Anderson v. City of Albany, GA Transcript of Record Vol. V
Public Court Documents
August 30, 1962 - September 21, 1962
Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Anderson v. City of Albany, GA Transcript of Record Vol. V, 1962. 8cf2b451-ac9a-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/0f9877c5-c048-450b-bd5c-5dd495dd6743/anderson-v-city-of-albany-ga-transcript-of-record-vol-v. Accessed November 11, 2025.
Copied!
TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD
UNITED STATES
COURT of APPEALS
F I F T H C I R C U I T
No.
W. G. Anderson, et al
v.
The City of Albany, Georgia, et al.
Volume V
Appellants
Appellees
C. B. King
221 South Jackson Street
Albany, Georgia
Donald L. Hollowell
Cannolene Building (Annex)
859-1/2 Hunter Street
Atlanta, Georgia
Jack Greenberg
Constance Baker Motley
Norman Amaker
10 Columbus Circle
New York 19, N. Y.
Attorneys for Appellants
H. G. Rawls, Esq.
P. O. Box 1496
Albany, Georgia
Eugene Cook, Esq.
Judicial Building
40 Capitol Square
Atlanta, Georgia
E. Freeman Leverett, Esq.
Elberton, Georgia
Attorneys for Appellees
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Middle District of
Georgia, Albany Division
I N D E X
(Volume V)
Page
HEARING ON MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION, NOS. 730, 731 ---------------------------- IB
Consolidation of Cases -------------------------- IB
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss-- ----------------- 13B
Correspondence: Court and Counsel -------------- 14b
Rulings on Motions -------------- ----•------------ 22B
Testimony of Mayor Asa D. Kelley, Jr.
(Adverse Examination)
Direct Examination-------- 24b
Cross Examination-------------------------- 60B
Redirect Examination----------- 80B
Recross Examination-------------- ---------- 92B
Redirect Examination ----------------------- 93B
Recross Examination------------------------- 943
Testimony of Mr. Ollie Luton
Direct Examination -------------------------- 96B
Cross Examination------------------------- 101B
Redirect Examination-- --------- 101B
Testimony of Dr. W. G. Anderson
(Recalled)
Direct Examination ---- --------------------- 102B
Cross Examination--------------------------- 112B
Redirect Examination ------------ -— -------- 143B
Recross Examination ------------------------ 151B
Testimony of Miss Ola Mae Quarterman
Direct Examination--------- ---------------- 155B
Cross Examination-------------------------- 159B
Testimony of Miss Patricia Ann Gaines
Direct Examination I63B
(Volume V - continued)
Page
Testimony of Mr. Charles Jones
Direct Examination ------------------------- 167B
Cross Examination -------------------------- I69B
Testimony of Miss Osie LeVernette Wilson
Direct Examination ------------------------- I78B
Cross Examination-------------------------- I83B
Testimony of Dr. W. G, Anderson
Recross Examination ------------------------- 186b
Plaintiffs' Exhibits Introduced------------- ---- 1883
Future Setting of Hearing----------- ------------- I96B
NOTICE OF DISMISSAL ----------------------------------- I98B-A
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731 IB
ALBANY, GEORGIA
2:00 P.M ., AUGUST 30, 1962
THE COURT: I call for hearing at this
time Civil Action No. 730 and Civil Action No.
7 3 1, which will be heard jointly, concurrently.
Will counsel who represent Plaintiffs in these
two cases identify themselves for the record at
this time?
* * * * * * * *
(Introduction of Counsel)
Mr. Rawls:
Your Honor, in connection with the consoli
dation of the cases for the purpose of trial,
counsel for the Defendant would like to suggest
that all three of the cases be consolidated
together, inasmuch as our complaint in 727 is
identical to our cross-action in #7 3 1; and we
think it would be entirely consistent, since
Your Honor has already indicated that you
intend to consolidate 730 and 7 3 1, to also
consolidate them with #727.
I believe that would be in keeping also
with the motion which was filed by counsel for
the Plaintiffs in these other two cases during
the progress of the trial of #727- A written
motion was filed to consolidate all three cases.
I think that motion was verbally withdrawn but,
after all, it Is the original motion which was
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730, 731 2b
filed in this case. And as I stated, our
position in our cross-action in #731 is identical
and almost verbatim the same thing setup by way
of cause of action by the Plaintiffs In #727;
and the judgment in #731 could completely elimi
nate whatever questions might be presented in
#727.
MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court, I
would like to have the record clarified with
respect to our objection to the consolidation
of 730 and 731 which are now before the Court.
Your Honor may recall that Mr. King, Attorney
for the Plaintiffs, corresponded with Your Honor
prior to this hearing, Indicating our desire
to have 730 heard separately on our motion for
preliminary Injunction.
Now, we feel that the consolidation of
730 with 731 prejudices our right to a prompt
hearing and determination of our motion in 730.
As Your Honor knows, we filed 730 on July 25 of
this year5; and when we filed the complaint, we
filed with It a motion for preliminary injunc
tion. It Is our understanding that when such a
motion is filed we are entitled to as prompt a
hearing as the Court can give in that case.
We feel that the facts In that case are
not really In dispute. Your Honor may recall
that on the trial of 72-7, the Mayor testified
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction* Nos.730*751
that he had received the petition from the Albany
Movement* requesting desegregation of the public
facilities listed therein; that no action had
been taken by the City* and he suggested to the
petitioners that they go to the Federal Court.
So that, there is no dispute as to the
facts in 730. Moreover* the law with respect
to public facilities* as Your Honor knows*is
well settled by many decisions of the United
States Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit. So, there's no doubt as
to the law applicable to those undisputed facts.
Now* when you have a case where the facts
are not In dispute and the law is settled* there
is no discretion to deny a preliminary injunction;
and to consolidate that case with #7 3 1* or at
this point with #727* would obviously prejudice
the rights of these Plaintiffs to a preliminary
injunction In that case. And for that reason we
do not think that this Is a proper case for proper
exercise of this Court's discretion under Rule 42
about consolidating cases* as it will clearly
prejudice our right to preliminary Injunction
with respect to public facilities* which we seek
to have desegregated in #730. And so* with respect
to that* we would like for the record to show
that we request this Court to separately hear
and determine our motion for preliminary Injunc
tion in #730.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730*731
4b
THE COURT: Well, as I indicated in my
correspondence with counsel at the time that I
set these matters down for hearing at this time,
it is the Court's view that the two actions,
730 and 73 1, spring out of the same set of
circumstances and the same overall situation,
and in large degree even involve the same parties,
though, of course, not Identical in all respects.
I "believe there is one Plaintiff In one case
who is not a plaintiff in another case; but
other than that, the cases spring out of the
same general set of circumstances and involve
the same general situation; and In a good many
instances Involve the same sort of evidence and
the same sort of presentation.
Acting under the authority vested in the
Court under Rule 42, It was my thought and it
is still my thought that bo expedite and save
costs and save time, which is the purpose of the
Rule, it is appropriate that 730 and 731 be
consolidated for the purpose of trial, for the
purpose of hearing, and save us all a lot of
time; and I don't believe, if it delays at all,
that it will very greatly delay a decision in
any of the cases. But that is the Court's view
and that's what we will do.
Now also, the Court does recall at one
stage of the proceedings In Civil Action 727,
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
Counsel for the Defendants In that case, who are
counsel for the Plaintiffs In this case, suggest
ed that 727 be consolidated with 730 and 7 3 1;
and we were on the verge of doing that when
counsel withdrew the request orally. I believe
the statement was that she did not want to insist
upon it. At any rate, we did not do that at that
time. But the Court made the observation at that
time that we might later feel that it would be
wise to consolidate all three for the purpose of
hearing to accomplish the general purposes
envisioned by the adoption of Rule 42.
I had wondered whether either side might
suggest today that, since we have taken a lot of
testimony in 727 and the case is not yet decided
by the Court, I had wondered whether counsel for
either side might at this time suggest that,
for purpose of further hearing, that case be
consolidated with 730 and 731.. In order to avoid
the necessity of the introduction of a great deal
of evidence in these cases which has already been
covered In 727.j because by doing that, the record
in #727 could be used as the record In these
cases also.
I had decided In my own mind that If nobody
suggested it, I was going to raise the question
myself. Now that it has been suggested by
counsel for the Defendants in these cases and
6b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
since I have announced my intention to consoli
date 730 and 731 for the purpose of hearing, I
wonder If counsel for the Plaintiffs in 730 and
731 might now concur in the suggestion that 727
be consolidated, in order that all of the evi
dence introduced there might come into consider
ation In these two cases?
MRS. MOTLEY: In reply to that, sir, I
would like first to clarify the record as to
what we sought by way of consolidation in 7 2 7.
At that time you may recall that we had filed a
motion to consolidate but I amended the motion
In effect by saying that what we sought was
consolidation of our motion for preliminary
injunction in 730 and 731 with the hearing that
was then going on. Again, the purpose of that
was to protect our rights to an early hearing
and determination of those motions.
But the Court was of the .view that these
cases or those cases should have been consoli
dated with 727 for the purpose of trial, which
would have necessitated a delay until the
Defendants had answered in 730 and 731. It
was at that time that I said that we did not
desire a consolidation of these cases for the
purpose of trial, that we desired it for the
purpose of motion for preliminary injunction
in 730 and 731} and the Court ruled that that
would not be consolidated for the purpose of
7B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
hearing the motion for preliminary injunction
in 730 and 731. That's the way I understood the
Court to rule; that you were overruling our
request for a consolidation of the motions for
preliminary injunction in 730 and 731 and insist
ing upon consolidation of the three cases for trial.
Now, with respect to testimony which has
already been adduced as to 727, I think that that
testimony is only relevant to our case 731, in
which we seek to enjoin interference with peace
ful picketing. We object to the placing of
that testimony In 730, because 730 is a very
simple action for desegregation of public
facilities and it's quite aside from the right
to picket and to demonstrate against segregation,
which are separate rights flowing from the First
Amendment to the Constitution and protecting
against state interference by the due process
clause of the l4th Amendment.
But the case involving the public facilities
is a simple case involving the equal protection
clause of the l4th Amendment. There Is no doubt
as to the law in that area but there certainly
is considerable doubt as to what is peaceful
picketing and what is a demonstration protected
by the First Amendment to the Constitution and
the l4th Amendment to the Constitution.
8b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
So that, we object to the placing of the
testimony in 727 in 730 because it would becloud
a simple and clear Issue on which this Court can
promptly rule.
THE COURT: Well, at the time the Court
makes a decision in the case the Court will make
every effort to avoid being influenced in the
decision of any one of those cases by any evidence
which is In the record which is not pertinent to
that case, and the Court will make every effort
to do that. But I do think that it would greatly
expedite this proceeding and will probably result
in an earlier decision of all of the matters
if the record In 727 is consolidated with 730
for the purpose of hearing, if the record in
that case, all evidence Introduced In that case,
could be considered as having been introduced in
these cases, and such parts as may not be per
tinent to consideration of one case or the other,
the Court will attempt to exclude that from its
consideration at the time.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Your Honor, may we have
just a second?
THE COURT: Yes...........
MRS, MOTLEY: What we would like to do at
this point is move for a continuance of the
hearing in #731 and proceed now with the hearing
on our motion for preliminary injunction In 730
9B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
for the same reasons which we gave before, because
we think that 730 is a simple case involving the
equal protection clause of the l4th Amendment,
in which there is no dispute as to the facts
and the law is well settled and we are entitled
to a preliminary injunction in it.
THE COURT: All right, I overrule the
motion and we will proceed with the hearing of
the three cases 727, 730 and 731 being consoli
dated for the purpose of hearing, but not con
solidated for the purpose of decision. By that
I mean to make it clear that the Court may,
after the conclusion of the hearing, decide one
case at one time, another at another time and
another at another time or may decide all three
at one time.
But for the purpose of hearing the cases
are consolidated.
Now, I notice in Civil Action No. 730 —
MR. HOLLOWELL: Pardon me, if I might Your
Honor: Counsel Is not clear, at least I am not,
as to the distinction which the Court might be
making in the use of terms when the Court says
"hearing"? Is the Court referring to the hear
ing on the motions for preliminary injunction?
In 731 an answer has been filed; In 730, no
answer has been filed. We presume that the
hearing would be on the motions for preliminary
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos,730.,731
10B
injunction but I am not clear in my own mind as
to what the ultimate decision of the Court has
been in connection with this matter?
THE COURT: I shall try to make it clear:
There is a motion for preliminary injunction
in Civil Action 730. There is a motion for
preliminary Injunction In Civil Action 731.
There is a question of preliminary injunction
remaining undecided,, the record still being open.,
in Civil Action No. 727. So., we will now proceed
with the hearing with regard to the motions for
preliminary injunction in all three cases.
MR, RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases,
I think under the rules a motion that we have
filed in 730, or motions rather, being a motion
to dismiss and a motion for more specific and
definite allegations, would take precedence over
any other motion.
THE COURT: Yes, I was coming to that next
as soon as we got the question about procedure
out of the way.
MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court, I am
sorry to have to be up again, but we do have
another motion we would like to make with
respect to these cases. We would like to move
the Court for an order dismissing #731 pursuant
to the provisions of Rule 4l.
113
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos,730,731
THE COURT: Well, that is the case, I
believe, 731 in which the Defendants have filed
a cross-action, is it not?
MR. RAWLS: Yes, Your Honor.
MRS. MOTLEY: That's right.
MR. RAWLS: Of course, we object to the
granting of the motion of Plaintiffs In that
case to dismiss, on the ground that our cross
action might go out with that dismissal; and
we don't think they have a right to dismiss it
and prejudice our rights.
THE COURT; In other words, the Defendants
object to the dismissal of that action?
MR. RAWLS: Yes sir.
MRS. MOTLEY: Well, we think, as Your Honor
has already pointed out, that crossaction has
really been tried before this Court, the cross
action in 731 has been substantially tried here,
and I can’t think of any further testimony that
we could put on. The only thing we were .going
to do with respect to 731 was to put In the
record those arrests that were made for what we
considered peaceful picketing and peaceful
attempt to use the library and so forth. That
is a matter of record here in the Recorder's
Court or ’whatever the Court is, and this Court
has heard the evidence in that case and I think
to try that case would certainly be a 'waste of
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
1.2B
this Court's time and expense, because there Is
no further evidence for either side to be put
in on this question.
THE COURT: Of course, what the parties
might offer in evidence is something that the
Court cannot know and, since the Defendants,
who have filed a crossaction, are objecting
to the dismissal of the case, of course, the
Court overrules the motion to dismiss.
Now, in Civil Action 730* the Court notes
that the Defendants in that case have filed
certain motions and It would be appropriate at
this time to take up and dispose of those motions
before we go further.
MR, RAWLS: Now, If Your Honor please,
these motions invoke rather technical legal
points and I have asked my two young associates
with Your Honor1s indulgence to go into as much
detail as the Court will permit in presenting
our legal theories on the motions.
MRS, MOTLEY: In order to save time, Your
Honor, I would like to say this: We are willing
to give them a more definite statement, every
thing they have asked for we are willing to give
them; so, they don't have to argue that.
MR. RAWLS: If Your Honor please, we
prefer to conduct our side of the case according
to our own views. I will ask Mr. Burt to submit
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction,, Nos.730, 731
our presentation.
It has been called to my attention, if
Your Honor pleases, that the Plaintiffs are in
default as to our crossaction in 731 and we
move the Court to enter a default judgment in
that case. The rules gave them twenty (20) days
I believe to file an answer to our crossaction
and none has been filed; and we have presented
and filed with the Clerk the affidavit required
under the Rules and we ask the Court to direct
the Clerk to mark that case in default.
MR. LEYERETT: May it please the Court,
the case has already been marked in default
pursuant to the rules and we are asking at this
time for a judgment on our crossaction in 731*
for the purpose of the record.
THE COURT: All right, go ahead. I will
rule later on that motion.
MR. BURT: May It please the Court,
in #730 the Defendants have filed a motion to
dismiss and I would like to present this motion
at this time.
* * *
(Argument on defendants' motion to dismiss)
All right, now, Is there any further argument
in connection with the motion from the Defendants,
in connection with support of your motion?
i4b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction* Nos.730*731
MR. BURT: No sir* that completes our motion*
Your Honor please.
THE COURT: All right* I will hear from
counsel for Plaintiffs.
MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court* I don’t
know whether the argument is part of the record in this
case but before I proceed to answer the motion to djsirdss
here* I want the record to show that the Defendants in
730 were permitted to argue for more than two hours on
a motion to dismiss.
* * *
(Further argument on motion to dismiss)
THE COURT: Allright* I'll let you have my
views on your motion when we reconvene in the morning
for further proceedings. We will take a recess now until
tomorrow morning at 9 3̂0.
5:05 P. M.* AUGUST 30, 1962: HEARING RECESSED
9:30 A.M .* AUGUST 31, 1962:
MR. RAWLS: Your Honor pleases* at the close
of the session yesterday afternoon* counsel for the
Plaintiffs took occasion to state into the record the
length of time which was consumed by my associate* Mr.
Burt* in reading what vie regarded as applicable prin
ciples of law In connection with our motion to dismiss
and for a more definite statement.
In the 45 years that I have been at the Bar
that’s the first time a situation like that has developed
and I don't know the connotation; I don’t know why
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730^731
15B
that had to be stated into the record. But since it
has been stated, I desire to state a matter into the
record.
On August l4, 1962, Attorney C. B. King addressed
a letter to Your Honor, a copy of which was sent to
Attorney Motley and Attorney Hollowell, which I desire
to read into the record:
"Honorable J. Robert Elliott, United States District
Judge For the Middle District of Georgia, Columbus,
Georgia: Re: Civil Action No. 730, Temporary Injunction
sought for desegregation of public facilities in the
City of Albany. Dear Judge Elliott:
"Your attention is called to the above subject case
now pending in the Albany Division.
"Though I recognize that your Court schedule is
perhaps congested, I am yet interested at this time, if
at all possible, In a determination by the Court of
the earliest possible time at which a hearing on said
case might be had. My principal concern, in this
matter, addresses itself to the facilities case, No.
730, and not to Civil Action No. 7 3 1.
"Please advise this office of the earliest possible
date on which the Court will be able to hear said
matter.
"With every good wish, I am, Very truly yours,
C. B. King", copies to Mr. G. H. Rawls, Attorney at
law; copy to Mrs. Constance Baker Motley, Attorney at
Law; and copy to Mr. Donald L. Hollowell, Attorney at
law."
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
i6b
In response to that letter, on August 17* Your
Honor addressed this letter to all counsel of record,
addressed to all counsel of record: C. B. King, 221
S. Jackson Street, Albany, Georgia; Mr. Donald L.
Ho Howell, 859 i Hunter St. N. W., Atlanta, Georgia.
Mr. Jack Greenberg, 10 Columbus Circle, New York,
N.Y.j Mrs. Constance Baker Motley, 10 Columbus Circle,
Newr York, New York; Mr. William M. Kunstler, 156 Fifth
Avenue, New York, N. Y.; Mr. Clarence B. Jones, 500
Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y., Mr. H. G. Rawls,
P. 0. Box 1496, Albany, Georgia; Mr. Eugene Cook,
Judicial Building, 40 Capitol Square, Atlanta, Ga.;
Mr. E. Freeman Leverett, Elberton, Georgia; Mr. Jesse
W. Walters, Perry, Walters & Langstaff, Albany, Georgia;
:"Re: W. G. Anderson et al v. City of Albany"
MRS. MOTLEY: Excuse me, Mr. Rawls, excuse me,
Your Honor: In order to save time, we are agreeable
that all of those letters go Into the record, Your Honor.
We think they ought to be In there if that's what he
desires, rather than reading them into the record.
We agree that they ought to be in there and we think
they ought to be made a part of the record in this case.
THE COURT: Well, apparently he intends to
have some comment to make about them. You may go ahead,
Mr. Rawls.
MR. RAWLS: "Mr. Jesse W. Walters, Perry,
Walters & Langstaff, Albany, Georgia. Re: W. G.
Anderson, et. al. v. City of Albany, et. al., Civil
i?B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
Action No. 730, Albany Division; W. G. Anderson, et. al.
v. City of Albany, et. al., Civil Action No. 731*
Albany Division. Gentlemen:
"I now wish to inform counsel concerning the
earliest time at which the above identified matters can
be heard. Next week, that is the week of August 20, is
out of the question because the court is otherwise
obligated.
"For the first 3'k days of the week of August 27 we
will be engaged in disposing of the criminal arraign
ment calendar and holding pre-trial conferences in
connection with the civil cases to be tried at the
regular term for the Columbus Division of this court.
The last pre-trial conference Is set for 10:00 a. m.
on Thursday, August 30. That matter will be concluded
in time for me to be in Albany by 2:00 p. m. on that
date, August 30, and it would be possible for us to
begin the hearing on these matters at that time and
we could devote the remainder of that day and all day
Friday, August 3-1* to them.
"The regular term of the Columbus Division of
this court convenes on Tuesday, September 4. Monday,
September 3* is Labor Day. It is anticipated that the
Columbus term of court will require three weeks. This
means that If we were unable to complete the trial of
these matters on August 30 and 31 as above mentioned, it
would be necessary that we recess the hearing until
sometime during the week of September 24 and resume it
i8b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction* Nos.730,731
"at that time. The court will be in Albany the .first par
of that week for the purpose of conducting pre-trial
conferences in connection with civil cases to be tried
at the regular Albany term of Court which convenes on
Monday* October 1. These pre-trial conferences in
Albany will probably not require more than 1 or l|-
days* and that means that we would have about 3 -̂ or
4 days available for the trial of these matters at that
time and could doubtless conclude them before it became
necessary for us to convene the regular term of the
court at Albany on Monday of the following week.
"An answer has not yet been filed in Civil Action
No. 730* but I anticipate that when an answer is filed
it will be apparent that Civil Action No. 730 and Civil
Action No. 731 should be consolidated and tried together
and It is my intention that this shall be done. I men
tion this now because this will certain affect the time
required for the trial of the cases. Counsel for the
parties in the respective cases know better than the
court does how many witnesses will be used and how much
evidence will be presented and you* therefore* probably
have a better idea about the time which will be required
to try these cases than does the court.
"What I suggest and request Is that counsel for
Plaintiffs and Defendants confer among yourselves and
decide whether you think It best to begin the trial of
these matters at 2:00 P. m. on August 30 and go as far
as we can with the hope of being able to conclude them*
Hearing on Motion for Preliminary Injunction* Nos.730*731
"or whether it would be better to take them up during
the week of September 24* when we could conclude them
with knowledge that it would not be necessaryto recess
the hearing. I wish to make it clear that I have no
objection to beginning the hearing on August 30* even
though it does necessitate recessing it for completion
on a later date. The court is willing to accommodate
itself to the wishes of counsel insofar as possible,
may be that some of counsel have conflicts which will
make it impossible to consider any of the dates which
I have suggested. If that develops* then I suppose
the only thing we can do is put the matters down for
hearing during the regular course of the term for the
Albany Division which convenes on October 1* and that
is normally what I would do In a situation of this type
but I have In mind* as counsel for the parties doubtles
have* that It is entirely possible that an earlier
hearing on these matters might contribute something
to calming the troubled waters which are known by all
of us to exist. It is for this reason that I am sug
gesting the earliest possible dates instead of waiting
until the regular Albany term.
After counsel have conferred please let me hear
from you at your earliest convenience."
Now* if Your Honor pleases* responsive to that
letter* which Is dated August 17* on August 18* without
conferring with me and* as far as I know* any other
2 OB
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary injunction, Nos.730,731
"attorney representing the other side of these cases,
Attorney King wrote this letter:
"Honorable J. Robert Elliott, Judge, United States
District Court, For the Middle District of Georgia,
Columbus, Georgia. Re: W. G. Anderson, et. al. v. City
of Albany, et. al., Civil Action No. 730, Albany Division
W. G. Anderson, et. al. v. City of Albany, et. al.
Civil Action No. 731, Albany Division.
Dear Judge:
"Thank you for your letter of August 17, 1962.
Responsive to same please know that counsel for plain
tiffs acknowledge the obviously congested schedule
under which Your Honor is presently burdened. However,
out of our concern for fulfilling what we believe to be
an appropriate demand of the public Interest, as well as
the right of the plaintiffs to a speedy hearing and
determination on their motion for a preliminary Injunction
pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Proced
ure, we are respectfully Insisting upon a hearing and
determination on the motion for a preliminary Injunction
in Civil Action No. 730 dealing with the desegregation
of public facilities, at 2:00 P.M. on August 30, 1962.
"As was previously indicated, counsel for
plaintiffs would not, on the above date, be seeking
a hearing on the motion for a preliminary Injunction
In the picketing complaint, Civil Action No. 731, but
would seek a hearing thereon at a.time subsequent."
21B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
"Now, if Your Honor pleases, that was stated
after Your Honor had stated that you intended to
consolidate the two cases ana that, as I say, without
any consultation at all with other counsel, as far
as I know, and I know not with me; and as far as I
have been able to learn with any other counsel connected
with the case or any other party connected with the
case. And he concludes the letter like this:
"If the Court's thinking in this matter is at
variance with that of counsel, we respectfully request
to be Immediately advised in order that we may proceed
to seek to secure the right of plaintiffs to a prompt
hearing and determination on their motion for a pre
liminary injunction in Civil Action No. 730, by applying
to the Chief Judge of the District, or Chief Judge of
the Circuit for the appointment of another Judge whose
court calendar is less incumbered. Respectfully yours,
C. B. King, of counsel. Copy, Honorable Elbert P. Tuttle,
Honorable W. A. Bootle, Mr. H. G. Rawls, Attorney at Law,
Mr. Donald L. Hollowell, Attorney at Law, Mrs. Constance
Baker Motley, Attorney at Law."
