Mapp v. Board of Education of the City of Chattanooga, Tennessee Appendix to Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellants

    I n  th e

United States (Eourt nf Appals
S ix t h  C ircu it  

No. 16,877

J am es J o n ath an  M a pp , et al.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,
—vs.—

T h e  B oard of E ducation  of th e  C it y  of 
Chattanooga , T ennessee , et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

ON A P PE A L  FR O M  T H E  U N IT E D  STATES D ISTR IC T COURT FOR T H E  
E A STE R N  D ISTR IC T OF TE N N E SSE E , S O U T H E R N  DIVISION

APPENDIX TO BRIEF OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS

D errick  A. B ell , Jr.
J ack  Greenberg

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019

A von N. W illiam s , J r .
Z. A lexander L ooby

McClellan-Looby Building- 
Charlotte at Fourth 
Nashville, Tennessee

Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellants



TABLE OF CONTENTS OF APPENDIX

PAGE

Relevant Docket Entries ..............................................  la

Progress Report on Desegregation—1964-1965 ........  6a

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Further Relief .........................  12a

Excerpts from Transcript of Hearing Held on May 1,
1965 ............................................................................. - 16a

Opinion of Wilson, D.J., Filed August 5, 1965 ..........  156a

Order of Wilson, D.J., Filed August 11, 1965 ........  164a

Notice of Appeal ..........................................................  166a

T estim o n y  :

Plaintiffs’ Witness:

Napolean B. Patton-—
Direct ...............................................................  86a
Cross .................................................................  87a
Redirect ............    89a
Recross ............................................................ - 89a

Defendants’ Witness:

Benny Carmichael—
Cross ......................................................... -......  16a

Recalled—
Direct ...................................................... -.......  92a
Cross .....    120a



11

E x h ib its  :
Offered Printed

Page Page
Plaintiffs’ Exhibits:

1— Newspaper Article ...........................  68a 122a
2— Teacher Employment Record ......... - 75a 125a
3— Transfer Record ........... ...............—  75a 136a



Relevant Docket Entries

8- 2 Complete record on appeal received from U. S.
Court of Appeals, together with copy of opinion 
(Miller, Weick & O’Sullivan, Circuit Judges) and 
mandates; as to the defendants, affirming judgment 
of District Court, and as to plaintiffs, remanding 
to the District Court for further proceedings con­
sistent with the opinion, filed. Copy of mandate for 
defendants mailed to Raymond Witt and for plain­
tiffs to Avon Williams by Clerk.

9- 9 Order, W ilso n , D.J. that deft, submit within 45
days a further plan with respect to desegregation 
of technical & vocational courses made available 
in public schools of Chatta.; (2) deft, submit with­
in 45 days full report on progress of desegregation 
in accordance with former orders in this cause, to 
include school yr. of 1962-63 & beginning Sep. ’63; 
(3) pltf. submit within 45 days legal memo, with 
respect as to his interpretation of Court of Appeals’ 
mandate with regard to teacher & principal assign­
ment & with regard to issues respecting transfers 
& assignments of pupils; (4) each party allowed 
15 days to respond to reports above ordered; (5) 
case set for further hearing on Fri. Nov. 15 at 9 :30
a.m. filed. Fmtered C.O.Bk. 18, pp. 16/17. Service 
of copies by Clerk to all counsel who were present 
at today’s conference, and also to Constance Motley.

10-24 Deft. Progress Report and Proposed plan for de­
segregation of technical & vocational courses in 
Chatta. Public Schools, filed. Service by counsel.

1963



2a

Relevant Docket Entries

11- 26 O rder, W ilson , D.J. that effective with the begin­
ning of the second quarter, Dec. 9, 1963, of the 
1963-64 school year, students will be admitted for 
study in technologies offered in the Chattanooga 
Technical Institute without regard to race. Such 
admissions shall be conditional, involving the fol­
lowing non-racial considerations: All applicants to 
be studied as to background training which might 
be substituted for the work & training completed 
during the current first quarter. Regular entrance 
requirements and procedures will be applied. Stu­
dents will be admitted to the school for the summer 
quarter under same conditions established for sec­
ond quarter. With beginning of 1964-65 school year, 
admissions shall be made on the basis of the use 
of the standard procedures. All other matters con­
sidered by the Court at the hearing on Nov. 15, 
1963, are taken under advisement and a decision is 
reserved, filed. Entered C. 0. Bk. 18, p. 259. Ser­
vice of copies by Clerk to all counsel of record.

12- 21 Opinion, Wilson, D . J that all vocational courses
in the public schools shall be offered without re­
gard to race effective Sept., 1964, filed. Service by 
clerk. Order to enter.

12-31 J udgm en t , W ilson , D.J. defendants’ plan for de­
segregation of Chatta. Technical Institute, effective 
12/9/63, approved; all other vocational & techni­
cal courses in the public schools of City of Chatta. 
shall be offered without regard to race effective 
beginning of school year in Sept. 1964; desegrega­

1963



3a

Relevant Docket Entries

tion of all courses other than vocational & techni­
cal courses, & desegregation of all schools, includ­
ing Kirkman, except with reference to vocational 
& technical courses, shall proceed in accordance 
with orders heretofore entered; defts. may adopt 
any policy or practice with reference to guidance, 
counseling, or placement of students in vocational 
courses as may seem proper, provided that no 
policy or practice may he based upon race or have 
as its primary purpose the delay or prevention of 
desegregation in accordance with this order or 
orders heretofore entered; allegations of the com­
plaint relating to assignment of teachers & princi­
pals upon a nonracial basis which were heretofore 
stricken from the complaint by order of this Court, 
are hereby restored to the complaint in accord­
ance with the mandate of the Court of Appeals; 
but no previous orders modified at this time, no 
further hearings scheduled, and no cause for entry 
of further orders; decision of Court made without 
prejudice to right of School Board to modify its 
policies with respect to teacher & principal assign­
ments and without prejudice to the right of plain­
tiffs to reassert the issue after a reasonable time; 
pltfs.’ objections with respect to assignment & 
transfer of pupils are not properly before Court 
at this time & not considered. Jurisdiction retained 
by the Court during period of transition to fully 
desegregated school system in and for City of 
Chattanooga. Entered C. 0. Bk. 18, pp. 342/44. 
Service of copies by Clerk to all counsel of record.

1963



4a

Relevant Docket Entries

1965

1-11 Progress report filed by defendants, Board of Edu­
cation for City of Chattanooga. Service by counsel.

3- 29 Plaintiffs’ motion for immediate further relief in
the desegregation of all phases of the school sys­
tem, teachers, transportation, R.O.T.C. etc., with 
brief attached. Service by counsel.

4- 30 Plaintiff’s Memorandum of points and authorities
in support of its motion for further relief filed. 
Service by counsel.

