"Divided " Passenger Cars for Jim Crow States.

[Spikre]

was looking thru a back Issue of Mainline when this Term was used
to describe a KCS Passenger car.
now the Rail Industry may have used the Term when describing recently
ordered cars in the 40s and 50s,maybe even earlier,not sure,but am
planning on doing more research on this topic.
am really surprised that Hundman gave a number of pages to the KCS car
but never once mentioned that KCS ran thru "Jim Crow" states.
do think its about time that this dirty secret of Passenger trains
gets the Exposure that It deserves.
what was odd that Roads that didn't run in the Jim Crow states didn't
rebuild the interiors of the cars they bought that were "Divided".
why was that ?
didn't seem like it would take too much effort to remove the dividers
in Coaches at least.
the Divided Diners wouldn't be worth the effort,that is understandable.
am really Disapointed by Bob Hundman not exposing this practice for what
it really was.
Edit-- the 1995 Southern Belle Article did call those Coaches "Jim Crow" cars.
but one would need that article to know that.
not everyone{including me} has Complete sets of Mainlines on hand.
Spikre

[Christian]

Jul 4, 2015 8:33:29 GMT -8 Spikre said:

am really Disapointed by *** ******* not exposing this practice for what
it really was.
Spikre

He has a LOT of company standing in a row with their hands over their eyes. Like most transition modelers today. Not just in the south. "No Coloreds" is the most common business sign of the '50's all across the land.

[edwardsutorik]

Regarding the KCS divided coaches (KCS 234-238) and Mr. Hundman:

Although these cars were divided, I do not think it was for racial segregation purposes. Note that these cars had room for only one women's and one men's bathroom. And only one vestibule. It's pretty difficult to pull off proper segregation when there's going to be all that mixing about. I am also looking at plans and photos for C&O and NKP divided coaches. Again, one vestibule, one men's bathroom, one women's bathroom. And NKP isn't exactly Deep South. And did you know CP had divided coaches--Canada, that hotbed of segregation?

There WERE cars set up for racial segregation purposes. This was apparently the case for ATSF 3187-3189. Note the two vestibules:


abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?august10/08-31-10/ATSF3188_La_Junta_CO_SEP1966.jpg


These cars also apparently had 4 bathrooms. How very thoughtful, Santa Fe--shorter lines! These were lightweights. I think for the Texas Chief. I note that, in the photo, this car is behind a baggage and an RPO. From this, I think this is the "shorts" coach. On a "regular" streamliner, there's commonly a single coach for short distance travel, and several coaches for long distance. A person could wonder how or if segregation was also carried out on the long distance cars.

Here's another of the most likely (surely) segregated cars. Note the use of two vestibules. The center division is obvious, in this case. But, of course, a divider can be put between regular windows and hardly show. There does also appear to be plenty of room for four bathrooms:


condrenrails.com/MRP/Tennessean/phil45.jpg


The above car was one of 6 cars that Southern bought for service on the Southerner (New York-New Orleans) and the Tennessean (DC-Memphis). There were quite a few "regular" coaches on these trains. And some sleepers.


I just had a quick look at Seaboard Air Line and Atlantic Coast Line, and didn't find any divided (perhaps more correctly called "partitioned") lightweight coaches for their trains, but I did see a drawing for SAL 6235-6241--Chair lounge cars. They DID have four bathrooms. But only one vestibule. The lounge was between a 30 seat section and a 22 seat section. It could be viewed on the one hand as a natural dividing line. On the other hand, a lounge is a good place for mixing. This one's a puzzle. I'll note that it doesn't look like the lounge had food or drink service.


I suspect most of the real Jim Crow coaches were ratty old heavyweights and were used for very short trains. This is because, for a normal length train, it's easier to add and pull out entire cars to adjust for ridership. And you can use regular cars from the coach yard, rather than try to scout up ANOTHER Jim Crow car. But if you only regularly have a dozen passengers or so, it IS cheaper to divide one car than to run two.

If my comments above are correct, then it would appear Mr. Hundman is owed an apology.



