an explanation of the Negro’s dark skin is a myth that flourished during the time of slavery in the United States. The myth seems to be traceable to a biblical reference used to justify the exploitation of Africans and their American descendants. Genesis IX, 25, tells of “Ham’s curse.” It was placed on Canaan, one of the four sons of Ham, by Noe: “Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shalt he be unto his brethren.” Even if we assume that the curse justifies the enslave- ment of Canaan’s descendants, which is highly improbable, we must determine who these descendants are. The Canaan- ites and the Hamitic people were Caucasians. The last place to look for their descendants would be among Negroes. Is “racial blood” really a superstition? Yes. Medical science is aware of four types of blood, designated A, B, AB, and O. Each of these types is found in all races. And what of “racial odor”? \ The number of sweat glands seems to be determined by 6 climate more than anything else. Caucasians (whites) in the United States have fewer sweat glands than Caucasians in India, and Negroes in the United States have fewer than Negroes in Africa. But in the United States itself, white women and Negroes both have more sweat glands than white men. Odor, of course, is in the perspiration produced by the glands and not in the glands themselves. This odor is deter- mined by eating and living habits and not by race. In an experiment conducted by Dr. E. A. Hooton of Har- vard University, in which samples of perspiration were sub- mitted to a blindfold test, the judges were unable to dis- tinguish racial differences. But doesn’t the Negro’s African background make him different? Most American Negroes are further removed from their “African background” than their fellow citizens are from their English, Irish, German, Polish, Norwegian, or what- have-you “background.” The dominant influence on Negroes in America is the culture of the particular social and eco- nomic strata to which each Negro belongs—an American culture, not African. About democracy—are its protestations about unity and equal- ity to be taken seriously? If Americans took the Bill of Rights seriously, would racial injustice and racial prejudice be so wide- spread in America? The Bill of Rights does not of itself guarantee that everyone in the United States will under all circumstances recognize the dignity and rights of his fellow citizens. It does not create a democratic spirit in all American citizens —nor eliminate hatred from men’s hearts or prejudice from their minds. We recognize that there are racial injustices committed in 7 the United States, but most decent Americans don’t try to justify them. We recognize racial hatred and prejudice — even where we don’t try to justify it. It might be good to consider the history of racial prejudices in the United States. In order to understand this, we must look into the his- tory of prejudice. Racial antagonism and prejudice have roots in the legal and moral attitudes that were developed in the United States with the introduction of Negro slaves. Slave owners—desiring to justify and promote slavery — declared Negroes to be chattel without any human rights. This meant that Negroes had no rights which white Ameri- cans were bound to respect. It was a way of getting around the Bill of Rights. The Emancipation Proclamation restored the notion of the sacredness of political and economic rights for Negroes in the United States. It did not restore the immediate en- joyment of human rights for the Negroes of the United States. The same ideas and concepts that many people held during slavery—that Negroes were something less than hu- man (certainly, less than white human beings)—continued to hold sway after slavery. Is that why the “Negro problem” is said to be really a white problem? Yes, the white man sowed the seeds of the problem in Colonial days by his exploitation of the Negro as a slave, and he helped the problem to grow by his refusal to recog- nize the Negro’s human rights. But that was a century ago. What does that have to do with today? The same basic notion that the Negro is something less than human influences our attitudes today. Segregation and discrimination logically follow from such a racist attitude. 8 What do you mean — “racist”? Racism is the false principle that one race is inherently superior to other races. The most notorious recent example of racism was Nazi Germany. Pope Pius XI called racism the “supreme evil of the day,” and Pope Pius XII declared (in Surwni Pontificatus ) that “the first of the pernicious errors widespread today is the forgetfulness of the law of human solidarity.” A “white supremacy” racist considers himself superior to Negroes. In promoting segregation and other artificial barriers between the races of mankind, he feels he is pro- tecting the so-called superior race against cultural and bio- logical “pollution” by the so-called inferior ones. The racist appeals to the false pride of members of the “Hey, Herman, what’a we do in a case like this?” 9 “superior” race. This, of course, works for disintegration of human solidarity—in direct opposition to that unity which is one object of Christianity. And religious tradition—-what does it say about the unity of mankind? Neither Jew nor Christian can be prejudiced without liv- ing a lie. The Old Testament teaches the unity and equality of all men, created by God, descended from common par- ents. The New Testament teaches the same unity of all men, redeemed alike by Christ so as to be joined with Him in His Mystical Body, destined alike to the vision in which we shall see God as He is. For the Catholic, especially, racial prejudice is a practi- cal denial of the full truth of his faith. . f ^ ~~~~ ‘ , , But is not segregation practiced in some Catholic Churches? Unfortunately, yes. Some Churches still insist that Ne- groes sit in the rear or in a special corner. Some still do not permit Negroes to join the parish societies. The ushers in a few Churches still refuse to admit Negroes at all. In some areas, Holy Communion is still distributed to Negroes only after distribution to all white communicants is com- pleted. These regrettable instances do not conform to the spirit or the letter of Church law, but to local customs of a very un-Catholic nature. Father Francis J. Connell, C.SS.R., puts it this way (American Ecclesiastical Review, June, 1946): “The general law of the Church, though providing for the cases in which different parishes can be established in the same locality on the basis of diversity of language or nationality, says nothing about different parishes for Catho- lics of the same nationality, established merely on the basis of diversity of color. 10 “The origin of ‘colored parishes’ was due to a deplor- able spirit of racial discrimination on the part of some Americans; and it is earnestly to be hoped that Catholic clergy will strive to bring about, as soon as possible, a con- dition in which white and colored Catholics will worship together in the same church.” Why are there so few Negro Catholics? There are approximately 410,000 Catholics among the 14,000,000 Negroes in the United States. It is not enough, not all that there might be. But with circumstances con- sidered it does not appear so small. It must be remembered that ten million or more Negroes live in the South, where less than five per cent of the en- tire population is Catholic. Hence it would be expected that Negroes rarely would come in contact with a Catholic priest, a Sister, a church, a school. The Catholic Church in the United States has been slow to take root in rural areas not only among the Negroes, but also among the whites. While the foregoing are probably the most important considerations, it must nonetheless be insisted that where Negroes have been brought into contact with Catholics they have too frequently suffered from discrimination and pre- judice that does little to make the Mystical Body of Christ attractive to them. Even as Catholics they have been treated as strangers