5- 3 Hearing on motion of plaintiffs filed 3/29/65 for
further relief. Evidence was introduced by parties, 
argued, taken under advisement by the court. Each 
party is required to submit briefs by May 10 and 
any response by parties must be submitted in five 
days thereafter. Wilson, D.J. Entered C.O.Bk. 23, 
p. 41.

5-7 Report on Projected Enrollment For Junior High 
Schools Single Zone with Tables I, II, III and IV 
attached as Exhibits filed. Service by counsel. (Mr. 
Raymond B. Witt, Jr.)

5-8 Defendants’ Brief opposing plaintiffs’ motion for 
further relief filed. Service by counsel.

5-10 Plaintiffs’ Brief in support of its motion for fur­
ther relief filed. Service by counsel.

5-14 Defendants’ Reply Brief to Motion for Further 
Relief filed. Service by counsel.



5a

Relevant Docket Entries

1965

8-5 Op in io n , W ilson , D.J. that no order of the court 
should enter at this time regarding the further de­
segregation of the school system, that the defen­
dants should be allowed additional time to resolve 
this issue; all remaining issues of the plaintiff’s 
motion will be denied as not being supported by 
the record, filed. Service of copies by Clerk to 
Raymond B. Witt for defendants; Avon N. Wil­
liams, Jr. & Z. Alexander Looby; Jack Greenberg 
& Derrick A. Bell, Jr., and William T. Underwood 
for plaintiffs.

8 -  11 Agreed O rder, W ilso n , D.J. according to next-
above opinion entered C.O.Bk. 24, p. 3, and filed. 
Service of attested copies by Clerk to all counsel of 
record.

9- 7 Notice of Appeal by plaintiffs, James Jonathan
Mapp and Deborah L’Tanya Mapp, b /n /f James 
R. Mapp, and James R. Mapp, together with 
$250.00 cost bond, filed. Service by counsel.



6a

Progress Report on Desegregation of 
Chattanooga Public Schools, 1964-65

(Filed January 11, 1965)

Chattanooga Board of Education 
Chattanooga, Tennessee 

November 11, 1964

This report is the third presented in compliance with 
the United States District Court order that a progress re­
port shall be made to the United States District Court 
after implementation of each annual step in the plan of 
desegregation of the Chattanooga Public Schools.

I ntroduction  and R eview

The initial step in the desegregation of the Chattanooga 
Public Schools involved grades one through three in 16 
selected elementary schools. This was carried out success­
fully in the fall of 1962 when 46 Negro students enrolled 
in six formerly all-white schools. The second step in the 
desegregation of the Chattanooga Public Schools included 
students in grades one through four in all elementary 
schools. The process continued to function smoothly in 
the fall of 1963 when ten formerly all white schools en­
rolled 505 Negro students and two formerly all Negro 
schools enrolled four white students. A supplementary 
report of the 1963 fall enrollment showed five instances 
of significant enrollment factors.

T hird  S tep of D esegregation

The third step in the plan of desegregation of the Chat­
tanooga Public Schools was effected at the beginning of 
the 1964-65 school year. All elementary schools, grades



7a

Progress Report on Desegregation of 
Chattanooga Public Schools, 1964-65

five and six, were included in the third step. As noted in 
the Supplementary Report, 1963-64, no official records 
would be received regarding enrollment by race in any 
school after the third official day of the 1963-64 school year. 
However, based upon a knowledge of the community the 
best estimates are that there are now 900 Negro students 
enrolled in eleven formerly all-white schools and 55 white 
students enrolled in three formerly all-Negro schools.

Special preparations for the implementation of the third 
step of desegregation followed those of the past. An­
nouncements were made to the public, law enforcement 
agencies were alerted and school administrative functions 
and registration procedures were followed as in the previ­
ous two years. No official records of enrollment by race 
have been kept. All students in grades one through six 
living in a specific school zone were admitted to the school 
in the zone. Permits have been issued based upon ap­
proved Board policy which excludes the question of race 
entirely.

The following schools, containing grades one through six, 
are desegregated: Avondale, G. Russell Brown, William 
J. Davenport, East Chattanooga, East Fifth Street, East- 
dale, Glenwood, Hemlock, Missionary Ridge, Oak Grove, 
Ridgedale, St. Elmo, Louis Sanderson, and Sunnyside. 
They are the only schools with pupils of both races in 
elementary school zones.

Classes were opened to all students in the Chattanooga 
Technical Institute in the winter of the 1963-64 school year, 
but no Negroes enrolled. Three are enrolled now. The plan 
for the desegregation of the vocational programs in the 
secondary schools as approved by the Court was imple-



106a

toward junior high and senior high as a total group.
Q. Why! A. It violates something that I think we have 

proven quite well in Chattanooga about the desegregation 
of schools. That is, that the introduction of a limited num­
ber of children to a successful desegregation—in other 
words, you could have accomplished the same thing if this 
were their intention by moving into 7 only and 10 only, 
and then 8 and 9, 11 and 12, rather than the total group,

—149—
and I think there should be this kind of reasoning taking 
that sort of step, you see. So, I would have disagreed 
with that approach even if I were intending to achieve 
the same end or objective in the same period of time.

Q. Not just because you don’t like it! A. No—

Mr. Williams: I object to his leading this witness, 
your Honor.

Q. Is it educationally sound, in your opinion! A. I don’t 
think it is as educationally sound.

Q. What difference do numbers make in a classroom? 
What differences does it make whether you have two Negro 
children or— A. It tends to push the teacher beyond the 
point that she can adjust to a need and problem that she 
has.

Q. Why! How? A. Because it is requiring more of 
her than she can give. She has got to build gradually 
toward what she can give and what she can adjust to, if 
she is going to teach adequately. This is true in every 
other consideration we make of a teacher. Everything. We 
don’t group children homogeneously when race is not in­
volved and load them on teachers all at one time. I don’t 
know why we can reason that we can do the same thing

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



107a

when it comes to race without giving the same considera­
tions.

—150—
Q. Do teachers prefer to teach white students? A. Yes, 

they do.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct

Mr. Williams: This is objected to, if your Honor 
please, whether teachers prefer to teach white stu­
dents is entirely irrelevant to any consideration in 
this case.

Mr. Witt: The whole purpose for us being in this 
courtroom today has to do with the quality of the 
education this community will get in the years ahead. 
What we are talking about, we are not playing a 
numbers game in the sense of so many Negroes here 
and so many white people there, we’re trying to do 
this in an intelligent way so that we have the first 
experience—

Mr. Williams: I hate to take up the time to make 
a responding speech, your Honor, but I would say 
that we are not here for the purpose of having a 
dissertation on quality of education and whether 
teachers prefer to teach white students. The Negro 
children in this city are entitled to have their con­
stitutional rights, the enjoyment of their constitu­
tional rights now, rather than have them in a 
deferred position, and that, your Honor, has no rele­
vance, whether she prefers to teach white children.

