MAKING THE SYSTEM WORK

Remarks by Nathaniel R. Jones

 at Youngstown State University Commencement
June 17, 1970

Words are not adequate to express my gratitude at being selected to receive an Honorary Doctor of Laws Degree by my Alma Mater. It is of particular significance to me since so much of my life has been intertwined with the community this institution serves. Vivid are the memories of my days as a student at Youngstown University following World War II, when many of us, freshly returned from duty with the Armed Forces, received the benefits of the G.I. Bill of Rights. To attend college was an experience that only few of our relatives and friends had enjoyed.

In those days, Youngstown University had a form of "open enrollment" conceived by former President Howard Jones and his associates. They encouraged numerous high school graduates to seek a college education. I had no distinctive high school credentials to offer, nor could I have passed a rigid college admission test. Nevertheless, I was accepted at this University and I wish to share the honor being conferred upon me with those who had confidence in my ability and were able to look beyond my deficiencies to qualities they considered more relevant and enduring.

On the occasion of this commencement ceremony it is well for each of us to ask ourselves what kind of a nation we are and what kind we are capable of becoming. To many persons it may appear that the nation is splitting apart. A smaller number of citizens, bitter and disenchanted, seem willing to accelerate the process by resort to violence and repression.

No thoughtful American can remain unmoved by the powerful currents whirling about us—manifested by campus unrest, the urban crisis, racial discrimination, the Indo-China War, a depressed economy and inflation. Further confounding us is extremism of the left and right, crime in the street, repression, racial and generational polarization, the mass use of narcotics, bombings of public and private buildings, and houses of worship, arson, attacks on school buses bearing little children, and physical assaults in the name of peace and Americanism.

Many people, particularly the young and the black, are questioning a number of the old assumptions that have for so long been taken for granted. This challenge often manifests itself in dialogue, violence and outright withdrawal from the political process.

To those genuinely concerned about the future of this nation, I recommend that a look be taken at the history of the civil rights movement in general, and of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, in particular. In that history you will find an illustration of how the political and judicial process can be made to work to redress grievances, and forge new instruments with which to reshape institutions.

The NAACP has been an historical dissenter, it has dared to do and say the unpopular. It has questioned and it has challenged. In 1909 when the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People was organized, there was great ferment in the land, just as there is now. The United States Supreme Court had, in 1896, licensed the institutionalizing of segregation when it declared in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, that States could legally separate black people from white under the guise of separate-but-equal. In the wake of that decision States hastened to segregate even the deaf, dumb and blind by race.

They forbade white female nurses to treat Negro males; Florida required Negro textbooks to be segregated in the warehouses; Atlanta as well as other cities in the South provided Jim Crow Bibles to be used by witnesses in court; hospitals, libraries, drinking fountains and even the dead in cemeteries were segregated. Such Northern states as Indiana, New Mexico, Wyoming, New Jersey, Ohio and Illinois encouraged segregated schools. Needless to say the idea of equality was a cruel illusion.

This legally-sanctioned insult to Negroes was reinforced by stripping them of their right to vote. To insure that they would not be able to undo this status into which they had been frozen, Negroes were intimidated and victimized by lynch mobs and other terror groups when they attempted to challenge the status quo.

The NAACP, in the face of these threats, stirred black people and their white friends to use their Constitutional rights of speech, assembly and the press to fight to make these and other constitutional guarantees meaningful for them. Steadfastly, the fight went on, often in hostile courts and in deceitful legislative halls. The consciences of communities and churches were challenged. Slowly, success began to come, even though lapses occurred. There were some court victories here and legislative victories there. But together these had meaning and Negroes continued to build on each victory.

In 1954, the climate had so changed, that the United States Supreme Court repudiated the separate-but-equal doctrine first proclaimed as the law of the land in 1896. It declared, in the now famous case of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education, that segregation of children by reason of race was repugnant to the 14th Amendment. It went on to spell out the general doctrine that segregation by race stamps people with a badge of inferiority.

I don't mean to suggest that this court decision brought instant compliance or the millennium. It didn't. But it was a landmark in terms of the establishment of constitutional principles that permitted further legal assaults against all forms of racial segregation. It breathed life, once again, into the 14th Amendment and the Constitution itself.