Ed

[kcjones]

Spikre,
What dirty little secret are you talking about? "Jim Crow" cars down south were a historical fact. Anybody who knows their railroad history knows this. And because it is historical, what makes it dirty? It was normal practice back then. What will happen next if some guy desides to model a JC car? Does that means he supports segregation? Nope, I wouldn't think so. It's history. Get over it!!
JL

[mlehman]

The divided Jim Crow cars are a reminder about our at times sad history of inequality. As a historian, you make value judgments about things and "civilians" do that, too. Nothing wrong with it, bring your evidence to the table is all. We should remember that normal doesn't equal moral, though. Lots of things in the past are in the past for a reason. Doesn't make things perfect now, either.

But we shouldn't obsess over the divided cars. Remember, these were constructed to serve relatively low traffic lines where they would be only a single car to accommodate passengers, who by law then must be kept divided.

Far more African-Americans likely rode separate and unequally because of segregation in cars designated as "Colored" cars than in the mixed use divided cars. That's an angle we've heard little about in regard to Jim Crow, but this must have been an even more common practice. It's not like the law allowed everyone to sit together if the train consisted of more than one passenger car. More likely, "white" and colored" cars were added to a train in accord with the anticipated passenger loads. We can probably guess which was the better ride. Such cars would have had little to otherwise distinguish them than a placard or other indication of who each car was designated to carry.

The features of the Jim Crow combines made them stand out, often with a center baggage door, for instance. But focusing on them really underestimates the way in which far larger numbers of the car fleet were involved in this odious practice.

[edwardsutorik]

Well said, Mike.


Ed

[Dear Leader]

Segregation happened, not only in divided cars, but station waiting rooms, bathrooms, eateries, etc. It's not a "dirty little secret". When I got in model trans at a early age, these cars were described for what they were. Photos of trains and facilities of southern railroads clearly show the Jim Crow signs. Nothing secret about this. It happened. If this is new to you, you need to read more.

[mlehman]

It's only fair to mention that discrimination was formal in the South until outlawed, but Northerners have little room to feel smug about their situation, where discrimination wasn't formal, but nonetheless was just as real in its effects. Guess which version, formal or informal segregation, has proven more persistent and difficult to eliminate?

There were plenty of roads all over the country that hired African-Americans and Latinos for track gangs, but only whites for road crews.

Then there is the case of Pullman, based right here in Illinois, who we're all familiar with their hiring blacks for porters on its cars and mostly white people in its factories, also here in Illinois. Yes, some people got decent paying jobs and other benefits of having a steady, regular job. But it was essentially a deadend career and fostered a stereotyped status of African-American men as servile.

We're getting pretty far afield from modeling here, this is more like Crew Lounge material.

[lvrr325]

Could there be just one place on the internet free from this political, racial nonsense?

I get tired of it being drummed into my head everyplace else how evil white people are and how blacks are just innocent little angels who dindu nuffins ever.

[Deleted]

Jul 5, 2015 1:06:04 GMT -8 lvrr325 said:

Could there be just one place on the internet free from this political, racial nonsense?

I get tired of it being drummed into my head everyplace else how evil white people are and how blacks are just innocent little angels who dindu nuffins ever.

no. But you can have the last laugh when black and white people are fighting for food scraps once global warming turns the earth into a barren wasteland.

[edwardsutorik]

This is a train forum, not an Armageddon forum. Of which there are several out there.

I'd like to not have this topic locked until Spikre can post his, uh, retraction?




Ed

[NS4122]

Either the moderators are asleep at the switch again or they condone tasteless posts like this on their forum. I was recently chided by someone on this forum when I stated an objection to one of Spikre’s typical nonsensical posts aimed at running up his post count. I have no idea why someone would post crap like this unless it is to start a flame war or to just childishly add another post to his count.

[Amboy Secondary]

We are talking about a time long ago, before these practices were outlawed.

I grew up in urban Southeastern Pennsylvania, in a small city which maintained "separate but equal" public grade and Junior High schools . The local newspaper had a separate category for "colored" real estate sales and rentals. I attended a "Lithuanian" Catholic Church, established along with a "Polish" and "Italian" Catholic Churches, because the "Irish" didn't want to worship with the dirty Eastern Europeans and Italians.
There were two Synagogues, one for Jews of Western European Descent, and the other for eastern Europeans. The Protestants, didn't like the Catholics, the Whites disliked the blacks and the blacks disliked the whites. Everyone disliked the Spanish speaking people. I suppose everyone needed to feel superior to someone. In the South it was institutionalized, possibly due to an overreaction to Reconstruction. In the North, it was voluntary, but just as wrong, and just as hurtful. What everyone forgets was that it just wasn't directed to people of different skin color.
And it comes from all directions. Unfortunately it still occurs today, and in more forms than most people would imagine.

A valid topic in another forum, but it really doesn't belong here.

[edwardsutorik]

Jul 5, 2015 9:20:54 GMT -8 Amboy Secondary said:

The Protestants, didn't like the Catholics, the Whites disliked the blacks and the blacks disliked the whites. Everyone disliked the Spanish speaking people.

Which reminds me of a song:








Ed

[mlehman]

Well, Spikre can be a bit obtuse, but he was talking about modeling this particular subject. I think the comments are trying to get a handle on what is a difficult issue for many of us to even attempt to discuss. Still, it was a reality that not only shouldn't be ignored, but can't be if we want to understand the social background of the material reality of the past.

My comments aren't intended to rub anyone's nose in anything, simply to grapple with things in a somewhat more informed manner. Those who still find it a topic that should be ignored should continue to do that, although that's most unlikely to make the issues involved go away. You either learn from the past or you end up rehashing it in the present. As a historian I find the idea we should skip over the topic is actually part of the reason it endures instead of our society transcending it. You end up with the opposite of what you state you'd prefer.

Yes, we are a land of immigrants from many cultures, not withstanding those who were conquered to make space for all this influx. But a century or more ago, most of us reading this forum weren't considered "white" -- something which wjli26's post reflects. We could have a graduate seminar on the process that made those of us "white" who could "pass" for that, as well as to better understand why that didn't happen for others whose ancestors have been here as long whites have been.

Sure, there's a lot of blame to spread around. That also suggests a lot of responsibility to fix things is, too, widely spread, unless you actually enjoy this state of affairs which I doubt most do.

Thus, while I think Spikre's particular take on things is rather myopic, his examination of the topic at least makes a good point in that we should ask plenty of questions when modeling things like Jim Crow cars. There's no easy answers here, like in life. We need to not only mean well, but be prepared to be open in grappling with difficult subjects if we want to understand these cars and their role better.

[Spikre]

??
KCJ,
how come in the other thread about the ex-C&O cars that went to D&RGW many
didn't know that C&O ran thru "Jim Crow States" ?
do have Mainlines with the C&O cars in them,but havnt checked those articles
yet.
or the Southern "Tennessean" article,or the N&W Coach article.
but will see what is covered in those articles.
can recall "Jim Crow" being mentioned in old Trains articles,Railroad,Railfan,
even some RMC articles,but these are all pre-1980,some are 50s issues.
to some this is a "Dirty Secret",or just an "Unknown Entity" of Rail Roadings past.
Spikre

[Spikre]

Mike,
think these Lite Weight cars were assigned to certain trains,while the
extra Black and White Coaches were put on trains when needed.
guess it was alrite for all to use the same bathrooms ?
when riding the "Lake Cities" out of Hoboken the Conductors told us which
cars to go to.in Pennsylvania a number of Amish teens got on,but they were
directed to the coach in front of mine.most were girls,and some of us,including
the military guys tried to talk to them,but they just sat there giggling.
after they got off was told that the conductors always tried to keep the young
guys under closer supervision,seemed to work on EL.
but this wasn't started to be racial,it was more of a surprise that the KCS
car wasn't divided to be an Interior Statement,but to meet the laws of the
states the cars ran thru.
in Dry States the RRs wouldn't sell any Beer,Wine or Liquor.
RRs generally obeyed the Laws where they ran.
how RRs treated Employees is a whole different matter,and not going there.
am really surprised and baffled that both the auther Dr Nick Muff and Bob Hundman
didn't at least have a sidebar on why the Divider in the car.
so were Missouri,Arkansas,and Texas all "Jim Crow" states ?
Edit - this 1st Lake Cities ride started 7/4/69,think that adds up to 45 years ago ?
this was a Hoboken to Youngstown Ohio round trip.
Spikre

[Amboy Secondary]

FWIW: Apparently, the Pennsylvania Railroad had a small sub class of "Divided" P70 coaches for use on the Delmarva Division, as well as the Winchester (VA) Branch. Read that during a discussion about the upcoming HO scale P70 models. Shocking!eh?