in their Father’s House, have rarely enjoyed peace, or have rarely been upheld by active charity or Christ’s thirst for justice. Fides, news agency of the Sacred Congregation for Pro- pagation of the Faith in Rome, stated in a report in 1950, The Catholic Church and Negroes in the United States: “Any thought of a wide, general conversion of the Ne- groes to the Catholic Church is an illusion until and unless the attitude of American Catholics—clergy and laity—is completely purified of approval of the segregation policy or 11 of the many deprivations of educational opportunity, of fair employment, and of decent housing that arise as a result of it.” Why are there so few Negro priests? There are a number of reasons—in addition to the fact that the number of Negro Catholics is proportionately small. Up until the 1940’s it was almost impossible for a Negro applicant to obtain admission to any seminary, and since generally only ten per cent of those entering preparatory seminary reach ordination, the number of priests was very small. Furthermore, a larger proportion of potential Negro candidates for the priesthood are unable to afford the train- ing, since Negroes as a group are in a lower economic level, due to discrimination. For the same reasons, many Negroes are unable to at- tend Catholic schools, and Catholic schools produce the great- est number of vocations. However, the present rate of increase in the number of Negro priests is very encouraging. In May, 1950, there were 30 Negro priests in the United States, most of whom had been ordained in the late 40’s. Since then the number has increased each year. Why hasn’t the Pope written an encyclical about the rights of the Negro? Because it would be unnecessary. The human rights enunciated in the Papal social teachings belong to Negroes and to whites, equally human beings, equally children of God. Take the rights of workers discussed in the famous “labor” encyclicals—Rerum Novarum and Quadragesimo An- no . Negro workers possess, as do all workers, the human rights to a stable family, to a saving wage, to decent and safe working conditions, to organize and join a labor union, to bargain collectively with their employer. And employers 12 are bound by the same obligations to their Negro workers as to all their other workers. This is the moral law—the law of God. In the law of God it is not less evil to defraud workers of their just wages when those workers happen to be Negroes, men or women. Why are there so many store-front churches in Negro neighborhoods? One important reason is the social contact that Negroes have enjoyed there as, until recent times, practically no- where else. This has been especially true where the con- gregation is small, so that everyone is known, his presence noticed, his absence missed. Another reason is the nature of the Baptist and Spiritual- ist denominations which, observation reveals, are most pre- valent among the storefronts. In both groups it is possible to start new churches where disagreement or dissatisfac- tion with abuses arises in the congregation. Churches, there- fore, multiply rapidly. I have heard that some Catholic hospitals are among those which discriminate against Negroes. How do you account for that? There is no justification on the basis of Christian teach- ing for such discrimination. On the contrary, Christian tra- dition would lead to caring for all, especially the humblest, the despised, the needy. Certainly the Negro would be in- cluded in large numbers among these. Discrimination in those Catholic hospitals where it exists does not always take the form of a direct refusal to accept Negro patients. In some hospitals, Negroes are seg- regated in all-Negro wards or private rooms. This practice, while not as reprehensible as refusing admission, certainly is a callous disregard of the human feelings and sense of dignity of people with colored skins, and as such is also an 13 insult to Christ, Who said, “What you do to the least of these, you do to Me.” While we are on the subject of hospitals— wouldn’t more separate but equal hospitals solve the problem? What reason can there be for separate but equal facil- ities? There is a duplication of expense, which frequently means two sub-standard hospitals instead of one better- than-average. Such divisions also mean that there cannot be the free interchange of experience and observation so vital to the practice of medicine. Furthermore, there has never been “separate but equal” anything, in practice. That has been presumably the prac- tice for seventy years in America, but according to the U. S. Public Health Service, though Negroes constitute about ten per cent of the population, only one per cent of the hospital beds are open to them. Isn’t the higher tuberculosis rate among Negroes proof of an inherent weakness? No. A high rate of tuberculosis is the result of environ- mental conditions and not of race. England, for example, has a higher rate than the United States. Tuberculosis is generally more prevalent among urban than among rural dwellers, and newcomers from the rural areas are most sus- ceptible to the disease. Large numbers of Negroes have re- cently moved from rural to urban areas, which is one of the chief reasons that the tuberculosis rate among them is high. Further reasons—also reasons why the death rate among Negroes is higher than among whites—are bad housing, which fosters disease, and low wages, which prohibit its early diagnosis and prolonged treatment. Moreover, the small number of hospital beds available to Negroes means inevitably a higher sickness and death rate. 14 You mention low wages. Is there discrimination in employment? If you are interested in an answer to this question, it might be well to ask yourself how many Negroes you have seen working in your own office, store, or factory in posi- tions comparable to your own. Or you might peruse the “help wanted” columns of our daily papers and discover how many of them turn out to be “white help wanted.” Are Negroes reliable workers? Once again it must be emphasized that Negroes are no different from any other group of men on earth. Some are reliable, some are not. It would seem that Negroes as a whole are more re- liable in their various jobs simply because the job field is so limited for people of color. The average Negro is not as free to jump from job to job as are other people. On the other hand, when one hears that Negro domestic help is unreliable one wonders if the white employer some- times might not be to blame, for in this particular field Negroes are more often than not greatly imposed upon. If a Negro asserts his independence of this kind of treatment, it is entirely unfair to say that he is for this reason essen- tially unreliable. Where Negroes are found to be unreliable, the reason could be found in social and economic conditions—not in racial myths. Certainly we have to consider the lack of incentive that Negroes must face. Regardless of their efforts or talents, they are generally “last to be hired and first to be fired.” Furthermore, opportunities for jobs, other than unskilled, are severely limited. Here are some random ex- amples from the 1951 report of the Illinois Interracial Commission: 98 out of every 1,000 white workers, 4 out of every 15 1,000 “non-white” workers are in managerial or professional positions. 207 of every 1,000 white workers, 91 of every 1,000 non-white workers are in clerical and sales work. 311 of every 1,000 white workers, 83 of every 1,000 non-white workers are skilled laborers. 320 of every 1,000 white workers, 760 of every 1,000 non- white workers are semi-skilled or unskilled laborers. That Negroes with normal backgrounds are as reliable as members of other racial groups has been confirmed by the employers in those few factories, stores, and offices that hire Negroes on the same basis as whites. With the improvement of the social environment and the upgrading of Negroes on the basis of their individual qualifications, Negroes are manifesting an equal degree of reliability. But isn’t it generally accepted that Negroes are not as self-reliant as other people? For a long time Negroes have been caricatured as the slap-happy, indolent, dice-shooting end-men in a sort of continuous minstrel show. All such caricatures, whether of Negroes or of other groups of people, should be assumed to be distorted pictures of 90% of the group. The ready ac- ceptance of such caricatures gives evidence of sloppy and lazy thinking. A little effort to visit such places as Friend- ship House would dispel a good deal of it. A little reading would convince anyone of the unsurpassed strides of Ne- goes during the past seventy-five years and acquaint any open-minded person with the many colored people who have made outstanding contributions to scientific, professional, and civic life, and all this despite overwhelming odds. Dr. Edwin Embree, in Thirteen Against the Odds , shows how 13 Negroes overcame the barriers to self-improvement by members of their race which had been erected by a white 16 society. This book shows the successful Negro has been forced to be more self-reliant than successful non-Negroes. Not merely does a Negro who rises to the top over- come the same handicaps met by some whites—poverty, un- kind nature, and family problems—but also those of dis- crimination against a dark skin. The difficulty of obtain- ing loans and credit and of obtaining mortgages for the purpose of buying a home is another special handicap. You mention minstrel shows— why are some people against them? The caricature of the Negro as a slap-happy, indolent, dice-shooting buffoon, which is presented not only in min- strel shows, but in the entertainment field generally, would not be any more objectionable than similar caricatures of other races, if this caricature were balanced by other views of the Negro, if it were part of a context in which the usual and over-all picture was more true-to-life. As it is, the minstrel show caricature stands for the most part alone and out of context. Standing thus, it cannot fail to belittle the Negro and to help perpetuate the stereotypes cherished in the minds of many white men. Getting back to employment— what can be done to lessen discrimination in employment? Fair Employment Practices Commissions are a great help in the nine states where they exist. There is a need for them in those states where they do not exist. Their aim is not to force an employer to hire all Negroes who apply, regardless of their qualification, but to make it pos- sible, and compulsory, to hire qualified workers, regardless of their color. FEPC is an assurance to minority groups that employment opportunities will be equal, that living conditions will be improved, and, above all, that they can feel that they are truly members of the American commu- 17 “No rooms? Then we’ll make room!” nity, enjoying basic human rights not only in word but also in fact. How can you legislate tolerance? You can’t, nor does an FEPC law attempt to. Of itself, legislation does not end prejudice—but it can remove the effects of prejudice. For example, suppose your state had an FEPC law, re- quiring employers to hire on a basis of merit. A certain employer might be prejudiced against Irishmen, let us say. With FEPC, he would retain his prejudice, but Irishmen would no longer have to suffer from it. Also, FEPC legislation is a form of education: by bring- ing people together at work there is an opportunity to meet one another as individuals and on a level of equality. FEPC is unfair to employers. It forces them to hire anybody a do-gooder tel is them to. Under FEPC an employer is never required to hire an unqualified person. The only restriction on the employer is that he cannot refuse to hire a qualified person because of the applicant’s race, creed, or color. Is this just? Consider the two rights involved: the worker’s right to work, the employer’s right to hire whom he pleases. Certainly the worker’s right to work is the more fundamental and basic right, and takes priority over the employer’s right in this matter. As Bishop Francis J. Haas has said, speaking of FEPC (in Catholics, Race, and Law), “We should be ashamed at how little the law requires of us.” Aren’t some labor unions guilty of discrimination? Although some unions do discriminate, most of them have done an outstanding job of winning for their Negro 19 members the right to work along with their white mem- bers in jobs commensurate with their skill rather than in menial jobs only. Unions increasingly are realizing that by discrimination they defy the principle that justifies their own existence. Their right to exist and to function springs from the na- ture of men. They exist to promote the common good and to preserve the dignity and rights of men. But if Negroes work alongside whites and get the same pay, won’t they want social equality, too? If by social equality you mean, will Negroes want to be addressed civilly and treated courteously and will they want access on the same basis as all other citizens to hotels, restaurants, theatres, schools, conveyances, etc.—of course, they will want social equality. And they are entitled to it first by the moral law which demands the external recognition of the human dignity of every man and woman, and secondly by the spirit of the American Constitution. But if you mean that Negroes when they are not your personal friends will expect to be admitted to your home and private gatherings—of course they do not want this kind of social equality. Do you mean to say that I must invite my Negro maid to my bridge party? No more than you must invite your white maid to your bridge party. How would you like to live next door to a Negro family? I would or would not depending upon the willingness and ability of the Negro to maintain community standards, and not upon the color of his skin. The day must come for all Americans when they will be able to move or live wherever 20 income, size of family, business or professional connections suggest. The Negro today asks for the same right which every other American group has ultimately been able to win for itself. Moreover, as a matter of record, in many small cities and towns in the country and in some big ones too, white and Negro families have been living next door to one an- other for a long time in peace and harmony. Why are Negroes so dirty and destructive of property? It is hopelessly nearsighted to explain the conditions of housing in Negro-occupied areas on the grounds that Negroes are dirty and destructive. The causes of slum conditions are the age of the struc- tures themselves, the lack of proper maintenance by owners (usually absentee landlords), the overcrowding. These con- ditions will produce slums whether the occupants are white or Negro. Given an opportunity to own or rent a good dwelling within his economic ability, the Negro over and over again has demonstrated that he will maintain the property as well as any group on the same level. Indeed, it is invariably true that in a Negro community, a dwelling that stands out for its good repair, clean paint, and fenced lawn, can be as- sumed to be owned by a Negro resident rather than the more usual absentee landlord. Finally, it might be pointed out that when you notice garbage not collected, streets needing cleaning and repairs, don’t blame Negroes, but the city officials who are supposed to provide such services to all citizens indiscriminately. And then remember that Negroes, too, are paying taxes. Property values go down when Negroes move in. Don’t property owners have the right to protect their property? Even if property values did go down —and it is not 21 * true that they do—property values are not the only nor are they the most important values in life. The right to protect property values springs from each individual's right to own property. It is obviously unjust to protect property values by denying others their right to own property. Attempting to protect property values by segregating a large segment of the population actually is self-destructive, as it is also