Now, If Your Honor pleases, that may or may not
be an effort at intimidation. It sounds to me like it's
an attempt to intimidate somebody and I hope he's not
undertaking to intimidate this Court. I wanted the record
to show that, in response to the remark that counsel
made concerning the length of time that we consumed
22B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
without any interference in presenting what we regarded
were the pertinent legal principles involved on our
side of the case.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. KING: If Your Honor pleases, responding
to counsel, to the comments of counsel, opposing counsel,
I would first of all like to address myself to the Court
and make It eminently clear that, notwithstanding the
unsavory construction imposed upon his letter by
opposing counsel, counsel had no intention of Intimidating
or doing any other thing that might even import an
inference of insulting the dignity of this Court.
THE COURT: Well, whatever -- I think nothing
further need be said along this line. Whatever the
Intention might have been, the tone of the letter
and the fact that copies were sent to the Chief Judge
of the Fifth Circuit and the Chief Judge of this
District, whatever the intention may have been, I can
assure counsel for Plaintiffs and counsel for the
Defendants that this Court is not Intimidated, nor can
this Court be intimidated.
Now, at this time I want to comment on the motion
which was heard on yesterday. At this time I sustain
the Defendant's motion to strike the City of Albany
as a party Defendant in Civil Action No. 730, and the
City of Albany is eliminated as a party Defendant.
I am going to defer ray ruling on Defendants ’
motion for entry of judgment on their cross-action
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730^731
23B
in Civil Action No. 731 for later decision.
I am going to defer a ruling on Defendants'
motion to strike Count Five of the complaint in Civil
Action No. 730 for later decision.
I am also going to defer a ruling on Defendants’
motion to dismiss Civil Action No. 730 for later
decision.
The reason I do that is because counsel for both
Plaintiffs and Defendants cited and read from in some
instances some cases with which the Court is not
familiar to the extent of having read them. I would
prefer to have the benefit of a complete reading of
some of those cases myself, rather than relying just
upon the excerpts that were read by counsel.
For that reason, desiring to give a more complete
study than I have been able to do in the short time
that I have had since the motions were filed, I want
to defer a ruling on those motions, and I am deferring
ruling on those motions until a later time.
Now, of course, at that point we might simply
recess this matter until I made a ruling but I do not
wish to do that. We will proceed with the hearing on
these cases subject to my subsequent ruling on the
motions to which I have referred.
Counsel for the Plaintiffs may now proceed.
MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court, yesterday
in my argument I overlooked the Defendants' motion for
a default judgment. I had Intended to comment at that
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731 24b
time on it. I had intended to point out that the
crossclaim in 731 is identical with the affirmative
complaint in 727. We filed an answer in 727 after the
crossclaim was filed and we, as you know, tried to
consolidate those cases; and it was our Intention that
the answer filed in 727 would be the answer to the
cross-claim, as it was identical; and it would certainly
burden the record to file two answers saying the same
thing. So that, we would move the Court for leave to
consider the answer filed In #727, if the Court con
siders an answer to that crossclaim necessary, in that
case. I don't think it's necessary, as I say, because
we had filed an answer in the other case which was the
same thing; and if the answer Is technically necessary,
then, we would ask the Court to consider the answer
in 727 as the answer to the cross-claim.
My first witness today is Mayor Kelley, Your
Honor.
MAYOR ASA D, KELLEY, JR,
a party Defendant, called as
adverse party by Plaintiffs,
being first duly sworn,
testified on
ADVERSE EXAMINATION
BY MRS. MOTLEY:
Q Would you please state your full name for the
record, sir?
A
Q
A
Asa D. Kelley, Jr.
Are you the Mayor of the City of Albany?
I am the elected Mayor of Albany.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
25B
Q How long have you been the Mayor of the City of
Albany?
A Since January of i960.
0. Then, you were the Mayor of Albany in November,
1961, were you not?
A I was.
Q Do you recall that in November, 1961, Dr.
Anderson, who is the President of the Albany Movement,
presented you with a petition regarding desegregation of
public facilities in the City of Albany?
A Dr. Anderson from time to time has presented
several petitions. I do not recall the exact dates of any
of them but I think it is a fair statement to say that during
the month of November, of '6l a petition was presented.
Q Regarding public facilities in the City of Albany?
A Yes, as a matter of fact, my recollection is that
the demand was for desegregation of all facilities, all
public facilities; and it also Included the library, which
is controlled by a board of trustees,* the hospital, which
is controlled by a hospital authority; and they sought
municipal employment in all areas with emphasis and priority
on the police force and utilities. And in that connection
I think at that time or shortly thereafter, applications
were made by some 2 or 3 members of the Negro community -
Chief Pritchett can give you the exact dates, I don't know -
and none of these applicants have passed the examination.
As a matter of fact, the scores, I think, were less than
35 or 40 for each one of them.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731 26b
In addition, Dr. Anderson wanted jury representa
tion. Of course, we have no control over the petty of
grand juries in the Superior or City Court of Albany.
That’s a matter exclusively - which addresses itself
exclusively to the respective courts.
And then, he also wanted job opportunities in
privately owned facilities catering to the Negro trade.
It has always been the policy of the City not to Interfere
with private business, if at all possible to avoid such
interferencej and, of course, the City has no jurisdiction
over how and In what manner a privately owned business is
operated,’ but that is a matter which, in my judgment,
addresses itself to the owner or proprietor of the facility.
I have a copy of this November 17 demand, which
apparently comes from W. G. Anderson, Chairman and M. S.
Page, Secretary, of the Albany Movement; but he purports to
represent the Youth Council, the Ministerial Alliance, the
Criterion Club, the Federated Women’s Clubs, the Student
Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, the Negro Voter League,
and the Naacp.
MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court, this is
a certified copy of the petition presented In the other
case and I suppose we can have It re-marked for this
case.
THE COURT: Suppose, Mr. Clerk, since it is
in evidence in the other case, that you leave the
designation which was placed on it in that case;
in other words, make some Indication about the case,
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
the case number, when you identify it for this purpose
to distinguish it from its evidentiary value In the
other case.
MR. RAWLS: Your Honor, she states this is a
certified copy; I wonder by whom?
MRS. MOTLEY: Well, I believe it’s the Clerk,
Mr. Cowart, the Clerk of the Court.
THE COURT: Oh, I misunderstood counsel's
statement. This is not the same Instrument —
MRS. MOTLEY: Yes It is.
THE COURT: It Is the same instrument that
was Introduced in the other case?
MRS, MOTLEY: That's right, and we asked the
Clerk to copy it and has identification on It but I
suppose It should
this case.
be marked in 730, as an exhibit in
THE COURT: Well, let me see it, just a
minute. I'm not sure that I understand. . .Well,
it's a different piece of paper; In other words, this
Is a certified copy?
MRS. MOTLEY: Yes.
THE COURT:
introduced?
Of another paper which was
MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, that's right.
THE COURT: It's not the same piece of paper?
MS. MOTLEY: No sir.
THE COURT: Well, there can't be any confusion,
I thought it was the same paper
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
28b
Q Mrs. Motley: Mayor Kelley, I would like to
show you PLAINTIFFS' EXHIBIT No. 1 for identification, and
ask you if this is the same petition which you have in your
hand or a copy of it?
A It appears to be the same, yes.
Q Now, directing your attention to this petition,
Mayor Kelley, I would like to ask you, do you have any
publicly owned parks in the City of Albany,
A We do have.
Q What are the names of those parks?
A We have Tift Park, Tallullah Massey, Carver
Park, and numerous smaller parks which are used primarily
for neighborhood gatherings and small groups of people
interested in athletics, the number of which I do not know;
but there are many such parks throughout the City of Albany,
both for use - used by both the Negroes and the whites.
Q Under whose jurisdiction are the public parks
in the City of Albany?
A Under our form of government which Is known as
a city manager form of government, the City Manager Is
charged with the responsibility of the operation of all
of the facilities of the City, Including the parks, and
excluding the water, gas and light department, which is
managed by another person. The person responsible to Mr.
Roos, the City Manager, insofar as recreation is concerned,
is Mr. Rod Blalock. The maintenance of the parks Is carried
out by Mr. Wills.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731 29B
Q Is there a recreation committee of the Board of
City Commissioners?
A There Is a committee, the title of which I believe
is Parks and Recreation Committee.
Q Who is the chairman of that Committee?
A I think that Mr. Mott, Commissioner Mott, is
the Chairman. I ’m not sure. I know that Commissioner
Collins, Mayor Pro-Tern Collins was chairman last year but
I revised the committee assignments In January of this year
and I don’t recall; but I think that It's Commissioner Mott
from the Second Ward.
Q Now, what’s the function of that Committee?
A The function of any City Commissioner, including
the Mayor and the Mayor Pro-Tem, is simply to formulate
policy and to communicate that policy to the City Manager,
who has the responsibility of operating the City in accord
ance with the policy established by the Commission.
Q So that, the function of this Recreation
Committee of the Board of City Commissioners, of which
you are a member as the Mayor and the Mayor Pro-Tem is
also a member, Is to determine the recreation policy of the
City of Albany?
A And to make recommendations to the City Commission
for the adoption of an over-all policy. The Committee itself
has no authority to establish a policy but simply to
Investigate and to determine, from talking to people involved
and witnesses, the best policy to be adopted by the City
Commission. A recommendation is then made to the City
30B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730^731
Commission and the City Commission as a whole either adopts
or rejects the recommendation of the committee. And the same
is true of any other facet of the City government.
Q What is the policy of the Board of City
Commissioners with respect to these parks, as relates
to their use by Negro and white citizens of the City of
Albany?
A We have, I suppose, one of the finest zoos
anywhere in the South and a playgrourd area, which to
my knowledge or as far as I know, has never been segregated.
The Negroes and whites have always been free to go to the
zoos in that area, to visit there and look at the animals
and what not.
The policy, insofar as the mechanical rides
is concerned, is that the Negroes may, if they wish to
pay the price, ride on the rides, I do not know whether
they have utilized them. I haven’t been to the parks
recently. We have many picnic tables and areas which
are used for cooking.
We have established a policy of permitting the
concessionaire the authority to assign these tables. They
are assigned on the basis of the number of people, whether
or not children are involved, and the period of time the
people making application for the tables want to use them.
These facilities have been used by both Negro and white on
the basis of assignment by the Concessionaire based on the
items I ’ve just outlined.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
313
We also have a swimming pool at Tift Park,* we
have one at Carver Park for the Negroes. I am informed
and believe that no Negro person has ever asked to be sold
a ticket at the ticket counter at the white pool. There
have been Negroes present at the park but none have actually
requested that a ticket be sold at the ticket counter,
according to my best Information.
Any other areas you would like for me to cover
on this?
Q, Well, let's find out first whether you have a
written policy of the Board of Commissioners regarding the
use of Tift Park by Negroes and whites?
A There Is no ordinance, to my knoivledge, on the
books relative to the use of recreational facilities by
Negroes and whites.
Q Is there a resolution of the Board of City
Commissioners regarding this policy?
A If there is, I'm not aware of it.
Q Are you aware of any written policy regarding
Tift Park or any other part in the City of Albany?
A I am not.
Q Now, with respect to the swimming pool in Tift
Park, Is it your testimony that Negroes are permitted to use
that pool?
A That Is not my testimony. My testimony is that
no Negro has ever tried to purchase a ticket to be used for
admission to the pool at Tift Park.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
32B
Q All right, now let me ask you, what is the
policy with regard to the use of that pool by Negroes?
A What is the policy?
Q Yes?
A I don’t know that the City Commission has ever
formulated any policy by resolution or ordinance. However,
in my judgment, because of custom and because of longstanding
agreement between all of the citizens in the community, the
white pool or pool for whites at Tift Park would be used
exclusively by whites and the one at Carver Park would be
used exclusively by the Negroes.
Q, All right, so it’s your testimony that in the
City of Albany, there is a custom, you say, on the part
of the citizens of the City that Tift Park pool is limited
to whites and Carver Park pool is limited to Negroes, Is
that it?
A Yes, that's true, and it has been true since
the pools were constructed. And the same is true of the
Teen Center. We have a teen center at Carver Park for the
Negroes and we have a teen center at Tift Park for the
whites; and the same is true for many other facilities.
Q, What other facilities?
A Pardon?
Q What other facilities?
A Recreational facilities. They use Carver Park,
The Negroes do, the white use Tift Park, but there are
other parks in the City being used by the Negroes.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
333
Q, Do you know when Carver Park was built for
Negroes?
A I do not know when the park was built. I know
that the Teen Center was dedicated during the administration
of Mr. Bill McAfee, which was some five years ago. But
now, when the Carver Park Itself was actually developed and
the pool put In, I just simply do not recall.
Q In addition to the pool and the teen center,
do you know of any other facilities at Carver Park?
A To my knowledge, no, because I have not actually
observed any other facilities except, of course, the swings
and the ordinary playground equipment, and the hobby shop,
which is located in the teen center, In the rear of the
teen center, and which has been used quite extensively by
the Negro community, as has the hobby shop at Tift Park
which has been used quite extensively by the white community,
both children and adults.
Q, Now, the trains which you have in Tift Park,
do you know whether they have trains of that kind In Carver
Park?
A I have never seen any there. Nor do I recall any
request by any person who owned such equipment for permission
to operate at Carver Park. I'm sure that If a person who
owned such equipment would want to place It at Carver Park,
the City would be glad to grant them permission to do so;
of course, subject to the regulations established by the
City Manager as a result of policy established by the City
Commission, insofar as it relates, say, to the price of
Hearing on Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
34b
the ride. The City Commission has established the price
of the rides to be what we think is low enough to encourage
children to ride the rides. But if anyone wants permission
to operate such equipment at Carver Park, I'm certain that
the City Commission would be glad to give them permission.
Q Let me ask you this, these rides in Tift Park,
is this an operation by private person?
A By a private person, yes.
Q What's the name of the private person out there?
A I do not recall. It's under a contractual
arrangement. As a matter of fact, I just signed the
contract about two weeks, two or three weeks ago, but I
just simply do not recall the name of the lessee.
Under the terms of this agreement he is to
operate the rides and carry liability insurance and charge
so much for the rides, and the City charges him, I think,
an amount which is just about equivalent to the use of the
electricity that he would use in the operation, some nominal
amount, the idea of the City being to encourage operators
to supply and provide these facilities. Of course, the City
has no funds with which to purchase this equipment and .
operate it itself.
0, Is there anything in that contractual arrangement
which requires the lessee to permit all citizens, that is
colored and white, Negro and white, of the city of Albany
to use that facility?
MR. RAWLS: If Your Honor pleases, we submit
that the contract itself would be the highest and best
35B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
evidence and we object to that question as the contract
is made a matter of written record in the City Clerk’s
office.
THE COURT: Is it readily available?
MR. RAWLS: Yes sir, it's readily available.
THE COURT: Well, I think the objection is
good on the basis as stated, the contract would be the
highest and best evidence; if it's readily available,
let’s get it.
MRS. MOTLEY: All right, we’ll get the contract,
Your Honor.
Q Let me ask you this, have you discussed with the
lessee of the trains the policy with respect to the use of
those trains by Negro and white citizens in the light of all
of the activities by the Albany Movement?
A I don’t recall ever having any discussion with
the lessee, except when I take my children out to the park.
Q What about the swimming pool, is that operated
by a private lessee?
A No.
Q. In Tift Park?
A The tickets are sold by a lessee, it is my
understanding, but the pool Itself Is operated by the City.
Q Now, has there ever been any discussion at the
meetings of the Board of City Commissioners regarding the
use of that pool in Tift Park by Negroes?
MR, RAWLS: Now, if your Honor pleases,
that’s a rather sweeping question. I imagine it would
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
36B
be difficult for the Mayor to remember every discussion
that’s been had by the members of the City Commission;
and it is true also, and this is the ground of my
objection, that whatever discussion might have been
had would not be the policy of the City, but whatever
resolution is passed and put on the minutes of the
Board would establish the policy. In other words,
there are three commissioners or two commissioners
and the Mayor who could talk all day about something.
That would be possible and yet that would not establish
the policy for the City. The proper way to establish
what the fixed policy of the City is, which can't do
anything at all, as Your Honor knows, being a corpora
tion except by formal action, either by resolution or
ordinance,* and, of course, the minutes of the City
Commission are open, public records, and certified
extracts or certification of those records would be
the highest evidence of whatever the policy was.
THE COURT: The question was, has there ever
been any discussion; and I think that that question can
be answered without going into what the discussion was.
The question so far is only as to whether there has
ever been any discussion.
Now, I agree with counsel that only what has
been decided by resolution or formal action of one kind
or another, only that would be evidence of what the
City's position is. But the question so far is, has
there here been any discussion, and I think that
37B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction* Nos.730,731
question can be answered. I overrule the objection.
A The Witness: Yes, there has been some discussion.
Q Mrs. Motley: All right, when did this discussion
take place?
A I don't recall.
Q Has it been within the last three months?
A I'm sure that there has been some discussion
relative to the matter within the last three months.
MR. RAWLS: Now if Your Honor pleases, we
object to this as being illegal, irrelevant and imma
terial, because whatever discussion, as I pointed out
In my previous objection, might have been had would not
have any binding effect until confirmation was had by
a formal passing of a resolution or an ordinance
formulating It. So, the time when or where any dis
cussion was had would be illegal, irrelevant and
Immaterial.
THE COURT: Well, it's possibly technicalljr
so but I overrule the objection, because the question
is simply, first, has there been any discussion; and,
second, when has the discussion taken place. You see,
she Is not attempting to go into what the discussion
was. Of course, only formal action would be admissi
ble as far as establishing the policy. But she's simply
asking him, has it been discussed and If so when.
I'll allow the question. I overrule the objection.
MRS. MOTLEY: I believe the question was
answered?
THE COURT: I think it was.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
38B
Q Mrs. Motley: As a result of that discussion,
did the Board of City Commissioners take any action?
MR. RAWLS: Now if Your Honor pleases,
objection is good to that question, on the ground that
if they did take any action, it would be available by
certified copy of the minutes of the City Commission.
THE COURT: She's asking him did they
take any official action. I don't believe she used
the 'word "official".
MRS, MOTLEY: Well, that’s what I meant, I ’m
sorry.
THE COURT: Yes. You’re asking him, did
the City take any official action as a result of this
discussion?
MRS. MOTLEY: Yes.
MR. RANTS: Now, if Your Honor pleases,
there would be strictly higher and better evidence
because that would of necessity have to be by resolution
or ordinance.
THE COURT: I agree when we reach that point
but we haven’t reached that point. The question now
is, did the City take any official action, and that’s
a proper questionj and I overrule the objection.
The question is, did the City take any official action?
A The Witness: Yes sir, I understand the question,
Your Honor. I was just trying to recall. There has been so
much going on In the past nine months as a result of all of
this activity I just simply can’t recall. But I can say this
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
39B
that I do know - now, whether this was done by resolution
or by - I know it was not by ordinance - but whether any
resolution was adopted, I don't know; but it was the feeling
of the Commission —
MR. RAWLS: Now, I object to that, if Your
Honor pleases.
The Witness: All right.
MR. RAWLS: The Mayor can't legally state
what the feeling of the Commission was,
THE COURT: Yes, I think we ought to limit
ourselves and I have already indicated what my view
about that is; and Mrs. Motley has not asked him to
relate anything of an official nature as yet; if she
does, I think a copy of the ordinance or the resolu
tion itself would be the best evidence of it. So, if
any official action was taken, I believe you stated
that you can't recall?
A The Witness: I do not recall.
THE COURT: Well, he can't recall whether any
official action was taken or not.
Q Mrs. Motley: All right, If any official action
was taken, it would be reflected in the minutes of the Board
of City Commissioners, would it not?
A It would.
Q Now, you have another park In the City of Albany,
I believe you stated, Tallulah-Massey Park?
A Yes.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
40B
Q, Is that for Negroes or whites?
A There is no ordinance or resolution of the
Commission specifying whether It's for Negroes or whites.
Because of geographical location and because of custom and
tradition, it's been used predominantly by white.
Q, Do you know when that park was opened?
A Again, I don’t recall the date. It’s been there
for several years.
Q Do you know what facilities they have there?
A Swimming pool, picnic table - tables, and the
usual playground equipment. It’s about in the same category
as Carver Park, with the exception of the Teen Center. We
do not have a teen center at Tallulah Massey.
Q Did you say you have a swimming pool there?
A Yes, there’s a swimming pool there.
Q, Now, I believe you said by "custom and tradition"
this park has been used by whites, is that right?
A Predominantly, yes.
Q, When you say "predominantly", what do you mean?
A I mean that some Negroes may use the park, I don’t
know. I don’t know whether they do or they don’t. I do
know that there is no resolution or ordinance requiring or
prohibiting Negroes from going to Tallulah-Massey Park.
Q Now, let me ask you this: in the light of that
tradition and custom, did the Board of City Commissioners
ever discuss that custom and tradition with relation to the
petition which you identified a while ago as Plaintiffs’
Exhibit No. 1 ?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
4 IB
A The City Commission has discussed the request
relative to parks, which, of course, Includes recreational
facilities; yes, they've discussed it.
Q, And was any action taken by the Board of City
Commissioners following that discussion?
MR, RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases,
I object to that because if there had been any binding
action taken, it would have to be in writing; as a
matter of law, any binding action - she asked him If
any action was taken- as a matter of law, this is a
corporation and can only act in regular or called
session with a quorum of the Board present and can
act only by resolution or ordinance in writing, which
would have to be entered on the minutes of the Board.
So now, in answer to the question she submitted, it
could only come from the minutes of the Commission.
THE COURT; Well, she’s simply asking him,
was any official action taken. That’s all she’s asking
him at this point, and I overrule the objection.
A The Witness: I do not recall any resolution
being passed relative to the parks. There may have been.
I don’t recall it though.
Q Mrs. Motley: All right, but if there was
action taken by the City Commissioners following a dis
cussion regarding the parks and Plaintiffs’ Exhibit #1,
which is a demand by the Albany Movement for desegregation
of those parks, it would be reflected in the minutes of the
Board of City Commissioners, would It not?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
42B
MR. RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases,
she's asking the Mayor a legal question. That’s a
matter of law, official action by the Board of City
Commissioners, and it would have to be a matter of law.
THE COURT: She's asking him If they did
take any official action, would it be reflected in
the minutes of the City Commission.
MR. RAWLS: And the answer to that question
Is foreclosed by the law. It's a matter of law, that
any official action by the Board of City Commissioners
would of necessity have to reflect Itself in the official
minutes of that Board.
THE COURT: She's entitled to know whether
they did what the law requires. She’s entitled to an
answer to that question. I overrule the objection.
A The Witness: Yes.
Q Mrs. Motley: Now, the playgrounds which you'
referred to a while ago, do you know how many there are In
number, approximately?
A I do not. I can get the information. There are
a great number throughout the City though, very small
parks, used by neighborhood children largely.
Q Do these neighborhood parks have any facilities
on them, such as swings or benches?
A Most of them do, yes.
Q Now, does the City Commission furnish any
equipment or uniforms for the use of the children in any
of the three major parks or these smaller playgrounds?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
43B
A To a limited extent, yes.
Q What equipment or uniforms do you furnish?
A Again, I can't answer specifically, I Just
don't know. I know that I ’ve signed checks for some
football uniforms, some football helmets, and maybe some
baseball equipment. I Just don't know. I do know that
we furnish some, yes.
Q Who would know about that?
A Mr. Roos may have the figures available. If not,
then Mr. Rod Blalock, who is in charge of Recreation and
Parks.
Q Now, going back to the playgrounds which we
discussed a moment ago, are there any of those playgrounds,
other than Carver Park, located in Negro communities?
A I'm sure there are some; I don't know where they are.
0. Who would know about that?
A Mr. Blalock can give you the exact location of all
of them.
Q I would like to direct your attention again to
Plaintiffs' Exhibit #1, which Is the petition of the Albany
Movement, and you will note that they ask for desegregation
of the library, is that right?
A Yes.
Q And you say the libraries In the City of Albany
are under whose Jurisdiction?
A A board of trustees and the board Is appointed
by the City Commission.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
44b
Q How many libraries do you have in the City of
Albany?
A Under the jurisdiction of the trustees of the
library board?
Q Yes sir?
A There are two, one which was just recently
completed at a cost in excess of $25,000, which was con
structed primarily for the use of the Negro community and
located in the area which would make it more accessible to
the Negro community.
Q, What's the name of that library?
A I do not know. It was just opened by formal
dedication this year.
Q What's the other library that you have in the
City of Albany?
A The Carnegie Library.
Q And that's under the jurisdiction of this board?
A Yes.
Q And that’s limited to whites, isn’t It?
A There Is no ordinance or resolution relative
to the use of the library by Negroes or whites.
Q All right, what about policy and custom? You
know that only whites have been permitted to use that
library, don’t you, as a matter of policy and custom?
A As a matter of custom and tradition, that's
true.
Q Now, has the Board of City Commissioners ever
discussed this custom In the light of the petition of the
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
45B
Albany Movement, Plaintiff’s Exhibit #1, that the library
facilities be desegregated?
A Yes, It’s been discussed,
Q Did the Board of City Commissioners take any
action following that discussion?
A The Chief of Police requested that the library —
MR. RAWLS; Now, Your Honor pleases, that
answer is not responsive and I object to it. She
asked him the question whether or not the Board of
City Commissioners had taken any action following that
discussion.
THE COURT; The question Is, did the Board
of City Commissioners take any official action in
consequence of such discussion?
A The Witness: The City of Albany or the City
Commission at a meeting discussed the problem, and It was
decided —
MR. RAWLS: Now if Your Honor pleases, I
object to what the City Commission decided because,
as has been pointed out many times, the official
minutes would be the proper way to prove that.
