Plaintiffs' Request for Admissions

    | by eb6 * » te 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

JOHN DILLARD, et al. 

Plaintiffs 

vs. C.A. No. 85-T-1332-N 

CRENSHAW COUNTY, ALABAMA 

V
a
”
 

N
a
”
 

N
s
”
 

S
a
s
?
 

N
a
’
 

N
t
”
 

N
a
t
”
 

N
u
?
 

u
s
t
”
 

Defendants 

Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions 

Come now the plaintiffs and request that the defendants 
admit or deny each of the following facts. The term “the County” 
refers to the county in which the respective defendant lives and 
such questions may be answer with regard to their individual 
county only. Defendants in the same county may file a joint 
answer. 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: VOTING 

l. From the 1870’s until 1965, the State used legal 

subterfuges to prevent blacks from registering and voting. Since 

1965 some counties in Alabama have used voting practices which 

might have had the effect of hindering registration of, voting 

by, and the election of blacks. 

2. The Alabama Democratic Party excluded blacks from 

membership in the party from 1902 until 1946. Alabama Democratic 

Party Minutes, Book 5, 10 July 1902, p. 67, in Gessner T. 

McCorvey Papers, Alabama Department of Archives and History. 

3. Ala Const, 1901, Amendment 55 (“Boswell Amendment”). 

After the US Supreme Court outlawed white primaries in Smith v 

Allwright, 323 US 649 (1944), the State of Alabama adopted the 

 



  

Boswell Amendment which provided for the elimination of the 

exemption to the literacy test for those who owned personal 

property assessed at $300 or more and the enhancement of the 

literacy test with the requirement of demonstrating a 

satisfactory understanding of a section of the Constitution of 

the United States. 

4. Davis v Schnell, 81 FSupp 872 (SD Ala 1949) (three-judge 

court), aff’d 336 US 932 (1950), enjoined the enforcement of the 

Boswell Amendment. The three-judge federal district court noted 

that during the time the Boswell Amendment had been in effect the 

Mobile County Board of Registrars had registered 2800 whites 

without asking them to explain the Constitution while registering 

65 blacks and rejecting 57. The court concluded that the 

Amendment “was intended to be and is being used for the purpose 

of discriminating against applicants for the franchise on the 

basis of race or color.” 

5. Ala Const, Amend. 91 (adopted in 1951), allowed 

registration only of those who could read and write any article 

of the U.S. Constitution, were of “good character,” and 

"understood the duties and obligations of citizenship.” Boards 

of registrars were declared to be judicial officers. Finally, 

the state Supreme Court was required to prepare questionnaires to 

be used by local registrars. The amendment passed by a margin of 

only 60,357 to 59,988, 

6. The Alabama Supreme Court promulgated a four-page 

questionnaire which required the applicant to write his name ten 

 



  

times in answer to several questions, explain his business or 

employment background three times, answer two different questions 

regarding his length of residence in several places, and give his 

spouse’s place of birth. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 

Voting: Hearings held in Montgomery, December 8-9, 1958, and 

January 9, 1957 (1959), pp. 17-20 reproduces the questionnaire. 

7. Ala Laws, 1961 1st Ex.Sess., Act 21, proposed a 

constitutional amendment to replace the voter registration 

questionnaire with an application and a separate examination, 

both of which would be drafted by a state board of voter 

registration examiners. The local board of registrars would 

determine qualifications to vote from the application, and the 

state board would grade the examination knowing only the number 

assigned by the county board. The amendment was defeated by a 

vote Of 94,281 to 163,847. ADAH, Alabama Official and 

Statistical Register 1963, pp. 756-7. 

8. Ala Laws, 1963 Reg.Sess., Act 417 proposed a 

constitutional amendment, which was identical to the recently 

defeated 1961 proposed amendment except that the voter 

examination was clearly labeled as a test of intelligence. The 

proposal set a minimum intelligence level equal to that required 

by the armed forces, but the voter registration examiners could 

set it higher. The voters defeated the amendment, 30,819 for and 

81,693 against. ADAH, Alabama Official and Statistical Register 

1967, . pp. 675-7. 

9. Ala Const, Amend. 223 (adopted in 1965), required 

 



  

applicants for voter registration to demonstrate the ability to 

read and write English. The voters approved the amendment by a 

margin of 93,647 to 37,137 with a majority in favor in every 

county. ADAH, Alabama Official and Statistical Register 1967, 

PP. 707-9. 

10. Ala Code, tit. 17, $31 (1958, 1973 Supp.) (the 

implementing bill accompanying Amendment 223) provided that the 

ability to read and write English could be demonstrated by an 

eighth grade education, or a state board of education test For 

literacy. This was later codified in Ala Code 8174-7 :(1975), 

which was repealed by Ala Acts, 1978, No. 584. 

11. United States v Alabama, 252 FSupp 95 (MD Ala 1966) 

(3-Judge court), declared the poll tax unconstitutional on the 

grounds that its purpose and effect was to abridge the right to 

vote by blacks. 