un-Christian and undemocratic. A more constructive way to look at the influx of new people coming into a neighborhood is to see it as an op- portunity to create a new and better neighborhood. Interest in community standards aroused by new people coming in can be directed toward a positive program. That's real “pro- tection of property values." Why do you say it is not true that property values decline when Negroes move in? Hysterical selling of property at the first influx of Ne- groes into a neighborhood causes an apparent decline in property values. Careful studies (such as those below by Roger Mastrude, Belden Morgan, and Luigi Laurenti) show that when the panic selling is over, property values as a rule actually go wp. “When Negroes enter a heretofore all-white neigh- borhood,” Mr. Morgan writes (The Review of the Society of Residential Appraisers , March, 1952 — “Values in Transition Areas: Some New Concepts"), “the whites sometimes become panic-stricken and try to sell out in a hurry. After the first hysterical selling phase passes, prices become stabilized then gradually increase—people are learning this." The author also points out that because Negroes are so badly in need of housing, they are willing to pay a premium for adequate homes. This creates and maintains a sellers market. He says: 22 “Actually whether prices rise or fall depends upon the extent of the demand and the ability of the mar- ket to bid upon prices, and has nothing whatsoever to do with racial characteristics. Generally speaking the Negro home owner pays a higher price than his white prototype because his color restricts his field of opera- tion.” Another study, this one of selected single family resi- dential areas in San Francisco (The Appraisal Journal, July, 1952 — “Effect of Non-White Purchase on Market Prices of Residence” by Luigi Laurenti), shows: “The results of a survey do not show that any deterioration in market prices occurred following changes in the racial pattern. Instead, transactions took place at prices closely corresponding to those in com- parable all-white areas, although a small fraction of the sales differed by plus or minus amounts which may have reflected unusual circumstances: (1) a premium price extracted from a non-white buyer anxious to get into that particular locality, and (2) a sacrifice price agreed to by a seller desirous of dumping prop- erty in an area believed by him to be on the verge of rapid deterioration. According to some experienced ob- servers, wide-spread non-white neighborhoods are pro- ceeding apace in such cities as Detroit and Chicago with no discernible repercussions.” Mr. Mastrude came to these conclusions about the effect of Negro occupancy on real estate values: “Colored occupancy increases sales value of prop- erty (because Negroes compete harder for decent housing). Actual study of white owners’ experience has proved that—to the tune of $2,000 per house. “Business-wise, the Negro is a good home-buyer. “The real estate experts say Negroes take good care of property that is at all worth caring for. 23 “Negroes are good credit risks, if business is han- dled with ordinary business common sense." Facts such as these completely refute the notion that Negro occupancy itself depresses property values. However, there are racketeers who can and do take advantage of fear of loss, buying low when the panic, often induced by themselves, is on, and selling a few months later at a hand- some profit. Because a desperate housing shortage among Negroes assures real estate operators of a ready market, they can either sell at a handsome profit or can cut up apartments and houses into many rental units and rent at exorbitant profits. James Downs, Housing Coordinator for Chicago, cites this instance (America , Jan. 31, 1953): “A real estate company recently valued two build- ings on the west side of Chicago. They were identical three-apartment buildings. One of them was in a white area. It contained three six-room apartments which were rented, under rent control, at $35 a month—or at a total for the building of $105 a month. Four blocks away from that particular building was an iden- tical building recently occupied for the first time by Negroes. The landlord who bought this latter building put a door on each of the room openings and installed a so-called Hollywood bed in each of the suites thus made so that they could be termed 'furnished apart- ments.' The income from this converted property was a thousand dollars a month instead of the $105 a month received from an identical building only a few blocks away." Such landlords reap profits from slums. At the same time the city as a whole pours money “down the drain" to provide the added police and fire protection, medical care, relief payments that these over-used, over-crowded, over- aged areas require. 24 But aren’t Negroes happier by themselves? Many Negroes would prefer to live with other Negroes, if moving into a white neighborhood means violence. No one prefers an atmosphere of violence or unrest. However, such a situation is an indictment of white people, and does not prove that Negroes are happier by themselves. Negroes want what every human being wants—a decent home at a decent price in a decent neighborhood. The Negro rarely can find a decent home at a decent price in the Negro ghetto,* and the overcrowding that exists in the ghetto makes a decent home for his children almost impossible to attain. Do Negroes resent segregation? Of course. Why? For the same reason that any human being resents segregation when segregation is imposed for reasons that imply that he is less human than other people, that he is a menace to the community. Racial segregation, it should be remembered, has nothing except the name in common with the segregation of criminals, the segregation of diseased patients, or the segregation of the mentally ill. When we in our society tell a Negro where he may or may not live, where he may eat, where he may pray, where he may go to school, where he may get a job, we do so to maintain social and economic prestige in a society where no white person is supposed to admit uncompromisingly the total humanness, the deep sensitiveness, the equal dignity of people with colored skins. * “Ghetto” is more familiarly used to describe historic Jew- ish areas in Medieval European cities. However, ghetto, by defini- tion, is “a quarter of a city in which members of a racial group are segregated.” That certainly describes the situation of Negroes in most American cities, and of Jews, Mexicans, Orientals, and other minorities in many of them. 25 You must be thinking about the South. Segregation is not just a southern or regional accident; it is a pattern of American society. This is shown by the fact that even in those parts of the country where no Ne- groes live, the segregation of Negroes is expected. We ex- pect Negroes to have menial occupations, to work for less pay. We expect Negroes to live in one neighborhood. We expect Negroes to receive inferior education and medical care. Nowhere in America can a Negro be sure he will suf- fer no discrimination because nowhere in America are people free of this segregation mentality. wfmm THE To choose ov* 0u//y PATROM ty 26 We have become so accustomed to this pattern that we assume it is just and proper. We enforce and approve (or do not oppose) racial segregation because it is the existing pattern. And it continues to be the existing pattern because we do not oppose it. Truly, a vicious circle. Deliberately imposed, this ban must be deliberately raised. 