Maxwell v. Davidson County, TN Board of Education Reply Brief and Appendix of Defendants-Appellees

    y

No. 14,607.

IN THE

UNITED S TA TES  COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT.

HENRY C. MAXWELL, JR., et al,, 
Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

v.
COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION OF DAVIDSON 

COUNTY, TENNESSEE, et al., 
Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 
Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division.

REPLY BRIEF AND APPENDIX 
OF DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

K. HARLAN DODSON, JR.,
1106 Nashville Trust Building,

Nashville 3, Tennessee,
SHELTON LUTON,

County Attorney for Davidson County, 
Tennessee,

Davidson County Courthouse,
Nashville 3, Tennessee,

Attorneys for Defendants-Appellees.

St . L ouis L a w  P r in tin g  Co ., I nc ., 415 N. Eighth. Street. CEntral 1-4477.



COUNTER-STATEMENT OF QUESTIONS INVOLVED.

The defendants feel that the following counter-statement 
of the questions involved more clearly presents the issues 
to be decided by this Court:

1. Were appellant Negroes entitled to disrupt the de­
segregation plan approved by the Court for the Davidson 
County School System so as to have exceptions made in 
their favor?

The Court below answered the question “No” .

Appellees submit it should have been answered “ No” .

2. Does the transfer provision of the Davidson County 
School System Desegregation Plan, as approved by the 
District Court and as approved by this Court in the City 
of Nashville School System case, violate the Fourteenth 
Amendment ?

The Court below answered the question “ No” .

Appellees submit it should have been answered “ No” .



TABLE OF CONTENTS OF BRIEF.

Page
Counter-statement of questions involved ...............Prefaced

Counter-statement of facts .............................................. 1

Argument ............................................................................ 7
I. Were appellant Negroes entitled to disrupt the 

desegregation plan approved by the Court for 
the Davidson County School System so as to 
have exceptions made in their favor! The Court 
below answered the question “ no.”  Appellees 
submit it should have been answered “ no”  . . . .  7

II. Does the transfer provision of the Davidson 
County School System desegregation plan, as 
approved by the District Court and as approved 
by this Court in the City of Nashville School Sys­
tem case, violate the fourteenth amendment? The 
Court below answered the question “ no.”  Appel­
lees submit it should have been answered “ no”  11

Cases Cited.

Board of Education v. Groves, Fourth Cir., 261 F. 2d 
527 ...................................................................................  11

Boson v. Rippy, 285 F. 2d 43 (Fifth Cir., 1960)... .12,13
Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U. S. 294, 75 S. Ct.

753, 99 L. ed. 1083 ......................................................7,14
Clemons v. Board of Education of Hillsboro, Ohio,

228 F. 2d 853 .............................................................. 9,10
Kelley v. Board of Education, 270 F. 2d 209. .4, 6, 8,12,13

Orleans Parish School Board v. Bush, Fifth Circuit,
242 F. 2d 156 .....................................    8

Robert W. Kelley et al. v. Board of Education of the 
City of Nashville, 361 U. S. 924, 80 S. Ct. 293, 4 
L. ed. 2d 240 ................................................................  13



TABLE OF CONTENTS OF APPENDIX.
Page

Melvin B. Turner—
Cross-examination .................................... .......... .. • • lb

Ferris C. Bailey—
Direct examination....................................................... lb

J. E. M o ss -
Direct examination ....................................................  3b
Cross-examination......................................................  17b
Redirect examination ..............................................  18b

William Henry Oliver—
Direct examination ................................    19b
Cross-examination ...................................................... 23b

Floyd A. Detchon—
Direct examination .................................................... 25b

Dr. Herman A. Long—
Cross-examination .....................................................  27b

Melvin B. Turner—
Direct examination ..................................................  28b
Redirect examination................................................  35b

R. Emmett Pettie—
Direct examination .................................................... 35b

Dr. Eugene Weinstein—
Cross-examination ...................................................... 41b

Jitsuichi Masuoka—
Direct examination..................................................  42b

A. E. Wright—
Direct examination ....................................................  44b

Joseph R. Garrett—
Direct examination ..................................................  46

ii



No. 14,607

IN THE

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT.

HENRY C. MAXWELL, JR., et a!., 
P!ai ntiffs-Appel lants,

COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION OF DAVIDSON 
COUNTY, TENNESSEE, et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 
Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division.

BRIEF OF DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

COUNTER-STATEMENT OF FACTS.

Appellees are generally satisfied witli the statement of 
facts as presented in the brief of appellants. There are cer­
tain respects, however, in which appellees feel either that 
undue emphasis has been placed on certain statements re­
moved from context or the statement of facts is not suf­
ficiently complete to fully apprise this Court of the factual 
situation presented to the Court below and upon which its 
findings of fact, conclusions of law and decree were predi­
cated. For that reason appellees are filing an additional



— 2 —

appendix, which will be referred to in order to designate 
it separately from the appendix of appellants, with the 
suffix “ b ”  and reference to the appendix of appellants 
will be with the suffix “ a ” .

Following the initial hearing in this cause and pursuant 
to the direction of the District Court to formulate a plan 
for the orderly desegregation of the Davidson County 
schools, the County Board of Education of Davidson 
County, Tennessee, appointed a special committee of its 
membership, to-wit, Ferriss C. Bailey, Frank "White and 
S. L. Wright, Jr., which committee worked with the staff 
of the Board of Education to compile and submit the plan 
(64a). This plan was then submitted to the entire Board 
of Education of Davidson County, which adopted it and 
submitted it to the Court (64a).

The plan, as submitted originally by the Board, abol­
ished segregation based on race for Grade One in the 
Davidson County School System for the scholastic year 
beginning September, 1961, with an additional year to be 
desegregated each subsequent year thereafter; a zoning 
plan was adopted based upon the location of the school 
buildings, transportation facilities, scholastic population, 
etc., without reference to race; subject to exceptions neces­
sary in the administration of the school system, thereafter 
the students in each desegregated grade would attend the 
school designated for their zone, unless transferred pur­
suant to their parents’ request for good cause; transfers 
were permitted to be applied for and consideration given 
when made by parents or persons standing in the rela­
tionship of parents, provided good cause for such was 
shown and such transfer was practicable and consistent 
with sound school administration; and among other condi­
tions upon which transfers could be granted by request, 
the plan provided that where a student would be required 
to attend a school where such student was in the extreme



— 3 —

race minority, transfer requests would be considered 
(69a-71a).

Following a full hearing the Court accepted the plan 
as submitted by the appellees, excepting that the Court 
required the first four grades, rather than the first grade, 
to be desegregated effective with the commencement of 
the January, 1961, Term, in order to cause the Davidson 
County plan to become current with the plan in the educa­
tional system of the City of Nashville (132a).

The plan as proposed by the appellees and as approved 
by the Court, with modifications as above noted, was sup­
ported by the testimony of persons experienced in the 
operation of the school systems within Davidson County, 
Tennessee. The first of these witnesses, the Honorable 
Ferriss C. Bailey, had served as the Chairman of the Com­
mittee of the School Board for the formulation of the plan. 
Mr. Bailey is an attorney and has served on the Board of 
Education of Davidson County for more than seventeen 
years, and prior to that time served on the Board of Edu­
cation of the City of Nashville, located within Davidson 
County, for a period of six years (Vol. 2, pp. 5 and 6). 
Mr. J. E. Moss has served for twelve years as the Super­
intendent of the Davidson County Schools and prior to 
that had served for twenty-five years as a teacher and 
supervisor in the Davidson County School System (Vol. 2, 
p. 31). Mr. William H. Oliver has served as Superintend­
ent of the School System of the City of Nashville for the 
last two years plus, and prior to that had served as a prin­
cipal and teacher in the School System of the City of 
Nashville for a period of thirty-three years (Vol. 2, pp. 
179-180). Mr. Floyd Detchon has served for twenty-seven 
years with the School System of Davidson County in the 
various capacities of principal and attendance and re­
search supervisor (Vol. 2, pp. 217-219). Mr. Melvin B. 
Turner has served in the School System of Davidson 
County for twelve years as Superintendent of Transporta­



*— 4 —

tion (Vol. 2, p. 311). The witness, Mr. Emmett Pettie, has 
served for a period of fourteen years with the Davidson 
County School System as a teacher and school psychol­
ogist (Vol. 3, p. 337). Mr. A. E. Wright, who likewise 
testified in support of the plan, has served for a period of 
thirty-five years with the Davidson County School System 
as a teacher, coach, principal, supervisor and assistant 
superintendent (Vol. 4, p. 27). The other witness used 
by the appellees in support of the plan and who assisted 
in the work of the staff in formulation of the plan was 
Mr. Joseph R. Garrett, who has served for twelve years 
with the Davidson County System in child welfare and at­
tendance (Vol. 4, p. 70).

As contrasted with these witnesses who had had daily 
contact with both the community and the School System 
of Davidson County, the appellants produced the testimony 
of a Dr. Long, who had never taught or supervised in any 
public educational institutions in either Davidson County 
or elsewhere (Vol. 2, pp. 275-276); Dr. Eugene Weinstein, 
who had never taught or worked in or for or attended a 
public school in this area (Vol. 3, pp. 392, 395); and Dr. J. 
Masuoka, whose experience was in general a study of race 
relations problems in Japan (Vol. 3, pp. 399-402).

There are two school systems in Davidson County, Ten­
nessee. One is the school system of the City of Nashville, 
which serves a school population of approximately 30,000 
pupils (Vol. 2, pp. 182-183). The other school system is 
the school system operated by the defendant-appellee, 
County Board of Education of Davidson County, Tennes­
see, which serves that portion of Davidson County outside 
of the City of Nashville and serves a school population of 
approximately 47,000 pupils (77a). The City of Nashville 
School System Plan for gradual desegregation was con­
sidered by the same District Court as considered the in­
stant case and was considered by this Honorable Court in 
the case of Kelley v. Board of Education, 270 F. 2d 209.