12. At the time of the 1984 primary and general elections, 

an injunction issued in Harris v Graddick, CV 84-T-595-N (MD 

Ala), governed the appointment of polling officials in the 

County. 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: SCHOOL SEGREGATION 

13. Ala Laws, 1868, p. 148. It is not lawful to unite in 

one school colored and white children, unless by unanimous 

consent of parents and guardians. Trustees shall in all other 

cases provide separate schools. Repealed by Ala. Code, 1923, 811. 

14. Ala Laws, 1873, p. 176. « Provided for a "State Normal 

 



  

School and University” for the Colored Race, for the education of 

colored teachers and students. Last codified as Ala Code, 1940 & 

1988, tit, 52, §8452~-5., Declared unconstitutional in United 

States v Alabama, 252 FSupp 95 (MD Ala 1966). 

15. Ala Const, 1875, Article XIII, Section 1. Separate 

schools shall be provided for the children of citizens of African 

descent. Replaced by Ala Const, 1901, §256, which was 

subsequently repealed by Amendment 111. 

16. Ala Laws, 1876, p. 98, Section 9. Names of poll 

taxpayers of colored race are to be kept in separate books. 

Amounts paid by persons of colored race shall be devoted to 

maintenance of schools for the colored race. Later codified as 

Ala Code, 1896, Sections 3607-8; later codified as Ala Code, 

1907, §1858. Repealed by Ala Code, 1923, §11. 

17. Ala Laws 1878, p. 136. Repeated separate school 

requirement of 1875 Const. Later codified as Ala Code, 1907, 

Section 1757. Repealed by Ala Code, 1923, §11. 

18. Ala Laws, 1884-1885, p. 349. Repeated separate school 

provision. This law was never codified. 

19. Ala Laws, 1892-3, p. 887. Appropriated a sum annually 

to the Tuskegee Institute (deducted from the “general fund for 

colored children”) and provide for the appointment by the 

governor of 3 commissioners who would also sit as members of the 

Board of Trustees. Last codified as Ala Code, 1958, tit. 52, 

§455(1) . 

 



  

20. Ala Code, 1896, Section 3720. Alabama School for Negro 

Deaf and Blind established. This school was consolidated with 

the white schools for the deaf and blind under Ala School Code, 

1927, 8877 and Alas Code, 1940, tit. 52, 8519. 

21. Ala Const, 1901, Article XIV, Section 256. Separate 

schools shall be provided for white and colored children, and no 

child of either race shall be permitted to attend a school of the 

other race. Repealed by Amendment 111. 

22. «Ala Const, 1901, 3256. State to provide a ”liberal 

system of public schools” separate for each race. Repealed by 

Amendment 111. 

23. Ala Acts, 1911, p. 677. A Reform school for juvenile 

Negroes shall be established, at Mt. Meigs, with name “Alabama 

Reform School for Juvenile Negro Law-Breakers.” The school shall 

have nine trustees, of whom five may be Negro women. The School 

replaced the privately-run Reformatory for Negro Boys run by the 

State Federation of Colored Women’s Clubs. Later codified as Ala 

School Code, 1927, §709-19; Ala Code, 1940 & 1958, tit. 52, 

§603-13. Repealed by Ala Acts, 1947, p.31l. 

24. Ala Acts, 1915, p. 284. Separate lists of white and 

Negro children shall be kept in making school census. Repealed 

by Ala Code, 1940, tit. 1, §9; the census provisions of Ala Code, 

1940, tit. 52, §54 makes no mention of race. 

25... Ala Acts, 1919, -p. 567. Created Alabama Boys 

Industrial School for whites only. Last codified as Ala Code, 

1940 & 1958, tit. 52, §§585 et seq. The constitutionality of 

 



  

these sections was questioned in United States v Alabama, 252 

FSupp 95 (MD Ala 1966), and they were repealed by Ala Code, 1975, 

$1-1-10. 

26. Ala School Code, 1927, §352. Required separate 

quarters for white and black applicants taking state teacher 

examination. Last codified as Ala Code, 1940 & 1958, tit. 52, 

§335. The constitutionality of these sections was questioned in 

United States v Alabama, 252 FSupp 95 (MD Ala 1966), and they 

were repealed by Ala Code, 1975, §1-1-10. 

27. Ala School Code, 1927, §356. Required separate 

institutes for white and black teachers. Last codified as Ala 

Code, 1940 & 1958, tit. 52, §339. All racial language was 

eliminated from this section by Ala Code, 1975, §16-23-7. 

28. Ala School Code, 1927, §482. Allowed only whites to 

enroll at the Alabama School of Trades and Industries. Last 

codified as Ala Code, 1940 & 1958, tit. 52, §443. Ala Code, 

1975, §16-60-211, eliminated all racial language from this 

section. 

29. Ala School Code, 1927, §510. Admission to Alabama 

College at Montevallo restricted to whites. Last codified as Ala 

Code, 1940 & 1958, tit. 52, §466. Ala Code, 1975, §16-54-11, 

eliminated all racial language from this section. 