The Court: Well, state a question.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, based upon your experience, what 
happens to the children in a classroom that are progressing



108a

—151—
at the slowest rate? A. They are tended to be overlooked.

Q. What do you mean, overlooked?

Mr. Williams: I object to this, if your Honor 
please. It is highly incompetent and irrelevant. If 
this man were testifying as an expert on the basis 
of some study that he had individually made and 
published, that’s one thing. He is now just asking 
general questions about what happens with regard 
to some hypothetical situation—

Mr. Witt: Your Honor, this study is pursuant to 
an act of the United States Congress, authorizing 
the expenditure of federal funds for this particular 
kind of study to meet this particular kind of prob­
lem. It is the first one in the United States approved. 
I would like to go into in step by step. This goes 
to—

The Court: Gentlemen, it is much easier, after 
these hearings are over, to sort out what is relevant 
and what is not relevant. It is rather difficult as we 
go along to anticipate where a considerable amount 
of the testimony is relevant—

Mr. Williams: It is true that this is a matter of 
determination by the Court, and the Court is learned 
in the law. On the other hand, the Court is a human 
being. I remember the Court in Nashville refused 
to allow himself to hear incompetent evidence. Who 
knows the effect of the accumulation—

—152—
The Court: If I exclude the evidence and they 

desire to put it in the record, they have the right to 
do so. I ’ve found on these non-jury hearings that

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



109a

the better part of wisdom is to be rather broad in 
allowing evidence to be put in, and then when you 
go to consider the evidence just disregard that por­
tion of it not proper to consider. I ’ve overruled the 
immediate objection, let’s move along.

Q. I hand you what purports to be a proposal for school 
board grants for programs on educational problems inci­
dent to school desegregation, submitted to the United 
States Commissioner of Education under the provisions of 
Title 4, Section 405, Public Law 88, 352 Civil Rights Act 
of 1964. Dr. Carmichael, was this proposal prepared under 
your direction! A. Yes, it was.

Q. Was it submitted to the Chattanooga board of educa­
tion! A. Yes, it was.

Q. Was it approved by the Chattanooga board of educa­
tion? A. Yes.

Q. Was it submitted to the Department of Health, Ed­
ucation and Welfare of the United States government? 
A. Yes.

Q. Was it approved by the Department of Health, Ed­
ucation and Welfare? A. Yes.

—153—
Q. Is it in operation? A. Yes, it is.
Q. Have you received the funds? A. Partially.
Q. Partially? A. Yes.
Q. Do you recall the section of the Civil Rights Act 

under which this was authorized? A. Section 405 of Title 
4, entitled Grants to Boards of Education.

Q. Do you recall the purpose for which these grants 
were made? A. The purpose is to provide grants to 
boards of education to conduct in-service education pro­
grams on problems occasioned by desegregation.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



110a

Q. Now, what remains to be done under this particular 
study? A. The evaluation, summary evaluation, and con­
clusions drawn with regard to changes that have been pro­
duced in teachers, on this first phase.

Q. On the first phase? A. Yes, sir.
Q. This will take place when? A. Following the end of 

the May 8 meeting, the actual preparation of the report 
will begin.

— 154—
Q. Who will prepare the report? A. It is the primary 

responsibility of Mr. William Smith, the director of the 
project.

Q. Is he an employee of the Chattanooga board of educa­
tion? A. Yes, he is.

Q. What will be done with this report once it is pre­
pared? A. It will be used to extend this kind of training 
and preparation of teachers on into the junior high level, 
and to accomplish the kinds of things in Avondale that 
are implied that should be accomplished, and some of that 
has already begun. We have already identified three 
specific kinds of things that must be done to carry on an 
adequate program in Avondale, and I ’d like to mention 
those, if I may. These are just conclusions drawn at this 
time—

Q. These are just temporary conclusions? A. These 
are temporary conclusions which our staff has begun.

Q. Are these your conclusions? A. My conclusions and 
those of the division of instruction of the Chattanooga 
school administrative staff. These are going to be the 
three kinds of things we develop in order to cope with 
the problem or to offer an adequate education program. 
I should like to mention them if you’ll let me.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



I l ia

— 155—

Q. Go ahead. A. One is the development of a cur­
riculum adequate to meet the needs of those children, 
particularly in pinning down the specific kinds of learning 
skills that we must pursue in order to provide an effective 
learning program for these youngsters. That gets quite 
detailed and involved.

Q. Can you illustrate that before you give your other 
two points? A. The best illustration that I would use 
would be the need to introduce a telephonic program for 
ear training for youngsters before they are introduced into 
first grade work, to use a specific in the area of curriculum.

Q. Can you think of a specific in terms of the seventh 
grade? A. No.

Q. What do you mean by telephonic? A. It’s a device 
by which certain sounds are prerecorded in relation to 
letters and certain pictures, and children are just—it’s 
flashed on a screen and it is played from a record, and 
children hear and identify the particular object or symbol 
that goes with it. This comes directly out of the program 
of the specialized Amadone school of Washington D.C.

Q. Will this be limited to Negro schools? A. It won’t 
after we get it perfected and introduced. In fact, our 
major objective is to introduce it and perfect it in such

— 156—

a way that we can then disseminate it to all schools, those 
which may remain predominately Negro and those which 
are white, and so on.

Q. Would this relate to Operation Headstart? x\. Yes, 
it would.

Q. Will this relate to senior high? A. Eventually there' 
must be an extension of it.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



112a

Q. What is the second point? A. The establishment of 
an adequate classroom environment in the Avondale School 
per se. This is described in terms of the organization of 
material in the room, even going to the point of being 
sure we put lines on the chalk boards by which children 
write; that certain specified materials are in every room, 
such as maps and globes, as opposed to just a sundry 
listing of materials that may be in a room now; and then 
the area dealing with teacher attitude of types of ques­
tions that are asked, how they are asked, and so on. And 
the consultants give very specific guides on these kinds 
of things, in order to teach children effectively. May I 
go on to the third area?

Q. Yes. A. The third area is the development of an 
adequate school-parent program. This is identified in 
Detroit, it is identified in Pittsburgh, it’s identified in every 
area where they have undertaken this kind of thing. To

—157—
develop a type of program with parents so that you have 
their interest and their cooperation and their assistance 
in the total program. These are kinds of things that give 
rise to and are the basis for all of your major projects now 
in this area of dealing with the culturally disadvantaged, 
the Headstart programs, and so on. They come from the 
proof that these kinds of things are necessary if we are 
going to help children as they ought to be helped.

