Peterson v. City of Greenville, South Carolina Transcript of Record

    The State of South Carolina
IN THE SUPREME COURT

APPEAL FROM GREENVILLE COUNTY 
H onorable J ames H. P rice, S pecial J udge

CITY OF GREENVILLE, Respondent, 
against

JAMES RICHARD PETERSON, YVONNE JOAN 
EDDY, HELEN ANGELA EVANS, DAVID 
RALPH STRAWDER, HAROLD JAMES FOW­
LER, FRANK G. SMITH, ROBERT CROCK­
ETT, JAMES CARTER, DORIS DELORES 
WRIGHT and ROSE MARIE COLLINS, Appel­
lants.

TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD

J en kin s  &  P erry,
Columbia, S. C.,

W illie T. S m it h , Jr., 
Greenville, S. C.,

Attorneys for Appelkmts.
W . H. A rnold,

Greenville, S. C.,
H. F. P artee,

Greenville, S. C.,
Attorneys for Respondent.



INDEX
P age

Statement .....................................................................  1

Warrant .................................................. facing page 2

Transcript of Trial Proceedings and Testimony . . 2

Witnesses for the City of Greenville:
Captain G. 0. Bramlette:

Direct ............................................................ 4
Cross .............................................................. 8

G. W. West:
Direct ............................................................ 19
Cross .............................................................. 20

0. R. Hillver:
Direct ............................................................ 49
Cross .............................................................. 51

M. B. Tolbert:
Direct ............................................................ 56

Witnesses for Defendants:
Raymond H. Carter:

Direct ............................................................ 31
Cross .............................................................. 35

Doris Wright :
Direct ............................................................ 40
Cross .............................................................  44
Re-direct .................................................... 47

Section 31-8, Code of the City of Greenville...........  56

Order of Judge Price ................................................  57

Notice of Intention to A ppea l................................... 61

Exceptions ...................................................................  61

Agreement .................................................................... 63



STATEMENT
The ten (10) appellants, all of whom are Negro high 

school students, were arrested on August 9, 1960, and 
charged with violating Act No. 743 (R896, H2135) 
Acts and Joint Resolutions of the General Assembly 
of South Carolina for 1960, Trespass after Notice.

Appellants were tried before Greenville City Re­
corder John V. Jester of Greenville, South Carolina, 
without a jury on August 11, 1960. Evidence presented 
was that the appellants seated themselves at the lunch 
counter of S. H. Kress and Company in Greenville and 
were thereafter requested to leave by the Manager.
S. H. Kress and Company does not serve Negroes at 
the lunch counter of its Greenville store although Ne­
groes are welcome to do business in all other depart­
ments thereof. Also, there is an ordinance which pro­
hibits Negroes and white persons from being served in 
the same restaurant at the same time. The management 
requested appellants to leave, it having been announced 
that the lunch counter was closed. The closing of the 
lunch counter was because of the presence of appel­
lants. Upon their refusal to leave, appellants were 
thereupon arrested and charged with the offense of 
trespass after notice. At the conclusion of all of the 
evidence, Judge Jester found each of the appellants 
“ guilty” and sentenced each of them to pay fines of One 
Hundred ($100.00) Dollars or serve thirty (30) days 
in prison.

Notice of Intention to Appeal was duly served upon 
the City Recorder.

Thereafter, the matter was argued before Honorable 
James H. Price, Special Judge, Greenville County 
Court.

On March 17, 1961, Judge Price issued an Order, af­
firming the judgment of the City Recorder.



2 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

Notice of Intention to Appeal was thereupon duly 
served upon the City Attorney.

PROCEEDINGS
Judge Jester: Mr. Arnold, is the city ready?
Mr. Arnold: Yes.
Judge Jester: Mr. Perry, defendants ready?
Mr. Smith: I would like to make a motion.
Judge Jester: Mr. Arnold, before we get into this I 

would like this man to move off the front row. I want 
to bring the defendants and put them on the front row. 
Are the defendants we have here? James Richard 
Peterson, is he here? Come around, James, and have a 
seat, James Carter, David Ralph Strawder, Prank G. 
Smith, Robert Crockett, Joan Yvonne Eddy, Helen 
Angela Evans, Harold James Fowler, Doris Wright 
and Rose Marie Collins. All of these defendants, Mr. 
Smith and Mr. Perry, are charged with trespassing 
after warning in violation of Act of 1960, number R896 
H2135 of the state code of South Carolina. Do they 
plead guilty or not guilty?

Mr. Smith: Before we take the plea, Your Honor, 
we would like to make a motion to precede that, please?

Judge Jester: We will he glad to hear you on the 
motion.

Mr. Smith: At this time, on behalf of all these de­
fendants, Your Honor, we make a motion to quash the 
information and dismiss the warrant on the grounds 
that as stated, the charge is too indefinite and uncer­
tain as to apprise these defendants of what they are 
actually being charged with. We feel that under the 
court merely to state the act charged under, and for 
trespassing is not enough, there should be some more 
under, these defendants are not properly apprised of



TRIAL
WARRANT

Stats of Sooth CjU olina
COUNTY OF GREENVILLE

MUNICIPAL COURT
CITY OF GREENVILLE

T H E  CIT Y

A r r e s t  a n d / o r  T r i a l  W a r r a n t

N? 5330

». a*. mat, *

Bond Required 

Bond Posted $.

Recognizance □  Cash □  

By------------_ --------------------------

DATE SET FOR TRIAL

- 19-

Attorney for Defendant

MOTIONS

VERDICT

JUDGMENT

days

Attest:
Recorder

Clerk

route ro-t

S T A T E  O F  SO U T H  CAR O L IN A  
CO U N T Y O F  G REEN VILLE

MUNICIPAL COURT 
CITY OF GREENVILLE

PE R SO N A LL Y comes before me deponent who makes oath that upon 
information and belief in this State and County and within the Limits o f the

City of Greenville on the— —day o f_ _ast______, is*.
the defendant—

did commit the offense o f_

All of which is against forms of the ordinances made and provided for, 

and against the peace and dignity of the City of Greenville; and that___________

are witnesses for the City; and that defendant did commit said offense in the 
view of deponent, whereupon deponent, a police.officer, did arrest defendant.deponent, whereupon de

_pi_____
Sworn to before me this— —day

(See reverse side if  not 
an On-View Arrest)

Notary Public for South Carolina 
Recorder, Municipal Court

_ (L . S.)

A g e - . Nationality—

Driver’s License No.

On-View Arrest □  Reported □  Other □  _

Date of Arrest

Where.

Date of Release- 

Witnesses—

Time-

Other Information—

Desk Officer-

Station Lieutenant-



ARREST
WARRANT

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) MUNICIPAL COURT
COUNTY OF GREENVILLE ) CITY OF GREENVILLE

To the Chief of Police of the City of Greenville or any Police Officer thereof or

Arrest and bring before me, or the Presiding Recorder, the defendant 

charged with__________________ _____________________________________ ______

as shown on the reverse side hereof, and the witnesses for the City herein 
named.

Given under my hand and seal this________________________________day

of_________________________________________________________________ 19_____

___________________________________________________(SEAL)
Recorder, Municipal Court

I appoint any Police Officer of the City of Greenville or_______________
___________________________________ _____________ to execute this warrant.

..................................... _ .................................. ...... ........(SEAL)
Recorder, Municipal Court

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA )
COUNTY OF GREENVILLE )

Personally comes the undersigned deponent and makes oath that he

arrested the defendant--------------------------- -— ------------------------------------------------

on the____________ day of-------------------------------------------------------------- 19-

at----------------------------------------------------------
in the City of Greenville, State and County aforesaid.

Sworn to before me this------------—-------- -— ----------------

day of-------------------------------------------------------- 19---------

______________ __________ _________ __________ (SEAL)
Notary Public for South Carolina 

Recorder, Municipal Court

(THIS SIDE TO BE USED ONLY IN REPORTED CASES-IT IS NOT TO 
BE USED WHERE ARREST HAS BEEN MADE BY OFFICER FOR OF­
FENSE COMMITTED IN HIS PRESENCE)



SUPREME COURT 3
Appeal from Greenville County__________

what they are actually being charged with under this 
warrant as drawn here.

Judge Jester: Anything further, Mr. Smith?
Mr. Smith: No, sir, it’s just too indefinite and un­

certain.
Judge Jester: Anything, Mr. Perry?
Mr. Perry: May I just add one sentence to the mo­

tion and that is, that the defendants are entitled under 
the Constitution of the State of South Carolina to be 
fully informed of the nature of the charge against them 
and to require them to go to trial on a warrant which 
is so vaguely and indefinitely phrased is to deprive 
them of liberty without due process of law, as protected 
under the 14th Amendment to the United States Con­
stitution, and under the South Carolina Constitution.

Judge Jester: Anything further?
Mr. Perry: No, sir.
Judge Jester: Any reply, Mr. Arnold?
Mr. Arnold: No, sir, Your Honor, I think the war­

rant is sufficiently definite, it refers to the number of 
the Act. The Act hasn’t come out in bound volumes 
yet, as opposing counsel knows, but it’s referred to the 
number and the date and I think it states trespass after 
notice and that’s substance of the act.

Judge Jester: I overrule your motion, Mr. Smith and 
Mr. Perry. Now then, we have these defendants 
charged as I so stated and my next question. Do they 
plead guilty or not guilty?

Mr. Smith: All of the defendants plead not guilty.
Judge Jester: And I understand that by agreement 

the city and counsel for the defendants have agreed 
to try all of these cases at one time?

Mr. Smith That is correct.



City of Greenville v. Peterson

Captain  G. O. B ramlette
Jndge Jester: And the facts and finding of one case 

would be the facts and finding of all as far as the rec­
ord is concerned?

Mr. Smith: That is correct.
Mr. Perry: May I make one addition, Tour Honor, 

that in the event that the testimony should indicate 
that one or more of the defendants is to be treated dif­
ferently, from the rest of them in terms of any judg­
ment of Your Honor, that at such time as the evidence 
does develop, that state of facts, that a motion for dis­
missal will be proper as to the person or any other 
motion which might be applicable to the situation.

Judge Jester: Well, I agree with you at this time 
until I have heard such a motion.

Mr. Perry: Yes, sir.
Judge Jester: Now who is the first witness, Mr. 

Arnold ?
Mr. Arnold: Captain Bramlette.

Captain  G. 0. B ram lette, being duly sworn, testified 
as fo l lo w s :

Direct Examination
By Mr. Arnold:
Q. Captain Bramlette, I believe you are a member 

of the police force of the City of Greenville?
A. That is correct.
Q. Your rank is Captain?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you been captain with the de­

partment?
A. Approximately five years.
Q. On August 9 of this year, did you receive a call 

from Kress Five and Ten Cent Variety Store?