---0

As appears from the report of the Special Committee of 
the Davidson County School Board working with the staff 
and from the testimony of the witnesses, there were many 
problems which had to be considered by the appellee-de­
fendant, Board of Education, in order to formulate a plan 
which might work in Davidson County, Tennessee. One 
of the problems to be considered was the fact that the 
Davidson County School System was terribly overcrowded 
at the present time and in fact and in spite of an active 
building program, seventy portable or temporary build­
ings were being used to house the excess of pupils (66a, 
87a, Vol. 2, pp. 47, 63-64, 225-226). Out of the School 
System of Davidson County, forty-four of the schools 
would be affected by a desegregation plan (78a, Vol. 1, p. 
50). Another factor was the concentrations of the Negro 
population and the white population in the County out­
side of the City, which would be the area served by the 
Davidson County School System (66a, 67a). In addition, 
the Davidson County School System offers transportation 
to its students residing more than one and one-fourth 
miles from the school attended, and any alteration of the 
existing school system would create transportation prob­
lems (67a, Vol. 1, pp. 70-71, Vol. 2, pp. 51-52). The trans­
portation problem was not only a problem of administra­
tion and operation of the school bus system, but likewise 
involved discipline on the buses where the driver was 
charged not only with the operation of the bus and the 
safety of its operation, but the discipline of the children 
riding the bus, which disciplinary problems would increase 
with integration (67a-68a, Vol. 2, pp. 52-53, 55, 56, Vol. 3, 
pp. 313-315).

Another important factor to the School Board, which 
was considered by it, was the custom in the community 
over many years of a segregated school system, which 
had to be overcome (54a, Vol. 2, pp. 60, 85, 166) and the



fact that friction would arise among the student bodies by 
too rapid a departure from the status quo (60a, 67a).

In addition, educational wise any change of a school for 
any cause has an adverse effect on the pupil (Yol. 2, pp. 
59-68, 194), and precipitous action would cause community 
disturbances, property loss and grave administrative dif­
ficulties (65a). The School Board in preparing and offer­
ing the plan also considered the variance in achievement 
levels at higher school grade levels as between the Negro 
school population and the white school population and its 
effect on the entire school population and the educational 
system from an integrated system (Vol. 2, pp. 65-73, 173, 
196, Vol. 3, pp. 347-354). Any change in the school system 
for any cause and for any reason requires a great amount 
of administrative work, which is time consuming, and 
the greater the change the more time required to work 
out the administrative problems (Vol. 2, p. 155).

Another factor which strongly influenced the Board in 
recommending the plan adopted, with certain modifica­
tions, by the District Court for orderly integration was 
that the City of Nashville plan, approved by this Court in 
the Kelley case, supra, was familiar to the residents of 
the area, the teachers in the school systems and the pupils 
in the. school systems and had been accepted generally by 
the local populace (Vol. 2, p. 187).

Based upon these factors the defendant-appellee, the 
County Board of Education of Davidson County, Tennes­
see, offered a plan identical with the plan previously of­
fered by the City of Nashville and which had been in oper­
ation in the community for a period in excess of three 
years. The only real modification made by the District 
Court was to increase the number of grades to start off the 
plan from the first grade to the first four grades in order 
that the Davidson County plan might be coextensive in 
time with the City of Nashville plan.

— 6 —



ARGUMENT.

I.

Were Appellant Negroes Entitled to Disrupt the Desegre­
gation Plan Approved by the Court for the Davidson 
County School System So as to Have Exceptions Made 
in Their Favor?

The Court Below Answered the Question “ No” .

Appellees Submit It Should Have been Answered “ No” .

The effect of plaintiffs-appellants ’ argument on Ques­
tion No. I, is that any plan which does not immediately 
admit all Negroes who desire to attend desegrated schools 
is an invalid plan; this for the reason that if the particular 
plaintiffs are permitted to attend the school of their 
choice so would any other parties making application and 
thus the plan would be destroyed. Such was recognized by 
the District Court.

No challenge has been made of a year by year plan of 
desegregation as such. Therefore, we will not attempt to 
justify the same, although we feel from the evidence ad­
duced and as set forth in the Statement of Facts and as 
found by the Court, that such a plan was one which com­
plied with the mandate of the Supreme Court of the United 
States for good faith compliance at the earliest practicable 
date, but recognizing the public interest.

We respectfully submit that unless the Supreme Court 
of the United States in the Brown ease (Brown v. Board of 
Education, 349 U. S. 294, 75 S. Ct. 753, 99 L. ed. 1083), had 
recognized the necessity of flexibility in reconciling public 
and private needs that Court would have entered a decree 
immediately desegregating all classes in all public schools.

— 7 —



On the contrary, that Court speaking through Mr. Chief 
Justice Warren said:

“ Traditionally, equity has been characterized by a 
practical flexibility in shaping its remedies and by a 
facility for adjusting and reconciling public and pri­
vate needs. These cases call for the exercise of these 
traditional attributes of equity power.”  (Emphasis 
ours.)

Thus we see that the Supreme Court of the United States 
recognized that some private individuals might not be 
satisfied with a plan which was adopted for the public 
good. Such was recognized by the District Court in this 
case, as it was in the case of Kelley v. The Board of Educa­
tion of the City of Nashville, etc., which was subsequently 
approved by this Court in 270 F. 2d at 209.

Such was likewise recognized by the Court of Appeals 
for the Fifth Circuit in the case of Orleans Parish School 
Board v. Bush, Fifth Circuit, 242 F. 2d 156, in the follow­
ing language:

“ . . . a  good faith acceptance by the school board 
of the unlying principle of equality of education for 
all children, with no classification by race might well 
warrant the allowance by the trial court of time for 
such reasonable steps in the process of desegregation 
as appeared to be helpful in avoiding unseemly con­
fusion and turmoil.”  (Emphasis ours.)

For the reason set forth in the Statement of Facts, which 
we will not restate, the Trial Court here found that rea­
sonable time was necessary in the process of the desegre­
gation in order to avoid confusion and turmoil.

Those experienced: in education in the City of Nashville 
and Davidson County recognized that such a plan as was 
here offered was necessary in order to avoid turmoil and 
confusion. The only opposing evidence was the theoretical

— 8 —-



—  9 —

testimony of those individuals who, while they had studied 
the subject of race relations, had had no direct contact 
with, and were not familiar with from their own personal 
experiences, the situation in Davidson County. Either the 
plan is a “ good faith compliance at the earliest practicable 
date”  and should be approved without exceptions being- 
made which would have the effect of disrupting the plan 
and destroying it as a plan or in the alternative the plan 
itself should be rejected by this Court in violation of the 
very principle which this Court has already established 
in similar cases. We submit that it is a good faith com­
pliance when considering problems related to administra­
tion, arising from the physical condition of the school 
plan, the school transportation system, personnel, revision 
of school districts and attendance areas into compact units, 
as well as overcoming deep-seated customs of the area, 
and that an attempt by plaintiffs-appellants to in effect 
destroy such a plan because of the “ private”  interest of a 
few individuals should not be permitted.

This Court in the case of Clemons v. Board of Education
of Hillsboro, Ohio, 228 F. 2d 853, pointed out that “ good 
faith compliance at the earliest practicable date”  did not 
require an immediate transition, regardless of the prac­
tical problems involved, and recognized that such practical 
problems would exist and that the primary responsibilty 
for the solution of the same was with the school authorities.

In view of these cases we feel that the- citation to other 
cases from other circuits recognizing and approving de­
segregation on a year by year basis is not necessary. This 
case has been retained in the District Court, as is proper. 
In the absence of some change in conditions and circum­
stances so as to require a change in the order of the Dis­
trict Court and a speeding up of the desegregation plan, 
frankness requires us to admit that it probably will be 
that some of the individual plaintiffs will not. attend a



10 —

desegregated school in the Davidson County system. This 
would be true in any instance where such a plan is adopted, 
and as pointed out in the testimony of the Superintendent 
of Schools, tlie school board is the school board of all of 
the children and all in any given category must be treated 
alike. It thus results that if the relief sought by the 
plaintiffs-appellants under their first prayer for relief 
(Plaintiffs’ Brief, p. 23) were granted a plan which has 
already been found to be workable in the immediate area 
would in effect be destroyed.

The argument is made that this Court in the concurring 
opinion of Mr. Justice (then Judge) Stewart in Clemons v. 
Board of Education, supra, suggested that the decree in 
this case should have enjoined the school board to im­
mediately admit the plaintiffs, even though they would 
be without the scope of the plan. We submit that such an 
inference is not justified. Mr. Justice Stewart was very 
careful to point out the distinction between cases where 
racial segregation on the part of school authorities was 
required or permitted by the state and any change would 
require the uprooting of a system, of education based upon 
decades of state custom and state law, on the one hand; 
and cases, such as the Clemons case, where segregation 
had been contrary to the law of the state for almost sev­
enty years. Such a distinction is clearly set forth in the 
opinion at page 859 in the following language:

“In the cases recently decided by the Supreme Court 
racial segregation on the part of the school authorities 
wTas required or permitted by the states involved. The 
Court recognized in its second opinion in those cases 
that the transition to an integrated school system in 
such states would involve many difficult practical 
problems, varying in each locality, but in each locality 
requiring the uprooting of a system of education built 
upon decades of state custom and state law. . . .



11 —

By contract the segregation of school children be­
cause of their race has been contrary to the law of 
Ohio for almost seventy years.............. I think the ap­
pellants were clearly entitled to injunctive relief as a 
matter of right in this case.” (Emphasis ours.)

Nor do the cases cited by plaintiffs-appellants in their 
brief (Plaintiffs-Appellants’ Brief, p. 15) require a differ­
ent conclusion from that rendered by the District Judge. 
It is true that where the District Court has found that the 
admission of one or two students to classes not integrated 
under the plan would not adversely affect the plan, such 
exercise of discretion and recognition of responsibility by 
the district judge will not be summarily overruled by the 
appellate court (See, for example, Board of Education v. 
Groves, Fourth Cir., 261 F. 2d 527). But where there is a 
reason, as there was here, and as found by the District 
Judge, that admission of the plaintiffs under an injunction 
would disrupt the plan, then the District Court has exer­
cised its responsibility to determine whether the plan is 
reasonable in all its aspects, including the duty of deter­
mining whether an exception to the plan in a given case 
should be made.

II.

Does the Transfer Provision of the Davidson County School 
System Desegregation Plan, as Approved by the Dis­
trict Court and as Approved by This Court in the 
City of Nashville School System Case, Violate the 
Fourteenth Amendment?

The Court Below Answered the Question “ No” .

Appellees Submit It Should Have Been Answered “ No” .

The transfer provisions of the plan approved by the 
District Court here challenged by the plaintiffs-appellants



12

is identical with the section of the plan approved by this 
Court in the case of Kelley v. Board of Education of City 
of Nashville, etc., 270 F. 2d 209. We do not feel that any 
clearer statement of the fallacy of the plaintiffs’-appel­
lants’ argument could be made than the statement made 
by this Court, speaking through Judge McAllister, com­
mencing at page 228 of that opinion, where the transfer 
provision is discussed, and continuing through page 230 
of the report of the case. We see nothing to be gained 
by recopying that clear statement of this Court’s opinion 
into this brief and thus unduly lengthening it. Certainly 
there is nothing in this record to indicate that there are 
any impediments to the exercise of a free choice by par­
ents, but as pointed out by this Court in the Kelley case, 
the District Court has retained jurisdiction during the 
entire period of the process of desegregation under the 
plan, and in the event such should appear, the District 
Court could make such modification as became necessary.

Plaintiffs-appellants rely upon the case of Boson v. 
Rippy, 285 F. 2d 43 (Fifth Cir. 1960). The decision in that 
case we confess is in conflict with the decision of this Court 
in the Kelley case. A careful reading of the Boson case, 
however, and especially the supplemental opinion in the 
case, would indicate that the United States Court of Ap­
peals for the Fifth Circuit actually deleted the transfer 
provision from the plan because such would apply a rule 
of law to the desegregated public schools from the Dallas 
School District different from that applicable to other 
public schools in the State of Texas. That question is not 
here raised by the plaintiffs-appellants. On the question of 
classification according to race, the United States Court of 
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit said only that:

“ We are so doubtful of the validity of the provi­
sions of paragraph 6 that we think they should not be 
included in the plan.”



13 —

This doubt seems to have been predicated upon the nota­
tion by the three members of the Supreme Court of the 
United States who thought certiorari should be granted in 
the Kelley case that the transfer provision constituted “ an 
absolute”  ground for transfer of students.

Such a conclusion could result only from a failure to con­
sider the entire plan. Section 4 of the plan as approved by 
the District Court in both this case and in the Kelley case 
(70a), provides only that transfer applications will be 
given consideration when such transfer is practicable and 
consistent with sound school administration and when 
“ good cause therefor is shown.”

Section 5 then defines one of the “ good causes”  and is 
the section complained of. This, however, does not make 
it an “ absolute”  ground for transfer, but, on the contrary, 
means that it is a basis or ground which may be given 
“ careful consideration”  by the school board and which 
may be the basis for transfer when such is practicable and 
consistent with sound school administration.

The Boson case further overlooks the fact that while 
three members of the Supreme Court of the United States 
desired to grant certiorari on the transfer provision, the 
majority of the Supreme Court did not desire to grant such 
certiorari and accordingly certiorari was denied when the 
identical question was before the Supreme Court of the 
United States in the case of Robert W. Kelley et al. v. 
Board of Education of the City of Nashville, 361 U. S. 924, 
80 S. Ct. 293, 4 L. ed. 2d 240.

Accordingly, the defendants-appellees respectfully sub­
mit that the findings of fact, conclusions of law and decree 
of the Court below should be in all respects affirmed by this 
Court and this cause remanded to that Court so that it 
might retain supervision during the entire period of the



— 14 —

process of desegregation in accordance with the mandate 
of the Supreme Court of the United States in the Brown 
case.

Respectfully submitted,
K. HARLAN DODSON, JR.,

1106 Nashville Trust Building, 
Nashville 3, Tennessee,

SHELTON LUTON,
County Attorney for Davidson County, 

Tennessee,
Davidson County Courthouse, 

Nashville 3, Tennessee, 
Attorneys for Defendants-Appellees.



Testimony of Ferris C. Bailey

APPENDIX TO APPELLEES’ BRIEF.

66* MELVIN B. TURNER,
called as a witness by the plaintiffs for cross-examination 
on his affidavit, being1 first duly sworn, was examined and 
testified as follows:

Cross-Examination on Affidavit,

By Mr. Williams:

70 Q. Well, what report has that committee ever made 
to the Superintendent?

A. Well, one recommendation I made was my discipline 
problems with children of the same race would be multi­
plied when we integrated.

Q. You made that recommendation when, now?
71 A. That is true. Oh, I have maintained that through­

out and still do.

5 FERRIS C. BAILEY,
called as a witness in behalf of the defendants, being first 
duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Direct Examination,
By Mr. Dodson:

Q. State your name please.
A. Perris C. Bailey.
Q. Mr. Bailey, you are a practicing attorney in Nash­

ville, Davidson County, Tennessee, and have been for a 
good many years. Is that rig'ht, sir?

A. Yes, sir.

* Numbers appearing in outer edge of text indicate page numbers of 
original stenographic transcript of testimony.



Q. How long have you been on the Davidson County 
Board of Education, sir?

A. I have been on the Board since 1942 or ’3. I
6 don’t remember the exact date.

Q. And prior to that time, I believe you served on 
the City Board of Education for a period, did you not, sir?

A. I served on the City Board from 1930 until January 
1st, 1936.

#  *  *  *  *  *  #

Q. Mr. Bailey, following the hearing here on September 
26—I believe that was the date. Anyway, the day we 
were down here for the original hearing on this, what 
action did the School Board take, the entire School Board, 
with reference to doing anything about formulating a 
plan?

A. The—the Chairman of the Board appointed a. Com­
mittee composed of myself, Mr. S. L. Wright, and Mr. 
Prank White.

Q. All three of you being members of the Board?
7 A. All three being members of the Board, Mr. Frank

White being a past Chairman of the Board, and we
were requested by the Chairman, Mr. Ed Chappell, to 
investigate the possibility of working out a plan pertaining 
to desegregation; and the Committee had several meetings 
with the staff, and did present the plan which has been 
filed in this court, and it was unanimously approved by 
the Board members.

Q. In all fairness, Mr. Bailey, the Committee did lean 
primarily upon the Staff for the accumulation of data and 
upon Counsel for the suggestion of various possible plans, 
did it not?

A. That’s true because, of course, as Board members, 
we were not as capable as the staff of producing a plan 
or producing the reasons for the plan.

Q. Now, there has been filed here a report o f the David­

— 2b —
Testimony of Ferris C. Bailey



3b

son County Board of Education as unanimously adopted 
by the Board itself. This plan was presented to the Board, 
was unanimously adopted?

A. Yes.
Q. What is your judgment or your opinion, based upon 

the factual data that was presented to you by the Staff 
and the various meetings that were held, your experience 
from being on the school boards, both of the City of Nash­
ville, and of Davidson County, for many, many years and 

your experience as, I believe, a lifelong resident of
8 this community------

Is that right?
A. That’s right.
Q. (Continuing)------as respects this plan?
A. Well, it ’s my opinion------

* * * * * * *

A. Well, it is my opinion that the plan as presented is 
a more practical plan and a more workable plan than 
any other plan that we could possibly adopt.

Q. The reasons that are set forth in this (holding up 
document) report, I take it, are the reasons that were the 

background of that conclusion?
9 A. That’s correct.

* * * * * * *

30 J. E. MOSS,
called as a witness in behalf of the defendants, being first 
duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Direct Examination,
By Mr. Dodson:

* * * * * * *
31 Q. Mr. Moss, you are the Superintendent of David­

son County Schools, are you not?
A. I am.

Testimony of J. E. Moss



Q. And have been for how long!
A. Twelve years, almost twelve years.
Q. And prior to that, were you connected with the 

Davidson County School System!
A. Yes.
Q. In what capacities?
A. As teacher and supervisor for a period of 25 years 

prior to Superintendent.
Q. Then you have had 37 years------
A. All together.

35 Q. And that was on the September 26th hearing.
All right, sir. Now, since September 26th, when 

we were down here, has the staff done any work on this 
matter !

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Just in fairness, much or little!
A. A  great deal; a great deal.
Q. What members of the staff have been working on it, 

Mr. Moss!
A. Well, myself and Mr. Detchon and Mr. Garrett and 

Mr. Higgins and Mr. Turner. That was the committee, 
and they have------

Q. That was the staff committee!
A. The staff committee, and they pulled in other per­

sonnel for special assignments.
Q. Now, what—First, what plan or plans were consid­

ered by the staff, what feasible answers, what possibilities 
were considered by the staff?

A. We studied several plans or considered and discussed 
several plans. The one that, where some systems started 
at the 12th grade, we gave that------

Q. (Interrupting) Started at the 12th grade and went 
down ?

— 4b —-

Testimony of J. E. Moss



36 A. Yes; one grade at a time, and 12th—start with 
the 12th grade rather than the first.

Then, we studied a plan or discussed a plan where you 
start one—start in the first grade and—and jump up into 
Junior High and start another.

Q. Now, let me make sure I understand you. You mean 
it would be one a year, starting with the first through the 
sixth ?

A. Sixth.
Q. And one a year at the same time, starting seven 

through 12?
A. Yes.
Q. All right, sir.
A. Then, we discussed and studied a plan, starting four 

grades at a time, one, two, three, four, to be even with 
the City.

Q. Let me make sure I understand that. You consid­
ered a grade-a-year plan, but------

A. (Interrupting) Starting with four grades.
Q. (continuing)------starting with the first four already

in?
A. Start with four grades and a grade a year.
Q. Yes. In order to make it coincide with the Nashville 

Plan?
A. Yes, yes.

37 All right, sir. Or with the plan presently used by 
the City of Nashville, I should say.

Q. All right. Did you make studies as to whether or not 
both would work?

A. Yes. We—We found more of our staff members and 
more of the people we were able to interview favoring the 
grade a year, starting with the first grade.

Q. You discussed this also with your legal counsed, did 
you not, as to various plans?

A. We discussed it with legal counsel.

— 5b —

Testimony of J. E. Moss



Q. Did you give consideration to the so-called Nash­
ville Plan, the plan that was adopted by the City of Nash­
ville under the direction of this Court back several years 
ago?

A. We did.
Q. Who, if anyone, did you consult with in the City 

System?
A. Well, we did quite a bit of work in the City. We 

went first to Superintendent Oliver’s office and studied his 
records.

Q. Superintendent Oliver is the man that occupies with 
the City School System a place comparable to yours with 
the County System. Is that right?

A. That’s right, yes.
Q. All right, sir. Then, next?

38 A. Then, after we had studied the records in his 
office and found how the program was working in 

the City Schools and brought that back, our counsel ad­
vised us to go into the schools and see it work directly. 
So we visited some of the City Schools to study the rec­
ords and see how children were progressing and what was 
happening.

Q. Did you make an actual physical examination of those 
records yourselves?

A. We made an actual examination of two schools.
Q. Now, Mr. Moss, I want to ask you, first, what was 

the result from that examination of records as respects 
those students who came in the first grade and have 
worked right on up, now, to the fourth grade: How are 
they comparing with their classmates where they came, 
say, from a school that previously had been an all-Negro 
school?

A. We found that—that the children that started in the 
first grade and went along a year at a time are doing all 
right. There isn’t much problem, and they are—they are

— 6b —

Testimony of J. E. Moss



keeping np satisfactorily. But, last year, there was a large 
number of third and fourth graders that went into the. 
integrated plan for the first time.

Q. Now, you say last year. When do you mean by that! 
A. Last year, I mean the beginning, this—this Septem­

ber.
Q. September of 1960!

39 A. For instance, in—I believe I can quote these fig­
ures. I have them here. I could look them up if

they aren’t correct. But the first year, I believe there was 
something like a dozen students in the program.

Q. They were all, of course, in the first grade!
A. They were all first graders.
Q. Yes, sir.
A. The next year, they had about 30 first and second.
Q. All right, sir.
A. The next year, there were 40-some-odd first, second, 

and third graders.
Q. All right, sir.
A. Then, this fall, that number jumped to 150-some-odd. 
Q. All right, sir.
A. Now, in that 150 there were quite a few fourth 

graders that came in for the first time, and that’s a group 
that is not doing well.

Q. When you say “ not doing well,”  are you talking 
about emotionally, physically, scholastically, or what, Mr. 
Moss!

A. Both scholastically and emotionally, and—I think 
that would cover most of them, unhappiness.

Q. Let me ask you, based on your experience, what hap­
pens when a child is unhappy in school or emotion-

40 ally upset in school with respect to their scholastic 
problems!

#  «  # #  %  *  *

47 Q. Now, Mr. Moss, what is the situation in the 
County School System as respects the use of the

Testimony of J. E. Moss



physical facilities, whether or not you have a substantial 
amount of vacant space, some vacant space, a little vacant 
space, or no vacant space?

A. Our system is very crowded. We—We have about 
70 portable rooms, temporary rooms we move around 
from school to school.

Q. Well, has the Davidson County School System failed 
to build schools since you have been Superintendent!

A. No. They have built a good many schools, but we 
just haven’t built them fast enough.

Q. Have you been opening schools each year or not, 
new schools or new classrooms!

A. We have built some each year.
Q. Was that situation true in the City School System 

at the time the plan was put into effect there? Were 
the physical facilities already overtaxed or not?

A. Not—Not in the White schools, no.
Q. All right, sir. What has been the trend in the City 

Schools populationwise as contrasted with the County 
Schools populationwise over the last several years?

A. The White children have been decreasing in the city, 
whereas the Negroes have been gaining. With us, it ’s 

been the other way. The—The Whites have gained 
48 a great deal, and the Negroes have pretty well 

stayed normal. I mean there hasn’t been a great 
growth there.

Q. All right, sir. What is the situation in the County 
School System as respects teacher load. I guess that is 
the way you express it; ratio pupil to teacher?

A. The County has a wider ratio. We have m o re - 
more students per teacher.

Q. What approximately is the ratio now?
A. Well, we ran up about one to 30 which means in ele­

mentary schools it would be up considerably above 30 
because you can’t—you can’t have that many in a high 
school very well.

— 8b —

Testimony of ,J. E. Moss



Q. From an educational standpoint, what is the level
you seek?

A. We—We try in elementary one—ah, 30 children to 
a teacher in elementary, and 25 in high school.

Q. All right, sir. Is it that high in the City School 
System? Do you have that many students per teacher?

A. No, sir; not according to the records in Mr. Oliver’s 
office.

Q. Now, was that factor challenged to the attention of 
the staff and the staff to the committee in arriving at 
this plan?

A. Yes, sir; it was.
Q. Now, I want to ask you, Mr. Moss, about the

49 concentration of school population and particularly 
with reference, now, to the concentration of the

Negro population around the schools in the City System 
as contrasted, and I realize there will be another witness 
from your staff to testify about this, but your own knowl­
edge, too, as contrasted with that in the County System 
or that area in Davidson County outside of the City 
System ?

A. In the City School, they are more concentrated. Ours 
are pretty well scattered. We have small communities 
all over the County as— —

# # * # * * *
50 A. Yes, sir. According to the records in the City 

Superintendent’s office, they have ten schools inte­
grated now.

Q. Out of how many?
A. Out of 46, I believe it is.
Q. All right. How many schools in the Davidson County 

System would be affected?
A. Forty some-odd, about 44 I believe is the number.

By the Court:
Q. How many schools are there?

Testimony of J. E. Moss



— 10b —

Testimony of J. E. Moss

A. Eighty-five.
Mr. Dodson: That was my next question.

By the Court:
Q. Eighty-five schools. Does that include high

51 schools and------
A. It includes—yes, sir.

Q . ------Junior High?
A. It includes High, Junior High and Elementary; yes.
Q. How many elementary?
A. Sixteen high schools, and take— —
Q. Sixteen high schools?
A. Yes, sir. And take that from 85, and you have------

By Mr. Dodson:
Q. (Interrupting) And you have 69, I believe?
A. Sixty-nine, yes.
Q. And you say 44 of those would be affected?
A. Forty-four of those would—would have some integra­

tion if all eligible went.
Q. If all eligible went?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. All right, sir. Does the City School System operate a 

transportation system for its students?
A. No, sir.
Q. Does the County System?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Mr. Turner will be here to testify about this, too, but 

I want to ask you: What is the situation now with respect 
to whether or not school buses are operating at full

52 capacity, medium capacity, less than capacity, or 
running (as Greyhound buses do) with a lot of

empty seats?
A. They are—they are full capacities. Some of them are 

very, very crowded.
Q. And how many trips per day, both in the morning 

and in the afternoon, is it necessary that each one of these 
buses run in order to handle the transportation system?



Testimony of J. E. Moss

A. They have to make three or four trips and serve—- 
one bus may serve three or four schools, and I believe some 
serve even more than that.

Q. Who is in charge of the bus? Is there a teacher on 
the bus?

A. No, sir.
Q. Who is in charge of the bus itself?
A. The driver.
Q. What is he charged with------
A. His------
Q. ------ other than driving?
A. To drive and then to look out for the safety of the 

children; of course, handle the discipline on the bus, and 
he has charge of the children and traffic and everything 
else. I t ’s his total responsibility.

Q. He is the discipline officer as well as the chauffeur. 
Is that right?

A. That’s right.
53 Q. What, then, is the effect on the transportation 

system and the safety of the children in the event 
there are breaches of discipline on the bus?

A. We certainly don’t need to add any more discipline 
to his list of troubles.

# * * * # # #

55 Q. Mr. Moss, what happens when you put children of
56 different age groups on a bus. Does that increase 

or decrease these disciplinary problems that you
have been talking about?

A. It would increase them.
Q. It does now, doesn’t it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is consideration given to that in attempting to as­

sign school buses?
A. Yes, sir.



Q. Mr. Moss, was that one of the factors that was given 
consideration by the staff and by the committee in pre­
senting this plan?

A. Yes, it was.
Q. You didn’t attempt to weigh each factor with the 

committee, did you, as to how much weight should be given 
to it as compared to some other factor?

A. No. But we recognized that as a serious problem 
because we would have—After we get to school, we have 
got a teacher to look after every group, but on the bus, 
the driver has as many as 130 children sometimes to 
handle. And that’s serious.

Q. On one bus?
A. On one bus, yes.
Q. Now, populationwise—I am not talking about just 

school population, but populationwise, if you will, if 
57 you can, compare the concentrations of population 

by races in the City and in the County outside of 
the City.

A. I can compare school children. I can’t compare 
the— —

Q. Well, compare the school children then if you will.
A. For instance, the City Schools have about 17,000 

White children and 12,000-something Negroes, where we 
have forty-five Whites and 2,400 Negroes.

Q. As a result, have the Negroes and the WTiites lived 
closer together in the City or not?

A. Well, they have been in more concentrated groups, 
yes, concentrated communities.

Q. And what about the association that has taken place 
between Negro and White in the City as compared within 
the County by virtue of that? Has it been more or less 
association between the two races in the City?

A. Well, I would think there’d be more. I wouldn’t 
know that for sure.

Testimony of J. E. Moss



Q. All right, sir. Then you can’t testify to that. Was 
that one of the things that you gave consideration to?

A. Yes, sir.
#  *  *  #  . *  *  *

58 Q. Mr. Moss, did the committee and the staff give 
any consideration to when any plan that is put in

should become effective?
A. Yes; yes. We would like to start any plan at the be­

ginning of the school year.
Q. Why is that?
A. Well, there are less interruptions. You can—You 

can plan for the beginning of a year. I t ’s difficult to plan 
for a program that starts in the middle of the year. And 
our Board has for several years followed a plan of register­
ing in the spring. As was brought out before, that has 
proved very effective and saves a great deal of time in 
the fall, and we hope we can continue to follow that sort 

of plan.
59 Q. You say it would cause confusion to attempt to 

do it at midyear, during the year?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, now what happens to teacher time and what 

happens to education of the students when you have con­
fusion?

A. Well, it ’s interrupted, and—and children lose. We— 
We never move children in the middle of the year if we 
can avoid it. Even if a child moves all the way across 
town, if he can get back to the place where he started, 
we—we will permit him to stay there.

Q. For the balance of that school year?
A. For the balance of that school year, and then trans­

fer at the end of the year.
Q. I believe there is some state law to that effect, isn’t 

there, or do you know?

— 13b —

Testimony of J. E. Moss



A. I don’t know of any law to that effect.
Q. Well, what happens to a student or a child when 

they are moved during the middle of a school year ? What 
happens to their own educational progression?

A. Most of the time they become unhappy and they— 
their grades show up reduced.

Q. Now, from telephone calls that you have received, 
letters that you have received, and communications on 
the street and elsewhere, you and the other members of 

the staff, would you say that there is public concern 
60 over the integration of the schools, or not?

A. There certainly is.
Q. Would that be, in your opinion—and I am talking 

about based on your experience with all factors in school 
life. Would that be more, or less, if this is held over 
until the beginning of your school year next year?

A. The people would be better satisfied if we could wait 
over till next year.

Q. What about the teachers?
A. The teachers would, too.
Q. What about attempting to prepare the student body?
A. We need this time to get teachers and students and 

parents adjusted to it, and it would work much better if 
we had that time.

Q. This plan provides, does it not, Mr. Moss, for a re­
quest for transfer?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you examine the records of the City of Nash­

ville? I don’t want you to testify to them in detail, but 
did you examine them to see whether there had been a 
request for transfer under that?

A. Yes.
Q. You anticipate the same would be------
A. Our records show a large number would ask for

transfer.

Testimony of J. E. Moss



61 Q. You anticipate the same would be true in the 
county?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. All right, now, can you just automatically handle 

those requests for transfers, or would they require any 
time?