THE COURT; The question is, did the City
Commission take any official action? That's the
question. Did they or didn't they take any official
action?
A The Witness: I simply do not recall whether
there was any official action insofar as the City Commission
is concerned because I just do not know, insofar as a
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
46b
resolution or ordinance is concerned.
Q Mrs. Motley; In other words, you're saying that
they may have discussed it but nothing may appear In the
minutes, is that It?
A I'm sure that it was discussed, yes.
MR, RAWLS: That's exactly why the law
requires a finding of the City Commission and it would
have to be a public record. That question illustrates
that point. What the Mayor may remember or the Mayor
Pro-Tem or some other member of the City Commission
may remember would be too fallible, which would be a
matter of proof, I mean verbal proof; whereas, the
law requires that official action of the City govern
ment be as a matter of law in writing and not what
somebody remembers about it,
THE COURT; Yes, the witness, as I understand
his testimony, is saying that they did discuss It
but he cannot recall whether any formal action was
taken —
The Witness: That's true.
THE COURT; — in the manner that the Com
mission acts, which is by ordinance or resolution.
The Witness: That's true.
THE COURT; He cannot remember whether they
did or not. If they did, would the minutes of the
Commissioners reflect it, If they did take any action,
would they, any official action?
The Witness: Yes sir.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
47B
Q Mrs. Motley: Mayor Kelley, have you read the
complaint in this case?
A Which one?
Q This case involving the public facilities, No. 730?
A Yes, I have read it, not as a lawyer would read
it, but as a lay person would read it.
Q, Do you recall that the complaint seeks to have
this court enjoin the enforcement of certain ordinances of
the City of Albany?
A Yes.
Q Do you recall what those ordinances were?
A I do not.
Q, Do you know whether — I would like to shoxv you
PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT No. 2 for identification, which Is a
certified copy of certain ordinances of the City of Albany
and ask you whether you are familiar with those ordinances?
A Yes, I am generally familiar with these
ordinances, I do not recall whether this ordinance is
in the language of the Code or not. I was familiar with
Chapter 22, I believe, of the Code. I do not recall
ever having seen a copy of Plaintiffs’ Exhibit #2 as such,
unless it has been incorporated in the Code.
Q Now, let me ask you about PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT #3,
which is another ordinance: Are you familiar with that
ordinance?
A I am.
Q Now, with respect to these ordinances, I would
like to ask you whether whether the Board of City Com-
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
48b
missioners ever discussed these ordinances with reference
to the petition of the Albany Movement, Plaintiffs" Exhibit
#1, as relates to buses and bus stations?
THE COURT; Before we go any further with
that, let me see those just a minute.
MRS, MOTLEY; Yes sir (handing up ordinances
P-2 and P~3 to the Court) . . .
THE COURT; All right.
A The Witness; I do not understand your question
insofar as you have related it to Plaintiffs’ Exhibit #1,
would you explain that?
Q Mrs. Motley; Yes, would you look at
Plaintiffs* Exhibit No. 1, a copy of which I understand
you have in your hand -
A Yes.
Q, The first Item among those listed by the Albany
Movement as principal targets of desegregation is bus
stations, is It not, No. 1?
A Yes, that's true.
Q And then, No. 6 is city busses, is that right?
A Yes.
Q Now, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit #2, which you’ve just
read, has to do with passenger busses operated In the City
of Albany, does it not?
A It does.
Q Now, my question is, whether the Board of City
Commissioners has ever discussed this ordinance with relation
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
to this demand by the Albany Movement for desegregation of
City busses?
A Yes.
Q Was any official action taken by the Board of
City Commissioners following that discussion?
A No, if you mean by official action the adoption
of a resolution or an ordinance?
Q. That’s right?
A No.
Q Now, let me direct your attention to Section 2
of Plaintiffs’ Exhibit #2, which has to do with taxicabs
in the City of Albany?
A Yes.
Q Has the City Commission ever discussed that
ordinance?
A The City Commission has discussed the ordinance
relative to the use of taxicabs, yes.
Q Has that been within the last three months?
A Yes.
0, Was any action taken by the City Commissioners
following that discussion?
A No official action.
Q Now, let me direct your attention to Section 3
of Plaintiffs1 Exhibit #2, which has to do with
theaters or places of amusement in the City of Albany,
and ask you whether the City Commission has discussed
that ordinance within the last three months?
A It has been discussed.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
Q It has?
A Yes.
Q, Now, following that discussion did the Board of
City Commissioners take any official action?
A No.
Q, Now, I will direct the same question to Section
4, which again has to do with separate lines in front of
theatres, I believe, and ask you whether the City Com
mission has discussed Section 4 in the last three months?
A It has.
Q, Has any official action been taken by the City
Commissioners following that discussion?
A No official action has been taken.
Q What about section 5, which has to do with the
penalty Imposed for violation of these ordinances: has that
ever been discussed by the City Commission within the last
three months?
A I have no recollection of any discussion relative
to the penalty.
Q Now, what about Plaintiffs' Exhibit #3, which is
another ordinance having to do with taxicabs and licensed
vehicles? Has the City Commission discussed that ordinance
within the last three months?
A It has been discussed, yes.
Q Has any official action been taken by the City
following that discussion?
A No, there’s been no occasion to cause any action
to be taken insofar as the taxicabs are concerned.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
Q, Now, directing your attention again to Plaintiffs '
Exhibit #1, which is the petition of the Albany Movement, I
would like to ask you whether the City Commission has dis-
cussed the train station in the City of Albany, which the
Albany Movement’s petition requests be desegregated?
A It has been discussed but I would like to point
out that the City of Albany has no Jurisdiction over the
train facilities.
Q, Weil, have they discussed the petition's demand
that they be segregated?
A It has been discussed generally in the light of
the Interstate Commerce Commission's ruling in November,
yes.
Q, Was any action taken by the City Commission
following the discussion of the ICC ruling?
A No action was necessary. There's no ordinance on
the books relative to the train station, as I recall it.
Q Well, hasn't it been customary for Negroes and
whites to use separate waiting rooms at the train station?
A Since the beginning of Albany, yes.
Q Well, in the light of that custom and in the
light of the ICC order of November 1, 1961, has the City
Commission discussed the matter of that custom?
A It's been discussed, yes.
Q Following that discussion, did the City Commission
take any official action?
A There's no official action the City could take.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
52B
Q, Now, directing your attention again to Plaintiffs 1
Exhibit #1, — would you strike that last — Going back to
the train station in the City of Albany, isn't it a fact
that Negroes were arrested in the train station in the
City of Albany in November and December, 1961, following
the ICC order?
A I think some Negroes were arrested but not for
violation of any so-called "segregation ordinance".
Q What were they arrested for?
A Chief Pritchett is here and he can tell you
exactly. I don’t know.
MR, RAWLS: Your Honor please, the record
would be the highest and best evidence.
THE COURT: Well, he says he doesn’t know.
Q, Mrs. Motley: What about the bus station,
weren't some Negroes arrested in the bus station in November
and December following the ICC order?
A Yes, some were arrested.
Q, Now, directing your attention to Plaintiffs'
Exhibit #1 -
A But In further response to that question, I
think the record will indicate earlier in this case, in
the other case, that they were not arrested for violation
of the segregation ordinances of the City of Albany.
Q What were they arrested for?
A Again, I do not know.
Q Directing your attention to Plaintiffs' Exhibit
#1, item numbered 5, hospital, I would like to ask you
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
53B
whether the Board of City Commissioners has ever discussed
desegregation of the hospital
MR, RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases, the
hospital Is a matter completely beyond the jurisdiction
of the City Commission. The City Commissioners of Albany
don’t have anything to do with policy making or the
running of.the Phoebe-Putney Hospital. That’s a matter
that’s addressed to an Independent board and the City
has no jurisdiction or control over it.
THE COURT; Well, I imagine, if that’s true,
the witness knows that; and the question at this point
is simply have they ever had any discussion. That's the
only question so far, whether they discussed it or not.
Of course, if they don't have anything to do with it,
I doubt If they discussed it, but the question is,
have you ever discussed it.
MR. RAWLS: Your Honor please, I can't see
how anybody's civil rights could be involved in the
Mayor and members of the City Commission talking to
members of the Hospital Board about it. There might
be but I just don’t see how It could be.
THE COURT: Well, probably not, probably not.
MR. RAWLS: And it's not embodied in the
complaint.
THE COURT: I was about to raise that ques
tion myself. I don’t recall, in reading the complaint -
MR. RAWLS: It's not in the complaint.
THE COURT: — any reference to the hospital
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
54b
anywhere in there. Is there?
MRS. MOTLEY: No, that’s true, Your Honor; but
I was trying to determine what on this petition had
been discussed by the Board of City Commissioners.
The petition asked for it and I was trying to find
out whether they discussed it and whether they’ve taken
any action on it or not.
THE COURT: Well, since it’s not a matter In
litigation here - all of these other things that you’ve
touched on are - but since it’s not a matter in litiga
tion, let’s skip over that.
MRS. MOTLEY: All right.
Q Let me ask you this, Mayor Kelley, has the Board
of City Commissioners ever replied to this petition In
writing?
MR, RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases, If
they had, the writing itself would be in the possession
of them and It would be the highest and best evidence.
THE COURT: That’s true but all she’s asking
at this point is, has the Board replied in writing.
That's all she’s asking. She's not asking him what
they replied. She’s only asking him whether the Board
has replied In writing, If he knows. If he knows,
why, he should answer that question. I overrule the
objection.
A The Witness: My best recollection is that a
reply was made, the exact date of which I just simply do
not recall.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
55B
Q, Mrs. Motley: To whom was the reply made In
writing?
A. Again, I am trying to recall but I can’t be
certain. I suppose it was sent to Dr, Anderson, I? it was
sent to anyone. It may have been simply a news release.
I do not know whether a reply was made directly to Dr.
Anderson or M. S. Page or not. I ’m inclined to think It
was but I do know that a reply was formulated and published.
Now, ’whether it was actually delivered to Dr. Anderson or
M. S. Page, I do not recall.
Q Where was it published?
A I am reasonably sure it was published In the
Albany Herald; whether or not it was published anywhere
else, I don’t know.
Q Now, following this petition which was presented
to you, did you have any conference with Dr. Anderson or
any other members of the Albany Movement regarding desegre
gation of these public facilities?
A Yes, on many occasions.
Q, You say you discussed desegregation of public
facilities on many occasions with Dr. Anderson?
A Dr. Anderson and I have discussed the over-all
problems on many, many occasions, yes. I cannot recall
the exact dates or places, but we have discussed them on
many occasions.
Q Now, following your discussions with Dr. Anderson
regarding the desegregation of public facilities, did the
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
Board of City Commissioners take any action following those
discussions?
A There was no official action.
Q Now, this reply which you say was published,
that Is the reply to the petition, do you have a copy
of that, what you're talking about?
A I do not.
Q Do you know of anybody that has a copy of it?
A Yes, I'm sure that Mr. Rawls may have one. I
don't know.
MR, RAWLS: I think this is what you're
talking about. (Handing document to counsel for
Plaintiffs) . , .
Q Mrs. Motley: Now, let me direct your attention
once more to Plaintiffs' Exhibit #1, item number — I'm
sorry, I'll withdraw that, strike that please —
THE COURT; Mrs. Motley, before you go
further with that question, suppose we take about a
10 minute recess.
MRS. MOTLEY: Ihank you.
RECESS: 11:00 AM to 11:10 AM 8-31-62
Q Mrs. Motley: Let me show you PLAINTIFFS'
EXHIBIT #4, Mayor Kelley, and ask you If it is your
testimony that that is a written response by the City
Commission to the petition presented to them by the Albany
Movement, which is marked Plaintiffs * Exhibit #1?
A Apparently not. As I recall, your Exhibit No. 1
was dated in November?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731 57B
Q, That’s right?
A And this apparently was Issued or published in
January of 1962.
Q Do you recall having seen that document,
PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT #4, prior to this time?
A Yes, I have seen it.
Q. When did you see it?
A I suppose jrou mean the first time I saw it?
Q Yes sir?
A I do not recall. I suppose it was some time in
January of 1962.
Q Do you know who wrote it?
A I do not.
Q. Do you understand that to be a statement of the
Board of City Commissioners of the City of Albany?
A This was a statement, I believe, that was
issued at a meeting of the Commission. It is not marked
as a copy of the minutes of the meeting, but I think it
was incorporated in the minutes of a regular meeting or a
special meeting at that time.
Q Is that the document that you stated a while ago
was published In the Albany Herald?
A % recollection is that it was published in the
Albany Herald.
Q Do you recall that that was read at a meeting
of the City Council in January, 1962?
A That’s my best judgment, yes. I do not recall
specifically, no, but that Is my best recollection.
58b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
Q, Do you recall who read the statement at that
time?
A I do not.
THE COURT; Let me see that before we go
any further, so I'll know what we’re talking about.
(P-4 handed up to Court) . . .
MR. RAWLS; If Your Honor please, I would
like to call the Court's attention to one thing since
you've read It there. It was pointed out to counsel
that the last two lines of the next to the last
paragraph of this document were deleted before it
was published.
THE COURT; The last two sentences?
MR. RAWLS; The last two lines of the next
to the last paragraph.
THE COURT; The last two lines or the last
two sentences?
MR, RAWLS: It’s the last two lines in the
next to the last paragraph, Your Honor pleases. It's
one sentence but It constitutes the last two lines of
the next to the last paragraph.
THE COURT: That's the quotation from Emerson?
MR. RAWLS: That's correct. That was deleted
before it was published.
0, Mrs. Motley: Do you know anything about the
last two lines of the third paragraph on page 2 of Plaintiffs'
Exhibit #3 being deleted before publication?
A That's my understanding, yes.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731 59B
Q Now, let’s see if we can establish clearly In the
record the sequence of events here: This Plaintiffs'
Exhibit #1, which is the petition of the Albany Movement,
dated November 17, 1961, was received by you some time In
that month, was it not?
A It was.
Q Now, is there a written reply to that petition
that you know of?
A Not to my knowledge, no. I thought there was
but apparently there was not.
Q Now, following the presentation of this petition
to you, did Dr. Anderson appear before the board of City
Commissioners regarding this petition?
A Yes, I think Dr. Anderson came before the Com
mission in January some time, toward the latter part of
January, I believe.
Q Do you remember whether he spoke at that meeting?
A The minutes would reflect that, I just simply do
not recall; if he was there, I ’m reasonably sure he did
speak.
Q Now, this statement which is marked now
PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT #4, do you recall whether this
statement was issued following Dr. Anderson’s appearance
before the Board of City Commissioners?
A % best recollection is that it was.
Q Do you have any recollection as to how many
times following the presentation of Plaintiff's Exhibit #1
that Dr. Anderson appeared before the Board regarding this
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
6 OB
petition? Was it more than once in January, 1962?
A Again, the minutes would reflect whether or not
he appeared. My best recollection is that he appeared
some time in January, 1962, and then again, oh several
weeks ago. Those are the only two times I actually
definitely recall him being there. He may have been
there more but the minutes would reflect that, If you would
like to have them.
Q Do you recall, Mayor Kelley, that when you
testified in this court in an action brought by you and
other City officials against Martin Luther King and others
for Injunction enjoining certain activities, that you
testified to this effect - I ’m not trying to give you the
exact words - in reply to one appearance by Dr. Anderson
before the City Council, there was a statement by you or the
City Council to the effect that there were no areas of
agreement on the matters presented in the petition of the
Albany Movement?
A I recall having made such a statement. Whether
it 'was in the City Commission meeting or whether it was
in response to an inquiry by some member of the news media,
or how or when I made it I don’t know, but I acknowledge
the fact that I did make It.
MRS. MOTLEY: I believe those are all the
questions for this witness, Your Honor.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. RAWLS:
Q Mr. Kelley, in speaking about the various areas
6 IB
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
of public recreation facilities in the City, I'll ask you
whether or not you regard the facilities that are available
to the aiMbers of the Negro race comparable to the facilities
available to the white race?
A I certainly do, based on the population. As
a matter of fact, the City of Albany in a 12 months period
just ended spent In excess of $36,000 solely for the use
and benefit of Carver Park, which is designed for the
members of the Negro community, which is a substantial
part of the total parks and recreation budget.
Q, Do you know of any ruly or requirement that
attaches to any concessionaire with reference to how he
will operate his little toy trains or swings or horses =
mechanical horses or any other playground equipment that
he uses In the park?
A Yes, by contract, we require him to carry public
liability insurance. We set the rates for the rides, so
as to make them what we think reasonable.; but beyond that,
as far as 1 know, there are no regulations.
Q. Do you as Mayor undertake the supervision and
operation of those various pieces of playground equipment?
A As Mayor, I certainly do not because I am
charged with the responsibility of being a member of the
Commission, which, as I have said before, is simply a
policy-making body. The City Manager is required to carry
out that policy.
Q As a matter of fact, you have raised your voice
on several occasions trying to keep the price down, so you
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
62B
could afford to let your poor boys ride, is that correct?
A That1s right.
Q, Now, this notice here, that’s marked Plaintiffs’
#1, headed "The Albany Movement" dated November 17, 1961,
indicates in capital letters "PRINCIPAL TARGETS", in
capitals and enclosed in parentheses ("in the order of
their appearance) FOLLOW", in caps, colon: 1. Bus Station"
What segregation practices have been enforced by
the City of Albany, if any, since the promulgation and
distribution of the ICC order, forbidding segregation in
public transportation facilities, such as the bus station?
A None to my knowledge.
Q Do you know or has it ever come to your attention
or come to your knowledge that any police officer of this
City has ever undertaken, since the promulgation and Issuance
of that ICC order, to enforce segregation in the bus station?
A I have no knowledge of any such enforcement.
Q Now, with reference to the train station, which
is No. 2 on the "principal targets", the train station, do
you know of any effort on the part of any officer of
official of the City of Albany to enforce segregation
in the train station since the promulgation of the ICC
order, banning segregation in those facilities?
A I have no knowledge of any.
Q Now, No. 3 is the library: now, do you know of
any cases that have been made involving the enforcement
of any segregation practice In the library as such?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos,730,731
63B
A I do not. As a matter of fact, there is no
ordinance requiring segregation of the public library. It
has as a matter of custom and tradition been used by the
white race, the Carnegie Library, and the other library
has been used by the Negroes. And I might add that it!s a
brand-new, very fine library.
Q Are the same books available at that library as
would be available at the old 50-year old library used by
the white folks?
A Yes, the books are interchangeable. If a person
wants a book from the Carnegie library, all he has to do
is to request It and it will be made available at the other
library.
Q Mr. Mayor, I never have been to the new library,
the one you're talking about, and I'm asking simply for
information, isn't it air-conditioned? Have you been there?
A No, I was cut of town the day it was dedicated
and I have not been there. I have been told it’s air-
conditioned. I don't know as a matter of fact.
Q But is it your understanding that it is air-
conditioned?
A Yes.
Q tod how about the one, the old Carnegie house
down here that's been here for 50 years, how about it,
is it air-conditioned?
A I think only a small portion of it. The entire
building is not air-conditioned, no.
Q Now, we come down to No. 4, the parks*. Are the
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
64b
park facilities for both races, in your opinion, the same or
on a reasonably comparable basis?
A In my judgment, they are. We have had, to my
knowledge, no complaints until recently about the recreational
facilities or recreational programs of the City. As a matter
of fact, many members of the Negro community have been
highly complimentary upon the action of the City in
providing park and recreational facilities; and I might
add that we employ the best trained personnel among the
Negro community that we can find to assist In these
programs.
Q Do you have Negro attendants at the Negro
facilities?
A We do.
Q Now, Majror Kelley, about swimming pools,
what do you think of the practicability of both races
using the same swimming pool?
A In my judgment, it is highly impracticable! and,
in my opinion, the people of the City of Albany would not
tolerate the use of any pool on an integrated basis but
would prefer them being closed.
Q As a matter of fact, they are actually closed
at the present time, aren't they, Mayor Kelley?
A They are now closed.
Q And that same thing applies to the library,
doesn’t it?
A Yes, to a degree. Of course, you do not have
in the library the personal contact that you have In the
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
65B
swimming pool or in a teen center or athletic activities.
And I might hasten to add that in my many discussions with
the leaders of the Albany Movement, they have recognized
the fact that Albany is not yet ready for the use of public
facilities which involve or would involve personal contact
among those using them.
Q As far as you're concerned as a member of the
City Commission, would you go out of the recreation business,
if it involves that close personal contact insofar as the
City is concerned, rather than undertake to operate on an
integrated basis?
A To avoid violence, possible blood-shed, it would
be necessary, in my judgment, for the City to close those
areas of recreation which involves or would involve bodily
contact.
Q. Now Mayor Kelley, they list 5# they list
hospitals as No. 5 in their list of principal targets;
I believe it1s already before the Court that the Board
of City Commissioners has no official connection with or
supervision over the operation of the hospital, is that
true?
A That is a true statement. However, I think it
should be pointed out that the City has the obligation
of paying in one way or another for* the indigent sick
of the City; and I might add that the City of Albany in
the past 12 months has expended some $60,000 for the indigent
Negroes of this community, either by direct contributions
66b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
or have had to raise the rates of paying customers at the
hospital to defray this. Me have many, many charity cases
for which some people have to pay and we can pin-point at
least $60,000 for indigent Negro citizens of this City.
Q So, even though the City doesn't have anything
to do with the doctors that a.re put on the staff, you do
have to pick up some of the "tab", Is that what you're
talking about?
A That's exactly what I'm talking about. And you
must also consider that, even though the City Is spending
that much money just In the field of charity, that the
Negro community only pays a little over 5 per cent, of
the total advalorem taxes that are paid. As a matter of
fact, we spend more for charity than the whole Negro com
munity pays In advalorem taxes.
Q Well now, the next item here is No. 6 and that's
City busses; I believe we do have an ordinance concerning
the operation of City busses. Let's see. . . here it is,
"SECTION 1. All passenger busses operated in the City of
Albany and its police jurisdiction shall provide separate
accommodations for white people and negroes on said busses.
All conductors, drivers, or other employees in charge of
said bus or busses shall assign all passengers to their res
pective seats on the bus or busses, so as to separate the
white and negro races as much as practicable, except that
negro nurses having In charge white children or sick or
infirm white persons may be assigned seats among white
people."
67B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730,731
Now, do you know of any case that's been made
since you've been Mayor or connected with the operation of
the City government on the basis of that ordinance?
A I do not.
THE COUNT: How long have you been Mayor,
Mr. Kelley?
The Witness: Since January of i960, sir.
Q Mr. Rawls: So, during the years of '60,
'6l and up to now in '62, you know of no charge being made
against any person or bus operator In connection with that
particular ordinance, is that a correct statement?
A That is true.
Q Well now, while we're talking about this segre
gation section of the City Code, let's talk about all of
It at one time. Now, I read to you a while ago about
passenger busses, nhich was, of course, about the busses.
Now, before we get off of busses, we will talk a little more
about that; Has there been any boycott by the Albany
Movement of the operators of the City Transit services being
operated here that you know of?
A First of all, let me say that the City of Albany
does not operate a bus service. The Cities Transit, Inc.
actually own and operate, or operate the bus service on
a franchise basis with the City of Albany.
To answer your specific question, there has
been a boycott of the bus service by the Albany Movement
and those allied with it, and I might add that it has bee
68b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730,731
quite effective, so effective In fact that there is no bus
service in the City of Albany today, and there Is little
likelihood that there will be any, any time In the future.
Q Mr, Kelley, there's an allegation in the complaint
that I want to call your attention to concerning the opera
tion of the bus service by the Cities Transit. It says
here that "the transportation facilities sought to be
desegregated in this action are privately owned, but
segregation with respect to these facilities Is required
by ordinance of the City of Albany, Georgia. These ordi
nances of the City of Albany are enforced by the Chief of
Police of the City of Albany, and all other police officers
under his jurisdiction, management and control. Buford
Collins is the Chairman of the Police Committee of the
Board of Commissioners of the City of Albany."
There’s a section in here somewhere - I don’t
want to read the whole suit - where It says that a part
of the public transportation facilities has been discontinued.
Bo you recall reading that In the copy of the suit that you
had, that only a part of the --
THE COURT: That’s over toward the end, Mr.
Rawls.
MR, RAWLS: How is that, Your Honor?
THE COURT: That’s over toward the end of the
petition of the complaint. You'll find It toward the end,
■Q Mr. Rawls: It says, "Plaintiff, W. G.
Anderson, has petitioned the defendant Board of City
69 B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730, 731
Commissioners to permit the Cities Transit, Incorporated,
to operate Its buses on a non-segregated basis, but these
defendants have failed and refused to do so as a result of
which the Cities Transit, Inc, has abandoned most of its
transportation service in the City of Albany since the
Plaintiffs and members of their class have refused to ride
the Cities Transit buses on a segregated basis and have
refused to ride them on an integrated basis out of fear
of arrest and harassment by the police officers and prosec
uting authorities of the City of Albany."
Now, do you know of any portion of the Cities
Transit service that hasn't been discontinued?
A All of the busses which were used for public
transportation have been or are no longer in use. The
reason I'm hesitating is because they did have a contract
with Turner Air Force Base or the Marine Base for the
transportation of some children to a school; and I think
that has been fulfilled. But Insofar as any public trans
portation system but system In the City of Albany, there
is none, and I am, informed that all of the busses have
teen sold except two,
Q. Do you know of any prosecution that's been
hade against the bus company before they went out of
business or any passenger or customer of theirs on the
basis of this section 1 , this ordinance regulating the
operating of busses?
A I do not.
70B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos.730, 731
Q We come down now to Section 2: "White and
colored passengers shall not be carried at the same time
in any taxicab for hire in the City of Albany,* provided,
that this section shall not apply to colored nurses or
other servants when accompanied by white children in
their charge":
Now, since you've been Mayor for 2-3/4 years,
I believe it is today, do you know of any prosecution
that's been had or any arrests that have been made by
virtue of the operation of that ordinance?
A I do not.
Q Now, we come down to Section III. "All persons,
firms or corporations, who sell or otherwise dispose of
tickets, coupons, or cards for admission to any theater
or place of amusement in the City of Albany, shall have
separate places for the sale of said tickets, coupons, or
cards, to white and negro persons to form separate lines
or groups whai assembled for the purpose of procuring
said tickets, coupons, or cards":
Do you know of any arrests that have been made
or cases that have been made or docketed relating to a
violation of that ordinance?
A I do not.
Q "SECTION IV. It shall be unlawful for any white
person to stand, be or remain in any line or group formed
°f colored persons, or for any colored person to stand, be
or remain in any line or group formed of white persons when
7 IB
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
"assembled for the purpose of procuring said tickets,
coupons or cards. It shall likewise be unlawful for any
person to remain In a seat or compartment of a bus other
than to which he has been assigned":
Do you know of any prosecution that's been had
under the provisions of that section of the ordinance?
A I do not.
Q Has anybody ever complained to ycu as Mayor of
the City that anybody connected with him or under his
protective care has ever been involved in a prosecution
by any police officer?
A Mo.
Q Now, of course, Section V is just simply the
penalty clause and, of course, not having heard of any
prosecution, you don't know of any abuse by anybody with
reference to any charges under either of the four other
sections?
A I do not.
Q Now, Plaintiffs' 3 is In relation to an
ordinance requiring, "Each and every vehicle licensed to
carry white passengers shall have a sign plainly painted
on each side, and on the rear the words 'FOR WHITE'; and
each and every vehicle licensed to carry colored passengers
shall have a sign plainly printed on each side and on the
rear the words 'FOR COLORED'":
Do you know of anybody or have you heard of any
instance of any complaint that anybody has been arrested
for a violation of that provision of the City ordinance?
72B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A None to my knowledge.
Q As a matter of fact, Mr. Mayor, hasn't the
policy of the City been not to enforce ordinances which
specifically spell out segregation, since it has been known
that the Supreme Court of the United States has stricken
down such ordinances?
MR. HOLLOWELL; Of course, I would object to that,
Your Honor, on the same ground that counsel has been
raising all day, that the policy would be a matter In
writing coming from the minutes of the Board.
MR. RAWLS; They're complaining about the
existence of the ordinances, Your Honor; and just
because a void ordinance is on the City's Code, if the
City is not enforcing It, I don't see how that could
aggrieve anybody too much; It doesn't hurt them.
THE COURT; But official policy would have
to come, as we have previously noted this morning,
official policy would have to come from ordinance or
regulation. So, I think the objection is good. He can
testify as to what they have done and what they have
not done, but official policy would have to be reflected
In some ordinance or regulation.
MR, RAWLS; All right, I withdraw that
question about the official policy.
Q What has been done within your knowledge with
reference to the persons charged with the enforcement of
Penal ordinances of the City of Albany, relative to the
73B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
enforcement of either one of these ordinances that I've
just read to you?
A There have been no cases whatsoever made against
any one based on any segregation ordinance, to my knowledge.
Q Now, Mr, Mayor, here on this classification,
No, 7-is "police brutality", what do you know about "police
brutality"?
MR?, MOTLEY: Now, we object, Your Honor, on
the ground as the Plaintiff pointed out before -
as plainly pointed out by Your Honor, that the Plaintiff
does not request any action by this Court with respect
to police brutality.
THE COURT: Yes, it was my view stated as
counsel will remember during the course of the hearing
in Civil Action No. 727 and it is still my view, now
that we are hearing the matters together, that any
testimony concerning any instances of any alleged
mistreatment of anybody In connection with any arrests
or what not would not be pertinent in the hearing of
this matter; but it would be peruinent if that individ
ual wants to make a complaint under any appropriate
civil rights statute or any other statute. But I don't
want to get Into that area In the hearing on this case.
That was my view of it and it's still my view. I don't
want to get Into that.
Q Mr. Rawls: Well, we'll go down to No. 8
there, Mr. Mayor, "Municipal employment to be sought in all
7̂ B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731,
"areas with emphasis and priority on the police force and
utilities".
Tell us all you know about members of the Negro
race's connection with police activities here, police
officers?
MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court, we
object on the same ground, that Plaintiff is not
seeking any relief with respect to this Item; and
we didn't go into It either on our direct examination
or cross-examination.
THE COURT: Yes. My recollection Is that
that was gone into somewhat or that was gone into
some in connection with previous hearing In Civil
Action #727. Does this only relate to employment
by the City?
MR. RAWLS: It says "Municipal employment to
be sought in all areas with emphasis and priority on the
police force and utilities".
THE COURT: Well, that was not gone Into in
#727. I was thinking with relation to employment in
various business establishments and that was gone into
somewhat in 727. But I'm going to sustain the objection.
I don't think we need to go into that because It Is not
involved in any of the counts.
MR. RAWLS: I think - I was thinking perhaps
that it might be Involved in 730, where they undertake
to restrain the City from — • well, I don't insist on It.
75B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
THE COURT: Yes, I don't think that's proper
area, let's don't go into that.
Q Mr. Rawls: No. 9 here is "jury representation";
What does the City of Albany have to do with who gets on the
jury?
A
Q
Absolutely nothing.
No. 10 is "Job opportunities in privately owned
facilities catering to negro trade": What jurisdiction
does the City of Albany pretend to have or assume over the
operation of purely private business?
A None.
Q Now, I believe this document is In the nature of
a certificate from the minutes of a meeting of the Albany
Movement; is that what you regard it as?
A I have a copy.
Q Well, I ask you to state whether or not It's
addressed to the City Commission?
A It is not.
THE COURT: Is that Plaintiffs' Exhibit #1?
MR. RAWLS: Plaintiffs' Exhibit #1.
The Witness: Yes sir.
Q, Mr. Rawls: Do you have a copy of page 2
on there, on this exhibit?
A Yes sir.
Q Have you paid any special attention to the last
two paragraphs of the last page?
A I've read it.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q On the basis of what’s contained in those two
paragraphs, would you or not regard this as a threat
rather than as a petition?
A It was so regarded by the City Commission.
Q As a threat, rather than a petition?
A Yes.
Q, Do you recall the manner in which this document
came Into the possession of the City Commission; do you
remember the events?
A I do not. I think it was sent by messenger but
I just simply don’t recall. I do know It was received,
however.
Q Mr. Mayor, as an official of the City of Albany
have you ever knowingly or Intention ally withheld any
right of any citizen guaranteed to them by the Constitution
of the United States?
A My responsibility as the Mayor of the City of
Albany as is the responsibility of the members of the
Commission Is to uphold the laws and ordinances of our City,
and that's what we have attempted to do and apply them
equally to all people.
Q Has any action, any official action on your part
ever been directed to any particular racial group on account
°f their race?
A No.
Q Mr. Mayor, In your opinion, in the event desegre
gation of the public recreation facilities are ordered and
77B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
decreed, I ask you whether or not the City will be compelled
to go out of the public recreation business and sell out the
facilities used for that purpose?
A I would not presume to speak for the Commission,
for the reason that no official action has been taken. In
my personal view, the City of Albany would be obligated,
in order to protect all of its citizens from harm and
violence, to discontinue any of the activities which would
require personal contact between the races.
And I say that for many reasons, one of which
Is that the people in this area feel very strongly that the
cultures are so different and the habits are so different
that it would be improper at this time to have a mixing
of the races in those areas which would require personal
contact.
I might add, and I am certainly not trying to
cast any aspersions against any one or any race, but the
facts are that some 76 per cent, of the felonies committed
in this County are committed by the members of the Negro
uacej and, in my judgment, the social, economic, religious
arid cultural backgrounds of some members of the Negro race
have not yet reached the point where you could in harmony
have a mixing of the races in those areas which would involve
Physical contact,
Q Mr. Mayor, do you remember when this hearing was
adjourned, by this Court on August 8, to be reconvened for
further hearing and the taking of testimony? That was
78b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Civil Action No. 727^ I believe. I'm refreshing your
recollection as to the date, I'm sure you remember?
A August 8?
Q Yes?
A Yes sir.
Q Do you know of any, has it come to your notice
or attention that any activities of the Albany Movement
have ensued since that date, that might be construed to
tend to disturb the peace and tranquility of this City?
MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court, we are
now going Into something which was not brought out on
direct examination.
THE COURT: Yes, if you want to go Into that,
of course, it's all right to go into It; but if you
want to go into it, I suggest that you wait until you
present your side of the case and put the witness back
on the stand.
MR. RAWLS: Very well, Your Honor.
Q Now Mr. Kelley, the customs and practices that
you have testified about in the City of Albany, are they
of recent vintage or are they of long standing?
MR. H0LL0WELL: Now, may it please the Court,
"these practices" that he's talking about, what practices
and customs?
MR. RAWLS: I'm talking about all the
practices and customs and uses that he's talking about,
whatever they are. I want to find out if he started
79B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
them out. I want to find out if they are the product
of his - did he think them up and start those practices
or did somebody else start them.
THE COURT: Well, I presume that you're
referring to the custom and usages with relation
to the library -
MR. RAWLS: And the swimming pools.
THE COURT: - and the swimming pools and
parksj is that what you're referring to?
MR, RAWLS: That's correct.
THE COURT: All right.
Q Mr. Rawls; Now, were those customs and
practices in effect when you went in as Mayor or did you
and your crowd establish these practices?
A it has been the custom and tradition since the
inception of Albany, as I recall It. The history of Dougherty
County indicates It's always been the custom, and certainly —
Q, How much of that history have you observed?
How old are you, Mr. Kelley?
A I am 40.
o 40, you probably didn't start to doing any heavy
observing until you were 8 or 10, did you, I don't Imagine?
A Yes, I didj as a matter of fact, I've walked the
streets of Albany since I was around 6.
Q Did you have a paper route?
A No, I sold ice cream on the streets.
Q Did you sell It at a reasonable figure or not?
80B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A Yes, and I made a reasonable profit.
Q So, the customs and practices have prevailed
ever since you can remember, is that right, Mr. Kelley?
A Yes sir.
Q And from a historical standpoint, I believe you
say from the very inception of the City Itself?
A That Is my understanding.
MR. RAWLS: I think that's all I care to
ask the Mayor at this time.
ADVERSE - REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MRS, MOTLEY:
Q. These customs which you've just referred to
are the customs and practices of segregation, aren't they?
A They are the customs and practices adopted by
both the Negro and the white community as to the use of
'public facilities.
Q When did the Negro community adopt that custom?
A When they began using the facilities.
Q Did they provide these facilities themselves?
A No, they did not. The City of Albany provided them
with the use of tax funds, some five per cent, of which
the Negro community contributed,
Q In other words, separate facilities were provided
for the Negroes by the white community, weren't they?
A By and large, yes.
Q And these segregation policies and customs,
wnlch you say have been here since the founding of the
8ib
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
City, are in accordance with the segregation policies,
laws and regulations and these ordinances, aren’t they?
A I'm not quite sure that I understand your
question specifically. Will you take them one at a time?
Q Yes, we're trying to get at the origin of this
custom you're talking about?
A Yes.
Q Now, this custom of segregation is based on
Georgia laws requiring segregation, isn't it?
A There are laws In Georgia requiring segregation,
yes.
Q And this policy is pursuant to those laws?
A In certain areas only.
Q Yes, segregation is pursuant to state law, Isn't
it, in many areas?
A No, I think not; in just very few areas, as a
batter of fact.
Q What about schools, have you state laws which
require —
MR. RAWLS: Now, If Your Honor please, I
object to bringing up about the schools. They're not
mentioned either In the petition or the petition or the
threat, whichever it may be determined It is, to the
City Commission or In the complaint.
THE COURT: Yes and, In addition to that, it
calls for a legal conclusion on tne part of the witness.
I sustain the objection.
82B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MRS. MOTLEY: I was trying to establish whether
the policy which he says operates here with respect
to these facilities that we're trying to get desegregated
Is a custom and policy pursuant to state law. I wasn't
trying to get the schools desegregated but I was only
trying to establish that there are state laws requir
ing segregation and this policy or custom that he's
talking about is In accord with those state laws.
THE COURT: But the question relates to
schools and that is not at issue in this case. I think
he's already said, already testified that he knows
that there are some state laws in some few areas.
I think he said that. So, you may pursue that, if
you wish by asking him In what areas —
MR. RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases, it
is a fact that there are no state laws which require
segregation.
THE COURT: Well, that's the reason I said,
the question asks the witness for a legal conclusion
and was not objected to on that basis; but I suggest
that no such question should be asked the witness as
to what the state laws are, whether there are state
laws with regard to such and such. As a matter of fact,
my recollection is that the state law to which counsel
refers îras probably repealed some time ago,
MRS. MOTLEY: I was trying to get at the origin
of the custom. There were such laws at one time.
83B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Well, let me ask you this, Mayor Kelley; Based
on these state laws which you have had in schools and other
areas, you understand, don't you, that the policy of the
State of Georgia has been segregation In public facilities,
don't you?
A I'm not in position to speak for the State of
Georgia. I can speak for the Oity of Albany, but I can't
speaking for the State.
Q Well, let's speak for the City of Albany then;
what the policy in the City of Albany, as reflected
by these ordinances; it's been a policy of separate but
equal, hasn't It?
A That has been the custom and tradition of the
City, yes.
Q And this custom and tradition that you spoke
about In relation to the library and the parks is a part
of that policy and custom In the City of Albany of segre
gation, isn’t it?
A I know of no policy that the City has announced,
either by ordinance or resolution. It has been the custom
and tradition of all of the people in the City, yes.
Q Now, I think you said that Dr. Anderson, on
behalf of the Albany Movement, has requested orally desegre
gation of all of the facilities in the City of Albany, is
that right?
A Yes, whether or not he's mentioned each
facility specifically I don't recall, but I'm sure that
was his intent.
84b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q, All right, well, what about the City -
MR. RAWLS: Now Your Honor pleases, I move
to exclude from the record and strike from the record
any matter that Dr. Anderson had had up individually
with the Mayor, because what he and Dr. Anderson
talked about, of course, would not even be notice to
the City of Albany.
THE COURT: The fact that Dr. Anderson talked
to him, to Mr. Kelley, I presume he talked to him as
the Mayor. I realize that that would not be binding on
the City Commission, and I'm not going to consider it
in that light at all; but just simply the question is,
whether they have had discussions about it. I'm going
to allow. I overrule the objection.
MR. RAWLS: And you're not going into what
the discussion was?
THE COURT: I don't think it would be appro
priate to go into the details of some conversation
because it couldn't reflect may official attitude
on the part of the City Government. It would just
be his personal attitude. But the fact that they had
conversations about these problems, I admit that.
Q Mrs. Motley: Let me ask yoa this, has Dr.
Anderson discussed with you as the Mayor of the City of
Albany desegregation of all of the public facilities of
the City of Albany?
A He has discussed ■—
85B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MR. RAWLS: Now, Your Honor pleases, that
question, to answer that question would necessarily
violate the Court’s ruling about what was brought out
in those conversations.
THE COURT: Yes, I think the question does,
that the question does go too far about what was
discussed. In other words, when you say "did you
discuss each one of these things", that gets Into the
substance of the conversation. I will allow you to
ask him whether they had discussions about the general
petition and the general problems presented by this
litigation, but not specific reference to specific
matters.
MRS. MOTLEY: I'm sorry; I don’t know that I
understood the last part. You say you would permit us
to ask about specific facilities?
THE COURT: No, that’s what I want to keep
away from, because he couldn't, one member of the
Commission or as the Mayor - I'm not sure whether
he is a member of the Commission or not - he could
not bind the Commission by anything he said. Suppose
I ask him this question -
MRS. MOTLEY: All right.
THE COURT: - and maybe It will satisfy
everybody, Mr. Kelley, during the months that have
passed, during the last 10 months, have you from time
to time had discussions and conversations with Dr.
86b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Anderson as a representative of the Albany Movement
about the various problems which are Involved in this
litigation which Is before the Court?
The Witness: I have on many occasions.
Q. Mrs. Motley: Now, do you have an auditorium
here In the City of Albany?
A We do.
Q Is the seating in that auditorium segregated?
A That's a matter which addresses itself to the
lessee of the auditorium. When an application Is made for
the use of the auditorium, we either grant it or refuse It.
If it's grante , then the organization using the auditorium
decides how and in what manner the people invited to attend
will be seated.
For example, we, until all of this disturbance
started, were blessed with many conventions; and many of
these conventions would use the auditorium and many of
the organizations would have Negro as well as white
members and they would attend these meetings based on
the rules and regulations of the organization itself.
Q Now, Is that auditorium owned by the City of
Albany ?
A It is.
Q Is that auditorium under the jurisdiction of
the Board of City Commissioners?
A Directly under the City Manager and generally
under the city Commission, yes.
87B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Has the auditorium been leased to a private
lessee, is that your testimony?
A No, that is not my testimony. My testimony Is
that the use of the auditorium is treated and is the same
as a lessor-lessee agreement to an individual, who makes
an application to the City Manager for the use of that
auditorium.
Q Now, let me ask you this: What is the racial
policy of the City of Albany with respect to the use of
that auditorium?
A There is no ordinance or resolution relative
to segregation or Integration at the auditorium.
Q Now, what Is the custom with respect to seating
in the auditorium of the City of Albany?
A The custom is determined by the person using
the auditorium, the person or the organization using the
auditorium. Frankly, I don't recall any use of the audi
torium recently by the City itself. Now, it's used on
many occasions by organizations. It's used on many
occasions by Negro as well as white groups and, of course,
we turn down the use or applications for the use of the
auditorium on occasions! but It's done, not on the basis
°f integration or segregation, but iu's because we think
that the organization trying to use it would do more harm
to the City than any possible good that could be served.
Q I don't know if I understand?
A I don't know of any Negro group that's ever
88b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos, 730, 731
been denied the use of the auditorium.
Q Now, when the auditorium Is leased, do you sometimes
lease It to private citizens for public affairs, is that
right, to which the public Is invited?
A Yes.
Q, And you sometimes lease the auditorium to private
individuals for private functions, limited to the membership
of the organization?
A Yes.
Q Now, with respect to the leasing of the City
auditorium for functions to which the public is Invited,
is there any requirement on the lessee as a matter of City
policy that all citizens be permitted Into the auditorium?
A There Is no ordinance or resolution governing it.
Q Is there any custom?
A The custom over the years has been, as I under
stand it, where you have mixed groups, for there to be
one area used by the Negroes and other areas used by the
whites; but there is no ordinance or resolution requiring
that, to my knowledge.
Q 'What about rest-room facilities in the auditorium,
are they segregated?
A I can't answer - honestly answer - that question.
I haven't been In that auditorium In so many years I just
simply don't know.
Q All right, has the City Commission discussed that
custom of segregation in the City auditorium within the last
89B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
three months?
A I don’t know that they've discussed that specific
area. I asked the City Manager this morning, in the
presence of one or two of the Commissioners, to refresh
my recollection as to how a person goes about getting the
use of the auditorium; and it was pointed out at that time
that the organization or group using it determines whether
it will be segregated or integrated, if that’s what you
mean?
Q. In other words, the policy of the City is to
let the lessee determine whether the affair will be segre
gated or Integrated, is that it?
A I know of no policy of the City. That’s been
the practice that's been followed, yes.
Q Now, this PLAINTIFFS' EXHIBIT #1, you've always
understood this to be the petition of the Albany Movement
to the City of Albany regarding the public facilities,
haven't you?
A I have known of its existence since I received
a °opy of it; and, as you will note on page - I think it's
Page 2 for you and page 1 in this one - the minutes of the
meeting of the Albany Movement Indicate that if complete
desegregation is not accomplished, other positive action
would be taken; and that was considered by the Commission
as a. threat.
Q As a. threat to what?
A To unlawfully violate the ordinances of the City
°f Albany.
9033
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q But a copy of this, you testified didn't you
in #727 and in this hearing today, was presented to you
by Dr. Anderson; Isn't that your testimony?
A I don't recall what my testimony was and I
don’t recall exactly how I got it. I do admit I got a
copy. Now, whether Dr. Anderson brought It to me or sent
it to me or that it was the result of a meeting, I just
simply don't recall.
0, But it's always been your understanding,
hasn't It, that this Is what the Albany Movement wanted
the City to do; that is, desegregate the public facilities
and other facilities outlined In this Plaintiffs' Exhibit
#1?
A Yes, that's what It says. And it further says that
if the City doesn't do it, then positive action will be
taken by the Albany Movement; at least, that’s the way I
interpret It.
Q Well, what I was trying to get at is that, there's
no doubt In your mind that this was a petition by citizens
to their government to desegregate certain public facilities,
right?
,v- MR, RAWLS: Now if Your Honor pleases, I object
to the document being referred to as a "petition"
because It's not addressed to anybody, but It's a
copy of a resolution. It's not a petition.
THE COURT: Well, of course, she's using the
word "petition" and if the witness doesn't regard it
91B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
as a petition, he can answer the question that way.
I realize there's a difference between counsel and
the witness as to what it Is, apparently. So, that's
her interpretation of it. Now, if it Is not the witness'
interpretation of it, he can so state.
MRS, MOTLEY: I was trying to get what the
witness understood this to be, whether he understood
it to be a demand by the citizens to a City body to
desegregate the facilities.
Q Is that your understanding of what this is?
MR, RAWLS: I believe the witness testified,
Your Honor, that he considered it as a threat,
THE COURT: Yes, that was his testimony,
but he's on cross-examination and he can take care
of himself, I'm sure.
A The Witness: Would you repeat your last
question?
MRS. MOTLEY: Do you want to read the last
question, please?
THE REPORTER: (Reading): "I was trying to
get what the witness understood this to be, whether
he understood It to be a demand by the citizens to
a City body to desegregate the facilities, Is that
your understanding of what this is?"
A The Witness: I certainly consider this
document as a statement of the Albany Movement relative to
Methods to be employed In achieving desegregation, yes.
92b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
THE COURT: Suppose right at that point,
we take a recess now until 2 o'clock.
LUNCH RECESS: 12:25 PM to 2;00 PM 8-31-62
Q Mrs. Motley: I believe when we adjourned
Mayor Kelley, I was asking you about Plaintiffs' Exhibit #1,
and I wanted to clarify the record to the extent of asking
you again, whether you received a copy of this document?
A I did.
Q Now, is it your testimony that the ordinance
requiring racial segregation in taxicabs has not been
enforced since you have been the Mayor of the City of
Albany?
A To my knowledge, there have been no arrests
bade in the City of Albany during the time that I have been
Mayor based on that ordinance.
MRS. MOTLEY: That is all the questions for
this witness, Your' Honor.
THE COURT: Anything further from this
witness?
MR, RAWLS: One question, Your Honor.
RECROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. RAWLS:
Q Mr. Kelley, the custom and practice of segregation
ln the City's recreational facilities, library and auditorium,
to which you referred was a voluntary custom formulated by
the people, both white - and colored, is that correct?
93B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A The custom and tradition has been based on
voluntary action on the part of Negroes and whites.
THE COURT: Allright, anything further?
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MRS. MOTLEY:
Q Who are these volunteers on segregation that
you're talking about?
A All of the citizens of Albany and Dougherty
County were until such time as demands were made by members
of the Albany Movement and CORE and SIN CO and Rev. King
and other outside agitators last year.
Q Was there a meeting at which the Negro and white
citizens came together and agreed to voluntary segregation?
A I'm aware of no such meeting.
Q Didn't you testify a while ago that you had such
customs since the founding of the City of Albany?
A I think that's true.
Q So that, this Is a custom and tradition that
existed long before any person living today, isn't that
night?
A That Is very true.
Q Do you know of any Negro officials that ever
Participated in the formulation of this policy at the
beginning of the City or since that time?
A I would have no personal knowledge of any
individual that participated in the formulation of any
Policy, no - at that time.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary injunction. Nos. 730, 731
Q Well, since you have teen Mayor, do you know
of any Negroes who have participated in any agreement
for voluntary segregation?
A I don't know of any agreement. It's been
a voluntary practice on behalf of both the races here.
And I might add that under this system the Negroes have
done extremely well, as compared to the things they had
30 years ago, as evidenced by just one example, the school
system in Dougherty County. We have just completed a new
junior high school for the Negro community and I am
informed and believe that it's the only air-conditioned
school In the State of Georgia. And 38 out of every 100
school children in Dougherty County are Negroes. And yet,
the Negro community only contributes slightly more than
$4 out of every $100 for the maintenance and operation
of these school systems. And I could give you example
after example of where the Negroes have done very well
hy themselves and, in my judgment, a great majority of
them are very happy to have the facilities. For example,
the new library and the Carver Teen Center and Carver
Park, and other facilities provided.
MRS. MOTLEY: I think that's all.
RECROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. RAWLS:
Q Mr. Mayor, is it your opinion that whatever
unrest that's prevalent here is created by outside agitators
and not the local citizens; Is that your testimony?
95B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A I think it was precipitated by those outside
agitators, yes. Of course, you have some of the local
citisens who have assumed the roles of leadership in the
movement and, of course, they are not satisified with the
system that now prevails.
THE COURT: All right, you may go down.
MRS. MOTLEY: We would like to call as the
next witness, Ollie Luton.
* # # *
96b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MR. OLLIE LUTON
witness called and sworn in behalf
of Plaintiffs, testified on
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY PE. HOLLOWELL:
Q Mr. Luton, are you engaged in the cab business,
taxicab business?
A Yes, I am.
Q Were you so engaged on the 13th of April, 1962?
A Yes.
Q Beg pardon?
A Yes, I was.
Q Was that engagement In the City of Albany?
A Yes. Colonel, it was the 9th of April, wasn't it?
Q On or about that time?
A Yes.
Q I will ask you whether or not there is a sign
on the side of your car indicating that is your taxicab,
indicating the racial identification of persons that you
can ride?
A Yes, there is.
Q ’What does it say on it?
A "Colored only".
Q Why is that on there?
A I wouldn't know.
Q Let me show you PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT #5 ana ask you
have you ever seen it before; that is PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT
for identification No. 5? Did you receive that?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
97B
A 5?
Q No, I mean that’s just our number. Have you
ever received or seen this particular document before?
A Yes, I have.
Q You have? What was the occasion, will you relate
how you came into possession of it?
A Well, I had a call to Turner Field.
Q A call to Turner Field?
A On April 9, to the Officers' Club.
Q The Officers' Club at Turner Field?
A At Turner Field, and I went there; and I went to
the kitchen and the help come out and told me that no one
there called a cab.
Q I see; now, Is the help there white or Negro?
A They're Negroes.
Q And then what?
A Then, I started on off and then three white guys,
they whistled me down and I stopped. They asked me for a
lift to town. I told them I could not ride whites. They
said, "If you just carry us", said "we'll stand twixt you
and the law." I said, "Well, I hate to see you stranded
and I'll give you a lift to town if you say you'll stand
twixt me and the law."
Q Did you give them a lift to town?
A I give them a lift to town.
Q Was this on a pay basis?
A No, no.
98b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q You did arrive in town, did you not?
A Yeah, I arrived in town.
Q Tell me what happened after you got to town?
A After I got about a mile of town, a car rolled
up behind me and tbrowed his bright lights on me and then
he cut them back down to dim. I told than, I said "Now,
dat’s the law". Sho nuff, it was the County cops. And so
they trailed me on to town, and at the far end of the bridge,
there was sane cops on that side on motorcycle, and one
was caning down the bridge and met. He turned around
and trailed me back and stopped me, told me to stop on
the far end of the bridge.
Q Was this the City police?
A Yes, it was.
Q All right, and then what happened?
A And then, when I stopped on the far end of the
bridge, he rolled up there and he say "What you doing
hauling whites?" I said "I just only give the gentlemen
a lift tom." And he axed them, said "Didn't you see
that sign on the car, for colored only?" They say, "I
didn't pay it no attention." He say, "Well, stand over
there, I'll call you a cab".
MR. RAWLS: Your Honor, I object to this.
This would be hearsay, I believe.
The Witness: He say "I’ll call you a cab".
THE COURT: Just a moment!
MR. RAWLS: I object to this as hearsay
99B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
THE COURT: Yes, this conversation with
other people unidentified. Of course, I know you
didn’t ask him about the conversation, but don’t
repeat statements other people made unless they’re
parties to this litigation.
MR. HOLL0WELL: You don’t mean to indicate that
he might not relate the conversation with the Police
Department?
THE COURT: Which is a representative of the
City of Albany.
MR. KOLLOVELL: You say If he is a representative?
THE COURT: Yes, policeman of the City of
Albany.
Q Mr. Hollowell: Now, you say the policeman said
what to you?
A They told them, said "Did you see that sign on the
car?"
Q Just a moment, excuse rnr, Mr. Luton; what the
Judge is saying, you can’t say what the white men said
insofar as that conversation went; now, as to your
relationship and the conduct and the statements relating
to what the police said?
A Well, he asked me for my permit.
Q He asked you for your permit?
A Yes.
Q Did the policeman permit the white men that you
were bringing in, in your cab, to continue in your cab?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
100B
A No, he didn’t; he told them to get out and get
on the other side and he would call them a cab.
Q Now, what was the result of the taking of your
permit?
A Because they was in the car, I reckon; that’s
all I could see.
Q Were you give a summons or not?
A Yes, I was.
Q Did you go to court?
A I went - I didn’t go to court. My lawyer went
for me.
Q He went for you?
A Yes.
Q Let me show you - I believe you said this
PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT #5 for identification is the summons
that you received?
A The summons I received.
Q Pursuant to your transporting these white
passengers on even a non-paying basis?
A Non-pay basis, that’s right.
Q I show you P-6 and ask you whether or not that’s
a receipt for the fine?
A This is reoeipt for the fine, $17.
Q Now, how long did they keep your permit?
A 10 days,
Q Were you able to operate during that 10 day period?
A No sir, not nary bit.
Hearing on Motion Fbr Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
101B
Q How much would you suggest that you lost during
that period by not having it?
A Colonel, I suggest, the lawyer I paid him $25
and the $17, I figure I lost $200 because both of them
was week-end cases.
MR. H0LL0WELL: He’s with you.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. RAWLS:
Q How long have you been operating a cab?
A I’ve been operating a cab ever since '36, the
second Monday in July, *36.
Q I suppose if you knew of any other instances
similar to this, you would certainly have told about it?
A Well, I would have if there was any except this.
Q You’ve been operating since 1936?
A ’36.
Q Let’s see, that’s 26 years?
A 26 years.
MR. RAWLS; That’s all.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. H0LL0WELL:
Q Have you had any occasion to ride whites before?
A How is that, Colonel?
Q Have you ever ridden white people in your cab
before?
A Yes, I used to have as many white customers
as I did colored, when it was that way; but since they've
changed, I haven't done it.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
102B
Q How long has this change been in effect, to
your knowledge?
A I can’t remember, twixt ’46 and ’45.
Q Mould you like to be able to ride any one who
wanted your services?
A I would feel proud to do so.
MR. HOLLOWELL: You may cane down. May this
witness be excused, Your Honor, so he can go back?
THE COURT: If there is no objection.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Mr. Rawls, do you have any
obj ection?
MR, RAWLS:
MR. HOLLOWELL:
No objection.
You may go then.
DR. W. G. ANDERSON
a party Plaintiff, called and
sworn as witness in behalf of
Plaintiffs, testified
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. HOLLOWELL:
Q Dr. Anderson, you heard the testimony this
morning of the Mayor; I ask you whether or not you ever
had the occasion to indicate to the Mayor and any other
City officials the fact that you were petitioning in behalf
of the Albany Movement and other Negroes, including yourself,
for the desegregation of all publicly owned facilities?
A Yes, this has happened on several occasions.
Q Would you indicate when those occasions were,
insofar as you can recollect?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
103B
A Well, I recall the first occasion as being in
February of 1961, when I went to the Mayor's office and
discussed with him the conditions existing in Albany,
which I find as an individual to be repugnant; and I
asked that a bi-racial ccranlttee be established for the
purpose of bringing about a peaceful desegregation of the
public facilities of the City of Albany. The Mayor did
not reply at all to this request.
Again, in November of 196I, I went to see the
Mayor, along with three other persons, and presented the
Mayor with a copy of the minutes of a meeting that had been
held with a group of leading citizens in the community and
other interested persons, again asking that the Mayor
prevail upon the City Ccranission to seek means of peace
fully desegregating the City of Albany's public facilities.
Q Now, I show you Plaintiffs' Exhibit #1 and
ask you if this is the copy of the minutes to which you
refer?
A That is correct.
Q Now, how did you say it was delivered?
A In person.
Q By you?
A By me.
Q Now, were there other occasions?
A Since that time there have been, well, literally
numerous occasions when I have discussed the problems of
segregation in the City of Albany with the Mayor and the
impact on the Nation and the detrimental effect on the
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
104b
Nation’s image as a world leader in a democratic society;
and have asked repeatedly that seme means be devised
whereby the City of Albany can peacefully desegregate its
public facilities.
I further urged that he recognize the inevita
bility of this social evolution being upon us and, if we
do not take sane constructive measures to bring about a
peaceful desegregation, the chaos and confusion would
undoubtedly occur.
Q Did I understand you to say that you had the
occasion to appear personally?
A That’s correct. I went to the Mayor’s office
first and we discussed it. He indicated to me - this was
in November - he indicated to me that he would take it up
with the City Commissioners and I could anticipate or we
could anticipate a response from the City Commission at
their next regularly scheduled meeting. And I don't remember
the date of that meeting but it was the very next regularly
scheduled meeting after November 17.
I went to that meeting and I sat through the
entire City Commission meeting and listened to all of the
discussions which ensued, and no mention was made of the
petition or the discussion which I had had with the Mayor.
At the end of their or at the coupletion of the agenda,
the Mayor asked if any person present had any matters
they wanted to present to the Commission, and at that
time I asked for a reply to the petition which I had
submitted; whereupon, the Mayor advised me that this
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
matter had been taken under consideration by the City
Commission and found no cannon grounds for agreement.
Whereupon, I replied this is unfortunate and regrettable
and not to the best interest of Albany.
Q Did the Mayor make any comment at that time?
A I left at that point,
Q Now, were there any other discussions - strike that
Mr. Reporter and let me ask you this ~ Have you ever at
any time received any document from the City Commissioners
or the Mayor, which in fact responded to the petition
which you had made for desegregation of all of the publicly
owned facilities?
A Yes, I went before the City Commission with
representatives from the Albany Movement on January 23,
1962, again seeking the establishment of a biracial
committee to study the problem of segregation and seek
means of desegregating the public facilities of the City
of Albany; and we were advised at that time that the
matters involved would necessitate some discussion and
we could anticipate an answer within 10 days.
We did get such an answer to the form of a
letter that was signed by all of the members of the City
Commission.
Q Did it address itself to the doing of anything
relative to desegregating any of the public facilities?
MR. RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor please, I
believe the witness stated that there was a letter;
if so, the letter would be the highest and best evidence.
106b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Mr. Hollowell: I'll ask another question; Do you
have a copy of that letter?
A Yes, I do and a copy of the letter is in evidence
here. I saw it this morning. I guess it has become a part
of the record.
Q Do you have reference to this PLAINTIFFS' EXHIBIT
#HS as identified?
A That's correct. This is the letter and it, of
course, was signed by all of the members of the City
Commission; and that's not, that part is not on here.
Q In your reading of it did you ever see anything
which addressed itself to the problems of the petition
which you had submitted?
A There is nothing in here that is consistent
with the items mentioned in the —
MR. RALLS: New if Your Honor pleases, I
object to the conclusion of this witness. The document
is in writing and will speak for itself.
MR. HOLLOWELL: I asked him, Your Honor, in his
reading of it did he ever see anything which addresses
itself. 1 am presuming that he read it.
THE COURT: Well, that calls for him to -
in other words, are you asking him what his interpreta
tion of the letter was?
MR. HOLLOS'®LL: No sir, I asked him in his reading
of it, did he ever see anything which addressed itself
to the matter of desegregating any of the public facili
ties
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
THE COURT: Well, since the letter itself is
in evidence, why is that question proper or appropriate,
since the letter is there? It’s been identified but
you haven't introduced it, I don't believe.
MR. HOLLOWELL: It has not been introduced.
THE COURT: It's the best evidence of what
it says rather than what this witness might say that
it contains; the letter is there and it's the best
evidence of it.
MR. HOLLOWELL: I don't think it's that important
Everybody that reads doesn't see, Your Honor, and I
vanted to see whether or not he saw it.
THE COURT: Well, that's the reason I asked
you If you were going to ask him what his interpreta
tion was?
MR. HOLLOWELL: I am not.
THE COURT: I m s going to allow you to
ask him -
MR. HOLLOWELL: Well, I'll ask him.
THE COURT: Ask him if he interpreted this
as being a response but do not ask him what is in the
letter but ask him what he considered it as.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Very well.
Q Did you interpret tills letter as being a response
to the petition to which you referred?
A No, it could not have been because the matters
included in the petition were not answered in the letter.
108B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Were any of the other things that are in this
letter, that is P-4, referred to in your petition?
A No.
Q Now, have you had the occasion to be arrested
by the City police? . . . Doctor, have you ever had the
occasion to go to Tift Park?
A Yes.
Q When was the last time you were there?
A I don't remember the exact date. It was the
Saturday Morning following the trial in Recorder's Court,
at which time I was sentenced to 60 days or $200 fine,
which was suspended.
Q What was that fine for?
A I was charged with failure to obey an officer,
disorderly conduct, unlawful congregation, to mention a
few. I don't remember the others. But it was related to
the situation wherein I was standing before City Hall in a
prayer service.
Q Now, that would have been about August 11; now,
you say you went to the Park; were you alone?
A No, I was with three other people, I believe
three otter people.
Q Will you relate what your experiences were at
the Park at that particular time?
A Yes, in this group, one of the individuals in
the group went to the concession man and sought to purchase
a ticket to go swimming; and at that time he was denied —
109B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730*731
MR. RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases,
unless the witness was present and names the person
who went there and heard him being denied, that would
be hearsay.
THE COURT: That testimony had better cane
or would cane better frcm whoever he’s talking about
than this witness.
MR. HOLLOWELL: I would submit, Your Honor, that
would depend upon what the situation was as of that
time, whether or not he actually saw this happen.
I believe he has testified that he was at the Park and I
think that the objection is premature.
THE COURT: All right, maybe so; maybe my
ruling was premature. I actually haven’t ruled but
maybe my observation was premature.
MR. HOLLOWELL,: I will pursue it, Your Honor,
and then we’ll hear the objection.
THE COURT: All right, go ahead.
Q Mr. Hollowell: I believe your testimony was that
the man, one of the persons in your party, went up to purchase
a ticket for swimming, is that correct?
A That's correct.
Q Did you see him do this?
A Yes, I did.
Q Would you relate what happened?
A He was told by the man at the concession booth
that he couldn't sell him a ticket.
Q Did you hear’ it?
HOB
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A Yes, I heard M m say that.
Q Were you denied any other facilities at that time?
A Not personally, no.
Q Have you had the occasion to be denied or have
any of your fanily denied any of the uses or the use of
any of the facilities of Tift Park or any other parks?
A Yes, my son wanted to ride the ponies and I
carried him to the person who was in charge of these rides
and he was told -
MR. RAWLS: Now if Your Honor pleases, I
object unless the witness testifies that he was present.
A The Witness: I was present.
MR. HOLLOWELL: He said he took him.
A The Witness: I took him and he was told that
he could not ride on the ponies.
THE COURT: Mr. Marshal, let's preserve order
in the courtroom.
Q Mr. Hollowell: What park was this at?
A TMs was in Tift Park.
Q I’ll ask you whether or not you have had the
occasion to observe any Negroes seeking to use the Carnegie
library facilities?
A Yes, sir, I have on two occasions.
Q Would you relate your experiences in that connec
tion?
A Well, the most recent occasion I observed seme
Negroes approaching the Carnegie Library entrance and the
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
door was closed and held closed and I presume locked;
and they could not get in.
Q Could you see who m s holding the door?
A Well, I could not identify the person by naqe;
apparently some —
Q I mean, could you see the person?
A Oh yes, yes.
Q Was that person of white, I mean of Negro or
Caucasion extraction?
A Caucasion.
Q Was the person inside or outside of the door?
A Inside.
Q What, if anything, did the Negroes do at that time
A They knelt and prayed.
Q Did they leave immediately thereafter?
A No; as a matter of fact, seme policemen came and
literally carried him away.
Q Were these policenen of the City of Albany?
A Yes.
Q Have you had the occasion to use the facility
which is known as the City Auditorium?
A Yes, I have.
Q Would you relate whether or not in your experience
iii using or visiting this facility you observed the seating,
arrangement?
A Yes, I have observed, and I have noticed that
Negroes were directed to certain section and white persons
are directed to another section of the auditorium.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Have you had the occasion to visit the auditorium
on innumerable occasions?
A Several, anyway; at least as many as four occasions
Q I mean on occasions when there were whites and
Negroes occupying the seats in the auditorium?
A Yes, I have been there when they were occupying
seats in the auditorium.
Q Have you personally been directed to a particular
section?
A Yes.
Q Have you at any time ever had the privilege of
sitting where you actually wanted to sit in the auditorium
without being directed to do so by whomever it was In charge
at that time?
A No, each time I was directed to a certain
section of the auditorium.
Q In that section were Negro or whites sitting?
A Negroes.
Q Have you at any time ever seen in your experience
Negroes and whites sitting in a mixed seating arrangement
in the auditorium of the City of Albany?
A No, I have not.
MR. HOLLOWELL: He's with you.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. HILLIARD BURT:
Q How long have you lived here in Albany?
A Five years.
Q Where did you cane fran?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
113B
A Michigan, Flint, Michigan.
Q And you are an osteopath, is that right?
A That’s right.
Q When you came to Albany did or did you not make
application to the Phoebe-Futney Memorial Hospital as an
M. D. to be put on the staff?
A Let me understand the question again?
MR. BURT: Will you read it to him?
THE REPORTER: (Reading question next above)
A The Witness: No, I did not.
Q Mr. Burt: You never did when Dr. John Inman
ms President of the Hospital Board?
A No, I never made formal application to be given
staff privileges at Phoebe-Putney. I did discuss it with
several of the members of the staff and did enjoy the use
of many of the facilities at the Hospital when I first came.
Q You don’t contend that you’re an M.D.?
A I am an M.D.
Q You are.
A Yes.
Q And you graduated from where?
A Tte California College of Medicine and the
College of Osteopathic Medicine and Surgery.
MR. HOLLCWELL: May it please the Court, I
submit that I don’t know of any expert testimony
that remains in this case that would even require
the outlay of what the witness’ back-ground is and
I can’t see where it is at all material or relevant.
114b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MR. BURT: Your Honor please, I was briefly
going into his background. I am through with that part,
simply to get his background for further cross examina
tion.
Q Now, you made a statement that you had spoken
with Mayor Kelley and had petitioned the City of Albany for
peaceful desegregation, is that right?
A Of the public facilities.
Q Now, what else, what is the alternative except
peaceful desegregation?
A What is the alternative?
Q Right?
A A perpetuation of the system of segregation.
Q What makes that not peaceful?
A Segregation within itself Is contrary to the
morals of the universe and contrary to the basic structure
of the Constitution of the United States.
Q We were not having riots in Albany before you
started this Movement, were we?
A Well, it all depends on the interpretation of
"riots'*.
Q Were we having lawlessness?
A Oh yes, there was lawlessness.
Q Because of segregation?
A Because of the enforcement of segregation.
Q There was lawlessness on the part of whom?
A The City.
1153
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q The City of Albany was guilty of lawlessness
because of segregation, is that your testimony?
A That’s correct. It is my understanding that
segregation is contrary to the Constitution of the United
States, which is the highest lav; of the land.
Q Well, m s there peace in the community before
you started your Albany Movement to desegregate Albany?
A Absolutely not; there was an absence of conflict
that was predicated upon the suppression of the aspirations
and longings of the Negro citizens to be free, but there
ms no peace.
Q Are you saying there is more peace today or for
the last six months than —
MRS. MOTLEY: Flay it please the Court, we are
now arguing with the witness.
TIE COURT: Yes, let’s ask the question now
and let's let the witness complete his answer before
you go on to asking him another question; and let’s
not have the witness arguing with counsel or counsel
arguing with the witness. In other words, let’s slow
down a little and let the witness complete his answer
and then the witness not interrupt the attorney when
he is questioning him and vice versa.
Q Mr. Burt: I believe you stated on direct
examination that, unless we had peaceful desegregation, we
would have chaos and confusion?
A Yes sir.
Q What chaos and what confusion?
i i6b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A Well, I also stated that it was inevitable.
Q Now, I asked you the question, what chaos -
let’s take that - what chaos?
A Well, chaos, of course, I presume you know wiiat
chaos is?
Q You tell us?
A Well, an air of discord; that is, we have
existing in the City of Albany as a result of an attempt
on the part of the City to preserve a system of segregation
and perpetuate a system of segregation, unrest, a people
who will no longer be satisfied with the systan of segre
gation; and, if they are not given adequate consideration
in bringing about a change in this system of segregation,
then they will continue to protest the system. And this,
of course, is chaotic.
Q And that started back in November, 1961, when
the Albany Movement started, as far as these demonstrations
are concerned?
A I think protests had been going on long before
that time.
Q As far as street demonstrations are concerned,
they did not originate before November, 1961, did they?
A I think that the mass protests involving several
hundreds of people in a relatively short period of tine
did not start until prior to November, 1961.
Q Those were street demonstrations?
A Well, they took plaice, the protests took place
on the streets
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Now, you stated that you presented to Mayor
Kelly an abstract of the minutes from your Albany Movement
meeting, Is that correct?
A That1s correct.
Q And how did you present these to Mayor Kelley?
A Well, actually, we did not anticipate submitting
the minutes as a formal document to him; but in the course
of conversation, so that he would have something to refer
to, we gave him a copy of the minutes of the meeting. In
other words, this was not to assume the status of a formal
or legal document, but in the course of discussion; and we
asked for the establishment of bi-racial committee to
study the problem, in order that he would have seme guide,
sane indication as to what would be included, he raised
the question; for example,"what if we desegregate the bus
terminal and the train terminal at the present time; will
tills be sufficient?" And, of course, at that point, we
indicated to him. that we felt as though this would be a
starting point and, if a permanent body could be established
that would evaluate the situation in Its entirety and make
recommendations as to when other facilities would be desegre
gated, tills would be perfectly acceptable.
Q In other words, this wasn't a demand on the City;
It was simply for their information as to what your
ccranittee, the Albany Movement or that group, had found
necessary in the City of''.Albany?
A I think that your construction is more fair
than to say a demand. We were merely prevailing upon the
U S B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
City CcKmisslon to recognize the inevitability of the social
change which was upon us and to make means to become a
part of this evolving system, rather than resist it.
Q And it wasn't actually address to the City,
it ms simply an abstract or a copy of the minutes of
your meeting?
A Well, the discussion was addressed toward the
Mayor of the City as the duly elected head of the Camassion
and, of course, as a representative of the Commission.
Q Bit it speaks of "Hie Albany Movement, November
17, 1961m, Plaintiffs' Exhibit #1, and it starts out,
"Minutes", isn't that correct?
A That's correct.
Q Mow, you spoke about the City Auditorium: who
directed you or any other member of your race to sit at
any particular area?
A Oh, I couldn’t give you the name of the individual.
Q Well, was it a policeman? Was it any official
of the City of Albany?
A No policeman, no uniform policeman. The person
who was at the door, I don't know whether he was an official
of the City or not.
Q When was this?
A Oh, this hasn't happened now in better than a
year. 1 can't remember exactly.
Q What was going on at the City Auditorium, the
reason you were there?
119B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A There was a benefit program, I believe, for the —
oh, I don’t know, one of the funds - one of the fund raising
programs. I don’t just remember which one it was in par
ticular. I didn’t pay that much attention to it.
Q Did you go in?
A Yes, I went in.
Q Did you stay?
A For a while. This was one of these all night
affairs and I stayed for a while, a short while.
Q What kind of entertainment was it?
A Oh, some Hollywood stars were here and there
was a variety program.
Q And someone who was not dressed in any official
capacity told you where you were going to be seated?
A Didn't have a police uniform on, yes.
Q ’Were you able to see the stage from where you were?
A Oh yes.
Q Now, I believe that you have filed this action as
a class action, is that right?
A On behalf of myself and on behalf of a number
of other Negro citizens of the Camnunity.
Q Have you been chosen by the vast majority of
your race to represent them in a suit in Federal Court?
A Well, I say that as a result of the experiences
which I have had with many members of my race, I am certain
that I reflect their interest and concern in filing tills
suit
1203
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730» 731
Q You are certain? Have you sent out a petition
to get so many thousand names?
A No sir.
Q Designating you as their spokesman or as the
one to file suit in their behalf?
A Well, of course, I was elected by a large
number of people in the Negro eaiinunity to represent
then in their civil rights.
Q That was the Albany Movement?
A That * s correct.
Q The Albany Movenent had as its policy demonstra
tions?
A I beg to disagree with that.
Q Well, your Albany Movement started in November,
1961; you weren't chosen at that time to file any complaint
In the District Court of the United States, were you?
A I m s never given ay specific direction as to
what course I might take on behalf of these people which I
was representing.
Q Hit you ail have demonstrated repeatedly since
November, 1961, have you not?
A And prior to that time too, yes sir.
Q And the Albany Movement has been the spear-head
for these demonstrations?
A Well, the construction of the Albany Movement
is not — well, the usual construction of a civil rights
organization, when xwe think in terns of NAACP and the CORE
anb so forth. The Albany Movement is an unincorporate body.
121B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
It is a freedom movement that involves a large number of
people in the City of Albany and, of course, membership
is merely predicated upon one’s wishes and desires to becane
free, to becane a first-class citizen. And when we say
the Albany Movement, I don’t think we can look at it fran
the point of being an organization.
Q Do you have officers?
A Yes, we do have officers, for convenience.
Q How many officers do you have?
A Approximately 15 officers.
Q And you are the President?
A I'm the President.
Q So, you do have some organization, do you not?
A We have some organization.
Q And you receive donations?
A We do receive donations.
Q And how is the money deposited in the bank?
A In the name of the Albany Movement.
Q The Albany Movement?
A Yes.
Q And you’re able to endorse checks for the Albany
Movement?
A Yes, I am.
Q Where do you get your money fran?
A Various and sorted places, mostly fran individuals.
There have been sane organizations that have made donations
to the Movement.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
122B
Q Where are you getting your money to file this
action in Federal Court?
A Well, no particular place. There is no single
individual or group of individuals or organizations
financing this suit.
Q You haven’t paid your attorney a cent, have you?
MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court, we
object to how the suit is being financed, on the ground
that it’s not relevant or material to ary issue in this
case.
MR. BURT: Your Honor please, we submit that
this is a class action, this is a party Plaintiff, and
we would like to search him to see if he himself has
voluntarily filed this action, whether someone else
has pushed him into this; and we would like to see
if he is a proper party before this Court.
THE COURT: Yes, in a class action, I think
it is a legitimate area of inquiry in order that you
may determine who the class is and who constitutes the
class; and one of the evidences of it would be who
contributed to it, who goes to the meetings, who are
its spokesmen, how it operates. I think that’s a
legitimate inquiry as to where the money cones from
and so on, because that is one of the ways you can
determine the class, who is interested.
MRS. MOTLEY: Excuse me, Your Honor. May I
say something further, Your* Honor? I think the
Supreme Court has already ruled on this. We have
123B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
a brief on this qeustion. We get this in many civil
rights cases. And in Evers v. Dwyer the Supreme Court
has ruled that this inquiry as to who is financing it
and so forth is not relevant or material to the consti
tutional area. Now, it may be relevant in some other
proceeding, barratry or sariething like that. But all
this Court has to determine is whether the City officials
have denied the Constitutional- rights of these Plain
tiffs and the fact that somebody may be financing it
wouldn't have anything to do with it.
MR, BURT: We believe, Your Honor please,
there may be a distinction there as to just who is
financing. We are interested in knowing whether
or not this Plaintiff actually took an overt act to
file an action or whether someone else took it for him
and he's just a nominal plaintiff, rather than -ust
the pure fact of who is financing it. We're interested
in trying to see whether or not he is a proper plain
tiff party to this action and a class representative.
THE COURT: Well, do you insist on your
question about financing it? Do you insist on that?
MR. BURT: No sir*, I withdraw that at this
time.
Q I believe I asked you the question, you haven't
paid your attorney anything, have you?
A On yes, yes sir.
Q I believe I asked you that question on deposition
Tuesday and you stated that you had your attorney on retainer?
124B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A That’s right.
Q Over the years?
A Over the past 4 or 5 years, yes sir'.
Q And you haven’t received a bill or paid any
money on this particular case?
MRS.MOTLEY: May it please the Court, excuse
me, I understood that the question regarding financing
of the lawsuit had been withdrawn
MR. BURT: My understanding, Your Honor
please, was outside contributions to him or the
attorneys. I am trying to determine whether or not
this Plaintiff actually has hired an attorney and
has actually brought tills action voluntarily.
THE COURT: I think that's legitimate. Now,
he has withdrawn any effort to go into where the
finances come from. But I think since we have a
situation where one man says he is representing a
class and. he has brought this action now for than,
I think it is a legitimate inquiry as to whether he
engaged the attorneys or whether somebody else did
and such as that. Of course, I’m not going into what
may have been paid to the attorneys or any amount like
that or anything in that area; but simply, who arranged
it; did he arrange for the attorneys or somebody else?
I think that’s proper in a class action; I think that’s
legitimate. I’ll allow it.
MR. BURT: What was my last question?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
125B
THE REPORTER: "And you haven’t received a bill
or paid any money on this particular case?"
Q Mr. Burt: Is that correct?
A I received a bill today, as a matter of fact,
1 believe, or yesterday. I received a bill in the past
2 or 3 days from Attorney King.
Q For this action?
A Well, he does not specify in the bills specifi
cally what case the bill is for. 1 presume I can get that
information if I Inquire; but he merely sends me a bill
for legal fees, and I get one every month.
Q You have a lot of legal business?
A Quite a bit.
Q Now, when did you retain your attorney to file
an action?
A For this particular case?
Q Right, for tills particular case?
A Well, I don’t remember the exact date. I think
I told you at that time too, this was around the time I was
in Atlanta before Judge Tuttle. I don't remember that
exact date, but it was around tills time. Of course, I
had indicated to him over a period of several months that
I was interested in doing this and I was dissatisfied with
the system of segregation and the imposition on me as an
individual and my associates as a group; and I asked him
to prepare such a case; and he advised me around the time
1 was in Atlanta before Judge Tuttle that lie was ready to
file it.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
1263
Q Did you sign the complaint?
A Well, yes. I'm certain that I did. Now, I can’t
give you the exact date again when I signed it, because I
have signed so many legal actions.
Q You read the complaint before it was filed, did
you not?
A Sure.
Q And you have a copy of it in your possession?
A I no doubt have a copy of it in my files.
Q But you understood you had to sign it before
it could be filed?
A I understand that.
Q And did you have a particular contract with
Lawyer King?
A Oh yes.
Q On this case?
A Well, put it this way: there are about five cases
that came up about that same time, and I signed, oh literally
tens of papers, legal documentsj and I have every reason to
believe that among these was a retainer for this.
Q Now you, I believe, are a member of NAACP, are
you not?
A That is correct.
Q How long have you been a member of that organization?
A Since 1943.
Q Have they undertaken to take any part in this
case?
A Well now, —
1273
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 73-*-
MR. HOILOWELL: Your Honor, I can't see where
this would be the slightest bit relevant, as to whether
or not the NMCP or anybody else for that matter has
taken any part in the case. There are individual
plaintiffs suing in behalf of themselves and others
similarly situated and there is no relevance as to
whether the NMCP or CMN have taken any part in the
case.
THE COURT: Yes, I don't think the question
is proper. You might ask him specifically whether the
NMCP is one of the classes that he represents.
Q Mr, Burt: Well, I will just ask him:
you are a member of NMCP, are you not?
A Yes sir, I am.
Q Do you contend that you are representing the NMCP
as a class in filing this action?
MR. HOLLOWEIL: May it please the Court, I think
the record will show that NMCP is a corporation; and
I think the petition shows that he's suing in behalf of
himself and others similarly situated; and I think
counsel knows this, of course; and, therefore, I still
don't see any relevance as to the NMCP being an
organization can be a class.
THE COURT: Well, I presume his answer is
going to be "no".
A The Witness: No; thank you, no.
Q Mr. Burt: Are you or are you not represent'
ing for a class the membership of NMCP?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
128B
A Only coincidentally; that is, I did not inquire
as to whether these persons were members of the NAACP when
they brought the complaints to me about segregation.
Q Has the NAACP furnished you counsel in this case?
A Well, of course, I look to Attorney King as
immediate adviser and counselor and, so far as I’m concerned
te’s at liberty to get what ever counselors he so desires.
So, I do not know what or who lie M s —
Q Who does Attorney Motley, what representation does
she have in this case?
A She was secured by Attorney King. She, of course,
works iranediately with the Legal and Educational defense
fund.
Q What legal and educational defense fund?
MRS. MOTLEY: We object to that, Your Honor.
MR. BURT: Well, he injected that In the case.
MRS. MOTLEY: The record doesn’t stow that the
Legal and Defense Fund represents this man. It shows
that I do as his attorney and this is not relevant
or material to the issue that this Court has to decide.
THE COURT: Yes, I’m not going into the
financial arrangements with the attorneys. I’m not
going into that.
Q Mr. Eurt: Mow, you Mve several other party
Plaintiffs with you in tills action, is that correct?
A That’s correct.
Q Did you all confer and join together to file
fchis action?
129B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A Well, we all are represented by the same
attorney and he elected to -
Q Who is ,!hen?
A Attorney King. Attorney King elected to cut
each of us in this one suit, I presume rather than bring
individual suits for both of us; but I did not attempt to
solicit any of than as individuals to go with me on this
suit, no, or even discuss with them retaining the attorney
for this purpose as individuals.
Q Are they all members of the Albany Movement?
A That's correct, yes.
Q And you contend that you all represent the vast
majority of your race in this City?
A Well, I can’t even say that. I presume so but
it would be perfectly a presumption. I know we do represent
a large number of people to the City, in our aspiration —
Q How many are there of your race in the City,
do you estimate?
A Approximately 24,000.
Q And your meetings, what is the largest meeting
that you lave had or gathering?
A Approximately 3,000.
Q Now, since you have started your Albany Movement
in 1961, November, 1961, the bus service has been discon
tinued, has it not?
A That's correct.
Q And that was used predominantly by members of
your race?
Hearing on Motion lor Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
130B
A That’s correct, yes sir.
Q The library has been closed?
A I presume so. I have not been there recently
but I have heard accounts of it having been closed.
Q The parks are closed?
A Yes sir, I did notice that personally. I saw
the barricades up before the park. I couldn’t understand
why but I did see that.
Q Can’t you tell from that, that you are not
representing your race, that you’re not doing them a service?
A I don’t think any member of my race —
TR, HOLIXWELL: just a moment! I have every
confidence that the answer that the witness would give
would probably net be satisfactory to counsel but it’s
argumentative and I suggest that it’s not proper.
THE COURT: Yes, that question is argumenta
tive.
MR. BURT: Your Honor, may I ask the
question if he contends that he is representing his
race in a class action, is he attempting to do a service
for his race?
THE COURT: You can ask him that and you can
ask him what service he thinks his organization has
performed. The form of your question as asked was
argumentative.
MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court, we
object to that question. This curt doesn’t have
to decide whether he’s doing a service for his race
13 IB
faring on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730* 731
In this action. All this court has to decide is
whether the State has deprived him of rights guaranteed
by the Constitution; and the fact that in some people's
opinion he may have done a, disservice to his race is
not constitutionally relevant, which Is another matter
that the courts have already ruled on, the University
of North Carolina case.
THE COURT: I am going to allow the question.
Go ahead.
Q Mr. Burt: Recognizing these losses to the
City and to your race, how do you contend that you are
representing your race In a class action for their benefit?
A Well, first of all, I do not recognize the fact
that any harm has come to my race as a result of the activi
ties of the Albany Movement; so that, I cannot answer the
second part because it Is predicated upon a part that I
don't agree with.
P You don't think the loss of bus service has
hampered your people?
A Not nearly as much as the indignities which
they have suffered as a result of using the busses on a
segregated basis.
Q You don't think the loss of the library facilities,
colored and white, or colored as far as you all are
secerned, has been a detriment to your race?
A So far as I know, my race did not have the
?piviiege of using the library facilities at the Carnegie
132B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Library down town, so that certainly they could not suffer
at all as a result of it having been closed.
Q Well now, you all had library facilities here in
Albany on Whitney for 15 years, did you not?
A That's correct, woefully inadequate.
Q And now you have a new library on Lee Street?
A Also woefully inadequate, yes sir.
Q What's woefully Inadequate about It?
A Well, just using the figure that was quoted
this morning by the Mayor, $25,000 for a modern library
is just not In keeping at all, a person that has any
knowledge at all of cost of equipping a library. $25,000
would not even start to build the building, let alone
put any books in It.
Q Have you been down there and read from the
library?
A Yes sir.
Q Is that closed today?
A I don't know. I haven't been by today •
Q Now, your parks are closed, are they not?
A Yes sir, I have noticed the barricades up
before the driveways leading into the park.
Q As far as you are concerned, as long as you
ape provided equal facilities, you have suffered no
detriment, have you?
A Well now, me as an individual or are you
speaking now In terms of the general population which I
feel that I may represent In part?
133B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
q Well, let's speak both ways?
A Well, sofar as I am concerned as an individual
and as a part of the City of Albany, I feel that the entire
city is being harmed as a result of this action.
q What action?
A The closing of the parks and the closing of the
libraries.
Q i ask you about the quality of the facilities?
A Well, out at the South - Lee Street branch of
the library, I say it's inadequate.
Q Let’s say the recreational facilities?
A For the Negroes9
Q For the size population compared to white?
A Woefully inadequate. The swimming pool at the
Carver Park, which is, oh I guess an over-size bath-tub,
about 30 x 50 feet, I believe, cannot nearly accommodate
the people that desire to go swimming there.
Q So, your position is that actually what your
complaint is, is the fact that your facilities are woefully
âdequate, is that right?
A Well, and segregated.
Q Well, as long as they were adequate, it would
the necessary facilities to suit your need, would it
nô if they were adequate?
MR. HOLLOWELL: May it please the Court, this
is argumentative; I think very succinctly he's arguing
with the witness.
134b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
THE COURT: Yes, let's avoid arguing with the
witness. Ask him questions and let him answer it
and don't argue with him about it.
q Mr. Burt: Let metsee If I understand the
witness: Your position is that the facilities for the members
of your race are woefully inadequate?
A And segregated.
q The segregation part puts a stigma, is that your
contention?
A Well, I feel as though all of the public facilities
should be available to all of the people of the City on an
equal basis.
Q If you had the same facilities that a white
person had in their neighborhood, you wouldn't have any
complaint?
A Well, of course, I find it Irrevocably repugnant
to have the distinction of a white facility and a colored
facility, both provided for by public funds,
q I don’t believe you answered my question -
MRS. MOTLEY: Your Horn*, I'm sorry - I think
he has answered the question; and the fact that the
facilities may be equal or unequal is not before this
Court, Separate but equal Is out under any construction
of the law and what is going in now is whether the man
would be satisfied with equal facilities, and the Court
has already ruled that out.
135B
Searing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
THE COURT: Yes, I don’t think that’s an
appropriate inquiry; and, even if it is, I think he's
already answered it.
MR. BURT: Your Honor please, I recognize
the legal aspect but he has made the statement that
he contended they were woefully inadequate and I was
simply trying to pin him down on his contentions along
that line.
THE COURT: I will allow you to go into why
he considers it inadequate because we've already had
some examination of Mayor Kelley along that line by
counsel for the Plaintiffs. If you want to go into
that area, that sphere, I will allow that, as to
whether he considers the facilities adequate and such
as that. But to ask him whether he would complain
if they were adequate is not an appropriate Inquiry.
Q Mr. Burt: I believe you stated that it was
your contention that segregation per se is a stigma as far
as you're concerned?
A Repugnant.
Q And you take the position that by virtue of
legation that you are denied certain opportunities, is
that right?
A That's correct.
Q, And you yourself have been able to graduate
frmn medical college?
136b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A Not in the State of Georgia, not, but I have been
able to graduate from a medical college outside of the
State.
Q You yourself have pulled yourself up by your
oro boot-straps and you are a doctor practicing medicine
today?
MRS. MOTLEY: This attorney is arguing with the
witness, Your Honor, as to what he has been able to
accomplish.
THE COURT: Yes, let's don't argue with him,
Mr. Burt.
MR. BURT: I just simply asked him that
question If he had done this himself under this
stigma that he is so possessed with.
THE COURT: Well, I believe he's already
testified that he is a graduate of such and such a
school, that he Is a practicing doctor of optometry,
I think, no - osteopathy.
A The Witness: And a doctor of medicine, both, sir.
THE COURT: So, he's already testified to
that and that's in the record.
Q fir. Burt: Going back to this incident at
116 Tift Park, I believe you stated It was several weeks ago?
A That's correct, yes.
Q And you went out there with whom?
A Well, there were several people in the group.
Member one of the names and I don't recall the other
137B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
names. Rabbi Israel Dresner was one of the persons in the
group. I don't remember the names of the others.
Q Where is the Rabbi from?
A New York; he was a guest of mine in the City
and a guest in my home.
Q And you all went out there for the purpcs e of
what?
A Swimming.
Q And did you yourself go to the ticket-taker
at the pool?
A No, he went to the — he approached the ticket
taker,
Q And you didn't attempt to purchase a ticket?
A No, he attempted to purchase the ticket.
Q At the ticket-taker there at the pool?
A Yes sir.
Q And had you attempted that morning to go to your
Carver swimming pool; was it too croxvded for you?
A it was closed.
Q It was closed?
A Yes sir.
Q And this was some three weeks ago?
A Yes sir. 3 or 4, I don't remember the exact date.
BY THE COURT:
Q This party who you say attempted to purchase a
ticket, who I believe you said was your guest?
A Rabbi Israel Dresner.
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos, 730, 731
Q Well, what Is his race? Is he a Negro, white or?
A Well, he's white, I guess. I don't know for use.
BY MR. BURT:
Q I don't understand; did you say this person who
went with you to the pool was a white person?
A I believe he's white. I have never actually
He said he didn't know.
But he appeared to be white.
He was a guest in your home?
in q uired .
THE COURT:
The Witness:
Q Mr. Burt:
A That's right.
Q, And who were the other people that day?
A I don't remember the names of the other persons
that were there»
Q Had they spent the night in your home the night
before?
A Now, whether these other 2 or 3 spent the night
in my home, I don't recall. There have been so many people
in my home in recent months, literally tens of people,
I just don't remember all of their names.
0 . Now, as far as desegregation plan, Is it your
theory that your demonstrations are the means by which to
obtain your result or have you finally decided that it
should be decided in Federal Court?
MR. HOLLOWELL: This is argumentative and I think
it would be irrelevant, There is one thing that is
certain, we are in court; and another thing that is
139B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730. 731
certain, there have been demonstrations. And what has
been the result of same I would submit to be a matter
of argument, as to what he has decided is the proper
approach and has no relevancy here.
ME. BURT; Well, I might ask him, if Your
Honor please, from the beginning of the Albany Move
ment, what the means to obtain the objective were.
THE COURT; I will allow you to ask that.
Q, Mr. Burt; Would you answer that question?
A The objective, as established when the Albany
Movement was first born, was to bring about a peaceful
desegregation of the City of Albany. This objective or
these objectives have not been changed. There are several
means whereby these objectives may be achieved. By protests,
we consider to be one of the means whereby it may be achieved
indirectly; through court action, through selective buying
and through other forms of direct action; that is, in
Picketing in a form of protest. And all of these are directed
toward achieving our ultimate objective.
Q You didn’t consider court action in that?
A Court action. I'm sorry If I omitted that. This
too we consider necessarily a part of achieving our ultimate
goal.
Q, Are you in agreement with this statement that "the
Albany Movement has belatedly taken Its case" —
MR. HOLLOWELL: May It please the Court, excuse
me; it became evident that counsel is reading and it
140B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
appears he's reading from a document, and the document
hasn't been identified; we don't know what the nature
of it is or wouldn't at least except by overhearing
counsel in their discussion; and I submit that it would
be improper to be reading up to this witness from a
document which has not even been identified.
MR. BURT; Your Honor please, I can simply
ask him the question. I don't have to read it from
a document. I would like to ask him the question.
THE COURT: You may ask him the question
and then, if there's still objection, I will rule
on It. I don't know what the question is yet.
Q Mr. Burt: Do you agree with the statement
that the Albany Movement has belatedly approached the
solution to their problem in the federal courts?
A No.
Q You don't agree with that?
A No, it is not a complete statement.
0, Well, in the voting ease you were, as far as
voting was concerned, you went to court in that action,
did you not?
MR. HOLLOWELL: May it please the Court, I have
the same objection. The route is of no relevance here.
This matter is In court and I think insofar as this
case is concerned, the fact that we are here now, and
this is one of the Plaintiffs, is all the relevance
or materiality. What they did in some other case would
i4ib
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
be of no consequence or any relevance or materiality.
Or what they did in any other phase, the fact is that
they are here in this case, which they have a right to
be.
MR, BURT: Your Honor please, we have a
movement here which was started back in November,
1961. We have an organization that took one course
of action and then took another course; and I was
about to ask him the question, since he was a plaintiff
in the voting case filed against Dougherty County, what
his ideas were about attaining his goal, and why he has
changed back to demonstrations and back to court. I was
simply trying to find out the plaintiff’s contentions
on how he should attain his goal, and why there have been
changes in their policy.
THE COURT: Well, the fact that he filed a
suit at another time in another situation would have
no evidentiary value in this case. I can see how you
might argue on the question of whether an injunction
should issue as prayed for. You might argue the fact,
if it is a fact, that the suit was filed so belatedly;
but that would be a matter of argument and I don’t
think it proper to ask this witness why did you file
a suit early in one case and why did you file a suit
after several months of demonstrations in another
case, I think you can argue that to me when we get
around to the argument stage of the case, but I don't
142B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
think it's proper question for this witness, about his
reasons or what his feeling is.
Q. Me. Burt: Are you familiar with Editor
Ralph McGill?
A I have read many of his editorials. I don't know
him personally.
Q You do not know him personally?
A No sir.
Q You do read his editorials?
A Frequently, yes sir.
Q Have you read his editorial in Today's Constitution
A No sir, I haven't had a chance to read today's.
Q Let me ask you if you would look at this short
editorial —
MR. HOLLOWELL: May we see it, Counselor? May
we see it? Has it been Identified. We want something
for the record. What part do you have reference to?
MR. BURT: Right here (Pointing and handing
newspaper to counsel for Plaintiffs) . . .
MR. HOLLOWELL: If It please the Court, again
I would have to make the same objection, that it's
an attempt to put in the same argumentative type of
question, relating to whether or not the proper approach
is now being taken in seeking to obtain some adjustment
for the grievances,
THE COURT: Well, I would have to read It
and see what you're talking about.
143B
gearing on Motion For Prelirainary In junction, Nos. 730, 731
MR. HOLLOWELL: This right there, Your Honor
(handing up newspaper to the Court) . . .
THE COURT: All right, now what is your
question now, Mr. Burt?
MR. BURT: Your Honor please, we simply
wanted to ask the witness, we would like to read the
editorial to him, which is from the Atlanta Constitution
of this date, and see whether or not he agrees with it.
THE COURT: Well, there again, Mr. Burt, we
get right back to the same proposition of going Into
philosophy, not necessarily philosophy; but argument
about why action was taken when It was taken and so on.
Now, as I say, I can anticipate that your might
want to clip that editorial out and read it to me
in argument when we come around to the argument stage;
you might want to adopt that as part of your argument,
that editorial that Mr. McGill has written for you.
But to ask this witness whether he agrees with it, I
don't think it has any value and it's not proper.
MR. BURT: All right, sir.
A The Witness: It may —
MR. BURT: That's all
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
3!r®. HOLLOWELL:
Q. Have you had the occasion to use taxicabs in the
of Albany?
A Yes sir.
144b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Have you had any occasion to witness the refusal
on the part of a white cab in carrying a Negro person or
a Negro person carrying a white person?
A Yes sir.
Q Will you relate what that experience has been?
A Yes sir, I was coming from downtown one evening
approximately three weeks ago and, as I approached the
intersection of South or Jackson rather, at the intersec
tion of North Jackson and Broad, where there Is a cab stand
for the Beck Cab Company, I saw a Negro open the door of
one of the Beck cabs and attempt to get in. And I over
heard the driver tell him that he could not carry him,
"I don't carry Negroes". And whereupon, this Negro closed
the door of the cab and went to the dispatcher and told the
dispatcher that he would like to get a cab, and the dispatcher
told him that he couldn't ride.
MR. BURT: Your Honor please, we object
to this without the witness identifying the Negro
who attempted to get in, in order that we could
check it.
A The Witness; I'll do that.
THE COURT; Well, so far there's been no
indication or any connection of the matter at all
with any of the Defendants in this case. So far the
testimony is purely about a conversation between a
cab driver and a prospective customer.
MR. BURT: We think it would be inadmissible.
145B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
THE COURT: Well, I was going to wait until
the examination was completed.
A The Witness: I can identify the party.
THE COURT: Well, It Is not a question of that.
There is apparently no connection between it and any
of these Defendants.
Q Mr. Hollowell: I ask you, have you had the
occasion, when you have had guests at your house, both
Negro and of Caucasion extraction, to have difficulty Insofar
as being able to dispatch them from your house by use of
taxicabs; and, if so, relate what your experience has been
in that connection?
A Yes sir.
THE COURT: Now, before you do that, before
you do that, I don't want anything related just like he
related a moment ago. Mr. Reporter, I direct that all
of his testimony with regard to the taxicab Incident
just testified to a moment ago be stricken because
there's no connection; he connected it up in no way
with any official action on the part of the City of
Albany or any of Its representatives. So, that would
be a matter apparently between the driver of the
taxicab and somebody who wanted to ride the cab; and
the testimony was that the cab driver told him he
carried only white passengers. So, that's a matter
between customer and the cab driver.
Now, here again, unless this testimony relates
14dB
Searing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
to some connection between official action on the part
of the City of Albany, it would not be admissible.
MR. HOLLOWELL: I would like to address myself
to that since Your Honor has taken that position.
Your Honor says this would not have any relevance,
that this was a private matter between the cab company
and an individual seeking a cab. And this would possibly
be true but for the fact that there is an ordinance
here which we are seeking to have struck or stricken,
which makes it incumbent upon them, upon the cab
company to have "white" on the side of his cab and
upon the negro companies to have "colored" on its cabs.
And we are seeking to show that, not only is the law
there but those who operate taxicabs are forced to
follow and that in fact they do follow that law.
THE COURT: That wasn't the testimony. The
testimony was that a man went up to a cab and wanted to
ride and the cab driver told him "we don't carry anybody
but white passengers" or something to that effect. There
was no statement made by this witness connecting that
with the ordinance.
MR, HOLLOWELL: I submit to you that there
wouldn't have to be a statement made connecting it with
the ordinance. What we are seeking to show is, not only
is this the law and we have the ordinance to put in
evidence, but that the law is being followed by those
who are subjected to it; and the inconvenience to which
1473
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
it puts Negroes, the Inconvenience to which it puts
Negroes and/or white people Insofar as the use which
they desire to make of it.
THE COURT: Well, the mere fact that the
driver of a taxicab declined to haul passengers or
to haul the passenger referred to at the time referred
to would not be proof that he was doing it because of
any City ordinance. He might do it because of the
manner in which he wants to conduct his own business.
MR. HOLLOWELL: May I ask another question on
that? Excuse me, sir.
THE COURT: That’s what I'm getting at.
The incident, purely an incident where a taxi driver
refused to carry a colored passenger or vice versa
a cab driver who refused to carry a white passenger,
could be explained in so many ways other than relating
it to the ordinance until I don’t consider that it is
admissible.
MR. HOLLOWELL: He related it to color, Your Honor.
That was the distinction.
THE COURT: Well, people have a right to do
that. There is nothing illegal about a person driving
a taxicab, if he wants to simply carry people of one
race, if that’s his desire.