4______  SUPREME COURT



SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County

5

Captain  G. 0. B ramlette
A. I had a call, I do not know where it come from 

Kress or not.
Q. Yon had a call?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. As a result of that call where did yon go?
A. To Kress’ Five and Ten Cent Store on South 

Main St.
Q. Where were you when you received the call?
A. In Police Headquarters.
Q. Did anyone accompany you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who?
A. I went in patrol car 9 with Officers Berry and 

Wall.
Q. About what time was it you received the call?
A. 11:18 a. m.
Q. All right, when you got to Kress’ on South Main 

St., did you find any of the defendants ?
Mr. Perry: Your Honor, may I interpose a slight 

objection to Mr. Arnold’s methods. I believe that his 
questions tend to be leading and if he would kindly 
rephrase it so as to let the witness testify as to what 
he found, I don’t believe it would be objectionable.

Q. When you arrived at Kress’ Store, did you go 
into the store?

A. I did.
Q. What did you find in the store, and I direct your 

attention to the lunch counter?
A. I met Officer Vaughn at the side door on McBee 

Avenue, he and I and several other officers entered the 
store. On arriving inside the store at the lunch counter 
which is located right rear of Kress, Officers, State 
Agents Hillyer and Morris were there and at the lunch 
counter we noticed these defendants along with four



6
City of Greenville v. Peterson

SUPREME COURT

Captain  G. 0. B ramlette

21 more- There were fourteen sitting at the lunch coun­
ter, the other four are juveniles.

Q. You saw these ten defendants, did you or noU
A. I did.
Q. And they were doing what?
A. They were sitting at the lunch counter.
Q. Sitting at the lunch counter? Now you mentioned 

two SLED Agents, Mr. Hillyer and Mr. Morris. Were 
they in the store when you arrived?

A. They were.
Q. All right. Do you know Mr. G. W. West?

22 A. I do.
Q. What position, if any, does he hold with the 

Kress Store?
A. He’s manager of the Kress Store.
Q. Was Mr. West, or not, in the store when you 

arrived ?
A. He was.
Q. Approximately where was he?
A. He was at the rear, at the lunch counter.
Q. Did he make any statement to these ten defend- 

- M ants ?
A. He did.
Q. What did he say?
A. He announced that the lunch counter was being 

closed and would everyone leave the store.
Q. Would everyone leave the store?
A. Yes.
Q. Did these ten defendants, or any one of them, 

leave the store?
A. They did not.

u  Q- Did they, were they standing or sitting when this 
request was made?

A. They were sitting.



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

7

Captain  G. 0. B ramlette
Q. Did they or not continue to sit?
A. They continued to sit.
Q. All right. What, if anything, did you do ?
A. After a reasonable length of time we announced 

that they were all under arrest.
Q. Did you transport them to headquarters?
A. We had a patrol car outside and we carried them 

out the side door of Kress, we carried the girls first 
and put them in the patrol car and brought them to 
police headquarters.

Q. All right, sir, when they were brought to head­
quarters is it, or not, customary to remove any per­
sonal effects, such as money, or knife or watch from a 
prisoner?

A. It is customary.
Q. All right, was that done in this case with respect 

to these ten defendants?
A. It was.
Q. All right, what amount of money, if any, was 

found on the person of Doris Wright?
A. Twenty-four cents.
Q. On Helen Evans?
A. Thirty-one cents.
Q. James Carter?
A. No money.
Q. Robert Crockett?
A. No money.
Q. Rose Marie Collins?
A. No money.
Q. Yvonne Eddy?
A. One dollar.
Q. James Richard Peterson?
A. One dollar and ninety-one cents.



City of Greenville v. Peterson

Captaih  G. 0. B ramlette 
29 Q. David Ralph Strawder?

A. One dollar and eleven cents.
Q. Harold James Fowler?
A. None.
Q. Frank 0. Smith, Jr.?
A. Five dollars and fifty-five cents.
Q. I believe that bond was posted for these defend­

ants ?
A. It was.
Q. When they were discharged under the bond, un­

der their bonds, was the money and any other personal 
80 effects returned to the defendants?

A. State that again.
Q. When they were discharged under the appear­

ance bond, this money that had been taken from the de­
fendants, was it returned to the defendants?

A. It was.
Mr. Arnold: Witness with you.

Cross Examination
By Mr. Matthew J. Perry:

si Q. Captain Bramlette, as I understand, you are a 
captain on the Greenville Police Force for five years?

A. Approximately five years, yes, sir.
Q. I see, and of course, were you also employed on 

the Greenville City Police Force prior to that time?
A. That’s correct.
Q. I see. As captain are you chief of the police, or 

not?
A. No, my position is in charge of one platoon.
Q. I see. Now, sir, I believe that you indicated that 

B 011 the 9tli of August you were at headquarters and re­
ceived a call to go to Kress’ 5 and 10  ̂ Store?

A. That is correct.

8 _______  SUPREME COURT



SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County

9

Captain  G. 0. B eamlette
Q. Do you know who made the call?
A. I do not know who called police headquarters but 

my radio and telephone man informed me.
Q. I see. And I believe you said that you and Officer 

Vaughn went into the store together, you having met 
him?

A. Along with two or three others.
Q. What did you expect to find when you went to 

Kress’ ?
A. I was told by Officer Mann who is my communi­

cations officer, there were a number of colored young 
boys and girls sitting at the lunch counter at Kress’.

Q. I see. Does Greenville have an ordinance against 
conduct of this sort?

A. We do.
Q. What is the ordinance, please?
Mr. Arnold: I don’t see that’s relevant, they’re not 

charged under any segregation ordinance of the city.
Judge Jester: On the state law, am I right, Mr. 

Perry?
Mr. Perry: Judge Jester, if I may, sir, whatever it 

was that prompted Captain Bramlette to go to Kress’ 
upon being informed that Negroes were sitting at the 
lunch counter, I think is relevant. In other words, he 
must have been conscious of some law because after 
all, he’s a law enforcement officer and I respectfully 
submit that I ’m entitled to ask him on cross examina- 
ti on what law he was purporting to proceed upon.

Judge Jester: Your question was, does the City of 
Greenville have a law pertaining to this particular of­
fense? All right, I ’ll let him answer it.

Mr. Perry: Thank you. Does the City of Greenville 
have such a law, Captain Bramlette?

A. They do.



10 SUPREME COURT
City of Greenville v. Peterson

Captain  G. O. B kamxette
Q. What is that law, please, sir?
A. It forbids colored and white eating at the same 

lunch counter.
Q. I see.
Mr. Perry: Your Honor, would you indulge me a 

moment, please, sir, I would like to look at that ordi­
nance. I won’t take but a moment. I did not know that 
the City of Greenville had such an ordinance.

(Discussion off the record.)
By Mr. Perry:
Q. Now, Captain Bramlette, as you answered this 

call to go to Kress’, then you had the City Ordinance 
in mind which required separation of races in restau­
rants and eating places in the City of Greenville?

A. I did not.
Q. Yet you knew of the existence of such law?
A. I did.
Q. And as a Captain of the Greenville City Police 

Force, you did not have this ordinance in mind when 
you went to investigate ?

A. I had the recently passed State law in mind.
Q. I see. Did the caller identify the race of the per­

sons who were sitting at the lunch counter?
Mr. Arnold: That would be hearsay.
Judge Jester: What was the question?
Mr. Arnold: He asked the caller identify the race.
Mr. Perry: I agree it would be hearsay.
By Mr. Perry:
Q. All right, sir, now, when you went—as you an­

swered the call then, did you receive information that 
there was any violation of the public order taking 
place?



SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County

11

Captain  G. 0. B ramlette
A. I was informed by my communications officer 

that there was a number of colored boys and girls sit­
ting at the lunch counter in Kress’.

Q. But there is nothing wrong with that, is there, 
sir?

Mr. Arnold: I don’t think he has to pass on that, it’s 
a matter of conclusion.

Judge Jester: I don’t think that’s in his discretion, 
Mr. Perry. He has the right to make the arrest and dis­
close later whether he’s right in doing so, am I right?

Mr. Perry: If Your Honor will bear with me, I be­
lieve that as an Officer of the Law, Captain Bramlette 
and his associates would, of course, naturally under 
their interpretation of the existing law be bound to en­
force law and if there was nothing wrong with their 
sitting there perhaps he would not have had occasion 
to go to make the arrest.

Mr. Arnold: May it please the Court, it’s the pro­
cedure of the City that when an officer gets a call to 
come to a certain place it is not necessary for the caller 
or the informer to state what is taking place and it ’s 
not necessary that the Officer take time to find out. If 
he’s called to come to a certain place and he’s on duty 
he should go there and investigate whatever may be 
transpiring or taking place.

Judge Jester: I think that is in substance, Mr. Perry, 
the attitude of the officer when they are on call because 
they could explain it had been a man killled or a man 
beating his wife and forty other things there before 
you went to see what was happening. I think possibly 
the main thing to do is get there and find out what’s 
going on.

Mr. Perry: Thank you.



12 SUPREME COURT
City of Greenville v. Peterson

Captain  G. 0. B eamlette
By Mr. Perry:
Q. Then, Captain Bramlette, when yon arrived at 

Kress’ and saw these young people sitting at the lunch 
counter, were they orderly?

A. They were.
Q. Were they talking among each other?
A. Some of them were talking.
Q. Could you hear them talking?
A. I could not repeat a thing that was said, I may 

have heard their voices.
Q. Did any of them use any profanity?
A. I did not hear any.
Q. Were they well dressed?
A. All were neat in appearance.
Q. Neat in appearance, did you ascertain that they 

were clean?
Mr. Arnold: I don’t see that’s relevant. W e’re not 

raising any question on that. He said they were neat in 
appearance and they were orderly. The specific charge 
is under the State Law and whether a person’s hands 
are clean or a little dirty is not relevant in a case like 
this.

Mr. Perry: I think if the Captain knows he certainly 
may testify to it on Cross Examination.

Judge Jester: I ’ll let him answer, Mr. Arnold.
The Witness: State the question again.
By Mr. Perry:
Q. Would you say in your opinion that they were 

clean or dirty?
A. They were clean.
Q. So there was nothing about their persons of an 

unoffensive character, was it, in terms of neatness and 
cleanliness?

A. That’s correct.



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

13

Captain  G. 0. B ramlette

Q. Now, Captain Bramlette, you’ve been a citizen of 
Greenville for quite some time?

A. That’s correct.
Q. Have you had occasion to go in and out of Kress’ 

Five and Ten Cent Store before?
A. Very few occasions.
Q. Have you been in and out of the place of business 

enough to know anything about its policy of serving 
the public?

A. I ’ve been there numerous occasions but not, I 
would say, I would.

Q. Does Kress’ Five and Ten Cent Store generally 
serve members of the public in its various departments 
without regard to race?