Q. How many teachers were involved in this first step? 
A. 75.

Q. How many of these were junior high? A. 25. See, 
you had 25 at Avondale, 25 elementary outside of Avon­
dale, and 25 junior high, the make-up of the group.

Q. Were these Negro teachers and white teachers? A. 
Negro teachers and white teachers. More whites than

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



113a

Negroes, more white teachers involved than white teachers.
Q. Now, what is the second step in this project? A. It 

depends on which phase you are talking about?
Q. What is the second phase? A. The second phase is 

a similar program conducted during the summer, in which 
the consultants returned to our school system and worked 
with a new group of teachers all day for 10 days. The 
teachers involved observed in Avondale and analyzed 
records of children and methods and procedures used

—158—
and so on.

Q. Will this idea be continued or discontinued at the 
end of the second phase? A. It will be continued and 
expanded. It will be continued upward first into junior 
high and particularly into Hardy Junior High, where 
these children will attend junior high school, and there is 
a fair commitment already on the part of the principal 
and this staff that it would like to pick up the kind of 
thing that Avondale is doing and be sure that it continues 
a similar program into the junior high school. Plans are 
being formulated to do this.

Q. You selected two Negro teachers to go to Avondale? 
A. Yes.

Q. Would you describe the process by which you selected 
these teachers?

Mr. Williams: May it please the Court, I object, 
on the ground that this is entirely irrelevant to any—

The Court: Gentlemen, could we not move on to 
the junior high and high school programs? Would 
that not be the area that we are concerned with here ?

Mr. Witt: Your Honor, it is fairly clear the dif­
ferences between counsel for plaintiff and myself,

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



114a

this school board and the plaintiff, it has to do with 
objectives. I ’m trying to identify for your Honor 
the kinds of considerations that are necessary in the 
opinion of this defendant and this board to make the

- 1 5 9 -
kinds of decisions with regard to people. Adminis­
trative decisions that result in the kind of an educa­
tion where the constitutional rights will have mean­
ing. I can illustrate with these two people, that 
they just didn’t pick two Negro teachers who had 
graduated from college and had the necessary 
courses in education. I ’m trying to get across for 
your information and guidance the kinds of prob­
lems that this superintendent must deal with if 
he is to direct this effort at, not the number gained, 
but the question of education.

The Court: It seems to me the relevant issues 
are the problems confronting the school board in 
the junior highs and senior highs. If you think you 
can make it relevant I ’ll allow you to proceed and 
we can determine whether it becomes relevant. As 
I understand now, you are relating the problems that 
have been confronted in the Avondale School, which 
school has now been desegregated?

Mr. Witt: As the best evidence, in face the only 
evidence, this superintendent and this school system 
has to guide them in planning for approaching un­
known territory, which is the 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 
11th and 12th grades.

The Court: Well, so far there hasn’t been any 
thing in the record, has there, to show the problem 
of Avondale is the problem of a junior high or the 
problem of a high school?

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



8a

Progress Report on Desegregation of 
Chattanooga Public Schools, 1964-65

mented, but as of this date there have been no Negro 
enrollees.

Z one C hanges

According to official Board records there have been 12 
zone changes in the Chattanooga Public Schools since the 
last report to the Court. All elementary school zones are 
shown in Appendix A. Many factors contribute to and 
make necessary the changing of school zones. However, 
in no instance were there any considerations given to race 
factors. The enrollment of all schools during any school 
year will change almost daily and certainly from month to 
month. Some school enrollments will show only slight 
changes while others will vary greatly.

The following zone changes have been made since the 
last report to the Court. Also noted are explanations and 
primary reasons which dictated the changes:

Ft. Cheatham-Ridgedale

The Ft. Cheatham Elementary School was closed in No­
vember of 1963. The school property along with adjacent 
property was acquired for freeway right-of-way. The Ft. 
Cheatham Elementary School zone was added to the Ridge- 
dale Elementary School zone.

Cedar Hill-East Lake Elementary

A portion of the East Lake Elementary zone was made 
optional for the 1964-65 school year and will become a 
permanent part of the Cedar Hill zone in the fall of 1965. 
This was done in order to relieve East Lake and to im­
prove the program at Cedar Hill. There are no Negro 
children in the zone of either school.



115a

Mr. Witt: Perhaps I can make this connection.
—160—

Q. What problems would there be in desegregating an 
entire junior high school, 7th, 8th, 9th grade! A. It’s a 
problem of amplifying each separate problem that you 
have when the number is smaller. By separate problems 
I mean such thing as learning level adjustment, boy-girl 
relationships, determination of how to handle extra-cur­
ricular activities, and this sort of thing.

Q. I f you have a junior high school with five Negroes 
entering the 7th grade, is there any different between this 
situation and the situation where you have 200 Negroes 
entering the 7th grade! A. Tremendously.

Q. Detail me, please? A. The teachers will not feel that 
they have a potential—potentially problem spot, to put it 
in terms of explosiveness or just learning problems or 
boy-girl, white-Negro relationship adjustment and so on. 
In the case of the five, they will not have this feeling. 
In the case of the 200, it will be on the tips of their 
tongues and their thoughts at all times, and this is the 
difference in the thing we are dealing with.

Q. How do you know this! A. They talk with you 
about it, they stop you and talk with you.

—161—
Q. Who is they? A. The teachers who are exposed to 

this. The teachers from Avondale, immediately when this 
set in, would stand and talk with you by the hour about 
this incident and this incident and I ’m afraid this is going 
to happen, and so on. I ’m not saying these are things to 
be afraid of or worried about, and I ’m not afraid of them 
and worried about them. I am just saying that these are 
kinds of things that are on the minds of teachers and you 
have to help them get them off.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—-Recalled—Direct



116a

Q. Are you saying there is a difference between Avon­
dale and Glenwood? A. There is no difference between 
Avondale at this time last year and Glenwood at this 
time this year. The concerns of teachers at Glenwood 
are at the stage this year that Avondale’s were last year. 
And those are just sheer fear, frustration, and concern 
about the problem that they are working with.

Q. Does this result from numbers? A. Yes, in large 
measure it does, because it has reached the point that they 
cannot continue to teach as diverse group, or to carry as 
many who are having special learning problems, out of 
30 children, without some kind of help.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, when you identify teachers such as 
this, why don’t you just discharge them? A. First, they 
have tenure. Secondly, these are genuine good teachers, 
their concern is wholly with teaching children. I ’ve never

—162—
had a concern in that regard. I respect them greatly for 
the concern they have. If they weren’t feeling this way 
about it, the problem would be much greater.

Q. Can you identify any other problem in connection 
with numbers? We’re asking this Court to justify the 
plan that we proposed before and has been approved, 
on the basis that what we have learned says that we should 
continue at this pace. This is the reas'on I ask you these 
questions. Is Sunnyside different from—in numbers, is 
Sunnyside different from Glenwood? A. Yes.

Q. How? A. The number is much smaller and the num­
ber per classroom with a given problem is less.

Q. If the number of pupils of another race in a classroom 
is small, this means that the problem in that classroom 
is small? A. If that race carries a preponderance of 
children with problems, yes. It’s not the matter that it is 
a different race, it’s a matter that more children have

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



117a

problems of that group with which the teacher must be 
concerned.

Q. Does the number of the Negro pupils in a classroom 
increase or decrease the frustrations of the teacher? A. 
If they have individual problems which our groups have 
had, it increases the frustrations of the individual teacher.

—163—
Q. What about the situation at Louis Sanderson, where 

you have two white pupils in a formerly all-Negro school? 
Any problem? A. Not that I know of. The problem is not 
even one of minority grouping in a classroom so far as I 
know. It’s not a case of the children being afraid of one 
another or being hostile to one another. We’ve not had any 
problem with this, never had. It’s learning and behavior 
problems of individual children that I ’m talking about, that 
teachers are concerned with.

Q. Do you think you know things to do now that will 
affect the quality of education in junior high school when 
we desegregate? A. We know a few things to do. We’re 
going to take more of these children into junior high schools 
with a specific delineation of what their problems are and 
what their learning levels are.

Q. Do you have an answer to all the problems? A. No. 
I don’t even know all the problems.

Q. You don’t know all the problems? A. No.
Q. Does anybody? A. Not that I know of. And from 

the experience we had in trying to get help with this project, 
I don’t think many people do.

—164—
Q. Where did you go for help with this project? A. I 

went to Detroit, I went to the University of Florida, I went 
to Vanderbilt, I went to Peabody, I went to the University 
of North Carolina. I tried about 10 people.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—-Recalled,—Direct



118a

Q. What were you. looking for? A. I was looking for 
a person that knew how to deal with this problem. How 
you really get in the classroom and teach a group of Negro 
children, adjust your methods and so on, so that they will 
fit. You will not find a person that I know of who is really 
comfortable in dealing with this question, to help teachers 
in a classroom.

Q. Do you have the manpower to meet these problems? 
A . No.

Q. Will the accelerated desegregation that the plaintiffs 
are asking for in their motion before this Court, will this 
increase your problems? A. Yes.

Q. How much? A. I don’t know how to estimate it. I 
would put it this way, to the point that I would not be 
inclined to try to work it out, in terms of really accommodat­
ing. I’cl merely keep the lid on, so to speak.

Q. You mean the problem would be so big you—

Mr. Williams: I object to that—
Mr. Witt: Excuse me, I withdraw it.

—165—
The Court: Sustained.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct

A. It’s the same thing I was referring to a minute ago. 
You’ll do what you can and you’ll judge what you do by 
what kinds of problems are you are dealing with. This is the 
only answer that I can really give to it. If 90 per cent of 
the problems are just keeping order, we’ll spend our time 
on that. If 90 per cent of the problems are in dealing with 
learning difficulties, we’ll spend our time on that.

Q. Can you describe briefly, based upon your experience, 
what you think will be the result, viewed as the school



119a

superintendent in Chattanooga, if the plaintiff’s request 
with regard to accelerated desegregation is approved? 
What would you expect? A. You mean in terms of num­
bers, instructional problems?

Q. The impact on the school system? Before you answer 
the question, I remind you, as school superintendent, that 
you have not recommended complete desegregation.

Mr. Williams: I object—
The Court: I ’ll allow him to answer the first ques­

tion, if the second was a question.

A. I will answer it in terms of the impact will be one of 
going beyond the point, in some instances, to where teachers 
could make the kinds of adjustments to the problem that 
I want them to make. Consequently, they will adapt meth­
ods and procedures to adjust—contain the situation, but

—1 6 6 -
will not be inclined to move toward thoroughly under­
standing it and overcoming it, with their own adaptations. 
This is the best possible way that I could put it. Let me 
use this as an example, if you will permit it. I had a junior 
high school this year that is not even a junior high school 
that we talked about before, who in foreseeing desegrega­
tion said should we not stop this year, perhaps, our 9tli 
grade outings, because desegregation is coming and 
shouldn’t we stop them. This was not the belief or feeling 
of the principal. I reasoned with them that if I were you 
I would wait, when desegregation occurs in the 7tli grade 
your school will make a far better adjustment to it than 
you’d think. I would hope that you would not start using 
this sort of method to escape doing what ought to be done 
for children. I cite this to say I think you can continue

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



120a

the kind of extra-curricular activities that are good for 
boys and girls, if you will be sensible about it, and if you 
give children time to adjust to it and parents time to ad­
just to it. On the other hand, I think to go at it otherwise, 
you may destroy some awfully important kinds of oppor­
tunities for boys and girls. I just don’t think that we are 
wise in moving this direction. I cannot say that, yes, you 
are going to take the 9th grade to Lake Winnepasauka 
and swim. I mean, I can’t force them to do it and I don’t 
want to. If people don’t want to swim, they don’t swim, 
as far as I ’m concerned. But I ’d wish they would continue

—167—
to go to Lake Winnepasauka and swim, because I think 
boys and girls need to do this. There is not a thing in 
the world wrong with doing it with both races. In fact, 
I don’t think boys and girls are going to conduct them­
selves well until they can do whatever boys and girls are 
supposed to do, in the presence of both races. But this 
takes time and adjustment and development for children 
to do it, as I see it operating in schools.

Mr. W itt: No further questions.

Cross Examination by Mr. Williams:

Q. Dr. Carmichael, regardless of race, you have ques­
tions involving cultural patterns, problems, educational 
problems involving cultural patterns? A. Yes, you do.

Q. This is just by way of comment, but are you familiar 
with Fisk University? A. Yes, I am.

Q. Are you aware that Fisk has a race relations depart­
ment and has had an institute there for years and years, 
and as a matter of fact this summer has been conducting

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Cross



121a

an institute where teachers are involved in desegregation? 
A. Yes.

Q. You did not, when you said you were at a loss and 
went to all these white universities up north and all over 
the country, it didn’t occur to you to contact someone at

— 168—

Fisk? A. Yes, sir, I know your people at Fisk. They 
don’t know how to do what I ’m talking about.

Q. I was just curious. A. Yes, sir.
* • # # *

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Cross



122a

PRESS RELEASE

The Mountain City Teachers Association is greatly con­
cerned with many of the existing conditions and practices 
with which our teachers are faced at this time. The failure 
of the School Board to integrate the teachers is not com- 
patable with their often expressed belief in quality educa­
tion. This continued practice of segregation can only re­
sult in low morale and a feeling of insecurity of a large 
segment of teachers. Dissatisfied and insecure instructors 
do not beget quality education; it is the opposite.
The continued hiring of white teachers to teach the extra 
classes brought about by the transfer of Negro pupils into 
the so-called white schools creates a surplus of teachers 
in the here-to-fore Negro school. The decrease in the stu­
dent body of certain schools may well lead to the closing 
of the schools and the abolition of some teaching positions.

Already more than thirty white teachers have been hired 
because of the 900 or more Negro pupils tied to the so- 
called white schools. This failure to integrate has already 
cost the taxpayers money for surplus teachers in the sys­
tem. There is no reason why the integration of the facul­
ties of all the schools can not be done smoothly and har­
moniously.
The children who are carrying the brunt of this great 
social revolution have a right to have some of their own 
teachers teach them. This certainly would alleviate some 
of the pressure and minimize some of the frustrations 
experienced by those children. This is certainly a deter­
rent to quality education. This condition could be remedied

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 1



123a

very easily and simply. Place at least one Negro and one 
white teacher in every racial school; balance the person­
nel in certain schools to meet the psychological needs and 
racial proportion of the student body.
The integration of the staff should be an essential phase 
of the desegregation program of our schools, instead, 
every conceivable reason that can be found is used to delay 
the inevitable; workshops to teach teachers to teach in 
desegregated schools; Negro counselors (glorified disci­
plinarians) assigned to schools with a large Negro pupil 
population.

— 2 —

Local #428 favors total integration of teachers and stu­
dents. We feel that it is impossible for teachers to teach 
democracy without practicing it in the classroom as well 
as in everyday living. Psychologically, children understand 
democracy when they experience it in action rather than 
through abstraction.
To integrate teachers in Chattanooga would not be setting 
a precedence in the South. Teachers are integrated in some 
cities in Kentucky, Oak Ridge and Cooksville, Tennessee; 
why not Chattanooga?
Our All American City has successfully integrated City 
Hall, downtown department stores, theatres, restaurants 
and other public and private facilities without ill-effect. 
Why has the school system not seen fit to keep pace with 
other facets of the community?
Since Negro and white teachers are working together in 
inservice training programs and other programs for the 
betterment of Chattanooga’s youth, we should have de­
veloped a relationship which would lend itself to the sue-

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 1



124a

cessful integration of the faculties of Chattanooga Public 
Schools.
It is our belief that the Chattanooga Public Schools can not 
provide quality education for all of its pupils until the 
schools are thoroughly desegrated. We further believe 
that the maximum benefit of all the schools to all pupils 
will only come with complete integration.
We call upon all citizens, including teachers, and the Board 
of Education, to help take democracy off paper and put 
it into immediate practice.

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 1



9a

Progress Report on Desegregation of 
Chattanooga Public Schools, 1964-65

Avondale-Garber-Glenwood

The enrollment at Avondale School exceeded to a con­
siderable degree all expectations and projections. In order 
to prevent Avondale’s capacity from becoming untenable 
certain portions of the Avondale zone adjacent to Garber 
and Glenwood schools were zoned to those schools. Both 
white and Negro children were affected.

Ridgedale-Oak Grove

Displacements of students because of the freeway con­
struction caused the enrollment of Ridgedale School to 
be more than building capacity. In order to prevent the 
setting up of classes on the stage and in the hall at Ridge­
dale, a small area of the Ridgedale zone was transferred 
to the Oak Grove zone. All the transfers were Negro 
students.

Piney Woods-Trotter

Both Piney Woods and Trotter schools are located in or 
adjacent to an industrial area in the city. A number of 
students who lived closer to Piney Woods were required 
to attend Trotter and this necessitated their walking 
through a heavily trafficked area. In order to provide for 
their safety and to lessen the distance they would have 
to travel, the zone was changed to allow them to go to 
Piney Woods Scool. Only Negro children reside in each 
school zone.

Moccasin Bend Area

The city limits of Chattanooga were recently changed by 
ordinance to include an area known as the Moccasin Bend



125a

C hattanooga P ublic  S chools 
1161 West Fortieth Street 

Box 2013
Chattanooga 9, Tennessee 

April 30, 1965

Reports and Records on Teacher Employment, 
Assignments, and Discharges for 1960-61 through 
1964-65 in Chattanooga Public Schools as Required 
by Civil Subpoena, Civil Action File No. 3564, 
to Dr. Bennie Carmichael Dated April 28, 1965

These reports and records are submitted in compliance 
with the Civil Subpoena cited above. For purposes of 
clarification, the word “hired” used in the third line of 
the second paragraph of the letter requesting that the 
subpoena be issued is interpreted to mean “new teachers 
employed” ; inasmuch as the last sentence of the letter 
states that “In teacher information, show whether hired 
as replacements or otherwise.” The report is based upon 
this interpretation rather than the meaning which would 
include all teachers employed by the Chattanooga Board 
of Education each year whether new employees or tenure 
employees. The word “respective” used in the same third 
line of the second paragraph is interpreted to mean “the 
schools of the Chattanooga School System” ; whereas, 
“respective” used in two other places in the same sentence 
is interpreted to mean the individual schools to which 
teachers were assigned or from which they were discharged.

The report, beginning on the next page, shows new 
employees by school years, 1960-61 through 1964-65.

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2



126a

Teachers for each year are shown separately by race and 
according to school to which they were assigned. Numbers 
of teachers discharged are shown by school, likewise, and 
the new assignments are recorded in terms of replace­
ments for resignations, retirements, or transfers, and for 
new positions created as a result of increased enrollments 
or other requirements for a new position.

This report is based upon the official minutes of all 
school board meetings in which teachers were approved by 
the Chattanooga Board of Education from 1960-61 to the 
present date, school directories for 1959-60 and 1960-61, 
and annual reports to the Board of Education showing 
personnel assigned to schools as of the tenth day of school 
for the 1961-62, 1962-63, 1963-64, and 1964-65 school years, 
verifying the employment of teachers by individual schools. 
These records are in the courtroom for substantiation of 
the summary report.