27 What’s wrong with racial segregation? Segregation by race is intrinsically evil. It creates and crystallizes artificial divisions between men. The effects of this artificial division are three-fold: 1. On those who are segregated (the minority group). There are economic injustices which can be measured — higher rents, lower salaries, over-crowding. But there are also psychological and spiritual wounds which cannot be measured but which in the long run take a much more costly toll. 2. On those who enforce segregation (the majority group). These effects are less obvious, but, in a way, more pernicious. Their racist ideals “inflate them with a better- than-thou attitude toward others.” (Haas, Catholics, Race, and Law) Such pride is a sin. “Clearly,” says Father George Dunne, S.J. (Commonweal , Sept. 21, 1945), “racial segregation is a sin against charity, and in the Christian dispensation, is certainly immoral and not to be tolerated. We can go to hell for sins against char- ity as easily as for sins against justice, perhaps more easily.” 3. On society as a whole. Again, the economic cost of segregation is needlessly high. Dual school systems, ghettos, with the resultant high cost in disease, crime, fire, etc.— obviously, these cost heavily. (According to Joseph J. Mor- row, of Pitney Bowes, Inc., America in 1950 lost six bil- lion dollars in potential markets due to prejudice.) But, again, the other costs are heavier yet—the psychological tensions that exist in a segregated society, and the spiritual wounds that are inflicted on Christ’s Mystical Body, caus- ing all of its members to suffer. How has residential segregation been enforced? Largely by restrictive covenants . . . agreement among property owners in a given neighborhood to sell or rent 28 their property only to such applicants as are approved by the other owners; or not to sell or rent to Negroes, Jews, or other minorities. Restricitve covenants were declared legally unenforceable by the Supreme Court in 1949. This meant that property owners who had entered into such an agreement could no longer enforce the agreement through the Courts. If restrictive covenants are no longer enforceable, why bring them up? Though no longer enforceable legally, restrictive coven- ants still operate in some communities through social pres- sure. Many “improvement associations” have as their aim not “improvement,” but a maintenance of the “lily white” character of their neighborhood. This is shown by the fact that such associations will prefer as a neighbor a person of low moral, cultural, or intellectual standards, as long as he is white, to a Negro who is morally, culturally, and in- tellectually superior. Furthermore, most neighborhood patterns were set dur- ing the many years when restrictive covenants were in effect. The mentality that created them still is with us. One reason you will find many whites vehemently main- taining that integrated housing (neighborhoods where whites and Negroes are neighbors) won’t work is that these people have never known anything but a segregated housing pat- tern. Are restrictive covenants evil? Restrictive covenants are evil because they help to per- petuate the heresy of racial superiority, intensify overcrowd- ed, unhealthy, and immoral living conditions, generate mis- understanding, hatred, and violence between racial groups, add to social tension, and conspire to keep Negroes from 29 enjoying the opportunity of getting good housing when they meet every requirement of the community except the arbi- trary one of skin color. There are some nice areas in Negro neighborhoods. Why don’t Negroes stay there? While one out of every ten Americans is a Negro, only two out of every thousand house vacancies are avail- able to Negroes. This would indicate that a Negro would have fifty times the difficulty finding a vacancy as a white person would. The “nice” areas in Negro neighborhoods are filled to capacity already, and will stay “nice” only so long as they are not overcrowded. If a Negro could get decent housing at a fair price— even if it were in a segregated area— wouldn’t he then be satisfied? It is high time we faced squarely the fact that segrega- tion in any area of life—housing, education, employment— has always resulted in discrimination. To talk about decent housing at a fair price in a segregated area is unrealistic. Let the facts speak: 1. Negroes pay a premium for housing. If they rent, they pay higher rents, and since the market is so crowded, building owners rarely do anything to keep up the property. “Negro residents of the Chicago ‘Black Belt’ pay as much per cubic foot per room as that paid by wealthy residents for equivalent space on Lake Shore Drive.” (Horace R. Cayton, “Negro Housing in Chi- cago,” Social Action , Apr. 15, 1940) If they buy, they pay higher prices—as much as $2,000 a house, one survey shows (If Your Next Neighbors are Negroes, American Missionary Assn., Fisk Univ.). Further- more, Negroes frequently cannot obtain mortgages (even when they meet all the financial requirements set for white 30 buyers), or they may have to pay higher carrying charges. In most places the only buildings which Negroes are per- mitted to buy are buildings that are old and need repairs. “The non-white,” the Illinois Interracial Commission re- ported in June, 1953, “who is fortunate enough to locate a home to buy is likely to encounter another difficulty — discrimination in obtaining financing. Many agencies refuse to lend to non-whites in mixed neighborhoods on the theory that such areas are unstable. They contend that the sound- est risk is either an all-white or all-black neighborhood. Such policies also help to perpetuate segregation. Even gov- ernment-insured loans through the Federal Housing Adminis- tration were subject to this policy until February, 1950.” 2. Negroes’ incomes are lower. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (U. S. Dept, of Labor, Negroes in the United States: Their Employment & Economic Status, Bulletin No. 1119, Dec. 1952) the aver- age income of Negro families in 1950 was $1,869, or about 54% of the average income of $3,445 among white fam- ilies. While Negroes represent 10% of U. S. population, their wealth is only 3%. Add these facts, and you see that Negroes must spend a greater proportion of a smaller income for housing. In order to make ends meet, this usually means the Negro may have to (1) rent out rooms—even if it means over- crowding the house or apartment (also thereby wearing the property out faster); (2) forego repairs and improve- ments on the property (so it may run down faster) ; or (3) cut down on other expenditures (and in some cases this may mean on necessities). When there is unfavorable reaction toward Negroes moving into my neighborhood, what should I do? Assume a friendly attitude and not one of distrust, recognizing that the Negro is an American citizen with 31 the right equal to that of any other American to live in any neighborhood. Encourage an attitude of friendliness among your neighbors toward Negroes. Help them to see that we are all brothers through Christ and through mem- bership in the human race. Here is the advice of Monsignor Cornelius Drew, pastor of St. Augustine's, a parish in Harlem: “1. If a Negro family moves into your block, sit tight, and get to know the newcomers before you make up your mind to move. You are likely to find that they are every bit as good as your white neighbors. “ 2 . Don't worry because a Negro child sits beside your son or daughter in school. They will get along splendidly, provided you don't interfere. And it will profit them both. “3. Don't form your judgments of Negroes by what you read in the newspapers. There are great masses of decent, honorable Negroes who are being made to suffer for the sins of few. Negro crime is made higher because of wide- spread anti-Negro intolerance and discriminations. Chris- tian charity demands that the Negro be helped, not con- demned. “ 4 . Rid your mind of the bugaboo of interracial marriage. Remember, the Negro feels the same about this as the white man; he much prefers to marry one of his own race. Out of our 30,000 Negroes here, we have had only two inter- racial marriages in three years." I am a restaurant owner, should I admit Negro patrons? If you want to live Christianity and democracy fully, you should. If you want to eliminate wholly the color line that works real injustice to the Negroes in getting jobs, school- ing, homes, hospitalization, you should. You should if you want to see people