Mr. Arnold: I don’t see that that’s relevant.
Judge Jester: Well, in this particular case it isn’t, 

Mr. Arnold. I think what he is getting at and getting 
in the record is whether or not the store that’s open is 
selling merchandise of any and all lands and items to 
the public. That’s the purpose for the question, am I 
right ?

Mr. Perry: All right.
Judge Jester: I ’ll let him answer yes or no.
The Witness: Yes.
By Mr. Perry:
Q. Kress’ Five and Ten Cent Store, I believe, is a 

rather large variety store, is it not?
A. Yes.
Q. Then it has many departments, hasn’t it?
A. Yes.
Q. I believe it sells some aspects, clothing and vari­

ous trinkets and all of the items that are usually sold 
in the stores such as Kress’, that is a variety store.

A. That is correct.



City of Greenville v. Peterson

Captain  G. 0. B ramlette
Q. Now, let’s go for a moment, please to the lunch 

counter in Kress’. I believe Kress’ in Greenville does 
have a lunch counter, does it not?

A. That’s correct.
Q. And at that lunch counter members of the public 

are served, aren’t they?
A. That’s correct.
Q. Except that, I believe, withdraw that question— 

what is the policy of Kress’, if you know, sir, with re­
gards to serving members of the Negro public at its 
lunch counter?

A. The policy of Kress’, I ’d rather for the manager 
of Kress’ to answer that.

Q. That’s quite all right, I  have no intention to tax 
you with an unpleasant answer. Then as you saw these 
young, neat, clean and unoffensive colored people, what 
was it then that made you, as a law enforcement officer 
of the City of Greenville, go into operation?

A. Under the State Law just passed by the Gover­
nor relative to sit-down lunch counters in Greenville, 
I enforced this order.

Q. But the State Law that just passed and signed 
by the Governor in May doesn’t mention anything 
about Negroes sitting at lunch counters, does it?

A. It mentions sit-ins.
Q. Perhaps you would like to refrsh your mind for 

a moment ?
A. I was wrong, it doesn’t mention sit in.
Q. Thank you, sir. So that that particular statute 

didn’t indicate any course of action on your part at 
that time, did it, sir?

A. Not until after I arrived.
Q. And after you arrived there, what did the statute 

indicate that you should do?

14 SUPEEME COUET



SUPBEME COIJKT 15
Appeal from Greenville County 

Captain  G. 0. B ramlette
A. We arrested them and made a case, trespassing 

after warning.
Q. Who were they warned about?
A. Mr. West, the manager of Kress’.
Q. What was the substance of this warning?
A. State that again.
Q. I would just like to know what was the warning 

that you said was made.
A. He announced that the lunch counter was being 

closed and would everyone leave.
Q. I see. Did I understand on your Direct Examina­

tion that he said “ everyone leave the place” ?
A. This lunch counter, I do not know. I think he said 

the lunch counter was closed.
Q. I see. Now this was, I believe, 11:18 in the morn­

ing or shortly thereafter?
A. That’s when I received the call.
Q. I see. August 9, I believe, was on a Tuesday, 

wasn’t it?
A. That’s correct.
Q. Now, could you, sir, tell me what time business 

places in Greenville normally close?
A. Between live and six o’clock in the evening.
Q. I see, those hours of opening and closing are more 

or less regulated not by law but by mutual consent, 
regulated by the Chamber of Commerce, aren’t they?

A. I would imagine individual stores decide when 
they will open and close.

Q. But isn’t it a fact that most stores open and close 
about the same time in Greenville?

A. That’s correct.
Q. So that there is some uniformity, either by agree­

ment or somehow, among the store owners that they



16 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

Captain  G. 0. B bamlette
open, they close the stores at a certain time, and close 
at a certain time?

A. I couldn’t answer that.
Q. Well, now, sir, as a member of the public and 

also a member of the Greenville City Police Force don’t 
you have knowledge that the places of business in 
Greenville are closed at a certain time?

A. I ’m sure they have a certain time to close.
Q. And you have just now stated that Kress’ ordi­

narily closes around five or six o’clock?
A. That’s correct. Most of the time, I think, Friday 

night they stay open later.
Q. AH right, sir. Now, why do you suppose they 

closed at that time?
Mr. Arnold: I don’t think it’s up to him to answer 

that question.
Judge Jester: I think this was a call to the police de­

partment, Mr. Perry, for an officer and I believe that 
the manager of the store will be in better position to 
answer that question, than the officer as to why he 
closed, am I right?

Mr. Perry: Thank you, sir. May I ask, is the man­
ager of the store in the Courtroom?

Mr. Arnold: He’s in the Courtroom and will be put 
on the stand.

By Mr. Perry:
Q. Did the manager of Kress’, did he ask you to 

place these defendants under arrest, Captain Bram- 
lette ?

A. He did not.
Q. He did not?
A. No.
Q. Then why did you place them under arrest?
A. Because we have an ordinance against it.



SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County

17

Captain  G. O. B eamlette

Q. An ordinance?
A. That’s right.
Q. But you just now testified that you did not have 

the ordinance in mind when you went over there?
A. State law in mind when I went up there.
Q. And that isn’t the ordinance of the City of Green­

ville, is it?
A. This supersedes the order for the City of Green­

ville.
Q. In other words, you believe you referred to an 

ordinance, but I believe you have the State Statute in 
mind ?

A. You asked me have I, did I have knowledge of 
the City ordinance in mind when I went up there and 
I answered I did not have it particularly in my mind, 
I said I had the State ordinance in my mind.

Q. I see and so far this City ordinance which re­
quires separation of the races in restaurants, you at 
no time had it in mind, as you went about answering 
the call to Kress’ and placing these people under ar­
rest?

A. In my opinion the State law was passed recently 
supersedes our City ordinance.

Q. I think, sir, that you may be somewhat off on 
that but we won’t belabor the issue, because His Honor, 
I believe, can make a proper ruling on that. But my 
question, I don’t want to seem repetitious but I don’t 
believe I got a direct answer to it. So once more, sir, 
you did not have the Greenville ordinance which re­
quires separation of the races in mind when you placed 
these defendants under arrest?

Mr. Arnold: Now, he’s answered that three times.
Judge Jester: I think that one more firm answer, 

Captain, would suffice the record.



18 SUPREME COURT
City of Greenville v. Peterson

Captain  G. 0. B eamlette
The Witness: I had the State ordinance in mind.
By Mr. Perry:
Q. Now, Captain, I still don’t want to belabor but 

Your Honor, I respectfully submit the answer was not 
responsive. I believe he is capable of a yes or no an­
swer.

A. I had the act that was passed May of this year in 
my mind an act which “provides for the offense of 
trespassing after warning with penalty thereafter—”

Mr. Arnold: No need to read it.
Mr. Perry: All right, sir. And do I understand that 

you did not have the Greenville City ordinance in mind, 
sir?

A. We have all ordinances in mind when we answer 
the call to go anywhere.

Q. But you just now admitted you didn’t have this 
one in mind, Captain?

A. I didn’t have it in mind?
Q. I seem to recall that you said it.
A. I have all ordinances in mind.
Q. So now, as I understand, you change your testi­

mony to say that you now have this ordinance in mind?
A. I am not saying I had it in mind, I said this su­

persedes our City ordinance. This is the one I was act­
ing under.

Q. And the manager of Kress’ did not at any time 
ask you to place these defendants under arrest, did he?

A. He did not.
Q. Yet you used the power of your office to place 

them under arrest without being requested by the man­
ager of Kress to do so?

A. I did.



SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County

19

G. W . W est
Mr. Perry: Thank you, Captain Bramlette. That’s 

all, Your Honor.
Mr. Arnold: That’s all.
(Witness excused.)

Mr. G. W. W est, being duly sworn, testified as fol­
lows :

Judge Jester: You are the manager of the Kress’ 
Store?

The Witness: Yes, sir.
Direct Examination

By Mr. Arnold:
Q. Mr. West, you are the manager of the Kress 

Variety Store located on the east side of South Main 
Street, here in the City of Greenville?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. On August 9, 1960, Tuesday of this week, did 

Officers Bramlette and Vaughn come into your store 
around 11 o’clock?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were any people at that time seated at the lunch 

counter ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was it of both races or just one race?
A. Both races.
Q. Both races? Did you make any statement or re­

quest to the people sitting at the lunch counter?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What?
A. We turned out the lights at the lunch counter and 

requested everybody to leave, that the lunch counter 
was closed.



20 ___ SUPREME COURT
City of Greenville v. Peterson

G. W . W est
n  Q- Everybody to leave, all right, I believe you said 

there were some white people sitting there, also?
A. Yes, sir, I did.
Q. Did they or not, leave immediately?
A. Yes, sir, they left.
Q. All right, these ten defendants, of the Negro race, 

were they sitting at the lunch counter?
A. Yes, sir, they were.
Q. When you made that request?
A. Yes, sir, they were.
Q. Did they leave? 

w A. No, sir, they did not.
Q. How long did they stay there before being placed 

under arrest, would you say?
A. I would say about five minutes, I  guess.
Q. About five minutes. Were you in the process or 

not of roping off the lunch counter?
A. Yes, sir, we had started to, we turned out the 

lights.
Q. I believe you testified, did you or not, that Cap­

tain Bramlette and the other officers placed these ten 
t# defendants under arrest?

A. Yes, sir. Those ten and four others.
Q. And they were escorted from the store?
A. Yes, sir, that’s right.
Mr. Arnold: Witness with you.

Cross Examination
By Mr. Perry:
Q. Mr. West, how long have you been manager of 

Kress’ in Greenville?
A. Since February 3.
Q. I see. Have you also worked for the Kress chains 

in other cities?
A. Yes, sir, fifteen years.



Appeal from Greenville County
SUPREME COURT 21

G. W. W est
Q. Fifteen years, how long have you lived in Green­

ville ?
A. Since February 3rd.
Q. I see, and when you came into Greenville did you 

learn anything about the policies of the Kress Store 
with regard to serving members of the public?

A. Well, I knew that before I came into Greenville.
Q. I see. I believe Kress is a very large variety store, 

isn’t it, sir?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I believe I learned in another city that it was 

called a junior department store now, is that correct?
A. That is the name it ’s been given to it.
Q. And Kress operates in cities practically all over 

the United States, doesn’t it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I believe it is one of the largest businesses of its 

kind in the country?
A. Well, I wouldn’t say it was one of the largest 

ones, no.
Q. But it is certainly not one of the smaller?
A. That’s right, yes, sir.
Q. Sir, what is the policy of Kress’ with regard to 

serving members of the public in all of its numerous 
departments ?

Mr. Arnold: I don’t see the relevancy of that, Your 
Honor.

Judge Jester: I don’t think it deals directly with 
trespassing after notice but I ’m going to let him put 
it in the record, Mr. Arnold.

By Mr. Perry:
Q. Let me put it this way, sir, approximately how 

many departments does Kress’ have?
A. Fifteen or twenty.