A. It would take time to draw these zones fairly. That 
shouldn’t be done in haste.

Q. Now, I am talking about the request to transfer it­
self. When is the easy time, the time that that can be 
handled without a disruption of the school system?

A. When school is not going on or in the spring when 
we register.

* * * * * * *
63 Q. Now, then, an application was made here by some 

of these students originally to go to the Antioch
School or Glencliff, as they said, and I want to ask you if 
you have checked to see which zone they would be in now. 

A. They would be in the Antioch zone.
Q. All right, sir. So assuming no segregation of schools 

at all, they would go to the Antioch School. Is that right? 
A. That is correct.
Q. Now, I want to ask you about the Antioch School and 

the physical facilities there as contrasted with the other 
schools in the County System. Are there more classrooms
with people not in them, or------

A. It is one of our worst spots. We added eight class­
rooms there this year, and we still have either four or live 
portables there that we hoped to move away and couldn’t.

Q. Well, is it a fair statement to say that even right 
now it is bursting at the seams?

A. It is.
Q. What about your teacher-pupil ratio there? Is it

64 out of line or is it in line with the rest of the system? 
A. Well, I can’t give you those facts, but I know it

-— 15b —

Testimony of J. E. Moss



would be pretty heavy, because always in the crowded 
spots teachers are more crowded, because if he had more 
rooms there, we might add another teacher.

Q. Were those factors reported by the staff, considered 
by the staff, and reported to the committee, and considered 
by the committee in the formulation of this plan?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. And this report?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right, tell us what you know about it. (Let’s put 
it that way) as respects the difference between stu- 

65 dents in the Negro class or the Negro race and stu­
dents of the White race, first grade, second, and on 

up, from these achievement tests?
A. We have a system of testing and guidance in the 

County Schools as all school systems have, at least all 
good systems, and we give what is called a standardized 
test, a readiness test to the first graders to see if they are 
ready to work with figures and are ready to learn to read. 
The tests in the first four grades are given by the teacher 
and graded by the teacher. Those in five, six, seven and 
eight are given by the teacher, but they are cards that can 
be machine scored, and they are scored for the most part 
out at A and I.

Now, our records show, and Mr. Petty will tell you if he 
comes up here, that the Negro children and the White 
children are pretty close together in the first grade.

Now, as they go along the Negro children fall behind. 
This is true in the county, and it was also true in the city. 
I investigated the records of Mr. Oliver, and it is true 
there. By the time they get to the sixth grade they are 
a year to a year and a half behind the White students.

Q. Was that one of the factors that was considered by 
the staff, reported by the staff to the committee, and con­

— 1 6b --

Testimony of J. E. Moss



sidered by the committee both with respect to the advis­
ability of the grade-a-year plan and when it should be 

put into effect?
66 A. It certainly was.

# = & # * * * #
68 Cross-Examination,

By Mr. Williams:

73 Q. Do you think there is something wrong with the 
teachers in the integrated schools in Nashville that 

they are just falsely labelling these children as having 
made unsatisfactory progress!

A. No, I think the cause lies deeper than that. I think 
you have got the children upset, and they are not doing 
their best. When you move them—If you start when chil­
dren are small, when they are first graders, it is a little 
different proposition than at an older age, or third or 
fourth grade.

* # # # # * *
85 A. If you start with a grade a year, you have got 

little children that have no fixed prejudice, they
have no racial consciousness, they are more interested in 
the teacher than they are in students, and they will get 

started off better and do a better educational job.
86 Q. Yes, sir. That’s primarily based on your theory 

that they have no racial prejudice?
A. That’s based on a lot of things, including the study 

of the City School System.
# # # # # # #

155 A. I am sure the Board will work out these zones, 
that they will be made available to all people, all 

schools, and that’s a thing that we need time on. That’s 
the reason we are begging for this spring registration.

— 17b —

Testimony of J. E. Moss



1(56 Q. Well, M]r. Moss, I don’t have reference just to 
the Maxwell children. I am talking about all Negro 

children and all White children. After all, they have a 
stake in this, too, you know.

A. Let me make this statement: W"e—we, again, work 
for the people, and there has been a custom for, lo, these 
many years, and any change in our thinking should come 
gradual and slow to avoid hurting children, both Negro 
and White.

173 Redirect Examination,

By Mr. Dodson:
Q. Mr. Moss, when a school child—I am not talking 

about an integrated or segregated school. When a school 
child gets behind in its work, be it he or she, do they tend 
to subsequently catch up, or get further behind?

A. Get further behind.
Q. And if they start out behind they tend to get further 

behind, is that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. You of your own knowledge know the public famil­

iarity with the Nashville Plan here, do you not, in this 
community?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was that considered by the staff, the committee, and 

the Board in connection with------ -
174 A. Yes.

Q. ------proposing this plan?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Something they were always familiar with!
A. Yes.

•— 18b —<

Testimony of J. E. Moss



Testimony of William Henry Oliver

179 WILLIAM HENRY OLIVER,
a witness called on behlf of the defendants, being first 
duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Direct Examination,
By Mr. Luton:

Q-. This is Mr. Oliver?
A. Yes, my name is William Henry Oliver.
Q. What is your profession or occupation, Mr. Oliver? 
A. I am Superintendent of the Nashville City Schools. 
Q. And how long have you been Superintendent of the 

Nashville City Schools?
A. I became Superintendent of the Nashville City 

Schools officially on the first of January, 1958. Prior to 
that time, I had served for six months as Assistant Super­
intendent.

Q. Now, prior to your being Assistant Superin-
180 tendent, what did you do, Mr. Oliver?

A. I had been at East Nashville High School for 
25 years, the last 18 of which I served as principal. Prior 
to that I had taught two years at Hume-Fogg High School. 
Prior to that I had had two or three years’ experience 
teaching elsewhere.

Q. So that, I believe, adding up all together, you have 
about 30 years’ experience as an educator. Is that correct?

A. I have had 30 in the Nashville City Schools and 
two and a half outside of the Nashville City Schools. 
Really 32y2 years—33%, excuse me.

* * * * * * *
182 Q. Can you identify that document that I handed 

you there? Is that a photostat of one of your of­
ficial records?

A. This is a copy of the enrollment in my schools, all 
of the schools. It just happens that I had a meeting of



my supervisors staff this morning and read to them all 
these figures; and as I look at these now, they seem to be 
quite correct. I don’t believe this is a photostatic copy, 
but I think that the figures are correct. And according to 
this, we have 17,372 White students.

Q. And how many Negro students?
183 A. And 12,815 Negro students, giving a total of 

30,187. I think those figures are correct, sir. 
# # # # # # #

187 A. Mr. Attorney, may I take the liberty of saying 
that I think that the Court made a very wise de­

cision and that our experience with the plan has justified 
my feeling. Excuse me for taking the time. Thank you.

# # # * * * #
190 Q. Now, Mr. Oliver, as His Honor has just indi­

cated, and we do want you to elaborate on that, with 
respect to the feature of the City Plan which has to do 
with transfers, that is, the transfer upon application of a 
student. Will you state to His Honor whether there have 
been transfers or applications, therefore, from either race 
pursuant to that provision?

A. There have been many transfers. The plan provides 
for transfers. I don’t want to take up too much time, but 
maybe I should state this: According to our plan, every 
elementary school has a zone, and that zone is established 
without regard for race. Each school has a zone of its 
own, and the doors of the schoolroom in that zone are open 
to all children who live in that zone, regardless of race.

Now, in many of our zones we have both White and 
Negro children. In some we have a great majority of 
Negro children and in others we have a great majority of 
White children. We offer a child or his parents the priv­
ilege of requesting a transfer from that zone to some other 
zone if the parents of a child prefer that the child attend

—  20b —

Testimony of William Henry Oliver



21b —

school with members of his own race. In other words— 
Now, these are not the only reasons, but these are some 
of the reasons for transfer. If a child is in the racial 
minority, either in his class or in his school, he, through 

his parents may request a transfer to some other
191 school outside of that zone, in order that he may 

be in school with other children of his own race.
The way it works is: The transfer is granted for one 

year at a time. The student can change his mind after 
one year if he wants to. In other words, if there is a 
Negro child in a White school zone, let us say, he has a 
choice each year as to which one he attends. He is not 
bound one year by the choice of another year. The first 
year, for instance—I remember the figures very well. The 
first year, we had 115 little Negro children who were eligi­
ble in the first grade to attend White schools. A hundred 
and five of them requested transfers. The other ten went 
to the schools in the zones in which they lived where most 
of the children were White. We had 55 White children 
living in what we might call the Negro school zones, and 
they all asked transfers, and they were granted.

Now, we think that through the press, radio, television, 
and through the principals and teachers, everybody in our 
community knows our plan rather well. We do not send 
individual letters or notices to children’s parents telling 
them what zone they are in. We thought of doing that, 
but we were afraid that someone might think that we were 
trying to influence parents one way or another as to where 

they sent their children to school. So we didn’t do
192 it. We never have done it.

Furthermore, we do not require the child to go in 
person to the school from which he wants a transfer. The 
reason for that is: You take a White school in whose 
zone there are just maybe three or four little Negro chil­
dren. It is embarrassing to those children, and originally

Testimony of William Henry Oliver



it might have been dangerous for them to go to this school 
in person to ask for the transfer. We say to the parents: 
“ Send yonr child where you want the child to go, and if 
that is a school in whose zone the child does not live, then 
the principal gives the child a transfer request card to 
take home. His parent signs the card and sends it back 
to the principal, and the principal sends it to the super­
intendent, and the superintendent passes on the request.

I might say that I personally have passed on every re­
quest for transfer that has ever been made in the Nash­
ville City Schools, and I have granted the requests which 
have been made.

I don’t know whether I have made that clear or not, 
but I want it to be clear that the parent has an absolute 
choice as to whether his child attends school in the zone 
in which he lives or not. He has the right to go there. If 
the parent thinks it is to the interest of the child to go to 
a school in another zone in order to be with children of 

his own race, the parent may request permission 
193 for the child to be transferred and get it. If that 

isn’t clear, I would appreciate your questioning me 
further on it.

Q. Mr. Oliver, I think you have made it abundantly 
clear. The sum and substance of it all is that in compli­
ance with the plan, you have made it voluntary for those 
who want to avail themselves of that voluntary feature.

196 The Witness: Well, I think that the smaller the 
child is, the younger the child is, the less the prob­

lem of adjusting to the new situation. Of course, we have 
had a number of children who started in desegregated 
schools who had never been in a segregated school, and 
our records indicate, and our observation convinces us 
that they achieve normal success; whereas, others who

Testimony of William Henry Oliver



have transferred from, let us say, a segregated to a de­
segregated school later, have had more difficulty in ad­
justing themselves socially and scholastically. I think 
that the problem is less at the beginning than it is higher 
up.