Mike,from a contemporary perspective, all railroad craft jobs were relatively well paying "Dead End Jobs", no matter who the worker was, what he(she) did, or what company was the employer. When accumulated seniority dictated which assignment one could work, accepting a promotion to an entry level management position was not a desirable option. Only a newbie or a fool would give up his/her seniority rights to accept a position that remotely permitted advancement beyond a first line position. Were these servile positions reserved for men of African descent, worse than the contemporary service industry minimum wage positions many of us (of all races), compete for in our post industrial age?

The biggest and saddest issue about our lack of discussion about the issues of race, is that we are hung up on sins of the past, and so afraid of offending, that we persist in perpetrating these sins into the future.

[mlehman]

Spikre,
I've heard nothing to indicate an association between the partition in the built-for-C&O cars the Rio Grande purchased. One big factor is the bathroom arrangement, just a single men's and women's restroom, in opposite ends of the car.

While Joe Strapac has his errors in other areas, he seems to indicate the partitions had nothing to do with Jim Crow in Rio Grande Diesels, Vol 3.

"In order to avoid the 'bus look' inside, an interior partition was used to jog the aisle from the center to the left of the car -- resulting in a slightly different (ten and eight) window arrangement." page 43

Now that could be a "just so" cover story. I deal with such things all the time in my primary field of interest. If the deal between the C&O, the Rio Grande and Pullman-Standard had come during 1946 (when Jim Crow on the RRs was ordered to a halt -- see below), that could account for a need to repurpose what might soon be a useless design feature. But these orders and the deal date from 1948, when it seemed pretty clear those governed by federal law could see that segregation was done for. Along with the bathrooms that don't support a Jim Crow car arrangement, my guess is that Strapac was right. A simple divider arrangement in these cars may simply be an interior design feature, not a legal requirement of segregation.

Arguing for Spikre's case is the fact that the Southern refurbished a car for Jim Crow service as late as 1950:
newsdesk.si.edu/releases/first-iconic-artifacts-installed-national-museum-african-american-history-and-culture

There were legal forces at work, although definitive resolution of this issue from a legal stand point took almost two decades. The railroads were put on notice in 1946 by a Supreme Court decision that a Virginia state law that required segregated accommodations was unconstitutional because it interfered with interstate commerce. This came in the wake of fighting a war that was in part fought against the racially-tinged laws and actions of the Germans and Japanese, which likewise enlightened and encouraged African-Americans who suffered under similar laws at home to hope they, too, would one day overcome. Truman's order to desegregate the armed forces came in 1948.

A 1960 era digest of Jim Crow laws is available here:
www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/links/misclink/examples/homepage.htm
More:
historymatters.gmu.edu/d/6327/

This is a past that's not so much past as it is well within the memory of millions, including myself. Young people in particular, who can't figure out why people care about such things may want to consider, "Well, you had to be there..." and put themselves in the shoes of the different players. In fact, that gives me an idea for a great in-class activity next time I need to teach this part of the history survey course.

BTW, came across an interesting general article on riding the Jim Crow accommodations that supplies some surprising nuances:
old.post-gazette.com/sprigle/199808SprigleChap3.asp

This article details the widespread application of Jim Crow and other segregation practices on Northern RRs:
www.rrmuseumpa.org/about/rrpeopleandsociety/legacy.shtml

[Spikre]

??
Mike,
there may have been Appeals to the Supreme Court Decision that took Years
to work thru the Court System.
the RRs may have wanted to cover their tails in case the Jim Crow laws stood.
but was thinking that the number of cars ordered after 1945 until the early
50s were too many if the Law was in general use.
but will do more reading on this, as thought it wasn't until the 60s that the
Jim Crow laws were finally over turned.??
the KCS Coach is just plain with 2 sections, no View Blocks or other Artsy
concealment factors.
Spikre

[mlehman]

Jul 5, 2015 18:33:51 GMT -8 Amboy Secondary said:

SNIP

The biggest and saddest issue about our lack of discussion about the issues of race, is that we are hung up on sins of the past, and so afraid of offending, that we persist in perpetrating these sins into the future.

JL,
Yes, most tragic would be to keep on keeping on, knowing what we know.

Don't feel bad if the subject matter leaves you a little tongue-tied. I see that quite often. Out of a group of two dozen or so supposed to be really smart kids, because they are after all enrolled at the world-class institution where I sometimes have taught at, maybe 3 or 4 have something to say. This happens often enough in sections where we don't discuss race, I know it's not necessarily about that as much as staying up until 4am or not doing the assigned reading. But race brings on it's own unique brand of painful silence.

That you're willing to say anything at all is actually a pretty good sign you've done some thinking about this -- although there was no reading assignment.

I will admit to a certain fixation with the past, but it goes with the territory when you teach history. The best thing I can say is that understanding the past better is often the best way to avoid offending and, most of all, perpetrating the circumstances that make for painful conversations and worse.

Sometimes you can make only incremental progress. Here I thought it important to convey that we are inaccurate if we think that things we'd be ashamed of today were confined to the South. They never were and aren't today. So getting that distraction behind us may be the best we can do here. That should make everyone feel both better, Southerners in particular, but also worse, because things are harder to solve when you can't blame some smaller group for a problem widely shared in a larger group. No one has a corner on the truth and it often hurts - not us personally, but to think about how wrong that humans could be at their worst.

The best advice I can give here when thinking about what could be changed in the present, which is the most important thing if I'm not handing out grades here (I'm definitely not) is that we all have the capacity to be generous in trying to understand each other. None of us are forced to disregard the concerns of others. We can choose to overcome the things that keep us from being an even greater nation. People rarely resemble the stereotypes we have before we understand each other. They're almost always better than we believed before we knew more about them.

For history here on the Jim Crow cars, if we don't understand things better at the end of the day, we've missed a great opportunity to take what many of us know about railroads and apply it to what we know about real life, i.e. the prototype, where it serves us better than before.

[mlehman]

Jul 5, 2015 17:14:54 GMT -8 Spikre said:

Mike,
think these Lite Weight cars were assigned to certain trains,while the
extra Black and White Coaches were put on trains when needed.
guess it was alrite for all to use the same bathrooms ?
SNIP

This is covered in some in the stuff I cited in the links.

What matters with regard to the cars in the batch of C&O cars shared with the Rio Grande was that the car's toilets for men and women were split into the two separate sections. I won't bother with what some say this says about patriarchy {a matter frequently entwined with race for we historians), but it was quite common as many know for men to be observant of the location of the women in their group for a variety of reasons. Thus putting the toilets for men and women divided in this specific batch of cars in this this way strongly suggests the arrangement with the divider was about aesthetics, rather than Jim Crow, which it would have likely been considered incompatible with in this arrangement.

[mlehman]

Jul 5, 2015 19:01:55 GMT -8 Spikre said:

??
Mike,
there may have been Appeals to the Supreme Court Decision that took Years
to work thru the Court System.
the RRs may have wanted to cover their tails in case the Jim Crow laws stood.
but was thinking that the number of cars ordered after 1945 until the early
50s were too many if the Law was in general use.
but will do more reading on this, as thought it wasn't until the 60s that the
Jim Crow laws were finally over turned.??
the KCS Coach is just plain with 2 sections, no View Blocks or other Artsy
concealment factors.
Spikre

I think you're right that the definitive history of the end of Jim Crow has yet to be written. But some general statements can be made. The railroads were historically the transportation mode most closely regulated by the federal government -- and they knew it. It was a lot easier to mostly go along on this matter with Uncle Sam and avoid hassles with things that were, quite frankly, more important to RR management.