MR. HOLLOWELL: It’s Illegal in this City,
Illegal to do other than that.
THE COURT: But you haven't related it to the
14SB
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
ordinances. You have related it only to the taxicab
driver saying that "we don't carry colored passengers",
that's all, without any relation to the ordinance
whatever. And I don't want to argue it any more.
Strike the testimony as directed, Mr. Reporter.
MR. HOLLOWELL: May it please the Court, could
I ask the Court to reserve his ruling until I had
finished or I think I will ask the Court to reconsider
when I finish.
THE COURT: My ruling is directed to the
testimony already given. Of course, I can't rule on
anything that is coming up until it comes up.
Q Mr. Hollowell: I will ask you, in the instance
to which we refer, which is the incident when you are
speaking that you saw the Individual of color seek to get
a Beck cab to take him somewhere, and the driver told him
that he did not carry colored and he got the same response
from the dispatcher: would you indicate, No. 1, whether
the Beck cab is white or Negro?
A Well, there's a sign on the door, the front door
immediately below the window, which says "WHITE ONLY".
MR. HOLLOWELL: Now, in the light of that
testimony, 1 would like to ask the Court to reconsider
its ruling.
THE COURT: All right, I have reconsidered it
and my ruling is the same, and I exclude it.
14933
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q. Mr. Hollowell: Now, have you ever had the
occasion to be arrested in connection with picketing other
than the time to which you referred when you were in front
of the City Hall?
A Yes sir.
Q Would you relate the circumstance#, what you were
doing and when and who made the arrest, if you have a recol
lection?
A Well, approximately March, around the middle of
the month, the date I am not certain of, I was picketing
in the 100 block of North Washington Street on the west
side of the street, I was going from the corner of Washington
and Broad down to the alley midway the block between Broad
and Pine. I was carrying a sign which read, "Walk and shop
in dignity", I believe. And after I had picketed before the
stores for some 10 minutes, Assistant Police Chief Summer-
ford approached me and told me I would have to stop walking
in front of these stores with that sign and move on.
I proceeded to picket the stores in the same
wanner as I had been doing, and he came to me again and told
he that if I didn’t stop picketing in front of these stores
and move on out from down here, I would be arrested. And I
asked of him, "On what charge?" And he said, "Well, Al'll
just have to make a case against you." Whereupon, I con
tinued to picket. The next time he approached me, he said
"You’re under arrest". Again, I asked him on what charge?
And he said "Well, we’ll get a charge." And I got in his
car and was taken to police headquarters.
150B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730.731
Q, Were you ultimately charged?
A Yes, I was charged with failure to obey an
officer and disorderly conduct.
Q Why were you - I mean, what was the result of
the charge? Were you ever tried?
A Yes, I was tried and fined $200 or 30 days,
I believe. I'm not certain of the exact number of days.
Q Why were you picketing?
A I was picketing protesting segregation. The
stores in front of which I was picketing do not employ
Negroes as clerks and they do not afford the Negro the
type of dignity and respect that I think he should be
afforded. My wife was not referi*ed to as "Mrs. Anderson".
And I feel as though they do not treat me or my family or
my associates fairly in employment and In giving the services;
and I was protesting this form of treatment.
Q Were there others picketing in the area of the
same street that you were?
A Yes sir, there was one other person on the same
side of the street that I was on, in the north half of the
block, Mr. Slater King, On the opposite side of the street
in the southeastern half of the block, Mr. Emanuel
Jackson were also picketing.
Q Let me ask you, as I understand it, you had
two pickets on each side of the street, each covering a
half block territory, is that correct?
A That's correct, yes sir.
151B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Do you know whether or not any of the other
three pickets were arrested?
A They all were arrested and similarly charged.
Q Were they ultimately convicted?
A Yes sir.
Q Did you see them at the time of the arrest?
A Yes sir.
Q And you heard their testimony at the trial?
A Yes sir.
MR. HOLLOWELL: We have no further questions of
this witness.
MR. RAWLS: Would Your Honor permit me to ask
him a few questions about the picketing incident since
I ’m familiar with it?
THE COURT: Yes.
RECROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR, RAWLS:
A Doctor, nox-tf you and three other men were picketing
down there in that block of the street in front of Church-
well’s store?
A Mr. Harris was in front of Churchwell's, on the
eastern side of the street, yes sir.
Q I believe we had a Recorder's Court trial
concerning this case, didn't we?
A That’s correct, yes sir.
Q Do you recall whether or not all four of you
testified that neither one of you knew or had any reason
152B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730* 731
to suspect that either one of the other three would be there?
A Your former promise is the more accurate one.
We did not know who would be there. I had no knowledge of
the other three deciding to be there and picket at that time.
Q, And you were sworn at that time?
A Y’es sir.
Q And the other three were sworn?
A Yes sir.
Q And all three of you swore that you, the individual
who was testifying, didn't know that the other three would
be there?
A Yes sir, and, as a matter of fact, 10 minutes
before I was downtown picketing, I didn't know I would be
there myself. I left my office and left some 4 or 5
patients in my office and went down there to stay for a
few minutes, recognizing the fact that I had the right
and the privilege to so protest. I was going to stay down
there for a few minutes and go back to the office and finish
ray work. I had no knowledge that even I would be there.
Q, And all four of you testified that you had no
pre-arrangement whatever with reference to that picketing,
didn't you?
MR. HOLLOWELL: Now, if it please the Court, he
has answered that question three times and the witness
has answered it three times, and I object to it.
THE COURT: I think it's clear that that's
what he has testified.
153B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Mr. Rawls: Now, how did it come about that
all four of your picket signs, the placards, every one of
them, were cut absolutely the same size? Don’t you remember
we laid them down on the table up in the Recorder's Court and
that they were all four identically the same size?
A And no one has ever denied that they were not all
made or denied that they were all made by the same person.
They were all made by the same person.
Q Well, did all of you testify the person that made
the signs?
A I don't know who made them, so I could not have
testified as to who made them. I have no knowledge of the
person who made them.
q, But it was clearly apparent that all four of the
signs were made by the same person?
A It was pretty apparent. I don't think that
anybody would dispute that. They were made by the same
person.
Q And all four of you arrived In that area at
practically the same moment, didn't you?
A That's correct, and I think that it is safe to
assume at this point that the time for the picketing to
occur may have been established prior to the time It actually
occurred; but there again, I say I had no knowledge of what
other individuals would be doing this.
Q Now, what you're saying now is that there was
probably a pre-arrangement that four people would appear
154B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos, 730, 731
there at that particular time?
A I had no knowledge of the number of people that
would appear. I had no knowledge of who would appear or how
many,
Q You knew the other three, of course?
A Oh, certainly, yes sir, I knew them by name and
Q But you still testify that you didn't know that
either one of them would be there on that day?
A That's correct. I did not know that they would
be there, and I don't think that they knew that I would be
there either. As a matter of fact, I'm certain they
didn't, that they did not know that I would be there.
by face
THE COURT: Anything further from this
witness?
MR. EOLLOWELL; We have nothing further from
this witness.
THE COURT: All right, we will take a recess
now for 10 minutes
MR. BURT:
RECESS: 3:37 PM to 3:52 PM 3-31-62
Your Honor please, with the
permission of the Court, we would like to ask the
Plaintiff Anderson one or two questions.
THE COURT: All right.
(Plaintiff Anderson not available in courtroom)
THE COURT: Whatever it is, maybe you can get
to it later
155B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MR. KING: If Your Honor pleases, we would
like to put on our next witness, Miss Ola Mae Quarterman.
MISS OLA MAS QUARTERMAN
witness called and sworn In
behalf of Plaintiffs, testified
DIRECT EXAMINATION
K MR. C. B. KING:
Q For the record, would you state your name?
A My name is Ola Mae Quarterman.
Q Where do you live, Miss Quarterman?
A I live at 1409 East Residence Avenue.
Q Is that In the City of Albany?
A Yes.
Q How long have you lived here?
MR. RAWLS: Your Honor, would you permit me
to drag my chair around here in front of the Clerk's
stand, so I can hear the witness.
THE COURT: Yes, maybe it would be better
if, instead of doing that as you would between
counsel, maybe you could sit over in this section here.
Q Mr. King: For purposes of facilitating
the function of the reporter and Mr. Rawls, would you speak
loud, enough so as to be heard:
Would you state whether or not you have over the
last 8 or 9 months had the occasion to use the City Transit,
Inc. services, that Is the local bus service?
A No.
15oB
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Have you had the occasion to use the services of
the Bus Company at any time or when was the latest time in
which you used their services?
A When they took me to Leesburg.
Q I take it that under those circumstances you
were not a paying passenger?
A No.
Q Would you Indicate the last time and what was the
last occasion on which you had the occasion to use the bus
service as a paying patron?
A On January 12.
Q, Of what year?
A Of 19b2,
Q Would you indicate then what, if anything,
happened on that occasion?
A Yes, I was arrested on January 12, which was
on a Friday afternoon.
q Would you indicate the circumstances immediately
Preceding or otherwise surrounding your arrest?
A ivy arrest?
Q Relate it?
A I, Ola Mae Quarterman, got on the bus at
Thomas and Carroll Street, which Is located in East Albany.
I got on the bus, dropped my 20 cents in coins, which was
two dimes, in the machine. The bus driver actually pulled
off very fast, throwing me out of balance, which forced me
to sit in the nearest seat, which was In the rear of the
157B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
front; and so, I sit there —
Q When you say you sat in the rear of the front —
A Yes.
Q. — what do you mean by that?
A The seat coming directly across, not the one next
coming straight across but the one forward, cross-wise.
Q Then, are you saying the first seat forward?
A Yes.
Q That is running the same way that the driver’s
seat was running?
A Yes.
Q Allright, go on?
A And as I sit there, there wasn’t a word mentioned
from Thomas on up to Washington, which was the comer of
Washington and Broad; and as the bus driver pulled up to
Washington and Broad, he pulled to a halt very fast; and
as he stopped, he jumped up from under his seat and come
directly to me and told me —
MR. BURT: Now, if Your Honor please, we
would like to interpose objection as to an Incident
on private bus company. We also submit the fact that
the bus company, according to the complaint, has gone
out of business. This is something very akin to the
taxicab incident between a private company, which
certainly is not being represented by the Defendants;
and we submit that because of the business being dis
continued, it has become moot; and secondly, that this
15SB
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Is a private affair and we don't see any relevancy to
this case.
THE COURT: I understood that —
MR. KING: If Your Honor pleases, I think
that the relevancy of this entire transaction will he
established by the time the witness concludes her
testimony.
THE COURT: I understood her initially,
maybe I misunderstood her, to say that she was arrested?
MR. KING: This is quite correct, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Go ahead.
Q Mr. King: Mould, you proceed, please?
A Just as the bus driver pulled to a halt there
very fast at the corner of Washington aid Broad, he jumped
from his seat very rapidly, and I was attempting to get up
to go out,* and he got directly over me, pointed his finger
directly In my face, saying "Do you know where you're
supposed to sit at, you just don't sit anywhere on this
bus?" i didn't say anything then. So, he just continued
aaying, "Do you know where you're supposed to sit at, you
Just don't sit anywhere on this bus; you know where you're
supposed to sit at, don't you?" I said, "Will you please
take your fingers out of my face?" So, he just continued.
And so, I stood and told him that "I paid my damn 20 cents
^d wherever there was a seat available, I think that I have
a right to sit there."
And so, he jumped off the bus loudly, hollering
159B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
"Officer, officer, officer, officer, come here, come here
right now." So, he told me, "You stay here, you stay here."
So, when the policeman came, he came and asked me what was
the matter and I tried to explain. And then he went to the
telephone booth to call one of the cars to come down. And
they took me to the headquarters and booked me on disorderly
conduct.
Q Was there a trial of this case held In court?
A Yes, in the City Court.
Q There was a trial of this matter, is that correct?
A Yes, in the City Court.
Q And you werei adjudged guilty?
A Yes, guilty.
MR. KING: She's with you.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. RAWLS:
Q You were not tried for sitting in the wrong seat
in the bus either, were you? You were tried for disorderly
conduct? You were tried for disorderly conduct, cursing In
the presence and using obscene language in the presence of
other passengers, weren’t you?
A No.
Q And there wasn't anything in the world In the
charge relating to the place you sat in that bus, was there?
A And also like that, that I was using obscene
language, I was only referring to my 20 cents. I wasn't
referring to any way to him, only my 20 cents.
i5o b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730* 731
THE COURT: Mr. Rawls, may I suggest that
during the course of your examination, that you should
come back down.
MR. RAWLS: Thank you, Your Honor. I had
thought perhaps that would be the best to do.
Q You were not tried for using the wrong seat in
that bus, were you?
A That's what they say, I don't know.
Q You were tried fox1 disorderly conduct?
MR. HOLLOWELL: Just a momentl I didn't hear
what the answer was. What was your answer, "that's
what they said"?
The Witness: Yes, that's what they said;
that's what the decision was.
Q, Mr, Rawls: The bus driver, you and the bus
driver were having a controversy, weren't you?
A No, I didn't. I didn't give him any wo I’d s until
he come directly to me and put his fingers in my face.
Q And you told him he had your damn 20 cents and
you would sit where you pleased, is that right?
A No, I didn't say sit where I pleased,* I said sit
wherever there is a seat available.
Q Well, what did you say about the 20 cents?
A I said "I paid my damn 20 cents and I sit wherever
^here's a seat available*" And at that moment thei’e were
People sitting all over that bus.
Q People sitting all over the bus?
i6ib
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos, 730, 731
A Yes.
Q And what you were arrested for though Is what
you were guilty of, was disorderly conduct, wasn’t It?
A No, I wasn1t ,
Q You were convicted and sentenced and you paid
your fine, didn't you?
A No.
Q Is your case on appeal?
A Yes.
Q Where is it on appeal?
A To the Federal Court.
Q Which Federal Court ?
A This Federal Court.
0. Which Federal Court ?
A This Federal Court.
MR. KING: If Your
for a conclusion of law, as a matter of fact, the
presumption being that her counsel has indicated
that it Is on appeal. As to x^hether she knows what
the proper court that this matter would be addressed
to certainly calls for a professional opinion; and,
as a matter of fact, she wouldn't know that.
Q Mr. Rawls: When you were up in Recorder's
Court —
THE COURT: Just a moment, Mr. Rawls. I think
the question was, Is It on appeal and which court.
I don't believe that would require a legal conclusion.
162B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
I think that's a matter of fact, as to whether it is
on appeal, not any basis, but just whether it's on
appeal and what court; I think that's a question of
fact which she can testify about. Of course, she
may be in error about it but it doesn't really matter.
MR. KING: If Your Honor pleases, counsel
states in his place that it is on appeal; however,
not to the Federal Court, but to the Superior Court
of Dougherty County, Georgia.
THE COURT: In other words, she's simply a
layman and she misunderstands which court. All right.
Q Mr. Rawls: But nobody in Recorder's Court
told you that you were charged with sitting In the wrong
place in that bus, did they?
A No.
Q And you were just simply charged with disorderly
conduct In connection with the language that you were using
there in the presence of the bus driver and the other
passengers on the bus, Isn't that right?
A Well, the onliest thing they had was disorderly
conduct.
THE COURT: Anything further from this witness?
MR. KING: We have no further questions.
163B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MISS PATRICIA ANN GAINES
witness called and sworn in behalf
of the Plaintiffs, testified on
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. HOLLOWELL:
Q Would you give your name and address for the
record please?
A Patricia Ann Gaines, 619 Holloway.
Q Where do you live? You live In the City of
Albany?
A Yes.
Q I will ask you whether or not you!ve had the
occasion on recent date to visit any of the theatres in
town?
A Yes.
Q Which theater was that?
A The Albany Theater.
Q The Albany Theater?
A Yes.
Q. Where is that located?
A It's on Jackson.
Q On Jackson Street?
A Yes.
Q Did you purchase a ticket?
A No, I started to,
Q You started to?
A Yes.
Q Where did you go to purchase the ticket?
164b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A I went to the front window.
Q To the front window?
A Yes *
Q Did you have the money with which to buy the
ticket?
A Yes.
Q Well, why didn’t you buy it?
A Because the lady in the ticket booth told me
that I had to go through the alley, to purchase a ticket.
Q Said that you had to go through the alley to
purchase the ticket?
A Yes.
Q Did she say why?
A No.
MR. RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases, unless
there’s some City connection with this transaction,
I would object to it and move to exclude the testimony
because the theater is purely a private enterprise.
MR. H0LL0WELL: May it please the Court, I submit
that the theater is a private enterprise but it comes
under the control of the ordinances of the City of
Albany and the ordinance of the City of Albany specifies
that there has to be two lines for purchasing tickets,
one of which will be used by Negroes and others by
whites; and we are establishing what the policy is
pursuant thereto.
THE COURT: You can’t establish the City
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730* 731
policy by showing what some ticket seller said. You
can!t establish the City policy that way, just like
you can't establish it by what some taxi driver said,
that he doesn't carry anybody but a certain race.
0 Mr. Hollowell: What did you do?
MR, HOLLOWELL; If Your Honor might reserve his
ruling upon the matter, I think that there may be
evidence which will come out in the matter.
Q What did you do when you were told that you
could not purchase a ticket there and were told, did you say,
that you had to go into the alley to purchase a ticket?
A Yes, she told me I had to go to the alley in order
to purchase the ticket.
Q Have you ever been into the alley to purchase a
ticket before?
A Yes.
Q What ticket window is there?
A What you mean?
Q Is there a ticket window in the alley?
A Yes, you have to go up a few steps In order to
get to it.
Q Who uses that window?
A The colored people.
Q Have you ever seen any white people there?
A No.
Q Have you ever seen any Negroes purchasing tickets
the front window?
166b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A No.
Q, What did you do when you were told to go to the
alley?
A I ax’ed her why did I have to and she told me
that because they didn’t sell Negroes tickets at the front
window.
Q I see. Now, what did you do then?
A I didn’t do anything, I stood there and I looked.
Q How long did you stay there?
A About a minute or so.
Q, Then, what did you do?
A I walked on.
MR. RAWLS: Now, If Your Honor please, I
object and move to exclude that testimony.
THE COURT: Counsel is not through with the
witness yet.
Q Mr. Hollbwell: Did you at any time during the
Process of the time that you were there see any police?
A I think there was some on the corner, I’m not
sure.
Q Did you have any conversation with them?
A No.
MR. H0LL0WELL: No further questions for this
witness.
MR, RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor please, I move
to strike from the record the evidence of the witness,
inasmuch as It does not appear even remotely that any
167B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
City action was connected with this proposition, but
purely a matter of a private enterprise regulating
the customers that they would receive. She said no
case was made against her and no arrest was made or
attempted.
THE COURT: I sustain the objection. The
testimony is excluded.
MRa CHARLES JONES
witness called and sworn in
behalf of Plaintiffs, testified
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR* HOLLOWELL:
Q Your name is Charlie Jones?
A Charles Jones.
Q, Do you live In Albany, Georgia?
A I am residing in Albany, Georgia,
0. Mr. Jones, you testified In the case #727 concern
ing having been arrested In the Trailways Bus Station, did
you not?
A Yes.
Q Is that testimony, is the testimony as it’s in
that record the same as you would relate now pertaining
to the circumstances surrounding your arrest?
A Yes, As I recall, Counsel, there was no real
testimony as to the facts surrounding the arrest In that
case; so that, there would be some elaboration, if this
ts what is desired?
168b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Well, just indicate what happened?
A Charles Sherrod and myself on or about the 14th
day of January, 1962, went Into the Trailway Bus Terminal
here in Albany, Georgia, with the purpose of going out of the
oity on the Interstate facilities. Before leaving we decided
to use the restaurant to secure coffee and a sandwich. We
entered the restaurant and sat down at the second table.
Upon sitting we were confronted by a gentleman we later
learned to be the manager, who asked If we had interstate
tickets, I replied we choose not to show tickets, to which
he went and sat back down.
One of the waitresses brought an ash tray and
then was told not to serve us. A policeman walked by the
front of the restaurant and was summoned in by the manager.
After a brief caucus he went back out and five minutes later
Assistant Police Chief Lairsey and one other policeman came
In and spoke, asked If we had tickets. I said "Yes, we
chose not to show them", to which he said "Come with me."
We asked If we were under arrest and he said "Yes". He
lidn11 know exactly what the charge was then but when we
got to the station, we were charged with City Code of
titering, which stated on the City streets or sidewalks.;
and, of course, we were inside the Trailway Bus restaurant
®hen we were arrested,
Q. Were you tried?
A No, when we were to have been tried, there was
3otne discussion on the part of Chief Pritchett, City
169B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Attorney Rawls and the Judge was In the conference; and
they decided that they didn’t have a case - now, this is
hearsay, I didn't hear Grady Rawls say this but I think
Attorney King did —
MR. RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases, I
object to him quoting me saying something that he didn’t
hear me say, whatever It was.
THE COURT: Yes, Mr. Rawls says enough that
everybody can hear to be quoted; so, let’s don’t quote
him on anything that we don’t hear.
Q Mr. Hollowell: What happened? I think the
record already shows, Your Honor, what Mr. Rawls said on
that occasion. Just relate what did happen?
A The charges, the City charges were continued
and State charges of trespass were taken and we were trans
ferred to the County Court on a $400 cash bond.
Q Have you at any time been tried on that charge
as yet?
A No, I still have some $200 cash dollars In the
4ty coffers.
MR. HOLLOWELL: He's with you.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. HILLIARD BURT:
Q Where did you say you lived?
A I didn’t,
Q Where do you live?
A Here in Albany at 623 Whitney Avenue.
170B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction* Nos. 730, 731
Q When did you move to Albany?
A I moved to Albany in October of 19 6l.
Q From where?
A From Atlanta and then my home, permanent home,
which is in Charlotte, N. 0.
Q What kind of business are you engaged in?
A I work with a gxoup called the Student Non-Violent
Coordinating Committee, which is a group of students working
in the hard core South in places like Albany, Georgia to
attempt to desegregate public facilities, to confront the
community with the problem of their own sickness as far
as this area is concerned.
Q, What is your title?
A I am a Field Secretary of the Student Non-Violent
Coordinating Committee.
Q, Where is the headquarters?
A The main headquarters is in Atlanta, Georgia,
135 Auburn Avenue, Northeast.
Q This incident you were referring to, I believe you
said, happened in January?
A January, about - on or about January 12 or 14th.
Q, And you were going where?
A To Dawson, Georgia, where we were conducting a
voter registration program.
Q And you were living in Albany at that time?
A Thatfs right at 214 Hobson Street, the home of
Mr. Jackson.
171B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
q You were living with one of the Plaintiffs?
A One of the Plaintiffs, yes.
q And where do you say you live now?
A 623 Whitney Avenue.
Q Who do you live with?
A The home Is owned by Mrs. Harris, Katie B. Harris.
q You*re not married?
A No.
Q Do your activities require you to work each day
for the CORE?
A % personal commitment requires me to work each
day.
Q, What are you doing at this time?
MR. HOLLDWELL; Just a moment, there hasn't been
any testimony that this man works for CORE. That's
something that counsel has injected.
MR. BURT; Your Honor pleases, If that isn't
correct, he can correct it. He's the witness and he
said that himself. He answered the question.
THE COURT: Well, I really don't remember the
name of the organization he first mentioned but he just
said, in response to that, that he felt committed to
work for the organization, but I don't know what organiza
tion he meant. Maybe the witness will just clarify it.
A The Witness: I think the record will show that
% response was, my personal commitment required me to work
in whatever capacity I do but not with the organization that
I was responding to.
172B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q Who are you working with here in Albany?
A I work with the Albany Movement and with the
Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, with the
church and with any group that associates itself with the
kinds of aims we!re concerned with.
Q When is the last time you’ve done some work
for the Albany Movement?
A Today.
Q This morning?
A This morning, right now.
Q What were you doing for them?
A Testifying in a hearing.
Q I mean outside of court?
A This is part of the ansxver to your question.
Q Outside of court what have you done for them
today?
A Well, we've done some public relations with three
students from England, who have come to observe this situa
tion, two from Cambridge and one from Oxford; and some
other students have come in to see the Albany situation and
want to give them a picture of what Albany really is like;
and this kind of activity, public relations with some of the
ministers that have come in, attempting to allow them to see
what is really going on from our position, and this kind of
thing.
Q Do you receive contributions from the Albany Move
ment?
A No.
173B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Induction, Nos. 730, 731
q Do yon plan to be a permanent resident here in
Albany?
A That depends on how long the City maintains the
particular system that we are concerned about.
Q But you're here at the pleasure of the Albany
Movement9
A I'm here at my own instance.
Q But at their request?
A Mo. We came in, as you recall, back in October
and helped form the Albany Movement,
0 Oh, you helped form the Albany Movement?
A Yes, for the record, yes.
Q Who did you first contact?
A The first contact, I think, was Slater King,
Dr. Anderson, Attorney King, Mrs. King, Rev, Gay, Rev. Wells,
Bo Jackson, who we were living with at that point,
Q What was you all's purpose? Were you going to
achieve desegregation by demonstration?
A Well, of course, our basic commitment is to
achieve the desegregation or the outward manifestations,
the elimination of outward manifestations of segregation and
discrimination, and also the causes, the attitudes, that
maintain these practices. And,.of course, we are accustomed
to using any and all constitutionally guaranteed means,
protests being one, litigation being one.
Q Which is your first choice, litigation or protest?
174b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MR. HQLLOWELL: May it please the Court, here
again we're getting back into the same kind of tiling
that we had on the other witness, what choice is
superior has priority, which is of no moment; and
this whole line of questioning Is irrelevant and
Immaterial.