22 SUPREME COURT
City of Greenville v. Peterson

G. W . W est

85 Q. Those fifteen or twenty departments sell about 
how many different commodities?

A. It’s hard to estimate, probably over ten thou­
sand items.

Q. Probably over ten thousand items?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are all members of the public invited into the 

business of Kress’ ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And all members of the public, include Negro, 

and white, Indians and Chinese and every other na-
86 tionality, do they not?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. So that Negroes are invited in Kress’ to do busi­

ness?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And when they come in to do business of these 

various items, I believe, you said over ten thousand 
items, is it not the policy of Kress’ to serve them cour­
teously?

A. Yes, sir.
sr Q. Now, I believe, Kress’ also has a lunch counter 

area ?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And it likewise is operated by the Kress chain?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is the policy of Kress’ Greenville, South 

Carolina, store with regard to serving Negroes and 
whites at its lunch counter?

A. We follow local customs.
Q. Now, sir, “we follow local customs” , is that or- 

ders from your headquarters?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. It is?



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

23

G. W. W est
A. Absolutely.
Q. And you understand as the manager of Kress’ 

assigned to Greenville and possibly in other areas that 
it is one of the mandates of your national organization 
business chain to follow local custom with reference to 
serving members of the public?

A. That’s correct.
Q. Now, what is the local custom with regard to 

serving Negroes and whites at your lunch counter?
A. The local custom, that we serve whites only.
Q. I see, so that members of the Negro public who 

may come in by invitation of your company to buy 
some ten thousand other articles may not purchase a 
cup of coffee or any other item from your lunch 
counter?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. That is your policy, isn’t it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, on August 9 when these young people were 

seated at your lunch counter, what did you do first?
A. The first thing I had one of my employees call 

the Police Department and turn the lights off and state 
the lunch counter was closed.

Q. Was this a prearranged matter, so far as your 
office was concerned?

Mr. Arnold: Your Honor, I don’t think that’s com­
petent. He can go so far but there’s one question and 
one question only in this case, was the State Law vio­
lated? All that leads up to it, and all is nothing it’s 
irrelevant, is to be placed in the record, as I interpret 
it, purely for a prejudicial standpoint when we could 
stay here ’til next week.

Mr. Perry: I don’t believe it’s our intention to stay 
’til next week.



24 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

G. W . W est
Judge Jester: Your question, Mr. Perry, was this 

prearranged t
Mr. Perry: Yes, sir.
Judge Jester: I don’t know what your next question 

would be.
Mr. Perry: Your Honor, if I may, it is my purpose 

through this line of questioning to bring out from this 
witness any arrangements or agreements which the 
manager of Kress’ and/or, the managers of other like 
businesses might have had with the Police Department 
or the City of Greenville, the South Carolina Law En­
forcement Division, the Sheriff of Greenville County 
and any other law enforcement agency. And my ques­
tion, which is designed to determine from this witness 
as to whether or not this course of action which he fol­
lowed was prearranged, is designed to lead me into 
that particular area.

Judge Jester: Well, I will have to rule it out, Mr. 
Perry. I think that the facts that appear in any par­
ticular instance would be a minor method on which he 
would have to make his decision. I ’d have to rule that 
out. I think the facts in each case would be the con­
trolling factor in what he did. I have to rule it out.

Mr. Perry: Your Honor, may I respectfully request 
that you reconsider that ruling in the light of the fact 
that here we are raising constitutional questions and 
there will ultimately be presented to the Court a mo­
tion based upon the unconstitutional application of the 
statute involved in this case, in this line of interroga­
tion, is relevant. And in the light of that we respect­
fully request then a reconsideration of your ruling.

Judge Jester: I have ruled out, I will have to rule 
that his acts were taken on what happened at that par-



(SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County

25

G. W . W est
ticular time, this act that presented itself at that par­
ticular instance.

Mr. Perry: All right, sir.
By Mr. Perry:
Q. Mr. West, why did you order your lunch counter

closed?
A. It’s contrary to local customs and its also the 

ordinance that has been discussed.
Q. Do I understand then further, that you are say­

ing that the presence of Negroes at your lunch counter 
was contrary to customs?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. And that is why you closed your lunch counter?
A. Yes, sir, that’s right.
Q. I see, and after the police had come and taken the 

defendants away, did you reopen your lunch counter?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And did you reopen it by reason of the fact that 

the presence of the Negroes was no longer a threat to 
your business?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you agree with the observations of Captain 

Bramlette that these young people were clean and un­
offensive ?

A. Yes, sir. I agree with him.
Q. Do you further agree that they were not profane, 

and not boisterous?
A. To the best of my knowledge they were not, I 

didn’t hear any profanity.
Q. Yet you went in their presence and stated that 

the place was closed?
A. Yes, sir.



26
City of Greenville v. Peterson

SUPREME COURT

G. W . W est
Q. So that when you say, “not in your presence,” 

you are taking into account the fact that they were 
directly in your presence?

A. Well, there were fourteen, sir, and they were 
spread out down the counter, and of course, I went to 
a group at a time. That’s why I say I don’t know what 
the others were saying at the other end when I was 
speaking to the ones at the opposite end.

Q. But you don’t make any statement that they were 
only anything but orderly, do you?

A. That’s correct, yes, sir.
Q. Now, I understand that they were seated, they 

meaning these defendants, were seated at your lunch 
counter approximately five minutes before they were 
arrested?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you at no time requested Captain Bramlette 

and the other officers to place these defendants under 
arrest, did you?

A. No, I did not.
Q. That was a matter, I believe, entirely up to the 

law enforcement officers?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Mr. West, had you at any time conversed with 

Captain Bramlette or any officer of the South Carolina 
Law Enforcement Division concerning the anticipated 
presence of Negroes to your lunch counter?

Judge Jester: Don’t think that’s admissible, Mr. 
Perry.

Mr. Perry: Of course, Your Honor, has made your 
ruling and I do not quarrel with the Court.

Judge Jester: Thank you.
Mr. Perry: I sincerely request, Your Honor, to re­

consider ruling because under my theory there is no



SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County

27

G. W. W est
question that the line of inquiry is quite relevant to 
the issue.

Judge Jester: I have to rule it out, Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry: All right, sir. Thank you, Mr. West. One 

other question, may I?
Mr. Arnold: Yes, sir.
By Mr. Perry:
Q. Of course, you only came to Greenville in Feb­

ruary?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. During that period of time I would imagine you 

spent a great deal of time learning your own Kress’ 
Five and Ten Cent Store!

A. Yes, sir, that’s right.
Q. But have you not also had the occasion to learn 

something about the City in which you recently 
moved to?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know the policies that are followed by 

other businesses such as yours with regard to this same 
question, that is, the serving of Negroes at lunch 
counters ?

A. You want my opinion?
Q. Not your opinion, just your knowledge of the 

custom?
A. My knowledge of the custom is exactly as ours.
Q. That’s what I was after, sir. Let me ask you this, 

sir. Approximately how many people can you seat at 
your lunch counter

A. About fifty-nine.
Q. Fifty-nine?
A. Yes.
Q. And do members of the public generally, those 

working uptown and those perhaps in town on busi-



28 SUPREME COURT
City of Greenville v. Peterson

G. W. W est
ness come into yonr store regularly for meals around 
the lunch hour?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. So that your business, you do a pretty good busi­

ness in serving members of the public at lunch time?
A. Fairly good, yes, sir.
Q. The service of food is a vital service being ren­

dered by your company, isn’t it?
A. Well, it’s one of the services that we perform.
Q. Your company and the other companies which 

are performing the same services are, as a rule, you 
are just about feeding the public, aren’t you ?

A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Perry: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Arnold: That’s all, thank you. That’s the City’s 

ease, Your Honor.
(Witness excused.)
Mr. Perry: Your Honor, would you see fit to grant 

us a two-or three-minute recess?
Judge Jester: Be glad to.
(Short recess taken.)
Mr. Perry: May it please the Court at this time the 

defendants move to dismiss the warrants against them, 
all of which warrants charged a violation of Act Num­
ber R896, House Bill Number 2135 of the State of 
South Carolina, which Act was approved by the Gov­
ernor on May 16, 1960. The evidence presented on the 
charge shows conclusively that by arresting the de­
fendants the officers were aiding and assisting the 
owners and managers of Kress’ Five and Ten Cent 
Store, in maintaining their policies of segregating or 
excluding service to Negroes at its lunch counter.

Mr. Arnold: Excuse me a minute, do you want this 
reporter to take the argument down?



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from G-reenville County

29

Mr. Perry: Yes, sir.
Judge Jester: This is a motion she’s taking? U3
Mr. Perry: Yes, sir, that’s right.
Mr. Arnold: When you start your argument if you 

don’t want her to take it, tell her not to.
Mr. Perry: I might say that I have no argument to 

make on the matter, just the substance of the motion.
Mr. Arnold: All right. Thank you.
Mr. Perry: —
Judge Jester: Your last statement was aiding and 

assisting the owners of the store as I recall?
Mr. Perry: Yes, sir. In maintaining their policies of 

segregating and excluding services to Negroes at the 1M 
lunch counter on the ground of racial color, in viola­
tion of the defendants’ rights to due process of law, 
and equal protection of the laws, under the 14th 
Amendment to the United States Constitution. That is 
the motion, there will be no argument on the motion.

Judge Jester: Motion denied, Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry: Also, may it please the Court, at this 

time, the defendants move to dismiss the warrant on 
the ground that the warrant which charges them with 
trespass after warning, the designation of the act be- ns 
ing set forth in the warrant is invalid, in that the evi­
dence establishes merely that the defendants were 
peacefully upon the premises of S. H. Kress &  Co. 
Which establishment is performing an economic func­
tion invested with the public interest as customers, 
visitors, business guests, or invitees, and there is no 
basis for the charge recited by the warrant other than 
an effort to exclude these defendants from the lunch 
counters of Kress’ Five and Ten Cent Store, because 
of their race and color. The defendants at the same

l l o
time are excluded from equal service at the preponder­
ant number of other eating establishments in the City



30 SUPREME COURT
City of Greenville v. Peterson

of Sumter, I beg your pardon, I ’m reading from an­
other motion so if the Court will permit me to insert 
the City of Greenville.

Judge Jester: I would have done the same thing 
myself.

Mr. Perry: Yes, sir. In the City of Greenville, South 
Carolina, thereby depriving them of liberty without 
due process of law, and equal protection of the laws 
secured to them by the 14th Amendment to the United 
States Constitution. That is the motion, there will be 
no argument.

Judge Jester: Motion denied, Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry: I have a further motion, Your Honor, 

with reference to the constitutionality of the statute. 
At this time may it please the Court, the defendants 
move that the warrants against them be dismissed, 
which warrants charge the crime of trespassing after 
warning. The designation of the act being set forth in 
the warrant under which all of these defendants, who 
are Negroes, were arrested and charged is on the evi­
dence unconstitutional as applied to the defendants, in 
that, it makes it a crime to be on property open to the 
public after being asked to leave because of race or 
color, in violation of the defendants’ rights under the 
due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th 
Amendment to the United States Constitution. That is 
the motion.

Judge Jester: Motion denied, Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry: At this time, may it please the Court, the 

defendants move for a dismissal on the ground that 
under the evidence presented the City has not estab­
lished by competent evidence a p r im a  fa c ie  case.

Judge Jester: Motion denied, Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry: Very good, sir.



SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County

31

R aymond H . Caetee
Judge Jester: That gets all the motions in the 

record ?
Mr. Perry: Yes, sir, it does.
Mr. Smith: The defense calls as its first witness Mr. 

Raymond H. Carter.
Judge Jester: I didn’t catch the name, Mr. Smith. 
Mr. Smith: Raymond Id. Carter. C-a-r-t-e-r.

Mr. R aymond H. Caetee, being duly sworn, testified 
as follows:

D i r e c t  E x a m in a t io n

By Mr. Smith:
Q. Mr. Carter, where do you live?
A. I l l  Luke St., Washington Heights.
Q. In Greenville?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have jmu lived in Greenville?
A. All my life.
Q. Are you employed here?
A. No, sir.
Q. You aren’t employed?
A. No.
Q. On August 9, on or about eleven o’clock in the 

morning, did you have occasion to be in Kress’ Five 
and Ten Cent Variety Store?

A. I did.
Q. On that morning were you anywhere near the 

lunch counter of Kress’ ?
A. Yes—
Q. Were you also there when the acts testified to 

heretofore this morning took place? You heard what 
has been said here already this morning?

A. No, not everything.



32 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

R aymond H. Carter

Q. Were you there when some arrests were made of 
colored people sitting at the lunch counter?

A. I was.
Q. Were you there when the store was closed since 

you heard Mr. West testify, you heard him testify the 
store was closed?

A. Yes.
Q. Were you there at that time?
A. I was right there.
Q. Would you please just tell us in your own words 

what were your observations, what did you see and 
hear, during the time of the closing of that lunch coun­
ter, just give it to us in your own words?

A. Well, actually I didn’t hear the manager say the 
lunch counter was closed, I only heard the officers and 
he could have said lunch counter closed hut I didn’t 
hear him. About the only thing I heard was the lunch 
counter was closed and you’re under arrest. They 
didn’t give the kids a chance to get up.

Q. Which officer are you referring to now, could you 
identify him, is he in the Court room?

A. He was the one I saw, this one, this guy right 
here with the paper in his hand going out the door.

Mr. Smith: May we have him identified, please.
Mr. Arnold: Mr. Hillyer.
Mr. Smith: Mr. Hillyer?
Mr. Partee: Mr. H-i-l-l-y-a-r.
Mr. Smith: I believe he is an officer of the South 

Carolina Law Enforcement Division, is that right?
Mr. Arnold: That is correct.
Mr. Smith: We would like the record to show your 

Honor that this witness pointed out Mr. Hillyer, who 
has been recognized as an officer of the South Carolina 
Law Enforcement Division.



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

33

R aymond H. Carter
Judge Jester: Glad to do that.
By Mr. Smith:
Q. Was that the only request that you heard for 

these children to leave!
A. He said lunch counter closed and the officer im­

mediately began arrest, stand-up and line-up, you’re 
under arrest and began searching the young men.

Q. Well, did the officer make a request that they 
leave!

A. No.
Q. Did you hear the request!
A. No, I didn’t hear a request.
Q. Did you hear the manager, Mr. West, make a re­

quest that they leave!
A. I didn’t hear Mr. West say anything, like I said 

before.
Q. As I understand, if such a request had been made, 

would they have had time to leave!
A. No. '
Q. Immediately upon the statement, they were im­

mediately placed under arrest!
A. Immediately.
Mr. Arnold: I think, Mr. Smith, you are leading the 

witness a little.
Mr. Smith: I ’m sorry.
Judge Jester: I usually wait ’til you all object be­

cause that’s not my business.
By Mr. Smith:
Q. Mr. Carter, did everyone leave the lunch counter!
A. No.
Q. Some people remained seated!
A. The white citizens.
Q. Can you identify them!
A. Well—



34 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

R aymond H. Carter

Q. I mean as to race?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. They did not leave?
A. They didn’t leave.
Q. Even after you heard the statement the lunch 

counter was closed?
A. Well, yes, they didn’t leave.
Q. Did you observe any attempt made to arrest 

those white persons who refused to leave?
A. No.
Q. They were allowed to remain, that was your ob­

servation?
A. They did.
Q. Did you hear any other officer make a request?
A. Well, that one, was the only one I heard and the 

others I think went to his command. They all began 
right after he said that, searching the young men and 
lining them up. And I also stayed in the store and 
watched while they was arresting and walking out the 
door, the lights came back on and the whites didn’t 
leave.

Q. They remained seated?
A. They remained seated.
Q. And is your testimony that no one made any 

attempt to arrest them?
A. No, sir, and I didn’t see a rope to rope off the 

counter.
Q. You did not see a rope?
A. I did not see a rope.
Q. Did you hear anyone say “you are trespassing” ?
A. I didn’t hear anything about trespassing ’til they 

were locked up.



SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County

35

R aymond H . Carter
Q. All you heard were the counter’s closed and the 

immediately arrest even before they had, could make 
an attempt to get up from the stools and leave?

A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Smith: That’s all.

C ro s s  E x a m in a t io n  

By Mr. Arnold:
Q. What is your age, please?
A. Twenty.
Q. Twenty. And you say that you are unemployed? 
A. Well, at the present, yes.
Q. Are you married?
A. No. '
Q. You live with your mother and father here?
A. I do.
Q. What is the last employment you had?
A. I worked for the Southern Railway, Railroad.
Q. What?
A. Mail handler for the Southern Railroad.
Q. I didn’t catch the answer?
A. Mail handler.
Q. When did you leave the Southern Railroad?
A. It was the day of the accident, the wreck at Sen­

eca, I don’t recall the date.
Q. All right, did you go with these ten defendants 

up to Kress’ Store?
A. No, I didn’t. I didn’t go with them, I was by my­

self, they was in front of me.
Q. But then you followed them?
A. Sure I followed them, that’s a free street.
Q. You knew that they were going into the store?
A. Sure I knew it.



36 SUPREME COURT
City of Greenville v. Peterson

R aymond H. Cabteb

Q. As a matter of fact, Mr. Carter, weren’t you the 
leader of this group?

A. If I was the leader, I would have been arrested.
Q. I didn’t ask you that.
A. Was I the leader?
Q. Yes.
A. No, I wasn’t the leader.
Q. Before Officer Bramlette and Vaughn and some 

of the others arrived on the scene, weren’t you going 
up and down the line where these ten defendants were 
sitting, talking with them ?

142 A. Sure, I know ’em.
Q. But you didn’t sit down?
A. No, I didn’t.
Q. I want to ask you when you saw Captain Bram­

lette and some of the other officers come into the store, 
you kind of made yourself scarce, so to speak?

A. I was right there, they didn’t see me, but I saw 
them.

Q. But you moved away from the vicinity of the 
lunch counter? 

us A. No, I didn’t.
Q. But you didn’t sit down?
A. I didn’t sit down.
Q. Where were you standing when the officers were 

there?
A. Right next to another counter observing.
Q. Well, why couldn’t the officers see you, you said 

they didn’t see you ?
A. Well, at that time, they marched the kids out.
Q. The time they marched the kids out?
A. At the time, they marched them out, I left.
Q. Did you leave by the side door or the front door? 
A. The front door.

144



Appeal from Greenville County
SUPREME COURT 37

R aymond H. Cakter
Q. I want to ask you, Mr. Carter, isn’t it a fact that us 

you went into that store with the purpose of being 
able to come and testify in case any arrests were made?

A. No, that wasn’t my purpose.
Q. What was your purpose in going in there?
A. That’s a chain store and I had money in my 

pocket to buy something I saw.
Q. Did you buv anything?
A. No, I didn’t.
Q. Did you attempt to buy anything?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. What? 146
A. I needed a new tip for this walking stick.
Q. Did you get it?
A. No, I didn’t.
Q. Did they have it?
A. I think so, but after I saw the kids sit down that 

took my mind oft this walking stick. That was more 
interesting than my walking stick, at the present.

Q. So you didn’t go to attend to your own business, 
but you attempted to mind somebody else’s?

A. I didn’t help ’em.
Q. What?
A. I didn’t help ’em mind their business, I merely 

spoke to ’em and talked to ’em.
Q. You talked with them?
A. Yes. Anything wrong with me talking with them?
Q. I ’m not being questioned. Is James Carter, one 

of the defendants, your brother?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where did you first meet up with this group, on 

this particular morning?
A. Where did I first meet up with them?



38 SUPREME COURT
City of Greenville v. Peterson

R aymond H . Cabtek

14. Q -  Y e s -
A. Well, I didn’t meet up with them, when I saw 

them they were going in Kress’.
Q. And you intended to go in Kress’, also?
A. Sure.
Q. You followed them in?
A. Sure I did, I had a purpose for going in there, 

too.
Q. But you never did sit down?
A. No.
Q. Now, you say that Mr. Hillyar here, with SLED 

gave an order to close the lunch counter?
A. I didn’t say he give the order, I said he give the 

order under arrest.
Q. Under arrest?
A. Yes.
Q. I understood if my recollection is correct, that 

you stated that he made the statement that the lunch 
counter is being closed?

A. I also said that I heard someone else say lunch 
counter closed and he said you’re under arrest.

161
Q. Now, I believe, on Direct Examination you stated 

that you could not be positive whether or not, Mr. 
West, the store manager, made the statement, that the 
lunch counter—asked them to leave, request it?

A. No, I couldn’t say that Mr. West said that, I 
didn’t hear him.

Q. In other words, I understand your testimony, you 
don’t say that he did or he didn’t?

A. No.
Q. I believe you testified that James Carter, one of

168 the defendants, is your brother?
A. Yes, sir.



SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County

39

R aymond H . Carter 
Q. Do you own an automobile?
A. Me?
Q. Yes?
A. No, sir.
Q. Does James own an automobile?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you come down to headquarters to get a set 

of car keys from James?
A. I did.
Q. Whose car was that?
A. My mother’s car.
Q. Where is it that you live?
A. Out at Washington Heights, 111 Luke St.
Q. Approximately how far is that from Kress’ 

Store?
A. Well, I ’d say, good two and a half miles.
Q. Does your brother James live with you?
A. Yes, we all live together.
Q. Did you all come to town that particular morning 

together in your mother’s car?
A. Yes, we did.
Q. Who else was in the car with you?
A. At the time, Mrs. Jones, she’s not here.
Q. Were any of these other nine defendants in the 

car with you that morning?
A. Yes, sir, I said Mrs. Jones.
Q. Mrs. Jones?
A. Yes.
Q. Is she a defendant here?
A. No, sir, she’s not in here. She’s at the Juvenile 

Home, or some place.
Q. She’s one that’s under sixteen years of age?
A. Yes.



