The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 106, July 2002 - April, 2003 Page: 432
Southwestern Historical Quarterly
Sunday because they had either gone home for the weekend or hid out
of fear, as was the case with California native Joel Rucker, who sought
refuge in the home of his uncle, who lived in Marshall."3
Because Friday's demonstrators had come up with their $100oo cash
bond fees, Marshall authorities sought to keep the other detainees in
custody overnight by requiring property as collateral for bail. Local
black attorney Romeo Williams, a former associate of the movement's
attorney C. B. Bunkley, helped solicit local African Americans for bail.
When Bunkley arrived at the basement of a black Marshall church early
Friday evening, Williams had gathered a number of local blacks who
agreed to act as sureties on the bonds. Law officials released most of the
female participants that same night, while the rest of the demonstrators
were freed by early Sunday morning.9
In Friday morning chapel services, under pressure from Marshall's
white leaders, both college presidents called for a cessation of protests,
emphasizing that the students' points had been made and only racial
discord and tension could result from further demonstrations. Both
presidents, however, refused to dismiss the movement as a fad and even
complimented the students' goals. While Bishop students agreed to
cease protests, Wiley students refused to make any commitments. They
gave their answer when they continued sit-ins on Friday afternoon. By
Saturday, April 2, even Wiley students' zeal had waned. Police promptly
arrested six picketers from the Methodist school carrying anti-segrega-
tion signs in front of Woolworth's and Fry-Hodge drug store by mid-
morning. Law enforcement officials charged them under a state statute
that mandated pickets stay a minimum of fifty feet away from the
entrance of the building being picketed. Local African American leaders
bailed these students out of jail by Sunday, April 3.40
Thus ended the Wiley-Bishop Student Movement's sit-in demonstra-
tions. Without pressure from local government officials or an ad hoc com-
mittee, recalcitrant Marshall businesses balked at the idea of concessions.
Not all, however, relished this decision. Manager W. W. Hall of Woolworth's
privately phoned movement representatives and condoned their goals,
but accentuated that his "hands were tied" because of his company's offi-
cial policy of following local customs.41 Movement attorney C. B. Bunkley
8J D. Hurd to Donald Seals Jr., Aug. 19, 2001, telephone interview; Joel Rucker to Donald
SealsJr., Aug. 21, 2001, telephone interview; Dallas MornngNews, Apr. 2, 1960.
S Undated Supplementary Report on Sit-in Demonstrations at Marshall, Texas, Papers of the
NAACP, Part 21 NAACP Relations with the Modern Civil Rights Movement, Group III, Series A,
reel 22, microfilm copy (Jones Library, Baylor University, Waco, Texas; hereafter cited as NAACP
Papers); Affidavit of C. B. Bunkley, Aug 29, 1961, State of Texas v. NAACP Case Records
0o Marshall News Messenger, Apr. 3, 1960.
4"Holmes to Seals, Aug. 13, 2001, telephone interview.
Here’s what’s next.
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page .
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 106, July 2002 - April, 2003, periodical, 2003; Austin, Texas. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101223/m1/500/ocr/: accessed December 13, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.