MR. BURT: Your Honor please, I am trying to
cross-examine the witness about their procedures,
which is superior. The witness has stated his opinion
but I wanted to ask him about their procedures In
going about and achieving their goals.
THE COURT: Well, he’s testified that they
used protests and demonstrations and litigation.
That’s already in the record. I don't think it’s
proper to ask him which he prefers and such as that.
I think it’s an improper sphere.
MR, BURT; May I ask him about this case,
what activity he had?
THE COURT: Yes, you can ask him If he has any
connection with this litigation.
MRS. MOTLEY: Your Honor, excuse me, may I
ask this attorney to stand back here. He sort of
blocks my view and I can’t hear the witness.
THE COURT: Yes.
Q Mr. Burt: When did you first learn of the
complaint being filed in the District Court with reference
to desegregation here In Albany?
175B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MR. HQLLOWELL: Now, may it please the Court,
I call the Court's attention to the fact that this
was gone into very extensively in case No. 727, the
time that he was served and all of this, I think,
came out.
THE COURT? I think probably, if I understand
counsel's question, it relates, not to 727 but to this
case.
MR. HQLLOWELL: To this case only?
MR. BURT: That's right.
MR. H0LL0WELL: Then, I will withdraw my objection.
THE COURT: Well, you say to "this case" but
the witness now understands you are referring to the
suit brought by Dr. Anderson and others -
MR. BURT: For desegregation in the City of
Albany.
A The Witness: I first learned about it in
Atlanta when we were trying to get Attorney iang back to
Albany to file this before the City had a chance to file
in the State court an injunction similar to the one they
filed in the Federal Court, which was vacated.
q Mr. Burt: Let me see if I understand you:
You all were trying to get this suit filed before the Caty
of Albany could file an injunction in the State court?
A Yes.
Q Where did you hear that?
A Counsel.
176B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Q, Where?
A Counsel, our counsels, all of these that are
representing us here.
Q. Where were they when they told you that?
MR. HOLLOWELL: If it please the Court, I
submit that it would be of absolutely no moment, when
he first learned that the case had been filed. He is
not a party to the case, he is a mere witness to the
case; there was nothing in the direct examination
relating to any such matter, and I submit that it is
still immaterial, it is Irrelevant and it is of no
moment.
THE COURT: The testimony that we have so
far, I have interpreted as simply trying to see what
connection he had, if any, with this suit. Now, questions
like "where were you when you heard about it", I don't
see the materiality.
MR. BURT: Your Honor* please, I am trying to
see —
THE COURT: In other words, if you want to
develop whether he has any connection with this suit,
that's all right.
MR. BURT: I would also like to see if I may
Your Honor or try to see what information this witness
has about who has actually brought about the filing of
this suit, if he has any information about that, and
whether or not these Plaintiffs have voluntarily come
into court and filed suit, or whether he knew about it
177B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
before they did.
THE COURT: He's not a Plaintiff, Is he?
MR. HOLLOWELL: He's not a party and It wouldn't
make a bit of difference.
THE COURT: He's not a party and as Mr. Hollow-
well says, that would not make any difference in the
case one way or another when he heard about It. Now,
If he has any connection with this case, if he has had
any part in the filing of the suit and all of that,
that would be material: but since he's not a party, let's
don't go far-afield into It.
Q Mr. Burt: All right, what connection,
directly or Indirectly, have you had with the filing of
this complaint; that's 730, with reference to desegregation
in the City of Albany?
A I’ve had no direct connection in the filing of
this.
Q Indirectly?
A No connection, only in that I am very passionately
concerned about the outcome of It and, of coui’se, concerned
about It being heard. More than this, I couldn't say directly
°r indirectly any connection.
Q That's all.
THE COURT: All right, anything further for
this witness?
MR. HOLLOWELL: You may come down.
178b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos, 730, 731
MISS OSIE LeVERNETTB WILSON
witness called and sworn in behalf
of the Plaintiffs, testified on
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. C. B. KING:
Q Will you state your name for the record, young
lady?
A Osie LeVemette Wilson.
Q Where do you live?
A 607 South Monroe.
Q 607 South Monroe?
A 607 South Monroe Street, Albany, Georgia.
Q Would you indicate whether or not you had an
occasion on or about the middle of i960 to attend the
showing of a movie at the Albany Theater?
A Yes.
Q Will you indicate what happened on the particular
occasion in question?
A Well, on this particular night, the movie "Gone
With the Wind" was showing and we attempted to attend this
Wovie. We entered at the colored entrance, purchased
tickets and proceeded up three flights of stairs and
Were seated. While waiting for the movie to begin, we
were asked to move to the rear of the movie by colored
employee of the Albany Theater,
MR. RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases,
unless It appears in this case that there was City
connection, that would be wholly irrelevant.
179B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MR. KING: If Your Honor please, counsel
proposes to have this witness connect it and I would
respectfully request the Court to reserve a determination
until the witness concludes.
MR. RAWLS: Well, of course, if the alleged
discrimination by the operator of the theater doesn’t
have any connection with the City, It xvouldn't be relevant.
THE COURT: Yes, I gather from what Counsel
King has stated that he intends to shew the City’s
connection ivith it in some way. If he does not, it
will be excluded.
Q, Mr. King: Would you continue, young lady?
A After being asked to move to the rear of t he
movie by the colored employee, we, of course, asked why
and he stated that he wanted us to move In order that white
patrons might be seated; and we refused, because we had gone
to the movie and had sat in the area they had designated for
colored people; so, we saw no reason why we should move and
let white people sit.
Therefore, another employee of the theater,
a white employee .this time, asked us to move and we again
refused. Then, the manager, George Eitel, came to me and
asked us to move and we again refused. So, he told us
to leave the movie. So, we asked would we get a refund
if we were to leave the movie, and he said yes.
We went downstairs and we, of course, got our
refund. We left the movie and after this, my brother, Eddie
180B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
Wilson, went to the Owner of the movie, I think it's Mr.
Gortatowsky.
Q Gortatowsky, is that it?
A Yes. He went to his home and request for a
conference with him. At the time he wasn't in, so some
of his relatives told us that he would be in his office that
Monday Morning at 9 o'clock.
Monday Morning at 9 o'clock we went to the
Principal of our high school, Mr. Melvin Heard, and requested
permission to attend this conference. Permission was
granted and we, therefore, went to the office. When we
arrived at the office, his receptionist told us that he
wasn't in, to come back about 12 o'clock. We went back to
school and received permission to again attend this confer
ence at 12;00. Permission was granted. We went back and he
was in at this time.
Q Where Is his office located, young lady?
A It's in the Albany Theater building on South
Jackson.
Q All right, you did go?
A Yes.
Q All right, go on?
A As we were going to his office by way of the
white entrance, we noticed that other school-mates had
congregated; so, we turned around and told them to conduct
themselves in an orderly fashion while we were in the
conference and they agreed to do so, and they were very
orderly.
l8lB
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
So, we were having this conference and we were
discussing what took place. And the Manager, George Eitel,
told us he had the right to seat us anywhere he so desired,
and that he could segregate us by any means which he felt
was necessary, a rope or a chair or what have you. And during
this conference Chief Pritchett came in, and he took a seat.
Q Would you care to identify Chief Pritchett?
Is this the Chief of Police of the City of Albany?
A Yes.
Q All right, go on?
A And he came in and he took a seat. And we continued
with our discussion. And by this time he had recognized ray
brother, Eddie Wilson, and he made the statement, "if
your father knew that you were here, Eddie, he would take
a 2x4 and strap you good," And after this statement, Mr.
Goi’tatowsky said "Yes, Boney" - his name.
Q Now, Mr. Gortatowsky, this is the manager or
owner of the theater?
A Yes.
Q, He said what?
A He said, "Yes, Boney is a good darkey." You see,
Boney is the name they call my father.
Q, Boney Is the affectionate characterization of
who was it?
A % father.
Q, Your father?
A Yes. After Mr. Gortatowsky made this statement, I
182B
Hearing on Motion Bor Preliminary Injunction, Nos, 730, 731
wondered why he called him a darkey; and my brother said,
"This is just the name that he refers to all colored people
by,” So, I accepted it on that ground.
Q Then, what happened after that?
A Well, after that Chief Pritchett, this is Chief
af Police of Albany, said that we were under arrest. Mr.
Gortatowsky said "these people haven't done anything wrong,
then, why are you arresting them?" He said "They're under
arrest anyway." At that time we left the Theater and went
down to the City Hall. While there they asked our names and
addresses and reported on a sheet of paper "we best cooperate
with them in giving our nams".
After a while the Principal of the High School,
Mr. Heard, came in the City Hall, and Chief Pritchett called
him to his office. Later on they called my brother, Eddie
Wilson, into the office. And I guess, I assume rather that
they had a conference in the office. After my brother and
Mr. Heard left the office, we went back to school and assumed
our duties at school.
Q But Chief Pritchett did indicate to you that you
were under arrest?
A Yes, he made the statement "You are under arrest".
Q And responsive to the statement, you went with him
to the Police Station?
A Yes.
̂ Just one other question I would like to ask her;
It is your testimony that this did take place on or about
the 15th of November, i960?
183B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
A Yes.
THE COURT: '60?
The Witness: Yes.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. BURT:
Q Did you state whether or not you were arrested
and charged ?
A We did not enter a jail cell, if that's what
you’re indicating, no.
Q, Was any case made against you?
A We did not have to mefest court at any time, sir.
Q As a matter of fact, the Principal of your
school came and got you all at the police station, did
he not?
A That’s right.
Q Do you know whether or not he had called Chief
Pritchett to hold you all until he got there?
A No, I do not.
q But you all didn't have permission to be away
from your school that morning?
A Yes, we had permission.
Q When did you obtain that permission?
A Well, since this was Monday morning, we, of course,
had to obtain it Monday morning. You see, the incident occurr
ed on Friday and the next school day was Monday; therefore,
we had to receive permission on Monday morning.
Q Why did the Principal come down there to pick you
all up?
184b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730*731
MR. HOLLOWELL: Objection, Your Honor.
MR. BURT: If she knows.
MR. HOLLOWELL: He's asking why the Principal
did a certain thing. This would be certainly a matter of
opinion.
THE COURT: Well, if she knows. I think
she's already testified that the Principal did come
down there and, if she knows why he came, I think
that would be part of the story.
MR. HOLLOWELL: If in fact she knows but there's
been no foundation Indicating that she did know why he
came.
MR. BURT: Well, she can answer.
THE COURT: Maybe we should ask her: Do you
know why the Principal came?
A The Witness: No, I don't.
q Mr. Burt: He did come down there?
A Yes.
q And took you all back to school?
A After going to the Chief of Police's office, yes.
Q, And you went back to school?
A Yes.
BY THE COURT;
Q With the Principal? The Principal came down and
you went back to school with the Principal; is that the way
it was?
A Well, after he told us that we were released,
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos, 730, 731
we .went back to school in a car.
Q I'm a little confused about the situation myself:
Was there any case of any kind made against you? Were you
given any summons of any kind to come to court?
A No.
Q No case of any kind?
A No.
BY MR. BURT:
Q Did you know that the Principal had called the
Police Chief looking for you all?
A No, I didn't.
Q He didn't say that when he got to the Chief of
Police’s office?
A He did not say anything to us until after he had
left the Chief of Police's office, and told us we were —
Q But he took you back to school and that's where
you went?
A Yes.
Q You all went back to school?
A Yes, we went back to school.
MR. BURT:
THE COURT:
MR. KING:
THE COURT:
MR. BURT:
That's all.
Anything further for this witness
Nothing further.
You may go down.
Now, if Your Honor please, the
Defendants insist on their objection to this witness'
testimony, since she was not in fact charged with any
186b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Mos. 730, 731
crime and it would be a situation between a private
company and not the City of Albany. We move to exclude
it on the ground that it would be irrelevant and
immaterial and incompetent testimony.
THE COURT: Well, I think my ruling will be
satisfactory. I think that, since the Chief of Police
came into the picture and since the witness testified
that the Chief said that "you're undei5 arrest", I think
that makes enough connection officially with the City to
admit the testimony; and the Chief, of oourse, can,
if he wishes, take the stand and explain it.
MR. BURT: Yes sir, he will deny that.
THE COURT: But I overrule your objection
to the testimony of the witness.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Dr. Anderson is back. I understood
that they wanted to question him further; and In that
connection, if they wish to question him now, he could
be put on and then go on his way, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Did you want Dr. Anderson back?
MR. BURT: Yes, may I ask him about two
questions, Your Honor?
THE COURT; Yes.
DR. W. G, ANDERSON
a party Plaintiff and witness for
Plaintiffs, duly sworn, being recalled
by Defendants, testified further on
RECROSS EXAMINATION
187B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MR. BURT: I would like to ask the Reporter
if he could find for me the questions I asked the
witness concerning his knowledge of Mr. Ralph McGill.
THE REPORTER: (Reading): "Question: Are you
familiar with Editor Ralph McGill? Answer: I have
read many of his editorials. I don't know him personally.
Question: You do not know him personally? Answer: No
sir. Question: You do read his editorials: Frequently,
yes sir.)" (See page 247 of transcript)
BY MR. BURT:
Q Do you recall testifying back on August 2-3 of
this year in Civil Action #727, you were asked the question
on page 785, "You know Mr. McGill, of course? Answer:
Quite well, I'm proud to say."?
A Yes, of course, this does not necessarily mean
by personal contact. In fact, I know Shakespeare quite well.
He was dead long before I was born but I know him quite well
through his xrorks-. I know Mr. McGill quite well through
his editorials. I don't know him personally.
Q But you did not make that statement at that time?
A I don't know whether it was asked for a qualifi
cation whether I knew him personally.
Q You recognize you made the statement that you
knew him quite well in this #727, "I know Mr. McGill quite
well, I'm proud to say"?
A Well, of course, likewise the question,, how about
the Southern Regional Council and so forth, these organiza-
188b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
tions and individuals I know through their reputation as
organizations, through their works and publications; and
Mr. McGill I know similarly quite well, through his editorials.
I just said I don't know him personally.
MR0 BURT; That's all.
THE COURT: You may go down.
MR. HQLLOWELL: May it please the Court, WE REST.
But before doing so, I think we had better put in our
exhibits, Counsel:
PLAINTIFFS' EXHIBIT #1, being the minutes of
meeting of The Albany Movement, November 17, 19 6 1.
MR. RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases, if
this document Is being offered in evidence to sustain
the contention that a petition has been made to the
City Commission concerning certain matters, we would
certainly object to it as evidencing any petition,
because it's anything except a petition.
THE COURT: Well, the document will speak for
itself. I notice that counsel and witnesses have used
different terms in referring to it; but is there
objection to It as a document, regardless of what
counsel may call it.
MR. RAWLS: No sir, It has been identified.
THE COURT: Is that the Plaintiffs' No. 1?
MR. HOLLOWELL: Yes sir.
THE COURT: You're offering it at this time?
MR. HOLLOWELL: Yes sir.
189B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
THE COURT: It Is admitted. (P-l)
MR. H0LL0WELL: PLAINTIFFS' EXHIBIT No. 2, which
Is a certified copy of ordinances of the City of Albany.
MR. RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases, my
recollection is that during the proceedings in Civil
Action No. 727, counsel offered these documents with
the consent of the other side and read these ordinances
from the City Code without any objection, and with the
stipulation that they are ordinances which are still In
effect in the City of Albany.
Now, the only objection that I would offer, if I
offered any, I will say this that it duplicates the
record if we consider they were offered in #727-. because
we concede that these are the same ordinances which were
read into the record In that case.
MR. H0LL0WELL: I believe they are, Mr. Rawls,
but I offered the others by reading them out of the
Code and they have different code sections, whereas
these are the actual ordinances as taken from the
minutes; and, therefore, I would have to compare them
to be sure that they were exactly the same; but we
submit these as certified copies of the particular
ordinances which these instruments represent.
MR. RAWLS: In that connection, Your Honor,
we concede that they are, that this is a certified copy
of the document because it has the City seal and the
City Clerk's signature.
19 OB
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
MR, HOLLOWELL: We want to enter it In this case,
Your Honor.
THE COURT; Allright, It is admitted. (P-2)
MR. HOLLOWELL; P-3 is certified copy of the
ordinance, Sections 1 and 2, signed also by Mrs. Huckaby
the Clerk of the City of Albany.
MR, RAWLS; Now, if Your Honor pleases, I
believe the same thing transpired with reference to
this particular ordinance, I think the Code section
with reference to requirement of "white" being printed
on the taxicabs, I think and I ’m rather sure that that
Code Section which relates to this ordinance was
read in the record and, of course, this would just
be duplication.
THE COURT; Mr. Rawls, my recollection Is
that counsel — and counsel can help me about it —
because it is all a matter of recollection -- I think
those ordinances were offered in #727 and I believe
that I excluded them. I think counsel offered them at
the end of counsel’s presentation and I ruled that
they would be immaterial in that case.
MR. RAWLS: Well, I withdraw my objection.
THE COURT: I believe that is what happened.
So, I admit - what was your number there, Mr. Hollowell?
MR. HOLLOWELL: This was Plaintiffs’ Exhibit #3 sir.
THE COURT: In any event, to avoid any possi
bility of that having happened, I admit them in this
191B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
case, In connection with this case, CA-730. (P-3)
MR. HOLLOWSLL: ¥e tender PLAINTIFFS' EXHIBIT 5 -
I will get to #4 In a moment, Your Honor - which is
a summons on Ollie Luton, which was identified by him
In this court in connection with arrest for violation
of the taxi ordinance.
MR. RAWLS: Now, If Your Honor pleases, this
P~5 looks like a summons to the City Recorder's Court
and, of course, that doesn't indicate that the man was
actually tried for that offense. It just means that he
was summoned for that offense. And P-6, which is tender
ed along with it.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Well, I am only speaking of P-5
now.
MR. RAWLS: I'm objecting to P-5 upon the
ground that the summons does not necessarily indicate
that the man was actually tried. Of course, the Court's
docket entry would be the highest and best evidence.
THE COURT: May I see that, Mr. Hollowell?
(P-5 handed to the Court) . . . My recollection of the
witness' testimony was that he was given a summons by
a police officer of the City of Albany, and he had
this in his hand and he said "this is the summons",
"this is the summons that I was given". And then he
said that he went to court and was tried and paid a
$17 fine, I believe he said. I don't recall what his
testimony was specifically on cross-examination, if he
19 2B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
was asked the question whether he was tried for this
offense or not. I don't remember,
MR. RAWLS: Now, Your Honor, the next document -
THE COURT: But he did Identify this as being
the summons given to him by a police officer of the
City of Albany, and I admit It. (P~5),
MR. RAWLS: Now, if Your Honor pleases, P-6,
which was tendered along with that P-5, shows that he
did not pay a fine, that he just put up a $17 bond,* so,
that contradicts what the witness said about what
happened in this court.
THE COURT: May I see that, Mr. Hollowell?
(P-6 handed to Court) . . .
MR. HOLLOWELL: May It please the Court, If I
might refresh the Court's recollection, as I recollect
it, the man said that his lawyer took cane of it for
him. That merely reflects the amount of money of the
bond. And this further substantiates the fact that he
was arrested and that there was this summons given
and this was the amount of the bond that he paid on
that occasion.
THE COURT: Yes, this receipt itself indicates
that it was for a bond. It so Indicates down In the
left-hand corner. I admit It. (P—6)
MR. HOLLOWELL: That Is P-6, the receipt,
THE COURT: It is admitted.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Now, P-4, which is a response to
193B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
the leaders of the Albany Movement, which I think the
record shows, the testimony was to the effect that it
had been signed on the original and I think perhaps for
the record we would need to indicate that there was
also testimony that the last line and part of the next
to the last line in the next to the last paragraph had
been stricken in the original instrument.
THE COURT: I think I remember that.
MR. RAWLS:
that.
I don’t have any objection to
THE COURT:
(P-4)
That Is admitted without objection
MR. BURT: Your Honor please, could we just
mark that in brackets, what we are talking about deleting
THE OOURT: Yes. But first, is there any
objection on the part of counsel for Plaintiffs to
counsel striking
deleted.
through the one sentence that was
MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, Your Honor, because the Mayor
said he didn't know about that being deleted. I asked
him about that. That was counsel's testimony and not the
witness'.
THE COURT:
recall?
The witness said he couldn't
MRS. MOTLEY: That's right.
MR. RAWLS: Is that right, Mr. Kelley?
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
THE COURT: I don't remember what he said.
Maybe counsel can agree.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Well, if it hasn't been officially
done, then I think it will have to go in for what it is,
THE COURT: I remember myself asking the
question, is it the sentence In relation to the quota
tion from Emerson, but I don't remember whether I was
asking that to be sure of what should be stricken or
whether I did it for some other purpose.
MRS. MOTLEY: And I immediately thereafter, as
I recall, asked him whether that was so; I asked him
who had written it and he didn't know; and I asked him,
therefore, if that was stricken, and he said he didn't
know anything about it.
THE COURT: Suppose we do this: Let’s admit
It without any alteration for the moment and, If counsel
wish to do so, they can check the record to see exactly
what was said there and, If Mrs. Motley's recollection
of it is not correct, we can straighten it out. But for
the moment let's admit it without alteration.
I wish to make it clear in connection with the
admission of the summons, Mr. Rawls, which I admitted
over your objection, that I was not Indicating that I
was taking that summons as proof that that was what the
party was tried on; but I was taking that as proof of
what he was charged with at the time that he was issued
the summons. If the City Police record indicates
195B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
something different, of course, that would be a matter
for you to offer proof in rebuttal. But it is admitted
as the summons which he was given by the police officer
of the City.
MR. RAWLS: And the matter of what he was
prosecuted for would be amatter of proof whenever
we get to our side of the case?
THE COURT: Oh yes. And if that varies, If
the record varies from that, you could, of course,
introduce that evidence. But it 3s admitted as having
been identified by the witness as the summons which he
was given by the policeman.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Plaintiffs' rest, Your Honor please.
MR. RAWLS: Do you rest?
MR. HOLLOWELL: Yes.
PLAINTIFFS REST
MR, RAWLS: Now, If Your Honor pleases, we
have, let's see, we have the Mayor and six Commissioners
and we may recall Chief Pritchett for some further testi
mony, which I Imagine will be right extensive. It's
now 5 minutes to 5:00, the hour of adjournment; would
you like for us to start now?
THE COURT: Well, since It is only 5 minutes
until our normal adjourning hour, I can see no particu
lar advantage in putting a witness on and having him
do very little more than identifying himself. So,
196b
Healing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
suppose we do adjourn at this time.
Now, I know what is in counsel's mind on both
sides and in the minds of all the parties, as to when
we will resume. The situation is - the letter which
I originally wrote counsel earlier this month, when I
was suggesting the earliest possible date, mentioned
something about the situation. The only variation from
what I said in that letter and the sirtation as I know
it at the moment is that the Court will be involved
somewhat longer in pre-trial conferences here In Albany
the fixu t part of the week of September 24 than I had
thought, as I have been over the calendar with the
Clerk this afternoon, and there are a good many more
civil cases to be pre-tried than I had anticipated,
an unusually heavy civil calendar.
In my letter I had. Indicated that we could
probably conclude the pre-trial conferences In a
day and a half. I believe that's what I estimated,
which was just a pure guess. Obviously, it's going
to require more than that. But it also seems to be
clear that we can during that week, as I originally
indicated, we can pick up this hearing again at that
time and conclude it at that time.
In other words, I cannot, because of the state
of the civil calendar and the large number of pre
trial conferences that I'm going to have to have, I
cannot state with definiteness which day of that week
19 7B
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
we will resume. All I can say at the moment is that
it is my plan to resume immediately following the
conclusion of the last pre-trial conference which I
will have to have the first part of that week.
So, that is the situation. The Court will com
municate with counsel as that time approaches and
as we can see more clearly what particular day can be
suggested for the conclusion of this hearing.
MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court, I x̂ as
wondering whether there was any possibility of our
concluding this hearing or continuing it tomorrow?
THE COURT: No, there is not. Not only the
Court itself but some of the court personnel are other
wise obligated for tomorrow.
MRS. MOTLEY: Well, is there any chance of
resuming this the day after Labor Day or something
like that?
THE COURT: No, as I explained in my letter
to you, I convene my regular term of court in Columbus,
Georgia, on Tuesday Morning at 9.30 following Labor Day.
That is set by statute, and that is the regular term of
court; and we anticipate being engaged in that term of
court three weeks. The earliest possible day we can
resume is the time that I just mentioned a moment ago.
MRS. MOTLEY: Well, I would like to then make
this motion, that in view of the testimony that has
been presented and introduced here today, we would like
198b
Hearing on Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Nos. 730, 731
to move the Court for an injunction, enjoining the
Defendants from continuing to operate the public parks
and the public library and the other matters that we
have referred, to in our complaint on a racially segre
gated basis.
I think from the testimony so far introduced, it
is clear that the Plaintiffs are entitled to a preliminary
Injunction; and, we would, therefore, move the Court at
this time, on the basis of the testimony in this case
and in #727, which I understand Your Honor is considering,
that the Court Issue a preliminary injunction, enjoining
the continuation of racial segregation in the public
parks and the public library and the enforcement of the
three City ordinances which are now in evidence.
THE COURT; All right, the Court denies the
motion. Me stand adjourned now until the Court
notifies counsel of the resumption of the hearing.
HEARING RECESSED; 5;00 PM AUG. 31, 1962
198 B-A
NOTICE OF DISMISSAL
(filed September 21, 1962)
Please take notice that the defendants' motion for more
definite statement is hereby dismissed.
This 2 1 st day o f Septem ber, 1962 .
H. G. RAWLS
H. P. BURT
FREEMAN LEVERETT
EUGENE COOK
BY:
Defendants' Attorneys