Erin Lamb
Special Projects Reporter

Tensions between the University community and the administration over the Universityıs policy of segregation swelled to a breaking point toward the end of the 1940s. Both The Hatchet and GW Hillel took an aggressive stance in showing their displeasure with the administration.

In November 1949, The Hatchet featured an editorial titled ³The Time Is Now.² It stated, ³Try as we may to rationalize our way out of it, we are forced to recognize that this University in the nationıs capital is, in this respect, behind the times and insensitive to current trends in American life.² Its final sentence, alluding to those who wished to delay desegregation, stated, ³We believe we should begin Œmoving forwardı now. We feel that the time for action has arrived.²

Irwin Glatstein, director of Hillel, openly supported The Hatchet editorial and publicly pushed for the University to open admission to all students, regardless of race.

Following The Hatchetıs first open endorsement of desegregation, the editorial was again thrust into the limelight in the early months of 1950. Rep. Arthur C. Klein of New York got word of a report from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that University President Cloyd Heck Marvin, whose support of segregation was widely known, had threatened to bar Hillel from campus. Klein accused Marvin of ³an outburst of religious and racial bigotry.²

³The controversy arose, said Rep. Klein last Wednesday, out of Hillelıs endorsement of an editorial appearing in The Hatchet last November which urged the University to change its policy of denying admission to Negroes,² The Hatchet reported.

The situation quickly became explosive. Speaking through the JTA, Klein stated that Marvin had ³talked wildly of a ŒJewish plot against the University,ı² adding that ³in recent weeks (Marvin) conducted himself in a pattern reminiscent of the late and unlamented Dr. Goebbels, (chief Nazi propagandist).²

Hillel and the University issued a joint statement declaring, ³The Hillel Foundation located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C., denies unequivocally and categorically either the authorship or sanction of the press release sent out by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency under the date of Jan. 13, 1950 Š Hillel has enjoyed traditionally cordial relations with The George Washington University under the leadership of its president, Dr. Cloyd Heck Marvin.²

The volatile nature of the charges prompted Rabbi Norman Gerstenfeld, of the Washington Hebrew Congregation, to release a statement to The Hatchet that stated, ³I was distressed to read the release by the Congressman, and I feel that it was most unfair to a great university and its devoted president.² The Hatchet reported that the national director of Hillel, Rabbi Arthur J. Lelyveld, stated that Congressman Klein, ³although undoubtedly well-intentioned, had made serious charges without having ascertained the facts from those directly concerned.² Marvin further stated that ³Hillel national officials told him they regarded Kleinıs attack as a Œlie out of the whole clothı and that it was ridiculous.²

Klein refused to back down, stating in response to Marvinıs denials and the Hillel leaders, ³I have been informed that several spokesmen for Bınai Bırith have suggested that I was in error in my charges of racial and religious bigotry on the part of President Cloyd Heck Marvin of The George Washington University. I am very surprised at this attitude. The spokesmen are in possession of the same facts that prompted my original statement.²

The allegations that Marvin held anti-Semitic views were never proven, but even after the incident, his support of segregation and the Universityıs policy of denying admission to black students still stood strong. Marvin told The Hatchet that the character of the institution provided that religion is not a bar to the admission of any student, but he said nothing specific about race. The Hatchet reported, ³he said that the Universityıs policy was to refuse admittance to Negroes, in conformity with the pattern in Washington and because it is Œtraditionalı not to admit them.²

The University did not allow racial integration until 1954, the same year the Supreme Court ruled that ³separate but equal² educational facilities were unconstitutional in the famous case of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education.