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ B e n ja m in  E. C aem ich ael  
Benjamin E. Carmichael 
Superintendent

BEC:rl



127a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2

School Year 1960-61
White Teachers

School

Num ber Num ber . , T,
N ew  Teachers A ssigned P er 

Teachers Dis- Replace- N ew 
E m ployed charged m ent P ositions

P osition

Gain

Change

Loss
Brainerd High 5 5 26
Chattanooga High 8 8 8
Kirkman 4 3 1 1
Brainerd Junior 3 3
East Lake Junior 4 4 5
East Side Junior 5 5
Hardy Junior 5 5 2
Elbert L o n g  Junior 1 i 2
Lookout Junior 4 4
North Chatta. Junior 7 5 2 2
P a rk  Place Junior 10
Avondale Elementary 1 1 4
Henry L. Barger Elem. 2 2
G. Eussell Brown Elem. 1
Cedar Hill Elem. 1
Clifton Hills Elem. 2 2 2
East Chattanooga Elem. 4 3 1 1
East Lake Elem. 1 1 1
Eastdale Elementary 2 2 1
Mary Ann Garber Elem. 2
Hemlock Elementary 1
Highland Park Elem. 3 3 1
Elbert Long Elem. 1
Missionary Eidge Elem. 1
Oak Grove Elementary 1 1 1
Eidgedale Elementary 5 3 2 2
St. Elmo Elementary 1 1 1
Sunnyside Elementary 1 1 1
Woodmore Elementary 2 2 1
Central Elementary 8
Lookout Elementary 1
Jefferson St. Elem. 8
Clara Carpenter Elem. 14

Net Eesult 71 53 18 44 66
Loss — 22



128a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2

School Year 1960-61
Negro Teachers

Number
New

Num ber
Teachers A ssigned F or P osition  Change

Teachers Dis- Replace- New
School Em ployed charged ment P ositions Gain Loss

Howard High 13 7 6 6
Howard Junior 6 6 7
Orchard Knob Junior 5 5 7
East Fifth St. Junior 2 1 1 1
Park Place Junior 1 1 12
Second District Junior 3 2 1 1
Charles A. Bell Elem. 2 2 22
Chattanooga Ave. Elem. 3
W. J. Davenport Elem. 4 4 9
Calvin Donaldson Elem. 1 1 4
East Fifth St. Elem. 6 6 3
James A. Henry Elem. 2
Howard Elementary 1 1 3
Orchard Knob Elem. 11
Louie Sanderson Elem. 2 2 2
Joseph E. Smith Elem. 2 2
Spears Avenue Elem. 2 2
Frank H. Trotter Elem. 6 6
West Main St. Elem. 1 1 10
Clara Carpenter Elem. 4 4 14
Ft. Cheatham Elementary 1 1

Net Result 62 32 30 79 38
Gain +  41

School Year 1961-62
W hite Teachers

Brainerd High 11 11 1
Chattanooga High 2 2 7
Kirkman 5 5 10
Brainerd Junior 1 1 1
Dalewood Junior 2 2 15
East Lake Junior 3 3 1
East Side Junior 3 3 1



129a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2

School Tear 1961-62
White Teachers

School

Num ber N um ber , . ,  T, 
at m u  A ssigned F or New Teachers ----------------------

Teachers D is- Replace- N ew 
E m ployed charged m eat P ositions

P osition  Change 

Gain Loss

Hardy Junior 5 4 1 1
Elbert Long Junior 1

Lookout Junior 1 1

North Chatta. Junior 5 4 1 1

Avondale Elementary 7

Henry L. Barger Elem. 2 1 1 1

G. Russell Brown Elem. 3 2 1 1

Cedar Hill Elem. 1 1 8
Clifton Hills Elem. 1 1 1

East Chatta. Elem. 2 2 2
East Lake Elem. 3 3 4
Eastdale Elem. 2 2
Mary A n n  Garber Elem. 1 1 2
Glenwood Elem. 1 1
Hemlock Elem. 2 2
Highland Park Elem. 1 1 1

Missionary Ridge Elem. 1 1 1

Normal Park Elem. 3 3
Ridgedale Elem. 4 4 4
St. Elmo Elem. 1

Sunnyside Elem. 1
Woodmore Elementary 3 3
Lookout Elementary 5

Net Result 68 57 11 27 51
Loss — 24

N egro Teachers
Howard High 8 7 1 1

Howard Junior 6 4 2 2

Orchard Knob Junior 3 3 5
Park Place Junior 2 1 1 1
Charles A. Bell Elem. 3 2 1 1
Chattanooga Ave. Elem. 3



Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2

School Year 1961-62
Negro Teachers

School

Number
New

Teachers
Em ployed

Num ber
Teachers

D is­
charged

A ssigned F or

Replace- New 
ment Positions

P osition  Change 

Gain Loss

W. J. Davenport Elem. 3 3 7
Calvin Donaldson Elem. 3 3
East Fifth St. Elem. 2 2
James A. Henry Elem. 3 1 2 2
Howard Elem. 6 6 11
Orchard Knob Elem. 8 8 18
Louie Sanderson Elem. 1 1 1
Frank H. Trotter 5 5 2
West Main St. Elem. 11
Clara Carpenter Elem. 1 1 3

Net Result 54 1 32 22 43 24
Gain +  19

School Year 1962-63
W hite Teachers
Brainerd High 16 5 11 11
Chattanooga High 2 2 3
Kirkman 6 2 4 4
Brainerd Junior 1 1 1
Dalewood Junior 9 3 6 6
East Lake Junior 2 2 1
East Side Junior 1 1 2
Hardy Junior 4
Elbert Long Junior 1
Lookout Junior 6 6 2
North Chatta. Junior 2 2 3
Henry L. Barger Elem. 2 2
Avondale Elementary 3
G. Russell Brown Elem. 4 4 2
Cedar Hill Elem. 1 1
Clifton Hills Elem. 5 5 2
East Chatta. Elem. 3 3
East Lake Elem. 4 4 1



131a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2

School Year 1962-63
White Teachers

School

Num ber Num ber A ssigned F or
N ew  Teachers ------- 2----- --------

Teachers Dis- Replace- New 
Em ployed charged m eat P ositions

P osition  Change 

Gain Loss

Eastdale Elem. 1
Mary Ann Garber Elem. 2 2 1
Glenwood Elementary 1 1 1
Hemlock Elementary 1 1
Highland Park Elementary 1 1 1

Elbert Long Elem. 2 1 1 1
Missionary Ridge Elem. 1
Normal Park Elem. 2 2 1
Oak Grove Elem. 1 1
Ridgedale Elem. 8 8 1
St. Elmo Elementary 1 1

Sunnyside Elem. 1 1

Woodmore Elem. 1 1

Net Result 89 61 24 24 26
Loss — 2

N egro Teachers
Howard High 12 4 8 8

Alton Park Junior 5 5 33

Howard Junior 4 4 6
Orchard Knob Junior 4 4 5

East Fifth Street Jr. 4
Second District Jr. 19
Charles A. Bell Elem. 2 2
Chattanooga Ave. Elem. 2 2 1
W. J. Davenport Elem. 2 2 1
Calvin Donaldson Elem. 3 3

James A. Henry Elem. 2 2 4
Howard Elementary 2 2 11
Orchard Knob Elem. 4 2 2 2
Louie Sanderson Elementary 2
Joseph E. Smith Elem. 2 2 1
Spears Avenue Elem. 2 1 1 1