30. Ala Acts, 1931, p. 272. Created State Training School 

for Girls for whites only. Last codified as Ala Code, 1940 & 

1958, tit. 52, §§570 et seq. Repealed by Ala Code, 1975, 

§1-1-10. 

 



31. Ala Acts, 1955, p. 492; reenacted and amended by Ala 

  

Acts, 1957, p. 483. Pupil Placement Act. Allowed local school 

board to assign students on the basis of several factors; school 

board has no authority to relocate students except after its own 

study (apparently to prevent compliance with federal court 

orders); child cannot be compelled to attend school where ”the 

races are commingled.” Last codified as Ala Code, 1958, tit 52, 

§61(1)-(12). Held constitutional on its face, Shuttlesworth v 

Birmingham Board of Education, 162 FSupp 372 (ND Ala), aff’d 358 

US 101 (1958) (per curiam). Held unconstitutionally applied, Lee 

Vv Macon County Board of Education, 231 FSupp 743 (MD Ala 1964). 

32. Ala Acts, 1945, p 62. State board of education may 

provide financial aids to Alabama residents to attend 

out-of-state schools for graduate and professional education not 

available at state-supported schools. Last codified as Ala Code, 

1975, 8§816-3-32 and 34. 

33. Ala Code, 1923, 86226 and Ala Code, 1940, tit. 46, §26, 

provided that graduates of the University of Alabama Law School 

were entitled to practice law without an examination. No black 

graduated from the law school until 1972. The State Supreme 

Court held that this section applied only to graduates of the 

University of Alabama Law School and not to persons who had 

accepted state funds to attend on out-of-state school. Ex parte 

Banks, 254 Ala 117, 48 So2d 35 (1950). 

34. Ala Acts, 1949, p. 710. State board of education could 

 



    

contract with Tuskegee Institute and Meharry Medical College to 

provide education for Alabama residents. Repealed by Ala Code, 

1975, '§1-1-10. 

35... “Ala Const, 1901, Amendment 111 (1956, 1st Ex. Sess). 

Amended §256 to repeal right to free education. Also provided 

that the legislature could authorize parents or guardians of 

students to elect to attend one-race schools. 

36. Ala Const, 1901, Amendment 112 (1956, 2d Ex. Sess). 

Legislature could enact laws allowing alienation, with or without 

consideration, of public parks and housing projects. 

37. Ala Acts, 1956 24 Ex. Sess., p. 446. Amended the 

compulsory school attendance law to provide that parents could 

choose whether child would attend one-race school. Last codified 

as Ala Code, 1940 & 1958, tit 52, §297. Ala Code, 1975, 

§16-28-3, eliminated all racial language from this section. 

38. Ala Acts, 1956 24 Spec. Sess., Act 42. Declared the 

U.S. Supreme Court’s school desegregation decision to be “null, 

void, and of no effect” in Alabama. 

39. Ala Acts, 1957, p. 723. Local boards of education may 

make final and unreviewable decision to close schools where 

continued operation would be accompanied by tension, friction, 

ill will, or disorder; board may make payment for private 

education if public schools not open; board may make payments for 

private education to prevent enrollment of students who would 

cause tension, etc; board may sell closed schools to private, 

non-profit educational groups. Last codified as Ala Code, 1958, 

 



  

tit 52, §§61(13)-(19). Repealed by Ala Code, 1975, §1-1-10. 

40. Ala Acts, 1957, p.827. Established 21 scholarships to 

Tuskegee Institute nursing school for black women and men. Last 

codified as Ala Code, 1958, tit. 52, §§455(2)-(4). Ala Acts, 

1971, No. 2301, eliminated all racial language from this act. 

41. Ala Acts, 1961, p.1396. Authorized established of 

vocational trade school “for Negroes” at Gadsden. Last codified 

as Ala Code, 1958 (1973 Supp.), tit. 52, §451(8). 

Constitutionality questioned in United States v Alabama, 252 

FSupp 95 (MD Ala 1966), and repealed by Ala Code, 1975, §1-1-10. 

42. Ala Acts, 1965, p.1281. Amended section of Ala Code, 

1958, tit. 52, §61(8) (assignment and transfer law) to allow 

tuition grants of $185.00 per year for students to attend private 

nonsectarian schools. Repealed by Ala Code, 1975, §1-1-10. 

43. Ala Acts, 1966 Sp. Sess., p.75. Repealing the teacher 

tenure laws as applied in Wilcox County and giving the Wilcox 

County board of education exclusive and plenary authority to 

appoint, transfer, remove, etc, teachers. This act was never 

codified and was declared unconstitutional in Alabama State 

Teachers Ass’n v Lowndes Co. Board of Education, 289 FSupp 301 

(MD Ala 1968). 

44. Ala Acts, 1966 Sp. Sess., p.372. "To preserve the 

integrity of the local public school systems against unlawful 

encroachment [by the federal government] in the administration 

and control of local schools,” state appropriations would replace 

any federal funds withdrawn by reason of failure to perform “some 

10 

 



  

act not required by law.” Repealed by Ala Code, 1975, §1-1-10. 