Thinking about it for a minute, what profit is there in supporting two groups of the same car class? Or even more costly specialized cars like the Jim Crow combines? It was a wasteful exercise that required more rolling stock than strictly necessary. Sure, some placards could be switched around and that helped somewhat with car utilization, but that's always an issue. It's the inflated need for capacity mandated by the law that actually caused the problem. That's one reason why there were Jim Crow _laws_ in the first place, because not everyone would have gone along with such a "custom" unless it was law. Which is nit to say that many in management were unsympathetic with such laws, only that they didn't feel their application shouldn't cost them anything.

My understanding is that the Supreme Court IS the court of highest appeal, so this specific issue was settled. The RRs seem to have complied within a few years (but note my comment on the Southern's slow response above). I'd almost bet the last car ordered specifically and built new for Jim Crow service was pre-WWII, but that's just a guess. Note that the 1954 Brown vs Board on schooling DID take a long time to come into effect. This was one of the things the several 1964 and 1965 civil rights bills addressed by putting a pretty firm end to the dalliance of some on these matters.

[antoniofp45]

Just my "2 nickels".

Jim Crow topics are mind-stirring topic and a saddening part of history that I've thought of and read quite a bit about over the years. Seaboard's and Atlantic Coast Line's Budd-Baggage dorm units were designated for Black American passengers as well as "ethnic" passengers that were dark skinned, AFAIK. I am modeling these units, as they survived through to Amtrak.

Thankfully, those cars lost their segregated status in the mid 60s. During that time period, my late Dad (Black Cuban) on one occasion rode an ACL train (either the Champ or Florida Special) from NY to Miami. From what he told me, he enjoyed the ride, was able to walk throughout the train, and experienced no negative issues. He did encounter segregation when he visited a movie theater in Miami with one of my uncles. My Uncle "Pico" who was white was told he could enter but my Dad, having a darker complexion, was told by the ticket seller that he had to sit in another section.

But since model railroading is supposed to be a "relaxing" hobby, in my 1960s HO world there is no segregation, Vietnam war, nor riots. But there will be some "long-haired and big afro wearing hippies and beatniks" in the scenes. I remember those characters well from my childhood. (Man, I am dating myself!!).

On the "For What It's Worth" category: After I had started reading/researching topics about segregation in the transportation industry back when I was a kid, I was amazed to learn that my Uncle Juan (r.i.p), who was a Black Cuban, was able to become a locomotive engineer on the New York Central during the 60s. I don't know what year he started his employment with the Central, but I assume he moved up via seniority. He ran the electrics in the New York City area. However, he chose not to stay as things were deteriorating and the "Penn Central" merger/corruption/disaster loomed ahead. He continued his rail career on New York City's subway system. I regret now not having questioned him more thoroughly.

[mlehman]

Antonio,
Thanks for the fascinating reminiscence!

One of the things I found in doing a little quick research last night that was particularly interesting was that if you could afford a Pullman ticket, those accommodations did allow ALL passengers to share the same area/car. What I don't know is when this started or if it was always so, given that African-Americans made up most of the porters in Pullman service. So long distance RR travel already had barriers falling before legal segregation came to an end. A big factor in this was likely the fact that Pullman travel was almost always an interstate service, which made federal jurisdiction pretty clearcut, especially after 1946. By 1965, the blanket laws against discrimination at the federal level would've covered RRs anyway, but your recollection shows how this worked in practice.

Another similar finding was with dining cars. One of the sources I cited discussed a trip by journalists "passing" as black to explore the difficulties faced by African-Americans in traveling. The coach accommodations required racial separation, but there was one small advantage if one could afford a dining car meal. Although mealtime saw such cars become crowded, with people waiting in line to be seated, two tables at one end constituted the "colored" section. Since lack of funds kept most from eating in such luxury and the law kept whites from being seated there, there was no waiting in line for the author, who was quickly seated and served without delay.

[Spikre]

Mike,
sit down when You read the following:
KCS 1956 "Divided" Coach,Mainline Modeler,January 2003,pages 40-45.
DR. Nick Muff.
KCS ordered these cars from ACF,numbered 245-250,6 cars total for
"Southern Belle" service.
capacity 60 riders divided into 2 sections of 32 and 28 seats.
the cars had both Mens and Ladies Lounges/facilities at both ends.
so these were true Jim Crow cars,built about 9 years after the Supreme
Court's 1947 Decision.
the cars were fully modern with the latest GSC Outside Equalizer Swing
Hanger Trucks,A-C units,300 gallon water tanks,and a space for pillows
to sell to the riders.
so the real question here is when did KCS stop following the Jim Crow Laws ?
would guess about 1965,but not sure when KCS went "Freight Only" ?
know it was before Amtrak arrived,but not sure exactly when ?
Spikre

[mlehman]

Spikre,
Well, maybe.

Problem is you can't intuit such service strictly from the design features. They simply suggest the possibilities. There is a list of streamlined services by RR that had Jim Crow cars in an old Trains forum thread that does have the KCS on it, but not sure about how accurate it is.

One must also remember that history is rarely sharply defined when it comes to cultural change. We all probably understand that the laws with regard to these matters changed long ago. The problems of cultural conflict over race still continue. So it would be no surprise at all to see examples of Jim Crow in action for years after the initial finding in 1946 by the Supreme Court. It was this studied lack of progress that resulted in the laws in 64 and 65 that firmly established the law of the land and removed the last legal "wriggle room" those who chose to resist integration exploited. In between, things were very much a gray area.

There were even laws passed after Brown vs Board in 1954 required integration in schools that were in clear violation of the SCOTUS decision. In the 1950s South, many adopted a policy of "massive resistance" to federal orders for integration and the law was just one area of that. Politicians do stupid stuff every day in order to go down on record as opposed to things they will be legally required to do. Examples from the current day of such grandstanding abound, but we won't go there. Yes, a KCS executive opposed to integration may have gone to the extra expense of ordering a design that could work as a Jim Crow car, but he then would have found little opportunity to use it. And at the end of the day, when it was clear such nonsense was coming to an end, I'm fairly certain like many, this hypothetical exec's mind was not changed a bit by the change in the law. That's a sad reality of human nature, but it also adds complexity to an issue that was far from open and shut.

A good reference for this is a National Park Service publication on the history of integration of public accommodations, pages 41-66 are right on this period, but it also goes before and after: www.nps.gov/nhl/learn/themes/CivilRights_DesegPublicAccom.pdf

What I'd like to see would be documentation of these cars in service that demonstrates they were used for Jim Crow accommodations or that the design decisions in ordering the cars included that as a factor. The late date of 1956 would mean that such an order was perhaps part of such "massive resistance" and would be particularly telling of the mindset of at least those responsible for making the order decisions. I think history has proven that if that was the intent, they certainly wasted the stockholder's money on this move.

BTW, not sure when KCS did what, but it was pretty much over by late 1961. The ICC issued a clear order that starting on Nov. 1. 1961, ALL bus service, intrastate as well as interstate was integrated. This was a follow-on to the earlier RR orders. There were likely a few resisters, but all the large outfits had pretty much figured out the laws had changed and moved on. If they did continue after then, it would have been newsworthy in itself as an illicit exception.

[Spikre]

Mike,
not sure if this had some effect on KCS thinking,but they
weren't a Publicly Traded Enterprise back then,they were
fully owned by a non rail industry.
similar to the US Steel Roads.
so they answered to their Owner, but not directly to Stock
Holders.
since the roughly 900 miles of Road operated by KCS was west
of the Mississippi,one of those states must have been Appealing
the Supreme Court Decision rather strongly.
this does need more research.
Spikre

[WP 257]

I read something recently to the effect that in at least some cases there were no--zero--restroom facilities available for blacks on passenger trains. So, partitions may only be scratching the surface. It may be difficult to discern from floor plans alone which cars were used for whom (as it relates to segregated travel).

[mlehman]

I suspect any lack of restrooms occurred only very late in the game. Most of the laws requiring segregation also required putatively equal facilities. That's in line with the watchwords of the last defenders of legal segregation that it was "separate, but equal," which was specifically the concept overturned by Brown vs Board in 1954. And it was also a matter of public health. The RR would be breaking other laws if it didn't provide a restroom.

But with the onset of "massive resistance" as a tactic of the deadender segregationists, it's possible "Closed" signs went up on locked bathrooms simply out of spite. These may not have even been done as a management order, but by the initiative of individual crew members seeking to make life miserable...to what end other than pure hostility is hard to say.