respected everywhere for what they are: children of God, destined to live in Heaven together. You should if you live in California, Colorado, Connecti- 32 cut, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Washington, or Wiscon- sin, and if you want to obey the civil rights statute of your state. And what have you to lose anyway? Isn’t it mostly a loss of prestige? Do you think that such a loss of prestige or the jibes of your friends will be sufficient before God for the insult perpetrated by refusing admission to Negroes who will meet all standards asked of anyone except that God has given color to their skin? And if yours should be the rare case in which there is considerable financial loss to you, the owner, because of the prejudices of your white customers, surely it will not excuse you from doing some- thing in a less costly way to uproot racial prejudice and to build a better society. Rev. John P. Markoe, S.J., Creighton University of Oma- ha, has examined this question fully in a pamphlet, A Moral Appraisal of an Individual Act of Racial Discrimina- tion. He explains: “An act is immoral if one (or more) of the constituent elements of the act is immoral, namely: (1) the end of agent (purpose); (2) the end of object (means); (3) the circumstances. In this typical case of racial discrimination in a restaurant, elements 2 and 3 are immoral. Hence the act is immoral on these two points, or doubly immoral.” Would you go to a school if Negroes were admitted? Why not? Not to go would give evidence of snobbishness that awkwardly becomes a Christian or an American. Not to do so would be denying yourself an opportunity to broad- en your friendships, in fact your whole knowledge and under- standing of people. And not to go would certainly be a de- nial of the truth we profess to believe—that Christ and all the members of His Church form one Mystical Body. 33 Why are schools that discriminate gravely wrong? Schools that close doors to Negroes are closing the hearts and minds of young people to a large body of fellow hu- man beings as sacred to God as they are. They are planting seeds of dissension that can blossom later into sin and racial strife, when they might be working toward cooperation and peace. When Catholic schools act in such a way it becomes dif- ficult for men to understand that we really believe that as Catholics we form the Mystical Body of Christ, and that what we do to one another we do to Christ. Furthermore, Catholic schools that keep Negroes out often make it difficult for Negro Catholic parents to follow the injunction that Catholics are bound under serious sin to send their children to a Catholic school. To propose that such an injunction affects only white parents is a little ridiculous. Am I not justified as a Catholic in not sending my children to the local Catholic school when it accepts Negroes? The only answer is embodied in the statement which the Catholic school board of Indianapolis made under similar circumstances : “. . . Before the judgment seat of God . . . parents can- not at that time tell Him that their children were denied a full opportunity to save their souls because they had an aversion to seeing their off-spring sit in the same classroom with a person whose skin was of a different color than their own. It may well be that God will be forced to tell such parents that in that case perhaps it will be best for them not to enter Heaven because in the Eternal Kingdom of God they will be forced to abide for all eternity with men and women whose skins are black, brown, yellow, and red: men and women whom God created after His own image and likeness, men and women for whom our Divine Savior paid a terrible price 34 on Good Friday afternoon because He loved them as much as He loves us.” If Negroes are accepted in our school, they will be unhappy because they won’t have normal school companionship and social life. When the average Negro has a difficult time getting along in a school, the fault is not that the Negro was ac- cepted, but that there is a weakness in the school group, calling for a firm stand on the part of authorities and co- operation from maturer students. The Negro does not want to be pampered or patemalized. He wants to be given the same opportunity to prove him- self that every other student in the school is given. It is hard to tell what the situation will be until it is tried. However, experience indicates that Negro students do get along well in many schools. Shouldn’t Negroes be satisfied with good schools of their own? / In a dual school system, Negroes have not had good schools. Furthermore, separate schools cloud our eyes to the unity of all men. On May 17, 1954 the U. S. Supreme Court outlawed segregation in public schools in a unanimous opinion. The opinion noted: “We come to the question presented: Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other ‘tan- gible’ factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? We be- lieve it does. We conclude that in the field of public educa- tion the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Sepa- rate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” A quick look at the facts shows just how much of a myth the “separate but equal” system has been. In the seventeen 35 states and the District of Columbia where separate schools have been maintained by law, a 1945 survey shows: white schools 430% higher in property value per pupil, white schools 219% higher in expenditures per pupil, white schools 40% higher in teachers’ salaries, white colleges 300% higher in undergraduate courses. But not only the Negro students suffer. In the average area where segregation has been practised, only $73.57 a year has been spent on each white student while in New York state, which does not have the double burden inflicted by segregation, $129 a year is spent on each. No American, colored or white, could honestly approve a second-rate edu- cational system when a better one is possible. Then you think a segregated society is inefficient? A totally segregated society is inconceivable and un- workable. It would suppose that we have two taxing sys- tems, two congresses, two governments, two telephone sys- tems, and supposedly two bishops in a diocese, two Popes in the Church and other absurdities. It should not be allowed to distract us or our imaginations from what we must neces- sarily do to build a just society. Theoretically, it might be admitted that with equal fa- cilities, Negroes might possibly be satisfied. But every Ne- gro detests, and every white person who honestly disavows the injustices which Negroes have always endured in the United States must detest, the American system of com- pulsory racial segregation. Compulsory segregation for colored people has every- where been accompanied by injustice, so regularly that the injustice can be said to be inevitable. They have consistent- ly endured inhuman, unhealthy housing, an inadequate and unfair share of money spent for hospitals and medical care, crowded and inadequate schools. No one can reasonably ex- 36 pect that such injustices will be remedied until compul- sory segregation as a social policy is abandoned. Isn’t it better to train Negroes for the kind of jobs they can get, rather than to open up schools of higher education for them? To deny opportunities for training on the basis that jobs are not now open is to take a defeatist attitude. How will they ever be opened unless people are trained to fill them? This kind of attitude would deny to America the talents of thousands of young Americans. It probably would, if possible, have denied her a Dr. Percy Julian or a Ralph Bunche. The Negro does not want a sentimental concern for his hurt feelings. He wants an equal chance to prove himself. Seriously, isn’t the Negro’s chief interest in white schools his desire to mix with whites? No. The Negro wants every right that other Americans have, including the right to a good education; and in the words of the late Professor Robert E. Parks of the Uni- versity of Chicago: “What has come to