45. Ala Acts, 1967, p.8l1ll. Allowed parents to choose the 

race of the teachers of their children; school board to reassign 

teachers as necessary; failure of board to follow law would 

result in cut off of state funds. Repealed by Ala Code, 1975, 

£§1-1-10, 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: HARASSMENT OF NAACP 

46. In 1956 the Attorney General of Alabama brought suit to 

enjoin the NAACP from operating in Alabama because of its failure 

to qualify as a foreign corporation. The Montgomery County 

Circuit Court issued an ex parte order restraining the NAACP, 

pendente lite, from engaging in further activities within the 

State and forbidding it to take any steps to qualify to do 

business under Alabama law. When the NAACP attempted to obtain 

review of a contempt citation, which it received for willful 

failure to produce certain documents, the Alabama Supreme Court 

refused to entertain the writ of certiorari and dismissed the 

petition. The US Supreme Court held that the State Supreme Court 

had jurisdiction to entertain the NAACP’s federal claims. The US 

Supreme Court set aside the contempt fine and remanded the case, 

holding that the State Supreme Court had applied a “novel 

procedural requirement” to avoid hearing the NAACP’s appeal. 

NAACP v Alabama, 357 US 449 (1958). 

47. The Alabama Supreme Court again affirmed its decision 

on the ground that the US Supreme Court was mistaken in its 

11 

 



  

facts. NAACP v Patterson, 268 Ala 531, 109 So2d 138 (1959). 

48. The US Supreme Court once again granted certiorari and 

remanded the case to the Alabama Court. NAACP v Patterson, 360 

US 240 (1959). 

49. In 1960, the Montgomery Circuit Court had still refused 

to hold a hearing on the NAACP’s motion to dissolve the ex parte 

order. The NAACP filed suit in federal court. The US Supreme 

Court eventually ordered the US District Court to proceed to 

trial if the State court did not accord the NAACP an opportunity 

to be heard by 2 January 1962 on its motion to dissolve the 1956 

order and on the merits os the action in which such order was 

issued. NAACP v Gallion, 368 US 16 (1961), vacating 290 F2d 337 

(5th Cir). 

50. The Montgomery Circuit Court held a hearing in December 

1961 and dissolved a previously issued temporary injunction, but 

issued a permanent injunction. The Alabama Supreme Court refused 

to consider the merits of the NAACP’s appeal because unrelated 

assignments of error were argued together. NAACP v Flowers, 274 

Ala 544, 150 So2d 677 (1963). The US Supreme Court held that the 

State Supreme Court had never before applied its procedural rules 

with such “pointless severity.” The US Supreme Court reached the 

merits and found that the State was attempting to suppress the 

right of persons to associate in Alabama. The charges the State 

had made against the NAACP were essentially that it had 

encouraged citizens to assert their constitutional rights and to 

protest against segregation. The US Supreme Court reversed and 

12 

 



  

remanded with instructions that the injunction be vacated and the 

NAACP allowed to qualify to do business. NAACP v Alabama, 377 US 

288 (1964). 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: MISCEGENATION 

51. Ala:const, 1865, Article IV, Section 31. 1%t shall De 

the duty of the general assembly at its next session, and from 

time to time thereafter, to enact laws prohibiting the 

intermarriage of white with Negro persons, or with persons of 

mixed blood, declaring such marriages null and void ab initio, 

and fixing penalties. Repealed by Ala Code, 1886, §10, pursuant 

to the 1868 Constitution. 

52. Ala Penal Code, 1865-66, §61. Marriage, adultery or 

fornication between white and a negro (including octaroons) 

punished by imprisonment for 2-7 years (cf, adultery or 

fornication: up to 2 years on third offense). Later codified as 

Ala Code, 1907, Section 7421. Ala Acts, 1927, p. 219, amended 

this to white and ”any negro, or the descendant of any negro.” 

later. codified in Ala Code, 1940 & 1958, tit. 14, §360. Held 

unconstitutional in United States v Britain, 319 FSupp 1058 (ND 

Ala 1970). 

53. Ala Penal Code, 1865-66, §62. Issuance of license or 

performing ceremony for interracial marriage punishable by $1000 

fine and/or up to 6 months in jail. Last codified as Ala Code, 

1940 & 1958, tit. 14, §361. Held unconstitutional in United 

States v Britain, 319 FSupp 1058 (ND Ala 1970). 

13 

 



  

54. Ala Const, 1901, Article IV, Section 102. The 

legislature shall never pass any law to authorize or legalize any 

marriage between any white person and a Negro, or descendant of a 

Negro. Held unconstitutional in United States v Britain, 319 

FSupp 1058 (ND Ala 1970). 