Cross-Examination,
By Mr. Williams:

202 Q. Now, your plan says that a student may—that if 
his parents or guardian make written application

for him to transfer to a school outside a zone, that request 
will be given consideration and granted and then a subse­
quent paragraph of your plan which is exactly the same 
as the Davidson County plan, sets forth these racial cri­
teria based on the majority or minority in the classroom 
or in the school. That’s correct, isn’t it!

A. As some of the reasons which may be offered for a 
request, that is right.

Q. Yes, Mr. Oliver, will you explain to the Court how it 
becomes a transfer if a Negro child who lives in the zone 
for Warner and who has been attending Elliott, or, rather, 
who would have attended Elliott under your separate 
Negro zoning system, how does it become a transfer if he 
is just permitted to go on to Elliott without ever having 
seen Warner, as a matter of fact, without having known 
that he was zoned in Warner?

A. Well, he has to get a transfer. A student has to get 
a transfer from one school district to another, even if he 

hasn’t been to one school.
203 Q. Then, what you mean by transfer is that it ’s a 

transfer made on paper and it ’s made at the segre­
gated school to which he goes, isn’t it?

A. A transfer, of course, is made on paper.

Testimony of William, Henry Oliver



Q. Yes, sir.
A. Any transaction of that kind is. The student doesn’t 

have to have it made at the segregated school to which 
he goes. He may go to the school in his own and get it 
there if he wants to. We don’t require them to go there. 
We are just, of course, trying to protect them from em­
barrassment and danger, but a student may go to a school 
in his own zone to get his transfer if he wants to.

Q. While you are on that, Mr. Oliver, is it your opinion 
that it facilitates peaceful desegregation for the public 
officials who are attempting to carry out desegregation to 
be always talking about protecting somebody from danger 
and that there might be danger and there might be vio­
lence? Is that your opinion as an expert?

A. I think I ’d be very foolish and blind not to recognize 
that there was some danger, and I think that I would be 
rather thoughtless of the children if I hadn’t tried to de­
vise some way to protect them from it. Now, this plan 
was started in 1957, and I think there was abundant evi­
dence that there was some danger.

•v. -It- -5£* -4£*-n~ '7r -tv- 'A-

216 A. I t ’s not just a matter of which school a child 
lives closest to. You can’t just draw the boundary 

lines exactly midway between schools, but I would say this: 
If your child lives inside the City of Nashville, he lives in 
the zone of some elementary school. I don’t know wdiich 
one. It doesn’t matter. But the whole city is zoned, and 
if you live inside the city, your child lives in some ele­
mentary school zone. Regardless of what school zone that 
is, your child may attend that school.

Now, if that happens to be a school in which your child 
would be in the racial minority, you may ask for a transfer 
for him to go elsewhere if you wish. Is my answer clear?

* # * # # * #

— 24b —

Testimony of William, Henry Oliver



217 FLOYD A. DETCHON,
a witness called on behalf of the defendants, being first 
dnly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Direct Examination,
By Mr. Dodson:

W -ft- -ft- -vr -7r A

218 Q. In what capacity?
A. I was the principal of an elementary school.

Q. And how long as a principal of an elementary school ? 
A. About 15 years.
Q. And then subsequently what happened?
A. I went to the Attendance Division of Davidson 

County Schools.
Q. And it ’s with the Attendance Division that you are 

now associated?
A. No. I am now working in the Research Department. 

Q. How long were you with the Attendance Division?
219 A. About ten years.

Q. And then how long have you been in the Research 
Department?

A. This is my second year in the Research Department.
* * * * * * *

225 Q. All right, sir. Can you state for me what the 
present situation is with respect to the facilities?

A. Well, we have------
Q. Were you operating at capacity, less, or more?
A. The majority of our schools are crowded, over­

crowded.
Q. Mr. Moss has testified generally about the new build­

ings that have been constructed over the last several years. 
You heard him testify. Is there anything you can add to 
that?

A. No, sir; I don’t think so.

— 25b —

Testimony of Floyd A. Detchon



Q. How many portable buildings are presently in use?
A. About 70.
Q. Mr. Moss was asked about the number of new school 

buildings that have been constructed. I want to ask you 
if, in addition to the construction of new schools, there has 
been a construction program under way of additions to 
existing schools or additional school rooms?

A. Yes, sir; that’s true.
Q. Each year?
A. Each year.
Q. Yes. What is the situation, if this falls within your 

field, of teacher load in the Davidson County School 
226 System?

A. Yes, sir; I have some figures on that.
Q. Can you state what they are please? And if you 

have it both with respect to the Negro school and the 
White school under the present system, I would be glad to 
have it that way.

A. Our teacher-pupil ratio for the White elementary 
g<3h00l—and I want to give them separately because we 
expect the elementary school to handle a little bigger load 
pupil-teacher ratiowise than in high school.

Q. Yes, sir.
A. So the elementary figure is 31.6 for the White schools. 

For the Negro elementary schools, it is 33.8. White high 
schools, 28.4; Negro high school, 29.2. And as a whole, 
both high and elementary, 30.56.

Q. Are you prepared to state, or is it within your field 
of work with the County Board of Education to state, what 
the desirable pupil-teacher ratio is that you seek to obtain 
in the system?

A. We would like to get elementary schools on a 30-per- 
teacher average; whereas, high schools, we prefer to 
have 25.

■— 26b —-

Testimony of Floyd A. Detchon

:X= * # # # * *



— 27b —

Testimony of Dr. Herman A. Long

240 DR. HERMAN A. LONG,
a witness called on behalf of the plaintiffs, being first 
duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

*  W -fiF "TV W 'K-

275 Cross-Examination,

By Mr. Dodson:
Q. Doctor, did you testify in the Nashville case!
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And your opinion was the same then that it is now! 
A, I think so.
Q. You never taught in the public schools here in Dav- 

vidson County?
A. I didn’t.
Q. Nor the City of Nashville?
A. No, I didn’t.
Q. You never were a supervisor in any of those schools? 
A. No. I have been teaching, however, though, for— — 
Q. You have been teaching in private—In Fisk?
A. At Fisk, at Miles College in Birmingham, Alabama. 

I was Dean of Instruction at Miles College before I came 
to Fisk University.

Q. Your teaching and your supervisory work has been 
on a college level?

A. On a college level, although I have supervised stu­
dents who have been teaching in the public schools.

276 Q. Now,.let’s don’t get too deep in this psychology 
and sociology. I didn’t do too well in that subject.

Let’s get down to Union-Street and Church-Street talk. 
I t ’s true, is it not, Doctor, in all fairness, that every area 
has its own problems and that the problems are different 
in the various areas? That is a correct statement, isn’t it? 

A. I think it is.
Q. As respects this problem of school integration or 

integration elsewhere. That’s a correct statement, isn’t it?



28b —

A. I think what yon are saying is that there are unique 
factors in almost every human situation, and I would cer­
tainly have to say this is true, and there are also common 
factors.

Q. You are running away from the Union-Street talk 
on me now.

A. I am saying the same thing you are saying.
Q. That’s what I want to know. You agree with my 

statement, then, is that right?
A. That’s right.

# # # * # * = *

Testimony of Melvin B. Turner

311 MELVIN B. TURNER,
a witness called on behalf of the defendants, being first 
duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Direct Examination,
By Mr. Luton:

Q. You are Mr. Melvin B. Turner?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your occupation, Mr. Turner?
A. Supervisor of Transportation, Davidson County 

School System.
Q. Speak out loud so that man sitting way back in the 

corner can hear you now.
How long have you been the Supervisor of Transporta­

tion in the County School System?
A. Twelve years. This is the 13th year.
Q. What are your principal duties as the Supervisor of 

Transportation ?
A. My principal duties is to provide for adequate bus 

service to all children within our county regardless of 
race who are eligible for such service, provide safe and 
efficient bus service.

Q. Now, when you say who are eligible, what is the



meaning of that! What children are eligible for bus 
transportation !

A. Eligibility is based on a-mile-and-a-quarter dis-
312 tance from school, and handicapped children of any 

distance are eligible for service.
* * * * * * *

313 Q. Now, Mr. Turner, how many drivers do you em­
ploy per bus?

A. Only one driver. Now, we have substitute drivers, 
but we only have one driver with a bus.

Q. At one time?
A. At one time.

Q. Do you have any other supervisory personnel
314 on the bus in addition to the driver?

A. We do not, sir.
Q. Now, then, in addition to driving the bus, then, what 

other principal duties does the bus driver have?
A. Ilis responsibility is sort of a dual nature with the— 

He is charged with the safe operation of his vehicle and 
also with the safety of the children who ride his bus, and 
is responsible for their proper conduct while riding the 
bus. Safety and discipline is his dual responsibility.

Q. In addition to, of course, driving the bus properly?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, Mr. Turner, do you know whether desegregation 

of the county schools will present any problems in trans­
portation, in county school bus transportation?

A. It will, sir; yes, sir.
Q. What are the problems that you can think of that it 

would present?
A. Well, the first problem, sir, would be rerouting of 

buses under the desegregated plan, and that would be 
quite entailed.

Q. Let me ask you this: Under the present plan your

— 29b —

Testimony of Melvin B. Turner



pupils are segregated on buses just like they are in schools, 
are they not?

A. Yes, they are.
315 Q. So that you say the principal problem presented, 

then, would be the rerouting of your buses? What
other problems would it present, if any?

A. Well, relative to rerouting, when we reroute, we 
change enrollments on the buses. That means that princi­
pals and drivers both have to make out new registers of 
the pupils, and that also changes schedules in which buses 
will operate when you rearrange routes. Where we ran 
one street at an early time, maybe on the rearrangement 
they will run at a late time, or vice versa. Rearrangement 
does change the time, and the pupils must be well informed 
of this or they will miss their bus for a while and are left 
standing.

And then another thing, under some rearrangements 
school schedules are affected. We think that the success 
of our being able to transport so many children, three 
and two-tenths trips per bus, is dependent upon, one thing, 
the staggering of school schedules. So we do stagger 
school schedules to permit efficiency of transportation. 

# # # # # * #
316 Q. Now, do you know that some of the plaintiffs in 

this case are the Maxwell children. Do you know
the family to which I refer?

A. I do.
Q. Do you know where they live?
A. Yes, sir, I know where they live.
Q. Now, under the present setup, if they went to high 

school, or any of the Maxwell children, what school would 
they go to under the present setup?