be known as Negro education can no longer provide the Negro with the intel- lectual horizon or the ‘area of orientation’ required by the world in which he must live.” The same might be said, to a lesser extent, of white education. All students, Negro and white, need to study and work and play together in order to come to know one another as individuals without the pall of racial tension. If Negroes and whites work and go to school together, won’t this lead to interracial marriage? As Father George Dunne, S.J., has pointed out, this question “assumes that with the elimination of segregation 37 there will be an end to freedom of choice in the matter of marriage. The fact is, of course, that it takes two to make a marriage and that we have the right to marry whom we choose. ,, You can always say no. “Many uncomplimentary things have been said about the institution of marriage,” says Margaret Halsey, author of Color Blind , “but even its strongest detractors don’t claim that it is compulsory.” Does racial mixture produce inferior children? Racial mixture more often than not produces superior children, with a hybrid vigor that combines the best quali- ties in the makeup of the parents. Dr. George D. Snell, ex- pert on genetics and heredity, affirms (in the Quarterly Re- view of Biology) the salutary effect of intermarriage not only on individuals, but on nations, and he believes that the United States may have a brilliant flowering of genius in thought and art because of its mixture of stocks. It might be pointed out here that there are probably no pure races left on the face of the earth—a rather fortu- nate situation in view of the sad effects of any prolonged inbreeding. Doesn’t the Catholic Church forbid interracial marriage? While the Church requires that two people of different religions must obtain a dispensation before they marry, it makes po such requirement of people of different races. The Catholic Church and reason itself teach that the right to marry is a natural right. It is obvious that an interracial marriage founded on love is just as sacred in God’s eyes as any other marriage, and that an interracial marriage of two baptized persons is as much a sacrament as any marriage of two baptized persons. 38 “The Supreme Court said what?” Do you mean that you advocate interracial marriages? Races don’t marry. Individuals marry. The right is given by God to individuals to select their partners. We aren’t attempting to make that choice for any individual couple. Whether two people should marry depends, upon such norms as their compatability and their willingness to face the problems that will arise in married life. These norms are the same whether the couple is an interracial couple or not. Would you want your sister to marry a Negro? That’s like asking, would I want my sister to marry a man with red hair? I would or would not want my sister 39 to marry a Negro depending on the character of the particu- lar individual my sister had chosen. Certainly the single fact that the individual was a Negro (or red headed) would not automatically disqualify him as a husband. (And unless my sister were very different from most sisters, my wishes in the matter would make very little difference in her choice of a husband.) But many whites say: We will grant Negroes equality when they have reached the level of our civilization. It might be wondered why Negroes must wait until they have attained our level of “civilization,” or what there is that is so commendable about it. It certainly would do no harm to recall that Pope Pius XII has cited many inglorious aspects of this civilization: “drunkenness, immodest and costly styles in dress, crime among minors, neglect of the poor, the base craving for ill-gotten wealth, the flight from the land, levity in entering marriage, divorce, the break-up of the family, birth control. . . .” (Serturn Laetitiae) Moreover, it might be wondered whether it is “civiliza- tion” which really interests us. For isn’t a social order built on racial pride really a form of barbarity? And isn’t the expression “our civilization” really only a subtle way of designating a social, political, and economic world in which white men have accumulated for themselves privileges, pres- tige, and power? And isn’t it true that these are the things to which white men are attached under the term “our civilization,” and not culture, wisdom, virtue, and produc- tive skills? If we are honest in our interest in civilization, we must recognize that there are countless Negro persons who in ability, virtue, and culture are our equals. And furthermore, if we are honest, we will assist more and more Negroes in their efforts to achieve a religious education, to develop 40 skills, talents, and wisdom, and we will assist in opening for them fuller and fuller opportunities for using them. I’ll admit there is a feeling against Negroes. But other groups have had this problem, too. Won’t it “work itself out”? No type of social segregation ever practiced in the United States against numerous groups of people parallels in malice and tenacity the segregation and hatred which colorless people practice toward people of colored skin. In other cases the problem solved itself—the Irish or Italians, for example, all of whom were segregated and classified as not “acceptable,” ultimately “escaped” and were absorbed in the American society. But American society has by long acceptance and deep historic roots come to be defined — partially, of course—as a white society. It will take the heroic and concerted action of many groups of people to modify that definition so that all hu- man beings can and will be free citizens, completely ac- ceptable people, acceptable by men as they are by God. What, in lesser ways, the Irish, Italians, and others have suffered and resented, but have overcome, colored peoples more deeply suffer and resent and more justly insist must be overcome. Why are the terms “blacks,” “Negress,” and “mulatto” offensive to Negroes? Because all such terms are derogatory in their origin. “Blacks” is first of all an inaccurate term when applied to Negroes; it is also offensive (as is “darkey”) because it exaggerates the sense of difference between peoples by em- phasizing skin color. “Negress” (“buck,” “pickaninny”) is considered insulting by Negroes, and should never be used. “Mulatto” (or other references to “blood”) helps perpetuate the superstition that there are racial blood types. Such terms as “nigger” or “jig” are, of course, so ob- 41 viously vulgar and insulting that people with any intelli- gence never use them. The other terms, mentioned above, are sometimes used by people who mean no ill will. How- ever, their use shows an ignorance of the contempt these terms imply, dating back to the period of slavery. Then how do I refer to Negroes? Just that way — “Negro/’ whether a man or woman. The term “colored” is also acceptable. In addressing a Negro, you would, of course, use the usual terms: Mr. Jones, Mrs. Jones, Miss Jones. What are Negroes doing to help themselves and improve race relations? Many individuals have worked against great odds to pull themselves up to a point of eminence: Dr. Ralph Bunche, member of the United Nations and recent Nobel peace prize winner; Mrs. Mary McLeod Bethune and Dr. Charles Wes- ley in the field of education; Dr. Charles Johnson in the social sciences; Dr. Allison Davis, Dr. Alain Locke and Dr. Lorenzo Turner, three among a number of over eighty colored professors in white universities; Willard Townsend, A. Philip Randolph, and John Yancey, in the field of trade unionism; Dr. T. K. Lawless in dermatology and Dr. Percy Julian, discoverer of cortisone and ACTH. These are only a few whose attainments confirm this point. Organizations, too—the National Urban League and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, while they are interracial, are organizations through which Negroes have worked to help themselves. The educational scholarships of fraternities and sororities, the health pro- gram of