55. The State was still enforcing the anti-miscegenation 

statute in the early 1950's. Jackson v State, 37 Ala App 512, 72 

S024 114 (Ct Crim App), cert denied 260 Ala 698, 72 So2d 116, 

cert denied 348 US 888 (1954). The law was declared 

unconstitutional, United States v Britain, 319 FSupp 1058 (ND 

Ala 1970). 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: TRANSPORTATION SEGREGATION 

56. . Ala Laws, 1891, p. 412. All railroads carrying 

passengers, other than street railways, shall provide equal but 

separate accommodations for the white and colored races, by 

providing two or more passenger cars for each passenger train, or 

by dividing the passenger cars by partitions so as to secure 

separate accommodations. The conductor is to assign each 

passenger to his place. If a passenger refuses to occupy it, he 

may refuse to carry such passenger on train, and is not liable 

for damages. But this section does not apply to white or colored 

passengers entering the state upon railroads under contract for 

transportation made in other states where like laws to this do 

not prevail. A person riding or attempting to ride in wrong 

place in railroad coach, is subject to a fine of $100. All 

14 

 



  

railroad companies neglecting to comply with the requirements of 

this act within sixty days, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and 

fined not exceeding $500. Any conductor, etc., neglecting to 

carry out the provisions of the acts, is guilty of a misdemeanor, 

and may be fined an amount not to exceed $100. Later codified as 

Ala Code, 1907, Section 5487, Section 7648; Ala Code, 1940 & 

1958, Sections 196-8, 464. Ala Code, 1975, §1-1-10 repealed 

§§196, 197, and 464. Ala Code, 1975, §37-2-115 eliminated all 

racial language from §198. 

57. Ala Acts, 1945, p 731. All transportation companies 

shall provide “equal but separate accommodations” in stations and 

vehicles for white and colored passengers, whether intrastate or 

interstate. Fine of up to $500 for violation by company. Last 

codified as Ala Code, 1958, tit. 48, §301 (31b). Held 

unconstitutional in Browder v Gayle, 142 FSupp 707 (MD Ala 1956) 

(3-judge court). 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: JURIES, CRIMINAL LAW, AND COURTS 

58. Ala Laws, 1865-1866, p. 98. Negroes shall testify only 

in open court, and only when a freed man, free Negro, or a 

mulatto is a party. Repealed by Ala Code, 1867, §10. 

59... Ala Acts, 1876-7, p. 1°20; repealed by Ala Code, 1940, 

tit. 1, §9. Replaced the sheriff, probate judge, and circuit 

clerk with 5 commissioners appointed by the governor as the body 

to compile the list of persons “thought competent” to serve as 

jurors. According to Rabinowitz, this act affected 6 counties in 

15 

 



the Black Belt with Republican majorities by removing the 

  

selection of jurors from locally elected (Republican) officials 

and placing it in the hands of commissioners appointed by the 

(Democratic) governor. Rabinowitz, Race Relations in the Urban 

South, 1865-1890-(1%78), p.39. 

60. Systematic exclusion of blacks from grand and petit 

juries was found in Norris v Alabama, 294 US 587 (1935); 

Patterson v Alabama, 294 US 600 (1935); Rogers v Alabama, 192 US 

226 (1903); Seals v Wiman, 304 F24 53 (5th Cir 1962); Mitchell v 

Johnson, 250 FSupp 117 (MD Ala 1966); White v Crook, 251 FSupp 

401 (MD Ala 1966) (3-judge court). 

61. Noting that of all the black policemen, detectives, 

marshals, sheriffs, constables, probation and truant officers in 

1930, only 7% were employed in the South, Myrdal says: 

The geographic distribution of Negro policemen is in inverse 
relation to the percentage of Negroes in the total 
population. Mississippi, South Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia 
and Alabama -- the only states with more than 1/3 Negro 
population -- have not one Negro policeman in them, though 
they have nearly 2/5 of the total Negro populations of the 
nation. 

2 Myrdal, An American Dilemma 543 (Pantheon Paperback 1964). 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: INSTITUTIONAL SEGREGATION 

62.4% Ala Penal Code, 1865-66, $241: Ala Acts, 1911, p. 356; 

Ala Code, 1876, §4321. Segregation of black and white jail 

inmates. last codified as Ala Code, 1940 & 1958, tit. 12 §188; 

tit 45, §§121-3, $172, §183. Declared unconstitutional in 

Washington v Lee, 263 FSupp 327 (MD Ala 1966). 

16 

 



  

63. Ala Laws, 1876, p. 285. White and Negro prisoners are 

not to be confined permanently together in the same apartments 

before conviction, if there are enough separate apartments. 

Misdemeanor, with a penalty of a fine not less than $50 nor more 

than $100. Declared unconstitutional in Washington v Lee, 263 

FSupp 327 (MD Ala 19686). 

64. Ala Laws, 1884-1885, p. 192. It is unlawful for white 

convicts, whether state or county convicts, and colored convicts 

to be chained together, or to be allowed to sleep together, or to 

be confined in same room or apartment when not at work. Declared 

unconstitutional in Washington v Lee, 263 FSupp 327 (MD Ala 

1966) . 

65. Ala Laws, 1885, p. 187, §19. Provided for segregation 

of prison inmates by race. Later codified as Ala Code, 1940 & 

1958, tit. 45, §52. Declared unconstitutional in Washington v 

Lee, 263 FSupp 327 (MD Ala 1966). 

66. Ala Acts, 1923, p. 67. Segregation of black and white 

prisoners who were tubercular patients. Later codified as Ala 

Code, 1940 &.1988, tit 45, §4. 

67. ‘Ala Acts, 1923, p. 738. Segregation of black and white 

mental deficient. Last codified as Ala Code, 1940 & 1958, tit 

45, §248. Constitutionality questioned in United States v 

Alabama, 252 FSupp 95 (MD Ala 1966), and repealed by Ala Code, 

1875, 81=1-10. 

68. Ala Laws, 1927, p.521. Segregation in county home for 

the poor. last codified as Ala Code, 1940 & 1958, tit. 44, §10. 

17 

 



Constitutionality questioned in United States v Alabama, 252 

  

FSupp 95 (MD Ala 1966), and repealed by Ala Code, 1975, §1-1-10. 

69. ‘Ala Acts, 1931, p. 166, Segregation of black and white 

prison inmates. Last codified as Ala Code, 1958, tit 45, §52. 

Declared unconstitutional in Washington v Lee, 263 FSupp 327 (MD 

Ala 1966). 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: ASSOCIATIONAL SEGREGATION 

70. Myrdal observed the following about professional and 

business contacts between the races: 

Voluntary associations -- civic, social, business, and 
professional -- almost always prohibit Negro members in the 
South *** unless the association is concerned with some 
phase of the Negro problem. They simply refuse to invite 
Negroes to membership or to admit them when they apply for 
membership, whether by formal policy or by informal ad hoc 
action of the membership committee. #*** The professional 
associations, such as the state bar and medical societies, 
usually admit Negro members in the North but not in the 
South. **x% 

[T]rade unions *** exclude or segregate Negroes. 

Because of their exclusion from the various 
associations, Negroes have formed their own associations. 

2 Myrdal, An American Dilemma 638-39 (Pantheon Paperback 1964). 

Membership in their own segregated associations does 
not help Negroes to success in the larger American society. 

*** Negroes are active in associations because they 
are not allowed to be active in much of the other organized 
life of American society. *** Negroes are largely kept 
out, not only of politics proper, but of most purposive and 
creative work in trade unions, businessmen’s groups, 
pressure groups, large-scale civic improvement and charity 
organizations and the like. 

2 Myrdal, An American Dilemma 952-53 (Pantheon Paperback 1964). 

18 

 



  

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: RACIAL DEFINITIONS 

71. “Ala Code, 1907,.p. 218, Section 2. The term “negro” 

within the meaning of this Code, includes “mulatto.” The term 

"mulatto” or “person of color” includes persons of mixed blood 

descended on the part of the father or mother from Negro 

ancestors, to the fifth generation inclusive, though one ancestor 

of each generation may have been a white person. (The fifth 

generation was substituted for the third generation by the Code 

Committee of the 1907 Code. Prior to this, the third generation 

was the term used in the laws.) Ala Laws, 1927, p. 716, 

redefined mulatto to include a person descended “from negro 

ancestors, without reference to or limit of time or number of 

generations removed.” The recodification of this section, Ala 

Code, tit 1, §2 (1940), includes the following Editor’s Note: 

Prior to 1927 a person was a “negro” if descended on 
the part of the father or mother from negro ancestors, to 
the fifth generation inclusive, although one ancestor may 
have been a white person. See Code 1923, §2(5). At this 
time there was a great diversity among the states as to the 
legal definition of a “negro,” which resulted in the 
regrettable situation of a person today being legally a 
white person, and tomorrow after a short migration, being 
legally a colored person. In 1927, the legislative bodies 
of a great many states, working along the same line, amended 
their statutes so as to define the term as defined in the 
instant section. This definition, while a strict one, has 
the advantage of being sure and uniform. 

Ala Code, 1975, §1-1-1 eliminated the word “Negro” from its 

definitions. 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: MISCELLANEOUS RACIAL LAWS 

19 

 



  

72. Ala Const, 1865, Article IV, Section 36. The general 

assembly shall enact such laws at its next session, and from time 

to time thereafter, as will protect the freedmen of the State, 

and guard them and the State against evils that may arise from 

their sudden emancipation. There is no equivalent provision in 

the 1868 Constitution, and thus this provision was repealed by 

implication. 

73. Ala Acts, 1915, pb. 727. It is unlawful ‘to require any 

white female nurse to nurse in wards or rooms in hospitals, 

either public or private, in which Negro men are placed. It is 

unlawful for any white female nurse to nurse in wards or rooms in 

hospitals, either public or private, in which Negro men are 

placed. Penalty, a fine of $10 to $200, and there may also be 

added confinement in county jail, or hard labor for county not 

exceeding six months. Later codified as Ala Code, 1940, tit. 46, 

§§188-9; repealed and replaced by Ala Acts, 1945, p. 98; codified 

as Ala Code, 1958, tit. 46 §189(19); repealed by Ala Code, 1975, 

$1-1-10. 