A. They would go to Haynes High School.
Q. Now, then, they have asked to go to Antioch School. 

Now, you know the locations of those two schools?

— 30b —

Testimony of Melvin B. Turner



Testimony of Melvin B. Turner

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, will you tell us if they went to Antioch School 

what would be the difference, if you can say, between the 
consumed time in their going to and coming from

317 school?
A. The scheduling and because of load equalization, 

we—it ’s a continuous process of routing buses, and those 
changes from time to time, what is true now may not be at 
a later time or may not have been true last year.

But presently I ’d like to say this: If those children went 
direct to each school it would only entail 10 minutes to 
Antioch and 25 to Haynes if they went direct. But now 
neither route is direct. Now, going to Haynes and with a 
bridge out presently, those children would be about 40 
minutes getting to Haynes and 40 minutes getting home 
from Haynes, or getting to their bus stop, which would 
be a half a mile from their home. That would be true in 
either case, that they’d be a half a mile from the bus stop.

Now, the peculiar routing, as I have explained, to 
Antioch there would be right at 30 minutes entailed at 
morning, and in the afternoon they’d have two routes 
home. And there is a—on the one, be there room for them, 
they would get in in about 15 minutes; on the other they 
would be 40 minutes, but now I think they’d get home in 
15 minutes right now.

Q. Now, there are white children under the present setup 
living in the same general neighborhood as the Maxwell 
children, are there not?

A. Yes, sir.
318 Q. And they now go to Antioch High School, is that 

correct ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, what would you say (the best you can give it) 

is the difference between the time of departure from their 
homes in the morning by bus of those Antioch High School



white students and that which would be true of the Max­
well children if they went to Haynes School?

A. In that particular area, going to Antioch I don’t 
believe I have the question just too------

Q. We will take it in parts. At what time would the 
white children in the Maxwell neighborhood board the bus 
to go to Antioch School in the morning?

A. Directly in front of their road, they would board the 
bus at five minutes, approximately, of eight, be at Antioch 
at 8:25. Immediately behind his house on the street—he 
lives on a dead-end street, and it lacks about 200 feet open­
ing into another street. Right there he can see a bus that 
would parallel this one at morning, but there is 20 minutes 
difference in the return that afternoon. That’s the reason 
why I was speaking of the way it presently is and is sub­
ject to change. If buses are overloaded we have to re­
route, and they are victims of rerouting. Sometimes they 
are benefited while others are penalized.

Q. All right. Now, the departure time that would 
319 have to be true of the Maxwell children to go to 

Haynes School, what time would that be?
A. Seven-thirty, they would depart; and at 8:10 they 

would be at Haynes right now.
Q. All right. Now, then, with respect to what time they 

get home in the afternoon, what time would the white chil­
dren from Antioch who live in the vicinity of the Max­
wells get home in the afternoon?

A. From Antioch in the vicinity of them, at their par­
ticular stop, would be home just shortly after four o ’clock.

Q. Shortly after four?
A. Four-ten, approximately.
Q. Approximately 4:10. What time would the Maxwell 

children arrive home from Haynes?
A. That would be 4:30 with our bridge out, and that

Testimony of Melvin B. Turner



route has been increased, incidentally, ten minutes in the 
past month.

Q. By what? By the bridge?
A. By more pick-ups.
Q. How long has the bridge been out? Is that just some­

thing recently?
A. The bridge has been out since school opened this fall 

and may be out another month or two.
Q. When that is restored it would be what?

320 A. When it is restored it would be about a 30-minute 
trip and that is near 12 miles, about the time it

would take a child to walk a mile or a mile and a quarter 
to school.

Q. Now, some other plaintiffs, the Driver children and 
the Clark children, do you know where they live?

A. Yes, sir; they are over in Bordeau.
Q. All right. Now, if they were to attend a school now 

operated as a white school, what school would that be?
A. That would he Bordeau------
Q. How far------
A. Elementary and Cumberland High.
Q. Do you know where they live? Do you know where 

the Driver children live?
A. Yes, sir. Just—not which house, but approximately. 
Q. Do you know7 how far it is from Bordeau School?
A. It would be near the mile.
Mr. Williams: If Your Honor please, I object to his tes­

timony. He says he doesn’t know which house; therefore, 
he can’t know.
By Mr. Dodson:

Q. Do you know what street?
A. I know which street. I have checked on it.

The Court: That will be close enough. What grade
321 are these children in?

Mr. Williams: The Driver children, if Your Honor 
please?

Testimony of Melvin B. Turner



— 34b —
Testimony of Melvin B. Turner

The Court: Yes.
The Witness: Oh, the third, fourth or fifth.
Mr. Williams: I t ’s second, fourth and sixth.
The Court: That’s all the children except the Maxwell 

children?
Mr. Williams: No, sir. There is little Deborah Clark 

who is------ -
The Court: Yes, Clark. What grade is she in?
Mr. Williams: Fifth grade.
The Court: All right.

By Mr. Luton:
Q. Now, how far does the Clark family—do you know 

where they live?
A. I did know a month ago. I have forgotten which one 

lives where now.
Q. Do you know the distance? Have you had in your 

mind, have you computed the distance?
A. That was—they were all between the—about between 

three-quarters and a mile, right in that range, what I esti­
mated it to be. I didn’t measure it, I estimated it.

Q. That would be within the mile-and-a-quarter 
322 limit------

A. Yes, within a mile and a quarter of Bordeau.
Q. ------within which they have to walk to school— —
A. That’s correct.
O. ------if transportation is not afforded?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, Mr. Turner, do you know of many instances 

where the departure time in the morning of white children 
is as early or earlier than what you mentioned for the 
Maxwell children, what it would be for them?

A. Only three miles from where the Maxwell children 
live, children attending Antioch High School catch a bus 
on the—at five of seven. Antioch High opens at 8:30. They 
have an hour and a half.

In the afternoon, they’d be on this same 4:10 bus, and



they would get home at 4:30; and that would be 45 minutes 
after school was out in the afternoon, an hour and a half 
before school takes in at morning. These are white children 
attending Antioch High School.

Now, those who catch a bus at 7 o ’clock for 8:30 high 
schools are at a minimum. We don’t have large groups. 
There are just a few in remote area, but we—we don’t have 
too many that way. We do have a few at several of our 
high schools picked up around 7 o ’clock, or even before, 

for the 8:30 high school. Of course, the same is true 
323 for Haynes. Some are picked up before 7 o ’clock 

for their 8:30 opening.
# * * * # # #

336 Redirect Examination,
By Mr. Luton:

Q. Mr. Turner, just one question: You did say that
there are White children who take an hour and a half 
getting to or from school who live——

A. Oh, yes. I am speaking of from Antioch High 
School. There are children right at an hour and a half— 
The ones most remote by routing, not by distance as the 
crow flies, are right at an hour and a half getting home; 
whereas, the children in the same community are getting 
in from Haynes because they did not have too many stops 
at too many high schools.

* # # # # # #

R. EMMETT PETTIE,
337 called as a witness in behalf of the defendants, 

being first duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows:

Direct Examination,
By Mr. Dodson:

Q. For the record will you please state your name?
A. R. Emmett Pettie, better known as Bob.

Testimony of R. Emmett Pettie



Q. Mr. Pettie, what is your age?
A. I will be 47 next month.
Q. What is your residence?
A. 1402 Woodmont.
Q. That’s in Davidson County?
A. In Nashville, in Davidson County.
Q. Mr. Pettie, by whom are you employed?
A. Davidson Comity Board of Education.
Q. And have been for how long?
A. This is the 14th year.
Q. In what capacity?
A. For three years I was a classroom teacher, and this 

is my eleventh year as the county school psychologist.
Q. What is your background, experience, education and 

training, sir? Relate it in its entirety?
A. Oh, I had two years of college work at Junior Col­

lege at Martin, Tennessee, before it was made a four-year 
college. I had some work at the University of Tennessee, 

some at University of Pittsburgh. I got my Bach- 
338 elor’s from Peabody, got my Master’s from Peabody.

I have done a little over two years of graduate work 
beyond my Master’s, taking courses at both Peabody and 
Vanderbilt.

Q. And your work presently, you are licensed as what?
A. Psychological examiner.
Q. Psychological examiner. You have some work 

toward a doctorate, do you not?
A. I have more than two years beyond the masters.
Q. What experience have you had in the field of psy­

chological testing other than in the Davidson County 
School System, if any?

A. No experience other than training.
Q. And that training was in conjunction with your col­

lege work?
A. That’s right.

. — 36b —

Testimony of R. Emmett Pettie



Q. Now, will you explain to me and to the Court what 
your duties are, your actual duties in the Davidson County 
School System; that is, what do you do in the way of 
psychological testing?

A. There are several facets to the work. One is to plan 
for a group testing program for the entire county system. 
One is to do individual testing of those children who are 
referred for various reasons. Another is to work with 
teachers in in-service. Another is to work with the rest 

of the staff in planning for an improved program 
339 for the entire school system.

* = * # * * # #

347 Q. All right. Now, you were present in the—Oh, no. 
I want to ask you something else. What, then, is

the conclusion, the psychological conclusion that is to be 
drawn from the figures that you have just given us?

A. I don’t think you can call it psychological or not, 
Mr. Dodson, but the figures on last spring’s testing, and 
I went back and checked other years to see if it was a 
pattern------

Q. Well, was it, or not?
A. Yes.
Q. All right,
A. It shows that there is very little range at the first- 

grade level.
Q. In other words about the same?
A. The variance is very little, but as they move up a 

grade, it consistently gets wider, the achievement level. 
Q. The achievement level?
A. Yes.
Q. What does the achievement level mean with refer­

ence to the preparedness or ability of the child to
348 enter into a particular grade?

A. I don’t know whether I understand that or not,

Testimony of R. Emmett Pettie



Q. What does it indicate to you. as an educator? What 
does 4.5 indicate to you as an educator?

A. 4.5 indicates to me that that child has the informa­
tion at hand that would make him. able to operate on the 
concepts that we would have in the fifth month of the 
fourth grade.

Q. All right, sir. It doesn’t reflect upon whether or 
not he had the intelligence to acquire? That may be 
a factor or may not. Is that correct?

A. That’s right.
Q. But it is actually what he has acquired.
A. Bight.
Q. And the ability to acquire that information, you refer 

to in another type of testing as intelligent quotient?
A. That’s right.
Q. All right. Now, what are the factors, or factor if 

there is just one, that bring about achievement ratings or 
achievement levels?