the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority, and the Better Business movement of the Phi Beta Sigma’s, to cite two — have done much good. Some 10,000 Negroes are being graduated from college 42 each year, and there are 70,000 students in attendance. American Negroes now own over one million homes. There are 184,000 Negro farm owners, with farms averaging seventy acres. For the past fifty years the economic gulf between Negroes and whites has been narrowing. Negroes own 14 banks, 200 credit unions, 60,000 retail businesses, 26 savings and loan associations, and 25 large insurance companies. A study of the progress of the Negro group from slavery shows more advance than any other group has made in the history of the world. It indicates what might be done without the difficulties that are superimposed by a preju- diced society. It is important to note, however, that the problems in Negro-white relations which this pamphlet has discussed cannot be solved by either group alone. Negroes and whites must work together to tear down the walls of separation which still exist in America, and they must work together to build a society that glorifies God by bearing wit- ness to the unity of all God’s children. IT’S UP TO YOU ... to do something about improving race relations. You have a personal responsibility to promote interracial justice. We offer a few suggestions as to What You Can Do Right Now! • Learn the facts about the race problem by reading books. Consult, for example, your teacher, librarian, a priest; see the attached reading list. • Build a better future by training your children to be democratic, Christian citizens. • Avoid hasty generalizations about Negroes. 43 • Squelch rumors and propaganda. They spread fast. • Make friends with Negroes and mix socially with them in order to understand them as individuals, not merely as members of a racial group. • Learn the Negro’s side by reading his newspapers and periodicals. • Indicate disapproval of segregation. Refuse to sign a restrictive covenant, or to move out when a Negro family moves into your neighborhood. • Volunteer time and service at an interracial center, or give your support and assistance with money contri- butions. • Cooperate with interracial projects and institutions, such as Friendship House, the National Urban League, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, etc. • Start or join an interracial group in your city, in your club, hobby, profession or occupational circle. • Let the interracial organizations in your town know of any case of discrimination that occurs on jobs, in schools, hospitals, churches, etc. • Support legislation that will protect Negroes from discrimination in hiring and firing. • See to it that Negroes are accepted into your union, your school, your church. • See to it that any person working for you receives a just wage. • Finally, and most importantly, pray for interracial justice. 44 BIBLIOGRAPHY Books: Ashmore, Harry S. The Negro and the Schools. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1954. The whole picture of bi-racial education in the United States—noting the practical results of educational integra- tion in many border communities. Benedict, Ruth. In Henry’s Backyard. New York: Schuman, 1946. Written for children, it is enlightening to adults. A cartoon version of The Races of Mankind. Cayton, Horace, & St. Clair Drake, Black Metropolis. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1945. Two sociologists study Negro life in Chicago. A mature and penetrating view of race relations in America. Day, Helen Caldwell. Color Ebony. New York: Sheed & Ward, 1951. A sensitive Negro convert tells her life story. DeHueck, Catherine. Friendship House. New York: Sheed & Ward, 1946. The founder of Friendship House, Catholic Interracial Movement, tells the story of this work. Embree, Edwin. Thirteen Against the Odds. New York: Viking Press, 1944. Frazer, E. Franklin. Negro in the United States. New York: Macmillan Co., 1949. A richly documented study of the adjustment of the Negro as a racial and cultural group to the life of the larger society. 45 Halsey, Margaret. Color Blind . New York: Simon and Schu- ster, 1946. A really delightful book which discusses the controversial phases of the race question with courage and insight. Hughes, Langston. Famous American Negroes. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1954. Hughes, Langston. Laughing to Keep From Crying. New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1952. Book of twenty-four stories in which the author ex- plores the ebb and flow of life in the Negro Ghetto. Hughes, Langston. Simple Speaks His Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1950. A lighthearted approach to the race problem with the author’s inimitable “Simple” as chief protagonist. LaFarge, John. No Postponement. New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1950. History of the Catholic Interracial Movement by the well-known priest who was a founder of the Catholic Interracial Council. Supplements his earlier book, The Race Question and the Negro. Logan, R. What the Negro Wants. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1944. A symposium comprising the contributions of fourteen prominent Negroes. Moon, B. (ed.) Primer for White Folks. New York: Double- day, Doran and Co., 1945. An anthology of prose writings by and about the Ameri- can Negro from slavery to the present. Myrdal, Gunnar. An American Dilemma. New York: Harp- er & Bros., 1944. 46 The most comprehensive study of the Negro question in America. An analysis of all life set against the back- ground of the “American Creed.” 1,483 pages. Paton, Alan. Cry the Beloved Country. New York: Scrib- ners, 1948. Sensitive story of a Negro clergyman in South Africa. Redding, J. Saunders. On Being Negro in America. Indian- apolis: Bobbs, Merrill & Co., 1951. Provocative essays showing how common racial prac- tices in America affect the intelligent and sensitive Negro. Rowan, C. T. South of Freedom. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1952. The author went south in ’51, to see if any changes in race problems had occurred since he left in ’43. This book is the result of his observations. Southall, Sara. Industry’s Unfinished Business. New York: Harper & Bros., 1950. An experienced labor relations expert offers in this book practical ways for achieving sound industrial relations and fair employment for minority groups. Tannenbaum, Frank. Slave and Citizen. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1947. A history of the Negro in the whole western hemis- phere which shows why and in what respects Negro status varies in different parts of the Americas. Weaver, R. Negro Ghetto. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1948. Weaver, R. Negro Labor: A National Problem. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1946. 47 Pamphlets: Blackface Minstrels by Albert Foley, S.J. Chicago: Cath- olic Interracialist. Catholics, Race, and Law by Francis J. Haas, D.D. New York: Paulist Press. Catholics Speak on Race Relations compiled by Daniel M. Cantwell. Chicago: Fides Publishers. Fifty Ways to Improve Race Relations and Race Riddles by Frank Riley. St. Louis, Mo.: Queen’s Work. Friendship House Staff Workers. Friendship House. Heresy of Race and Racial Myths by Sr. Mary Ellen O’Hanlon, O.P. River Forest, HI.: Rosary College. If Your Next Neighbors are Negroes. Nashville, Tenn.: American Missionary Association. A Moral Appraisal of an Individual Act of Racial Dis- crimination by John P. Markoe, S.J. Omaha, Nebr. : Creigh- ton University. The Negro in America by Maxwell S. Stewart. New York: Public Affairs Committee. Digest of Myrdal’s An American Dilemma. Races of Mankind by Ruth Benedict and Gene Weltfish. New York: Public Affairs Committee. Saving the White Man’s Soul by Clare Boothe Luce. Huntington, Ind.: Our Sunday Visitor Press. Segregation and the Schools. Public Affairs Pamphlet No. 209. A digest of the Ashmore report on bi-racial education. Sense and Nonsense About Race by Ruth Alpenfels. 48