When the NAACP began its struggle 60 years ago, it had no tools, except a warped judicial interpretation of the Constitution. But there was a faith within the breasts of Negroes that this document would somehow come to mean what it was meant to mean, if they would persevere.

Moreover, the NAACP legal drive against injustice led to the most fundamental developments in American jurisprudence. Through this development, the Bill of Rights, historically applicable only to the federal government, was made applicable to the states from which threat or oppression so often comes.

Even though relied on today by persons in all stations of life, the restraints on government power grew out of cases brought by black people.

As we view remaining problems the tools that have been fashioned through this long struggle can and will be used to further rid this nation of old iniquities. We now have the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that outlaws segregation and discrimination in interstate travel as well as discrimination by labor unions and employers. There is also the Civil Rights Act of 1965, that made it possible to register over one million black voters in Southern states creating a climate that assisted in the election of 1500 black public officials.

To illustrate the interconnection of these various victories, let me point out something very interesting. In the recently-concluded Senate confirmation contests over Judge Haynsworth and Carswell, whom the President of the United States sought to have placed on the Supreme Court, we saw the interesting sight of United States Senators from such Southern and border States as Tennessee, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas and Kentucky, joining with senators from New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts to reject the nominations of Judge Haynsworth and Judge Carswell. This would not have occurred prior to the enactment of the Voting Rights Act and the addition of a million new black voters to the rolls during vigorous registration efforts of such groups as the NAACP. And when you consider that the fight against these nominations pitted private organizations and citizens against the virtual majesty of the President of the United States, the most powerful political/governmental leader in the world, the victory must be acknowledged as a ringing reaffirmation of the democratic process.

There are numerous examples of other actions I could cite that are persuasive of the fact that law and the democratic process can be successfully used to right wrongs. Unfortunately, since much of this issue-solving process lacks the excitement of provocative rhetoric and violence, little is reported about it.

All I am really trying to say, I suppose, is that in bringing about change let us remember that both history and common sense teach there is an alternative to ugliness and violence and repression. My belief of this stems from the fact that Negro people, crippled for generations by institutional racism, hobbled by lack of educational opportunities, literally bereft of financial resources, and denied political power, led a fundamental reformation of our social and political institutions. If they could accomplish such a transition you of this generation, as endowed as you are can, achieve even more.

Were you, the members of this class, to commit your education, financial resources, political sophistication and moral fervor to a resolution of our contemporary problems, we would see many things change. There would be adequate funds spent on educating all children and more and better job training opportunities for minorities. There would be an increase in the supply and quality of housing, an opening up of the suburbs and restricted neighborhoods to blacks, a relaxation of racial bars to union membership, an end to job discrimination by employers, and a measurable reduction of crime in the streets.

This commitment of which I speak must begin with each individual—and as President Kennedy declared, one person can make a difference.

As we weigh the agenda of social action that I have just listed we should also consider appropriate methods to use in redressing grievances. The Bill of Rights guarantees to each individual the right to gather together with others and to speak his mind. Because of the painfully slow pace of change, there is a temptation to skirt these constitutional processes. Looking at my own institution and this community, I am struck by the fact that not only is there now a black assistant to the President of this great institution but also Negro members of the faculty. And, tonight the highest honor within the power of the University to bestow, is awarded to me.

Taken separately these developments may not seem like much. Some may choose to characterize them as mere tokenism. I view them as part of people tending to the unfinished business of civilizing mankind. And so this process must go on, spurred by a belief in the ultimate triumph of justice and decency.

It was this need to believe that the brilliant black poet, Langston Hughes, undoubtedly had in mind when he wrote his moving poem, "Mother to Son", a poignant plea to continue to struggle in the face of adversity:

Well, Son, I'll tell you:
Life for me ain't been no crystal stair.
It's had tacks in it,
And splinters,
And boards torn up,
And places with no carpet on the floor—Bare.
But all the time
I'se been a-climbin' on,
And reachin' landin's,
And turnin' corners,
And sometimes goin' in the dark
Where there ain't been no light.
So boy, don't you turn back.
Don't you set down on the steps
'Cause you finds it's kinder hard.
Don't you fall now—
For I'se still goin', honey,
I'se still climbin',
And life for me ain't been no crystal stair.