A. You mean what things influence a child’s making- 
progress at the expected rate?

Q. Eight.
A. Motivation is one of the big factors.

Q. What do you mean by motivation?
349 A. A child’s own desire to learn for one thing.

The parents’ desire for their child to learn and pro­
viding the opportunity is a motivation factor. Environ­
ment has something to do with it. Opportunity has another 
thing to do with it, Instruction has something to do 
with it. Materials provided to acquire information is an 
important factor.

Q. All right. Now, let me ask you, if you know, is 
there any distinction between the materials furnished to 
work with in the schools that are presently operated as 
all-Negro schools and those that are operated as all-White 
schools in the Davidson County system?

— 38b —

Testimony of R. Emmett Pettie



A. They share alike.
Q. What about the textbooks!
A. They use the same ones.
Q. Same ones?
A. Uh-huh. They use the same guides, curriculum 

guides.
Q. Is there any difference in the material of any kind 

that is furnished to the two different groups?
A. Not that I know of.
Q. Are you familiar with the standings (I am talking 

about the professional standings or the professional back­
ground or the educational background) of the teachers in 

the Negro schools as comapred with those in the
350 White schools ?

A. I can give you information that is two years old. 
Q. All right. Has there been any substantial change 

since then?
A. No.

Q. Well, we will reverse it. What is teacher salary 
based on?

351 A. Teacher salary is based on training and experi­
ence or length of service.

Q. What was the last, or in-service?
A. Length of service.
Q. Length of service plus what?
A. Training.
Q. By training do you mean degrees, educational back­

ground ?
A. That is right,.
Q. All right. Those are the factors which raise the 

salary?
A. That’s right.
Q. Otherwise, you have a basic salary? Is that correct? 
A. That’s right.

—  39b —

Testimony of R. Emmett Pettie



Q. All right. Now, having made that statement, will 
you go ahead with the statement you started to make on 
the salaries?

A. The highest average was the Negro men; teachers, of 
course.

Q. Yes.
A. Next was the Negro women. Next was the White 

men, and the lowest average pay was the White women 
teachers. This was two years ago.

Q. And you say if there has been any change, it would 
be a lowering of the White teachers?

352 A. It would not change appreciably.

354 Q. Now, I want to ask you this one additional ques­
tion and then I am through: Assume, for the mo­

ment, that you place a child, be it a Negro child or a White 
child, in a substantially lower (and by that I mean a year 
lower) achievement average, with the other group the 
norm of a year higher, what is the effect on that child 
educationwise ?

A. Now, we have to assume that, within that grade 
that you are placing this one child, that there is a varia­
tion.

Q. Yes, sir.
A. But if the average variation is one grade less, it 

makes the competition for that individual child who is 
one grade behind, his average is one grade behind the 
average, that much harder. He not only has to produce 
what they are doing, but catch up that much. It makes 

it more difficult for the teacher, too, because the
355 range is made that much wider.

— 40b —

Testimony of R. Emmett Pettie



41b —

374 DR. EUGENE WEINSTEIN,
a witness called on behalf of the plaintiffs, being first, duly 
sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

* * # # * # #

392 Cross-Examination,

By Mr. Dodson:
Q. Doctor, did yon ever teach in any of the public 

schools ?
A. I have not taught in public school.
Q. Were yon ever in a supervisory capacity in any 

public schools?
A. I have never worked for, directly, a public school 

system. I have done research in them.
Q. Did you ever attend a public school south of the 

Mason-Dixon. line?
A. I did not.
Q. Doctor, you have been living in this area now for 

two years. Is that right?
A. A little over two years. That is correct.

395 Q. If I understand it, the study that you made here 
was based on interviews?

A. That is correct.
Q. And those interviews were all with Negro parents?
A. Correct.
Q. No interviews with White parents?
A. No, wasn’t part of the problem of study.
Q. No interviews with teachers, either Negro or White? 
A. No, it wasn’t part of the study problem.
Q. No interviews with children, either Negro or White 

in the school grades?
A. No, this was not a problem addressed in the study.

Testimony of Dr. Eugene. Weinstein



Q. Doctor, you refer to this attitude against separating 
children. As a matter of fact, children are separated in 
families constantly, aren’t they, between kindergarten, 
elementary, junior high and high school'?

A. Yes. This happens.
Q. And parents still go on and send them to school, 

though, don’t they?
A. Certainly.

* * # # # * #

399 JITSUICHI MASUOKA,
a witness called on behalf of the plaintiffs, being first duly 
sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Direct Examination,
By Mr. Williams:

Q. Will you state who you are, sir?
A. Just call me J. Masuoka.
Q. Dr. J. Masuoka?
A. Yes.
Q. Mr. Masuoka, you are very soft spoken. If these 

gentlemen are going to hear you, you are going to have 
to make a special effort to speak loudly.

Sir, are you a resident of Nashville, Tennessee?
A. Yes.
Q. How long have you been living here, sir?

A. About 19 years.
400 Q. I believe you are a native of Japan, are you 

not, sir?
A. Yes.
Q. And are you a naturalized citizen?
A. I was naturalized in this very court six years ago. 

I was naturalized here six years ago.
Q. Dr. Masuoka, where are you employed?
A. Fisk University.

— 42b —

Testimony of Jitsuichi Masuoka



Q. In what capacity, sir?
A. Acting chairman of the Social Science Division. I 

don’t know what they mean by that.
Q. Where did you receive your formal education, sir?
A. I had my AB from the College of Emporia.
Q. Is that Kansas?
A. Yes. MA from University of Hawaii in Honolulu, 

and Ph. D. from University of Iowa in Iowa City.
Q. Have you done any post-doctorate studies, sir?
A. I did. I have a post-doctorate fellowship from the 

University of Chicago to do some study in race problem 
in the City of Chicago,

Q. Was that the Louis Wirth study, sir?
A. Louis Wirth, yes.
Q. Dr. Masuoka, I neglected to ask you in what field 

you received your doctorate, what field or fields?
A. Well, my field is Sociology, but I did my MA 

401 thesis on racial attitudes of Japanese in Hawaii, 
and for my Ph. D. dissertation was Changing 

Japanese Family in Hawaii. However, I did most of my 
research in the area of race relations, in the area of race 
relations; but my interest is not confined to Negro-White 
problems per se, because I believe strongly if I were to 
get objectivity of any kind, I have to study distant 
phenomena. To me, the situation immediately right under 
my nose is too difficult, to cope with. Therefore, I have 
been studying comparatively general type of problem that 
is found generally all over the world, particularly in the 
big cities.

Q. Now, Dr. Masuoka, I believe you were in Hawaii in 
1954 as a representative of somebody. Will you state 
who that was, sir?

A. I was participant of Conference on Race Relations 
in World Perspective. At this conference, scholars drawn 
from all over the world gathered together at the Univer­

Testimony of Jitsuichi Masuoka



sity of Hawaii to consider the problem of race relations. 
I was one of them.

Q. You were one of the representatives of the United 
States at that time?

A. Yes.
Q. I believe that last year you were away from Fisk 

University. Will you state what you were doing at that 
time, sir?

402 A. I was given Fulbright Visiting Professor to 
Metropolitan University in Tokyo.

Q. Have you ever------  And you spent a full year there
last year?

A. A full year, yes.
Q. Have you ever served as visiting professor on the 

faculties of any other universities, sir?
A. In Japan?
Q. Well, in Japan or in the United States.
A. Well, when I was in Japan, I was one of these 

Fulbright traveling lecturers. In this capacity I lectured 
at 12 different universities on the topic of American 
families today. They were very much interested, wanted 
to know what American family look like or what the 
problems are, so I give a lecture throughout Japan, 12 
universities on that topic, in addition to my teaching 
capacity as a visiting professor at Tokyo.

 ̂  ̂ ^
27 A. E. WRIGHT,
a witness called on behalf of the defendants, being first 
duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Direct Examination,
By Mr. Dodson:

Q. State your name to the Court, please.
A. A. E. Wright.
Q. Mr. Wright, how old are you, sir?
A. Sixty years of age.

Testimony of A. E. Wright



Q. You have been with the school systems around here 
since before I even started to school, haven’t you? How 
long have you been with them?

A. I have been teaching about 35 years.
Q. That’s not quite before I started, but almost.
In what capacities have you served in the school sys­

tems in Davidson County, Tennessee?
A. I have served as classroom teacher, basketball coach, 

high school principal, supervisor, and now assistant su­
perintendent in charge of personnel.

Q. And how long have you been assistant superintend­
ent in charge of personnel?

A. I believe for seven years.
28 Q. Prior to that, and in your work as supervisor, 

did you have any contact with the assignment of 
personnel?

A. Yes, I assisted in the assignment of personnel.
Q. As superintendent, did you have anything to do with 

the actual assignment of personnel or anything to do with 
the requests for assignment of school personnel?

A. As assistant superintendent.
Q. I mean not as assistant superintendent, I mean as 

principal, not as superintendent of schools.
A. As principal.
Q. Of a high school?
A. Yes. They often ask ns to interview applicants, if 

they fit our needs, and we still follow that policy today.
Q. Now, in order that we might get to the question, ex­

plain, if you will, to the Court, how teacher personnel for 
the entire system, first, is selected, new personnel. How 
do you go about selecting them?

A. We have an application form that we present to the 
applicant. That form gives the personal data that is neces­
sary, such as age, marital status, where they have had 
their training, and also the transcript of their college 
work. We have also asked them about any experiences,

— 45b —

Testimony of A. E. Wright



and if they haven’t had experiences, we want a complete 
breakdown on their practice teaching, where they 

29 have done it in their college work. We also want to 
know something about their family background, 

where they came from. We want to know what religion 
they belong to, what extracurricular activities they have 
had in college, and whether they can handle basketball or 
forensic or drama, or large areas that we are interested in.

Q. Is this the—I guess “ Per”  stands for “ personnel,”  
“ Personnel Form No. 2, Application for Position in the 
Davidson County School System.” Is that the form of 
application to which you refer?

A. That is the form of application that every applicant 
fills out before we employ them or even have an interview 
with them.

Q. Yes, sir.
* * * * # # #

70 JOSEPH R. GARRETT,
called as a witness in behalf of the defendants, being first 
duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Direct Examination,
By Mr. Dodson:

Q. For the record, please state your name?
A. Joseph R. Garrett.
Q. Mr. Garrett, your age?
A. Thirty-nine.
Q. Your residence?
A. Davidson County.
Q. Your occupation?
A. Attendance teacher in charge of child welfare and 

attendance, Davidson County Board of Education.
Q. And you have been with the Davidson County Board 

of Education for how long, sir?
A. Twelve years.

— 46b —

Testimony of Joseph R. Garrett



98