I gave basically this question considerable thought back one summer when I was operational leader of the civil rights movement in Baltimore to open restaurants to all. The two prior summers got no where with moral argument, even some sermons preached. I have long believed that most people act in what they think is their best economic interest, so refocused the effort on making economic pain for restaurants. As a result of the prior summer´s sit in efforts, the Restaurant Association, RA, had organized a quite effective "Telephone Alert Chain" - Any restaurant which an integrated group got into immediately called some others, who then locked their doors with waitress standing at the door to let white only in.
Thus, precise strike timing was required and was achieved thanks to a dozen or more cars available, mainly from rich girls from then all girl school Gaucher College. I.e. a car load of four blacks, a white driver plus one other white was dropped at least a block away from the target. Often they had only one synchronized watch as most of the blacks where bored high school kids with none. Then driver returned to the pick up point to fill up again for 2nd target. About five minutes before strike time, whites went in and ordered then at strike time, the wave of blacks ran in and some sat with the white(s).
On a good weather Sunday, we (the civic interest group) could effectively close 20 or more restaurants for about 2 hours then after evicted by police, some picketed outside, making approximate $25,000 of lost business. Near the end of that summer the RA, turned 180 degrees and joined us asking the MD legislator to make race based discrimination illegal in all of Maryland which they promptly did.
At least one, perhaps more, restaurants went under with the economic strain, waitress had to find other jobs, etc. I pondered if I had a right to cause this, or should the non-productive two-summers of failed "moral persuasion" approach* have been continued? I was never sure of the answer, but as the restaurants expected to have taxes paid by some they would not serve** used to fund the police, the fire department, health inspectors, and even the courts which were already prosecuting at least three blacks, who had refused to leave when told to do so by the police, I continued until the RA joined us.
* The lunch counters in large department stores are there mainly to keep hungry shoppers from leaving the store - typically make no profit or even operate at a small loss. In the prior two summers, moral persuasion and a simple picket line in front of their doors had open one or two to all but most just closed their lunch counters.
** Blacks were more than welcome to by food, often from a special window, and sit on the curb to eat it, but never inside even if raining.
SUMMARY: Yes the owner does have right to refuse service and say “Don´t come back.” IF he does not get tax payer benefits to continue his discrimination against those rejected tax payers, is where I come down on this. For example if you build a duck blind on edge of a lake you own, or non-owed, salt-water, bays, etc. then you have the right to say “Go away and don´t come back.”
Thus, precise strike timing was required and was achieved thanks to a dozen or more cars available, mainly from rich girls from then all girl school Gaucher College. I.e. a car load of four blacks, a white driver plus one other white was dropped at least a block away from the target. Often they had only one synchronized watch as most of the blacks where bored high school kids with none. Then driver returned to the pick up point to fill up again for 2nd target. About five minutes before strike time, whites went in and ordered then at strike time, the wave of blacks ran in and some sat with the white(s).
On a good weather Sunday, we (the civic interest group) could effectively close 20 or more restaurants for about 2 hours then after evicted by police, some picketed outside, making approximate $25,000 of lost business. Near the end of that summer the RA, turned 180 degrees and joined us asking the MD legislator to make race based discrimination illegal in all of Maryland which they promptly did.
At least one, perhaps more, restaurants went under with the economic strain, waitress had to find other jobs, etc. I pondered if I had a right to cause this, or should the non-productive two-summers of failed "moral persuasion" approach* have been continued? I was never sure of the answer, but as the restaurants expected to have taxes paid by some they would not serve** used to fund the police, the fire department, health inspectors, and even the courts which were already prosecuting at least three blacks, who had refused to leave when told to do so by the police, I continued until the RA joined us.
* The lunch counters in large department stores are there mainly to keep hungry shoppers from leaving the store - typically make no profit or even operate at a small loss. In the prior two summers, moral persuasion and a simple picket line in front of their doors had open one or two to all but most just closed their lunch counters.
** Blacks were more than welcome to by food, often from a special window, and sit on the curb to eat it, but never inside even if raining.
SUMMARY: Yes the owner does have right to refuse service and say “Don´t come back.” IF he does not get tax payer benefits to continue his discrimination against those rejected tax payers, is where I come down on this. For example if you build a duck blind on edge of a lake you own, or non-owed, salt-water, bays, etc. then you have the right to say “Go away and don´t come back.”
Last edited by a moderator:
