U.S. Supreme Court Asked to Review Mississippi "Chicken Feed" Conviction

Press Release
August 3, 1961

U.S. Supreme Court Asked to Review Mississippi "Chicken Feed" Conviction preview

Cite this item

  • Press Releases, Loose Pages. U.S. Supreme Court Asked to Review Mississippi "Chicken Feed" Conviction, 1961. 7ebe02ca-bc92-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/1ace15ae-49f2-4c88-951f-598f97ae4ca2/us-supreme-court-asked-to-review-mississippi-chicken-feed-conviction. Accessed May 03, 2025.

    Copied!

    PRESS RELEASE 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND 
TO COLUMBUS CIRCLE + NEW YORK 19,N.Y. © JUdson 6-8397 

DR. ALLAN KNIGHT CHALMERS OS THURGOOD MARSHALL 
President Director-Counsel 

U. S. SUPREME COURT ASKED TO REVIEW 
MISSISSIPPI “CHICKEN FEED" CONVICTION 

August 3, 1961 

NEW YORK - NAACP Legal Defense attorneys petitioned the U.S. 

Supreme Court last week to review the conviction of a Negro farm- 

owner in Forrest County, Mississippi who received a seven-year prison 

term last winter for helping to plan the burglary of five bags of 

chicken feed worth less than $25, 

The prisoner, Clyde Kennard of Hattiesburg, Miss,, is a 32-year 

old war veteran who, in September, 1959, attempted to enter all-white 

Mississippi Southern University. 

Charging that Kennard was tried by a jury procedure "which 

systematically discriminates against Negro jurors," the Legal 

Defense attorneys asked the court to review an April 3 Supreme Court 

Mississippi ruling which upholds the conviction, 

A preliminary battle to have Kennard released on bail was lost 

July 29 when a Motion for Stay of Execution was denied by Supreme 

Court Justice Hugo Black. 

Kennard's attempt to enter Mississippi Southern in 1959 was the 

subject of considerable publicity. He was not only denied admission 

but was arrested on the day he attempted to register, for speeding 

and having five half-pints of liquor in his car, which was parked on 

the Mississippi Southern campus. 

Kennard was convicted on these charges, but the Supreme Court of 

Mississippi threw out the trial court finding last year because of a 

procedural error. 

On Nov. 14, 1960, Kennard was arrested on the present charge 

that he induced a 19-year old farm hand to steal five bags of chicken 

feed from the nearby Forrest County Co-op, and bring them to his farm. 

Kennard pleaded "not guilty", but the all-white jury returned a 

verdict of "guilty as an accessory before the fact." 

During the trial, Kennard's attorney, R. Jess Brown of Vicksburg, 



attempted to present evidence which would show that Negroes were 

excluded from juries in Forrest County, though Negroes represent 

almost one-third of the male population of voting age. 

The Justice Department has recently filed suit in Forrest County 

charging that Negroes are denied the right to register on an equal 

basis. Brown pointed out that jury lists are taken from the list of 

registered voters in the county, and in the entire county only 25 

Negroes are registered. 

The Supreme Court of Mississippi, after hearing Kennard's appeal, 

held on May 3, 1961 that Kennard had "failed to establish his charge 

that he was denied due process and equal protection of the laws by 

reason of Negroes being systematically excluded from the juries of 

Forrest County." 

In its petition to the U. S. Supreme Court, Legal Defense Fund 

attorneys plead that "unless petitioner [Kennard] has a right...to 

present evidence to support his charge of jury discrimination, the 

protection offered by the Fourteenth Amendment against conviction by 

a jury from which his race has been excluded will be hallow indeed." 

NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund attorneys for Kennard 

are R. Jess Brown, of Vicksburg, Miss.; Thurgood Marshall, Constance 

Baker Motley and Derrick A. Bell, Jr. of New York City. 

S307=

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.


Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Return to top