40 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

R aymond H. Carter 
D oeis W eight

Q. And that puts three in the car, were there any 
more in the car?

A. That’s all.
Q. At any time that morning, before the arrest, did 

any of these other nine defendants ride with you or 
your brother, James, in the car!

A. No.
Q. Where did you leave your car parked?
A. Up on Laurens Street that runs behind Wool- 

worth and Green’s, I think that’s the name of the street.
Mr. Arnold: Thank you.
(Witness excused.)
Mr. Smith: Next witness, Doris Wright, one of the 

defendants.

D oeis W eigh t , being duly sworn, testified as follows: 
D i r e c t  E x a m in a t io n

By Mr. Smith:
Q. Where do you live, Miss Wright?
A. 13 Nichols Street. That’s in Nicholtown.
Q. In Greenville?
A. Yes.
Q. At the present are you employed, are you a stu­

dent, or what is your present—
A. I am a graduate student, I ’m not employed.
Q. You’re not employed at present?
A. No.
Q. I believe on the morning of August 9, at around 

eleven o’clock, you went into Kress’ Five and Ten Cent 
Store?

A. That’s correct.



41SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

D oris W right
Q. Miss Wright, would you tell us what your pur­

pose was in going up to Kress that morning, please?
A. I went in Kress, my main purpose was to be 

served.
Q. Served where?
A. At the lunch counter.
Q. At the lunch counter? You then went into Kress’ 

with the intention of getting some lunch, or coffee or 
something like that?

A. Yes.
Q. Did you make a request to be served?
A. I did.
Q. After sitting at the lunch counter?
A. I did.
Q. What was the reply to your request?
A. “ I ’m sorry, we don’t serve Negroes.”
Q. Sorry, we don’t serve Negroes?
A. Yes.
Q. Were there other people sitting at the counter at 

that time, Miss Wright?
A. They were.
Q. Were they being served?
A. They were.
Q. Did they continue to serve them?
A. Well, they continued to serve the orders that had 

been placed, but they didn’t, no new orders were made.
Q. No new orders were made?
A. No, no more.
Q. The request or order that the store is closed, was 

it made at the time that you were there?
A. Yes, it was.
Q. How long had you been seated at the lunch coun­

ter before the order, that the lunch counter is closed, 
was made?



42 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

D okis W eight
A. We had been sitting at the counter approxi­

mately three minutes.
Q. Do you remember what person told you or re­

layed the order to you that the lunch counter was 
closed?

A. Well, no, I heard a voice say that “ the lunch coun­
ter was closed, you’re under arrest,” and I forgot his 
name over there, he made the order that the counter 
was closed and that we were under arrest. Mr. West, 
did not make the request because he was coming from 
the back at the time, at the time the arrests were being 
made.

Q. You pointed over there, who were you point­
ing at?

A. In the brown suit there, whatever color it is, I 
can’t see from here.

Mr. Smith: Your Honor, I believe that’s Mr. Hillvar, 
would you let the record also show that this witness 
pointed out Mr. Hillvar of the South Carolina Law En­
forcement Division as the person who gave that order?

By Mr. Smith:
Q. Now, the way you just testified, as if the order 

and the arrest were all in one sentence?
A. It was, in one breath.
Q. No pause?
A. No pause.
Q. As I understand the order was, the lunch counter 

is closed, you’re under arrest?
A. That’s right.
Q. And were you immediately placed under arrest?
A. We were.
Q. Were you given any opportunity to leave if you’d 

wanted to, Miss Wright?
A. No.



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

43

D oris W right
Q. Did you observe the lunch counter at all after 

your arrest, as to whether or not, everybody left the 
lunch counter!

A. Well, I couldn’t say because Officer Wall and the 
policemen in the back there, they got four girls and put 
us in a car and immediately carried us down to head­
quarters. We left the boys and two other girls in the 
store, they were searching the boys, they were search­
ing the boys in the car.

Q. So you were not able to observe as to whether or 
not the other people at the counter left or not!

A. No.
Q. Miss Wright, I want to ask you this question, did 

you expect to be served at Kress on that morning!
A. Well, I had talked with the manager earlier, dur­

ing some other demonstrations and he had stated that 
the pressure that was being put on him by our demon­
strations. And I also asked him a question, if he would 
press charges against us, if we would continue coming 
and he said, no, and also, I went back to the counter 
since so much pressure is on him, maybe he will break 
as he is done, as they were serving us in other parts 
of the store. Maybe he will be willing to serve us at 
the lunch counter, too.

Q. Then did you expect to be served!
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Did you feel that you had a right to be served!
A. Yes, I did.
Q. That was your purpose for being there that day!
A. That’s right.
Mr. Smith: Your witness.



44 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

D oris W right

C ro s s  E x a m in a t io n

By Mr. Arnold:
Q. You referred to other demonstrations, how many 

times previous to this, had you been to the store and 
sat down at the lunch counter?

A. I don’t recall, it has been several times.
Q. Some three or four?
A. I wouldn’t some three or four, I would say it has 

been several times.
Q. Several times?
A. Yes.
Q. Now several, you mean two?
A. One or more, yes.
Q. One couldn’t be several, could it?
A. No, so it would be one or more, could be two, I 

couldn’t vouch for three.
Q. How many in this group of ten defendants were 

with you on prior occasions going to Kress’ Stores, if 
you can recall, approximately?

A. I would say two to three.
Q. Two to three?
A. Yes.
Q. Where did you ten meet that morning?
A. We didn’t.
Q. You mean all ten of you just happened to gather 

up at Kress’ ?
A. I didn’t say we happened there, I said we didn’t 

meet.
Q. If you didn’t happen there, then what did you do, 

just explain to the Court?
A. Well, I mean, since the curfew and everything, 

we thought the managers thought we were afraid of 
our fight for freedom, and our privileges, so we tele-



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

45

D oris W right
phoned, when I say we, I telephoned and other defend­
ants telephoned and we decided we would go get us 
some coffee. I don’t know whether Jim was coming up 
town, I guess he wanted some coffee, too. I mean, ’cause 
my pocketbook, I couldn’t buy anything else but coffee 
or soda.

Q. Where is it you live?
A. Nieholtown, 13 Nichol Street.
Q. How did you get to town that morning, in a car 

or on a bus?
A. I rode the City bus.
Q. Rode the City bus? Did any of these other ten 

defendants accompany you on the bus that morning?
A. No, they didn’t.
Q. But you all did meet there in front of Kress’ ?
A. No, we didn’t.
Q. Where?
A. We didn’t meet.
Q. Well, let me ask you this, didn’t the ten of you 

go in the store, more or less, as a group?
A. No, we didn’t.
Q. You went in singular?
A. No, we didn’t. I don’t know how they come, I 

went in Kress.
Q. Was—
A. I was accompanied by one.
Q. Let me ask you, were any of these other nine de­

fendants already sitting down at the counter when you 
got into the store?

A. No, they werent.
Q. You were the first one?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. Now, who was with you?
A. Helen Rose, Helen Evans.



46 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

D oris W right
Q. She’s a defendant here?
A. Yes.
Q. Was anyone else with you?
A. No.
Q. How long would you say it was after you all sat 

down before the eight other defendants came and sat 
down?

A. It may have been a minute or so.
Q. A minute or so? Well, then, they must have been 

in the vicinity of Kress’ Store?
A. I couldn’t say.
Q. All right, you say you all went in there to get 

some coffee, or to served at the lunch counter?
A. Uh huh.
Q. Can you explain to the Court how these four that 

had no money could be expected to be served, had no 
money on their person?

A. Beg your pardon, sir.
Q. These four that Officer Bramlette testified had 

no money on their person when they were arrested, 
could you give the Court an explanation as to how they 
could expect to be served any food or coffee?

A. I imagine they could expect to be served by the 
waitress, by the waitresses.

Q. But you know it’s a matter of common knowledge 
you don’t go into a store and order coffee or food when 
you don’t have any money on your person?

A. I didn’t say that they ordered, I said that I or­
dered.

Q. My question to you, can you offer any explana­
tion to the Court, as how these four that had no money 
on their persons could have expected to be served food 
or coffee?

A. No, I don’t.



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

47

D oris W right
Q. And you deny that Mr. West made any request 

to you, to leave?
A. I do.
Q. Did you hear Mr. West say anything?
A. No.
Q. Of course, you are not in position to say whether 

or not Mr. West may have made a request to some of 
the other nine?

A. Yes, I am, Mr. West, come from the hack of the 
store, at the time we were being arrested and were told 
that the lunch counter was closed.

Mr. Arnold: Thank you.
Mr. Smith: Just one minute, one or two questions 

on Re-direct, Your Honor.

Re-direct Examination
By Mr. Smith:
Q. First, Miss Wright, I would like to ask you, if 

you and all your co-defendants, all of you that were 
arrested that morning, are all of you Negroes?

A. We are.
Q. No white people among them, in that arrest?
A. No.
Q. You have testified here this morning as to the 

amount of money that each of you, you and your co­
defendants, had upon their person and their pockets. 
Wouldn’t it be customary for some of the—

Mr. Partee: That’s leading.
Judge Jester: I don’t believe I can go along if I ’m 

interpreting your question, Mr. Smith.
Mr. Smith: I believe, I may have started it as being 

leading, Your Honor, but what I ’m after, I believe is 
admissible.



48 SUPREME COURT
City of Greenville v. Peterson 

D okis W eight
Judge Jester: Now, if it isn’t, I ’m going to strike it 

out. Go ahead, if it isn’t, I ’m going to strike it out.
Mr. Arnold: Tell the witness not to answer until the 

Court has ruled.
Judge Jester: Go ahead and ask her but tell her not 

to answer, I ’ll ask Doris not to answer until I have 
ruled.

By Mr. Smith:
Q. I will ask you whether or not it is customary in 

a group of friends like that for one to pay for what­
ever another may order, or what two or three may 
order?

Judge Jester: I ’ll have to rule that out on account 
of her previous statement there.

Mr. Smith: All right, that’s all.
Mr. Perry: One other witness, please, sir. Your 

Honor, we would like to call Officer Hillyer of the 
South Carolina Law Enforcement Division and we pre­
sume that by reason of the fact that he is an officer of 
the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, that he 
is hostile and we ask permission to treat him as a hos­
tile witness.

Mr. Partee: Your Honor, I would think that would 
necessarily be true. He’s merely enforcing the law 
which is any law enforcement officers are—

Judge Jester: I couldn’t consider him as a hostile 
witness, Mr. Perry.