74. ‘Ala Laws, 1923, p. 152, §29. Tax collector to record 

the sex and race of each person paying poll tax. Later codified 

as Ala Code, 1923, 83035; modified by Ala law, 1935, p.256; 

codified as Ala Code, 1940 & 1958, tit. 51, §244; repealed by Ala 

Code, 1975, §1-1-10. 

75. Between 1930 and 1957, Alabama executed 2 whites and 18 

blacks for rape. Federal Bureau of Prisons, Federal Prisons 99 

(1957); Federal Bureau of Prison, National Prisoner Statistics 

20 

 



  

(1956) . 

76. In 1961 Gov. John Patterson authorized the disbursement 

of $3,000.00 from the Governor’s Emergency Fund to Wesley Critz 

George to write The Biology of the Race Problem, which asserted 

the biological inferiority of blacks. McMillen, The Citizens’ 

Council: Organized Resistance to the Second Reconstruction, 

1954-64 (1971), p. 169. 

77. At least twice, the Governor of Alabama was personally 

enjoined from interfering with attempts to desegregate schools. 

United States v Wallace, 218 FSupp 290 (ND Ala 1963); United 

States v Wallace, 222 FSupp 485 (MD 1963) (Five-judge court). 

78. In a joint resolution commending Governor Wallace “for 

his prompt action in dispatching the Alabama Highway Patrol and 

other law enforcement officers to Birmingham to quell the mob 

violence in that city,” the Legislature also stated that ”the 

federal government has long assumed a policy of tacit 

encouragement and active support of irresponsible racist 

agitators sent into this state to defy our laws and to 

deliberately inflame unstable emotions into frenzied, savage, 

racial violence.” In a commendation to the state public safety 

director and the state highway patrol, the Legislature 

characterized the disturbance as ”depredations upon persons and 

property incited by out of state racist agitators”. Ala Acts 

1963, p.388. 

ELECTION PRACTICES AND FACTS 

21 

 



79. The winner in the Democratic primary for a place on the 

  

County Commission has, in the past, been the winner in the 

general election for that place. 

80. The Republican and Democratic Parties use a runoff 

primary for county commission positions if no candidate has 

received a majority in the first primary. 

RACIAL APPEALS IN ADVERTISING 

81. Subtle or overt racial appeals have been used in 

political campaigns in the County within the last 20 years. 

82. Carl Elliott, running for US Congress in the 1964 

Democratic primary, ran ads in the newspapers throughout his 

district stating that he had opposed every civil rights bill for 

15 years. An example of this ad is found in the Birmingham News, 

31 May 1964, p.B5. 

83. George C. Hawkins, running for Congress in the 1964 

Democratic primary, ran ads in the newspapers throughout his 

district that stated his support for “states rights,” which were 

code words or shorthand for opposition to federal civil rights 

legislation. An example of this ad is found in the Birmingham 

News, 29 May 1964, p.7. 

84. George C. Wallace, running for the 1964 Democratic 

nomination for President, ran ads in the newspapers throughout 

Alabama on behalf of his delegate slate stating his and their 

support for ”states’ rights,” which were code words or shorthand 

for opposition to federal civil rights legislation. An example 

22 

 



  

of this ad is found in the Birmingham News, 3 May 1964, p. B4. 

85. John Patterson, running for governor in the 1966 

Democratic primary, ran ads in the newspapers throughout Alabama 

claiming that he had defended Alabamians’ constitutional rights 

from 1959 to 1963 and called on Alabamians to elect him so the 

State could “return to our winning ways” on civil rights issues. 

Example of these ads are found in the Birmingham Post-Herald, 29 

April 1966, p.8, and 22 April 1965, p.20. 

86. Lambert Mims, running for US Senate in the 1972 

Democratic primary, ran ads in the newspapers throughout Alabama 

saying, ”He will return schools to local control.” He advocated 

removal of federal court orders desegregating schools. An 

example of this ad is found in the Birmingham News, 29 April 

1972, +p. 7. 

87. Walter Flowers, running for Congress in the 1972 

Democratic primary, ran ads in the newspapers throughout his 

district stating that he believed in “returning] control of 

schools to local and state authorities.” He advocated removal of 

federal court orders desegregating schools. An example of this 

ad is found in the Birmingham News, 27 April 1968, p.6. 

88. George C. Wallace, running for Governor in the 1970 

Democratic primary runoff, ran ads in the newspapers throughout 

Alabama claiming that “militant blacks” had ”bloc voted” against 

him and for Albert Brewer. Brewer received the endorsement of 

all the black and predominantly black groups who made 

endorsements. 

23 

 



  

89. The Alabama Republican Party ran ads in the newspapers 

throughout Alabama in 1976 for “President Ford and his Alabama 

team” stating that Jimmy Carter was in favor of “busing,” meaning 

forced busing to achieve school desegregation. An example of 

this ad is found in the Birmingham News, 24 Oct 1976, p.2B. 