Mr. Perry: I know him quite well, I think he’s a 
very fine gentleman hut in this matter—

Judge Jester: He is a law enforcement officer, hut 
I ’m a Judge and I ’m not a hostile Judge.

Mr. Perry: Not at all.
Judge Jester: I think every darky that’s ever been 

in and sat before me said I done them as fair as any-



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

49

0. R. H illyer
body else but I can’t say that because I ’m working for 
the City that I ’m hostile, so I couldn’t go along with 
you. I ’ll allow you to call him but I will not put into 
the record that he is a hostile witness.

Mr. Perry: Well, if at any point in his testimony it 
develops that he is hostile perhaps Your Honor will re­
consider. We ask that Officer Hillyer come to the stand.

Mr. 0. R. H illyer , being duly sworn, testified as 
follows:

D i r e c t  E x a m in a t io n

By Mr. Perry:
Q. Mr. Hillyer, I believe you are an officer of the 

South Carolina Law Enforcement Division?
A. That’s right.
Q. How long have you been working for the agency, 

sir?
A. Four years and two months.
Q. Do you hold any official position in the office, or 

are you what is known as patrolman?
A. I ’m an agent.
Q. You are an agent?
A. We don’t have patrolmen.
Q. I see. What are the general duties of an agent, 

may I ask?
A. An agent of the South Carolina Law Enforce­

ment Division is set up as an assistant agency to help 
any police or sheriff’s office that needs any assistance 
that we can render, and we render any assistance we 
can render.

Q. I see, and who do you receive your orders from?
A. Chief J. P. Strom.



50 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

0. R. H illyek
Q. I see, and Chief J. P. Strom is the head of the 

South Carolina Law Enforcement Division?
A. That is correct.
Q. May I ask you, sir, who does Chief Strom take 

his orders from?
A. Governor Hollings.
Q. I see, so when Chief Strom’s men go into action, 

why generally speaking the Governor of the State is 
more or less, his attitude is reflected by what he would 
do. On the occasion in question, namely August 9, at 
which time it has been testified that these defendants 
were arrested, were you present at Kress’ Five and 
Ten Cent Store?

A. I was present at Kress’.
Q. I see. Were other agents of the South Carolina 

Law Enforcement Division present?
A. Yes, they were.
Q. Did you render any assistance to the Chief of 

Police or the other local law enforcement officers on 
this occasion?

A. I checked a few of the boys, a few of the defend­
ants, I shook them down.

Q. Did you confer with Captain Bramlette concern­
ing the charge which would be placed against them?

A. No, sir, I did not.
Q. Did you any way assist in effecting the arrest?
A. You’ll have to ask that another way. I was there 

to assist Captain Bramlette or any other policeman.
Q. I see, and my question was, did you assist?
A. Yes.
Q. I see. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Perry: You may examine.



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

51

0. R. H illyer

C ro s s  E x a m in a t io n  201

By Mr. Partee:
Q. Mr. Hillyer, I believe, you were in the store be­

fore Captain Bramlette and Officer Vaughn, perhaps 
some other officers arrived?

A. I was.
Q. Who gave the order or made the request for the 

defendants to leave the store?
A. Mr. West. Mr. West, told them the store was 

closed, the lunch counter was closed.
Q. Was he in a position and was his voice loud 252 

enough for these ten defendants to have heard him?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. After he made that request, what happened?
A. After Mr. West said the lunch counter was 

closed, the defendants just remained seated, and a few 
minutes after he had made the request Captain Bram­
lette said “you are under arrest.”

Q. Captain Bramlette is the one who put them under 
arrest ?

A. That’s correct, sir.
Q. Did you put any of them under arrest?
A. No, sir, Captain Bramlette, ordered placed them 

under arrest.
Q. Did you at any time say “the lunch counter is 

closed, you’re under arrest” ?
A. I did not.
Q. Now, there’s been testimony that the request or­

der to leave and the arrest was simultaneous, is that 
true or not?

A. That is not true. 204



City of Greenville v. Peterson

0 . R . H illyer

joe Q- ^ owj after Mr. West said the luncli counter is 
closed, did he also say, “you are requested to leave or 
everybody leave the counter” or anything like that?

A. He said “ the lunch counter is closed, everybody 
leave” but the defendants didn’t move.

Q. There’s no doubt in your mind they all heard it?
A. No doubt in my mind they all heard it.
Mr. Partee: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Perry: Just one more question. Now, as I un­

derstand it, in response to these questions you stated 
that Captain Bramlette made the arrest, that as I un- 

®06 derstood your earlier testimony, you did render as­
sistance to Captain Bramlette?

The Witness: That’s correct.
Mr. Perry: Very good, sir. I think that’s all.
(Witness excused.)
Mr. Perry: Your Honor, that’s the defendant’s case.
Mr. Arnold: We have nothing in reply.
Mr. Perry: At this time, may it please the Court, the 

defendants would like to renew all motions for dis­
missal which were made at the conclusion of the City’s 

207 case and we would like to renew them in this manner 
as if repeated again in their entirety. My purpose be­
ing to expedite these proceedings.

Mr. Arnold: We are wiling to agree to that, we ask 
that they be reproduced in the record as if so done.

Judge Jester: Motion so denied.
Mr. Perry: I would like, at this time, to make this 

additional motion which is to be appended to the mo­
tions which were made at the conclusion of the City’s 
case. At this time, the defendants move for a dismissal 

Mg of these cases which charged these defendants, all of 
whom are Negroes, with the violation of the statute 
which is set forth in the warrant, on the ground that

f»2 S U P R E M E  C O U R T



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

53

the Negroes, the Negro defendants, were arrested and 
charged under a statute which is itself unconstitutional 
on its face, by making it a crime to he on public prop­
erty after being asked to leave by an individual, at 
such individual’s whim. In that, such statute does not 
require that the person making the demand to leave, 
present documents or other evidence of possessing a 
right sufficient to apprise the defendants of the valid­
ity of the demand to leave. All of which renders the 
statute so vague and uncertain, as applied to the de­
fendants, as to violate their rights under the due proc­
ess clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States 
Constitution, that is the motion, no argument on that, 
sir.

Judge Jester: Motion denied, Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry: All right, sir. May it please the Court 

for whatever it’s worth, we should like to have placed 
in evidence the ordinances of the City of Greenville, 
Section 31-B as amended. We should like very much to 
have, Your Honor, consider that as a part of the evi­
dence in this case, and we make this observation that 
although the warrant does not cite that particular 
ordinance, Captain Bramlette stated in his testimony 
that he had this and all the ordinances of the City of 
Greenville and the statutes of the State of South Caro­
lina affecting this situation in his mind. We would, 
therefore, like to have this ordinance included in the 
evidence.

Mr. Arnold: Your Honor, to identify, Mr. Perry, 
Section 31-B of the 1953 Greenville City Code as 
amended.

Mr. Perry: Thank you.
Mr. Arnold: We can’t see the relevancy of it, it’s 

just encumbering the record, there’s no charge on it.



54 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

Judge Jester: I ’d have to deny it because I ’m trying 
this case purely on those facts and the substance there­
of, of the act as set forth in the warrant on the arrest.

Mr. Perry: All right, sir. The defendants will agree 
to waive any final argument before judgment, if that is 
acceptable to the City.

Mr. Arnold: We agree to that, Your Honor.
Judge Jester: Let the record so show that both the 

Defendants and the City waive the arguments and 
places the case in the hands of the Recorder, is my un­
derstanding.

Mr. Perry: Beg your pardon?
Judge Jester: That’s my understanding, no argu­

ment.
Mr. Perry: I might say depending on whatever rul­

ing we may have one or two observations that we 
would like to make.

Judge Jester: Sentence of the Court that James 
Richard Peterson, James Carter, David Ralph Straw- 
der, Prank G. Smith, Robert Crockett, Joan Yvonne 
Eddy, Helen Angela Evans, Harold James Fowler, 
Doris Wright, Rose Marie Collins, pay a fine of $100- 
.00, or serve a sentence of thirty days.

Mr. Perry: May it please the Court, at this time, the 
defendants each move for arrest of judgment or in 
the alternative for a new trial.

(Off the record.)
Mr. Perry: The defendants based upon all motions 

and all grounds used in said motions both at the be­
ginning of this proceeding, at the end of the presenta­
tion of the City’s case, and at the end of the defend­
ant’s case, we move for arrest of judgment or in the 
alternative a new trial based upon all those grounds 
and we ask that they be stated in the record, in the



S U P R E M E  C O U R T 55

Appeal from Greenville County

new form, that is motion for arrest of judgment or 
alternative for new trial.

Mr. Arnold We have no objection to that form. In 
other words, there’s no need to encumber the record 
by repeating it.

Mr. Perry: Very good, sir.
Judge Jester: All right.
Mr. Perry: At this time, may it please the Court, the 

defendants each give verbal notice of appeal and we 
state to the Court that within the period required by 
statute we would tender the formal written notice in­
corporating our exceptions and we ask that the Court 
set an appeal binder in this matter.

Judge Jester: Two hundred-dollar bond in each case, 
Mr. Perry, same they have up now, an appeal bond, 
and if necessary, do you need a little time? I think Mr. 
Arnold will be glad to give you additional time in 
which to get up the appeal and file all the papers. I 
think the appeal is ordinarily gotten up in twenty-four 
hours and if he needs a little extra time, there’s no ob­
jection to that.

Mr. Arnold: Counsel of the parties have just agreed, 
subject to Your Honor’s approval, that the appearance 
bonds signed on August 9, 1960, by Mr. M. B. Tolbert 
for each of the ten defendants in the amount of $200.00 
be considered and continued as an appeal bond without 
the necessity of formally re-executing the bonds, is 
that agreeable with opposing Counsel?

Mr. Smith: That’s agreeable.
Mr. Perry: That’s agreeable.
Mr. Arnold: I think that the Bondsman might have 

to be sworn.



City of Greenville v. Peterson

M. B. T olbebt
M. B. T olbebt, being duly sw orn, testified as fo l ­

low s :
Direct Examination

By Mr. Arnold:
Q. Do yon agree to continue the ten appearance 

bonds each in the amount of $200.00 that you have 
signed for each of these ten defendants on August 9, 
1960, to be continued and considered as an appeal bond 
and that your liability will remain $200.00 each on said 
bond.

A. Yes, I do.
Mr. Arnold: You think that’s sufficient1?
Mr. Smith: That’s fine.
Mr. Perry: Thank you very much.
(Witness excused.)
Judge Jester: Thank you, gentlemen, Court ad­

journed.
(Court adjourned at 10:50 a. m.)

S e c . 31-8, C o d e  o f  G r e e n v i l le ,  1953, as a m e n d e d  by 
1958 C u m u la t iv e  S u p p le m e n t.

It shall be unlawful for any person owning, manag­
ing or controlling any hotel, restaurant, cafe, eating 
house, boarding house or similar establishment to fur­
nish meals to white persons and colored persons in the 
same room, or at the same table, or at the same coun­
ter; provided, however, that meals may be served to 
white persons and colored persons in the same room 
where separate facilities are furnished. Separate fa­
cilities shall be interpreted to mean:

(a) Separate eating utensils and separate dishes for 
the serving of food, all of which shall be distinctly 
marked by some appropriate color scheme or other­
wise;

56 Hl! 1’HEME COURT



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

57

(b) Separate tables, counters or booths;
(c) A distance of at least thirty-five feet shall be 

maintained between the area where white and colored 
persons are served;

(d) The area referred to in subsection (c) above 
shall not be vacant but shall be occupied by the usual 
display counters and merchandise found in a business 
concern of a similar nature;

(e) A separate facility shall be maintained and used 
for the cleaning of eating utensils and dishes furnished 
the two races. (Code 1953, Sec. 31-8, Ord. No. 9, Sec. 1.)

ORDER
This is an appeal to this Court from the Recorder’s 

Court of the City of Greenville.
The Defendants were tried on August 11, 1960, in 

the Greenville City Recorder’s Court before the Re­
corder, John V. Jester, upon a charge of violating the 
Act of May 20, 1960, which in substance makes any 
person a trespasser who refuses to leave the premises 
of another immediately upon being requested to leave.

The Act is very simple and plain in its language.
It appears that on August 9, 1960, the ten Defend­

ants, who are making this appeal, with four other 
young Negro youths went to the store of S. H. Kress 
and Company and seated themselves at the lunch coun­
ter at that store. At the trial there seemed to be some 
attempt to minimize the evidence of the officers in­
volved as to whether or not the Defendants, now Ap­
pellants, refused to leave the premises immediately 
upon the request of the store manager that they should 
leave. However, in the argument of the chief counsel 
for the Appellants, all question of doubt in this respect 
is resolved in favor of the City. According to the writ­
ten Brief of the Defendants, the Defendants now



58 S U P R E M E  C O U R T

City of Greenville v. Peterson

“ seated themselves at the lunch counter where they 
sought to be served. They were not served and, in fact, 
were told by the management that they could not be 
served and would have to leave. The Defendants re­
fused to leave and remained seated at the lunch 
counter.”

The act clearly makes it a criminal offense for any 
person situated as the Defendants were to refuse or 
fail to “ im m e d ia te ly ”  depart upon request or demand.

Therefore, the main question before this Court is 
whether or not the Appellants were lawfully tried on 
a charge of violating this Act by refusing to leave the 

230 lunch counter immediately when requested to do so.
In the oral argument counsel for the Appellants 

seemed to reply in a vague manner upon an “unconsti­
tutional application” of the Statute.

As the Court views the statute it was merely a stat­
utory enlargement and re-enactment of the common 
law in South Carolina which has been recognized for 
more than a half century to the effect that when a 
property owner, whether it be a dwelling house or 
place of business, has the right to order any person 

2 3! from the premises whether they be an invitee or an 
uninvited person. This principle of law was fully and 
clearly reaffirmed by the Supreme Court of South Car­
olina in the recent case of S ta te  v .  S t a r n e r  e t  a l. , 49 
S. E. (2d) 209.

For scores of years South Carolina has had a num­
ber of Statutes with reference to the law of trespass. 
They are now embodied as Article 5, Code of 1952, em­
bracing Sections 16-381 to 16-394. Section 17-386 par­
ticularly refers to trespasses after notice.

Therefore, the Act of May 20, 1960, now designated 
in the 1952 Code as Sec. 17-388 is the controlling fac­
tor here. There can be no doubt that the field into

282



S U P R E M E  C O U R T 59
Appeal from Greenville County

which the Legislature entered by the enactment of this 
particular law was a well recognized portion of the 
law of the State of South Carolina. The Constitution­
ality of the Act cannot be questioned.

Every presumption will be made in favor of the Con­
stitutionality of a statute. There are more than fifty 
decisions by the Supreme Court of South Carolina to 
this effect. The United States Supreme Court in many 
cases has recognized that there is a presumption in 
favor of the constitutionality of an Act of Congress or 
of a State or Municipal legislative body. In the ease of 
D a v is  v .  D e p a r tm e n t  o f  L a b o r ,  317 U. S. 255, 87 Law 
Ed. 250, the United States Supreme Court held that 
there is a presumption of constitutionality in favor of 
State statutes. Time and time again the Supreme Court 
of South Carolina has held “ the law is well settled that 
the burden is on the person claiming the Act to be 
unconstitutional to prove and show that it is uncon­
stitutional beyond a reasonable doubt” . M c C o l lu m  v .  

S n ip e s , 49 S. E. 12, 213 S. C. 254.
In 16 C. J. S. 388, we find this language, “ Statutes 

are presumed to be valid and a party attacking a stat­
ute as unconstitutional has the burden of proof” . Over 
five hundred decisions from all over the United States 
are cited to support this statement of the law.

The argument of counsel for the Appellants failed 
to raise a single serious question as to the constitu­
tionality of the statute.

Counsel for Appellants insisted upon the right of 
the Defendants to adduce evidence of some alleged con­
spiracy or plan on the part of the officers of the law 
and store management to bring about this prosecution. 
We think the sole issue in the Recorder’s Court was 
whether or not the Defendants were guilty of violating 
the Act in question. They now boldly admit through



60 SUPREME COURT 
City of Greenville v. Peterson

counsel that they defied the management of the store 
and refused to leave when requested. Had they de- 
partd from the store immediately, as the law requires 
they should have, there would have been no arrest, but 
apparently in accordance with a preconceived plan 
they all kept their seats and defied the management 
and refused to leave the premises.

Evidence of any other motive on the part of the 
management would have thrown no light on this case.

In my opinion the appeal should be dismissed be­
cause the prosecution was conducted under a valid con­
stitutional statute and in addition the appeal should be 
dismissed upon the ground that S. H. Kress and Com­
pany had a right to control its own business. We think 
this position is fully sustained under the recent case 
of W i l l i a m  v .  J o h n s o n ,  Res. 344, 268 Fed. (2d) 845, 
and the North Carolina case of S ta te  v .  N e ls o n , de­
cided January 20, 1961, and reported in 118 S. E. (2d) 
at page 47.

I carefully considered all the exceptions made by 
the Appellants and I am unable to sustain any of them. 
It is, therefore,

O r d e r e d ,  a d ju d g e d  a n d  d e c re e d  that the Appeal be 
dismissed.

J ames H. P rice,
S p e c ia l J u d g e ,  G r e e n v i l le  

C o u n ty  C o u r t .

March 17, 1961.

240



SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

61

NOTICE OF INTENTION TO APPEAL 
T o  M e s s rs .  W .  H .  A r n o ld  a n d  H .  F .  P a r te e ,  A t to r n e y s  

f o r  th e  C i t y  o f  G r e e n v i l le :

Y o u  w i l l  p le a s e  ta k e  n o t ic e  that the defendants above 
named intend to and do hereby appeal to the Supreme 
Court of South Carolina from the Order of the Green­
ville County Court in the above matter, dated March 
17, 1961, the case and exceptions to be hereafter served 
upon you.

/ s /  W illie T. S m it h , Jr.,
/ s /  L incoln  C. J en k in s , J r ., 
/ s /  M atthew  J. P erry, 

A t t o r n e y s  f o r  D e fe n d a n ts .

March 21, 1961.

Due and legal service of the foregoing Notice is ac­
cepted this 22 day of March, 1961.

H . F. P artee,
C i t y  A t t o r n e y .

EXCEPTIONS
1. The Court erred in refusing to hold that the war­

rant is vague, indefinite and uncertain and does not 
plainly and substantially set forth the offense charged, 
thus failing to provide appellants with sufficient in­
formation to meet the charges against them as is re­
quired by the laws of the State of South Carolina, in 
violation of appellants’ rights to due process of law, 
secured by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United 
States Constitution.

2. The Court erred in refusing to hold that the 
State failed to establish the c o rp u s  d e l ic t i .

3. The Court erred in refusing to hold that the State 
failed to prove a p r im a  fa c ie  case.



City of Greenville v. Peterson

4. The Court erred in refusing to hold that the evi­
dence of the State shows conclusively that by arresting 
appellants the officers were aiding and assisting the 
owners and managers of S. H. Kress and Company in 
maintaining their policies of segregating or excluding 
service to Negroes at their lunch counters on the 
ground of race or color, in violation of appellants’ 
rights to due process of law and equal protection of 
the laws, secured by the Fourteenth Amendment to the 
United States Constitution.

5. The Court erred in refusing to hold that the evi­
dence establishes merely that the appellants were 
peacefully upon the premises of S. H. Kress and Com­
pany, an establishment performing an economic func­
tion invested with the public interest as customers, 
visitors, business guests or invitees, and that there is 
no basis for the charge recited by the warrants other 
than an effort to exclude appellants from the lunch 
counter of said business establishment because of their 
race and color, thereby depriving appellants of liberty 
without due process of law and equal protection of the 
laws, secured by the Fourteenth Amendment to the 
United States Constitution.

6. The Court erred in refusing to hold that the stat­
ute appellants are alleged to have violated, to wit, Act 
No. 743 of the Acts and Joint Resolutions of the Gen­
eral Assembly of South Carolina for 1960 (R 896, 
H 2135), is unconstitutional on its face by making it a 
crime to be on public property after being asked to 
leave by an individual at such individual’s whim and 
does not require that the person making the demand to 
leave present documents or other evidence of posses­
sory right sufficient to apprise appellants of the valid­
ity of the demand to leave, all of which renders the 
statute so vague and uncertain as applied to appellants

62_________________ S U P R E M E  C O U R T



63SUPREME COURT 
Appeal from Greenville County

as to violate their rights under the due process clause 
of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States 
Constitution.

7. The Court erred in refusing to permit defendants’ 
counsel to elicit relevant testimony concerning coop­
eration of Store Managers and Police in the City of 
Greenville, South Carolina in pursuing the store man­
agers’ policies, customs and practices of segregating 
or excluding Negroes from their lunch counters.

AGREEMENT
It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between 2R) 

counsel for the appellants and respondent that the 
foregoing when printed, shall constitute the Transcript 
of Record herein and that printed copies thereof may 
be filed with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and shall 
constitute the Return herein.

W . H. A rnold,
Greenville, S. C.,

H. F. P artee,
Greenville, S. C.,

A t t o r n e y s  f o r  R e s p o n d e n t.  521

J en k in s  & P erry,
Columbia, S. C.,

By M atthew  J. P erry,
W illie T. S m it h , Jr.,

Greenville, S. C.,
A t t o r n e y s  f o r  A p p e l la n ts .

252