90. Albert Lee Smith, running for Congress in the 1978 

Republican primary, ran ads in the Birmingham newspapers accusing 

the incumbent John Buchanan of supporting “forced busing of 

school children” to achieve school desegregation. An example of 

this ad is found in the Birmingham News, 4 Sept. 1978, p.48. 

Buchanan received the endorsement of all the black and 

predominantly black groups who made endorsements. 

91. Dan Wiley, running for US Senate in the 1978 Democratic 

primary, ran ads in the newspapers throughout Alabama accusing 

his opponents Maryon Allen and Donald Stewart of promising the 

Alabama Democratic Conference that they would work for electoral 

systems which guarantee more black elected officials. An example 

of this ad is found in the Birmingham News, 24 Aug. 1978, p.55. 

Stewart had received the endorsement of all the black and 

predominantly black groups who made endorsements. 

92. George Williams, running for Alabama Supreme Court in 

the 1982 Democratic primary, ran ads asking voters to "look 

closely” at the candidates for the State Supreme Court, Place 3, 

and including pictures of himself, Justice Oscar Adams, and Jim 

Zeigler. An example of this ad is found in the Birmingham News, 

1 Sept. 1982, p.138A. 

24 

 



Se pA * 

93. It is unusual for one candidate to run an ad with his 

  

opponent’s picture in it. 

STATE POLICY ON SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS 

94. The use of at-large elections for county governments is 

a tenuous state policy. 

95. Most counties in Alabama have used single-member 

districts for the nomination or election of county commissioners 

at some time. 

96. The general law of Alabama has provided for the 

election of members of county commissions at-large since 1852. 

There have been and are still exceptions to this general rule. 

97. Each of the following counties now elects (or will 

elect at the next election) its county commission using 

single-member districts: 

Autauga 
Barbour 

Blount 

Butler 

Chambers 

Choctaw 

Clarke 

Colbert 

Conecuh 

Coosa 

Dale 

Escambia (adopted single-member districts in a referendum, but 
| has not yet implemented the law) 

Geneva 

Greene 

Hale 

Lamar 

Lauderdale 

Limestone 
Lowndes 

Marion 

Mobile 

25 

 



  

Monroe 

Montgomery 
Perry 

Pike 
Raldolph 
Russell 

Sumter 

Tallapoosa 
Tuscaloosa 

Washington 
Wilcox 

ELECTION PRACTICES AND FACTS 

98. Election practices such as at-large elections, runoffs, 

and numbered places discriminate against blacks, according to 

empirical studies published by reputable political scientists. 

99. Most black candidates are at a disadvantage in waging 

successful at-large campaigns in the County due to lack of 

financial resources and lack of access to campaign organizational 

skills outside of the black community. 

100. Blacks have almost no chance of being elected at large 

to the County Commission. 

101. Successful campaigns in the County are waged with the 

assumption that voters vote along racial lines. Thus candidates 

target a winning coalition assuming they will get the black vote 

or alternatively they try to minimize the black:white ratio (by 

minimizing the black vote or by maximizing the white vote). 

26 

 



  

Submitted by, 

0 2/ 
Edward Still 
714 South 29th Street 

Birmingham AL 35233-2810 
205/322-6631 

  

Vv 

James U. Blacksher Terry G. Davis, Esq. 
Larry Menefee, Esq. Seay & Davis 
Wanda Cochran, Esq. P.O. Box 6125 
Blacksher Menefee & Stein P.A. Montgomery, AL 36106 
P.O. BOX. 1051 

Mobile, AL 36633 

Julius L. Chambers, Esq. Reo Kirkland, Jr., Esq. 
Deborah Fins, Esq. P.O. Box 646 
NAACP Legal Defense Fund Brewton, AL 36427 
99 Hudson Street 

New York, NY 10013 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I, the undersigned attorney, do hereby certify that, prior 
to or immediately after filing the foregoing with the Court, I 
mailed or delivered a copy to: 

Alton L. Turner, Esqg., Turner & Jones, P.A., P.O. Box 207, 

Luverne, AL 36049 

D.L. Martin, Esqg., 215 South Main Street, Moulton, AL 35650 

David R. Boyd, Esq., Balch & Bingham, P.O. Box 78, 
Montgomery, AL 36101 

Jack Floyd, Esqg., Floyd Kenner & Cusimano, 816 Chestnut 
Street, Gadsden, AL 35999-2701 

¥.0. Kirk, Jr., Esg., P.O. Box A~-B, Carrollton, AL 35447 

H. R. Burnham, Esq., Herbert D. Jones, Esq., P.O. Box 1618, 

Anniston, AL 36202 

Warren Rowe, Esg., P O Box 150, Enterprise AL 36331 

Barry D. Vaughan, Esg., 121 North Norton Avenue, Sylacauga, 

27 

 



Ny 

  

AL 35130 

James Webb, Esqg., P O Box 238, Montgomery AL 36101 

ee M. Otts, Esg., P O Box 467, Brewton AL 427 

2 / 

  
  

28