132a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2

School Year 1962-63
Negro Teachers

School

Number Number Assigned For
New Teachers ----- -----------

Teachers Dis- Eeplace- New 
Employed charged ment Positions

Position Change 

Gain Loss

Frank H. Trotter Elem. 3 3
Ft. Cheatham Elem. 1 1 1
Clara Carpenter Elem. i

Net Result 50 28 22 61 39
Gain +  22

School Year 1963-64
W h ite  Teachers
Brainerd High 10 6 4 4
Chattanooga High 7 4 3 3
Kirkman 3 2 1 1
Brainerd Junior 1
Dalewood Junior 4 4 1
East Lake Junior 5 5 1
East Side Junior 5 5 2
Hardy Junior 2 2 2
Elbert Long Junior 2 2 1
Lookout Junior 5 5 1
North Chatta. Jr. 1 1 2
Avondale Elementary 7 2 5 5
Henry L. Barger Elem. 4 4 1
G. Russell Brown Elem. 1 1 2
Cedar Hill Elem. 1
Clifton Hills Elem. 3 2 1 1
East Chatta. Elem. 1 1 2
East Lake Elem. 5 4 1 1
Eastdale Elem. 2 1 1 1
Mary Ann Garber Elem. 1 1 1
Hemlock Elem. 1
Highland Park Elem. 3 3 2
Elbert Long Elem. 3 3
Missionary Ridge 1 1
Normal Park Elem. 1 1



133a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2

School Year 1963-64
White Teachers

School

Number Number Assigned For
New T e a c h e r s ---------------- -

Teachers Dis- Replace- New 
Employed charged ment Positions

Position

Gain

Change

Loss

Oak Grove Elem. 2 1 .1 1
Ridgedale Elem. 8 7 1 1
St. Elmo Elem. 2 2
Sunnyside Elem. 3 3
Woodmore Elem. 1

N et Result 91 71 20 22 20
Gain +  2

N egro Teachers
Howard High 3 3 22
Riverside High 4 4 40
Alton Park Junior 5 5 1
Howard Junior 7 7
Orchard Knob Junior 1 1 1

Riverside Junior 7 7 34
East Fifth St. Junior 15

Park Place Junior 13

Charles A. Bell Elem. 2 2 i

Chattanooga Ave. Elem. i
W. J. Davenport Elem. 1
Calvin Donaldson Elem. 1 1 1

East Fifth St. Elem. 5
James A. Henry Elem.
Howard Elem. 1 1
Orchard Knob Elem. 3 3 1

Joseph E. Smith Elem. 1 1 i

Frank H. Trotter Elem. 1

Ft. Cheatham Elem. 2

Clara Carpenter Elem. 18

N et Result 35 24 11 81 79
Gain +  2



134a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2

School Year 1964-65
White Teachers

Num ber
New

Num ber
Teachers

A ssigned  Eor P osition  Change
Teachers Dis- Replace- New

Gain LossSchool E m ployed charged ment P ositions

Brainerd High 6 4 2 2
Chattanooga High 10 6 4 4
Kirkman 6 3 3 3
Brainerd Jnnior 1 1
Dalewood Junior 4 4
East Lake Junior 5 5
East Side Junior 5 4 1 1
Hardy Junior 4 4 3

Elbert Long Junior 4 3 1 1
Lookout Junior 2 2
North Chatta. Junior 1 1

6Avondale Elementary 5 5
Henry L. Barger Elem. 4 3 1 1
G. Bussell Brown Elem. 2 2
Cedar Hill Elem. 2 2
Clifton Hills Elem. 4 4
East Chatta. Elem. 3 3
East Lake Elem. 4 4
Mary Ann Garber Elem. 4 3 1 1
Eastdale Elem. 1

Highland Park Elem. 1 1 1

Elbert Long Elem. 5 3 2 2
Missionary Ridge Elem. 1 1
Normal Park 1 1
Ridgedale Elem. 6 3 3 3

St. Elmo Elem. 2 2
1Sunnyside Elem. 3 2 1

Net Result 95 70 25 26 5 
Gain +  21



10a

Progress Report on Desegregation of 
Chattanooga Public Schools, 1964-65

Area. This area has been designated as an optional school 
zone for grades 1-12.

C oncluding  Observations

In addition to the orderly process of the court ordered 
desegregation of the Chattanooga Public Schools there 
have been additional instances related to desegregation 
which are related and worthy of note. The Central Office 
Staff of the Chattanooga Public School System has been 
desegregated since the fall of 1962. Currently there are 
four Negro personnel holding supervisory and admin­
istrative positions in the Division of Instruction.

At the opening of the 1964-65 school year, two Negro 
teachers were assigned to a school with an all-white fac­
ulty. These assignments were made in connection with a 
special project which was begun at one school this yeai. 
This school, which has kept a special record of the prob­
lems growing out of cultural differences, has committed 
itself to a concentrated study devoted to determining edu­
cationally sound methods for dealing with these problems. 
The school in which the study will be conducted on a co­
operative basis is attended by both white and Negro stu­
dents.

The Manpower Development Training Program spon­
sored by the United States Government and operated by 
the Chattanooga Public Schools admits students regardless 
of race. Classes conducted under the provisions of the 
Manpower Development Training Act are open to all 
students.

In the Day School Program at the Chattanooga Tech­
nical Institute there are currently enrolled three Negroes.



135a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2

School Year 1964-65
Negro Teachers

School

Number Number Assigned For
New Teachers ----- 5---------—

Teachers Dis- Replace- New 
Employed charged ment Positions

Position

Gain

Change

Loss

Howard Senior High 8 2 6 6
Riverside Senior High 3 3 7
Alton Park Junior 4 3 1 1
Howard Junior 3 33 1
Orchard Knob Junior 4 2 2 2
Riverside Junior 4 3 1 1
Avondale Elementary 2
Charles A. Bell Elem. 1
Chattanooga Ave. Elem. 4
W. J. Davenport Elem. 1
Calvin Donaldson Elem. 1 1
East Fifth St. Elem. 7
James A. Henry Elem. 1
Howard Elementary 2
Orchard Knob Elem. 2 2 3
Piney Woods Elem. 2 2 13
Joseph E. Smith Elem. 2
Frank H. Trotter Elem. 3
Ft. Cheatham Elem. 3

Yet Result 31 16 15 32 28
Gain +  4



136a

C hattanooga P ublic  S chools 
1161 West Fortieth Street 

Box 2013
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37409

April 30, 1965

Summary Report and Record of Transfers of Students 
Out of Zone in Chattanooga Public Schools for the

Years 1961-62 through 1964-65
In compliance with the Civil Subpoena, Civil Action File 

No. 3564, to Dr. Bennie Carmichael, dated April 28, 1965, 
the following reports and records are submitted. Transfers 
between school zones (permission to attend school out of 
zone) are permitted in Chattanooga Public Schools under 
the policies of the Chattanooga Board of Education adopted 
August 12, 1964, and shown on the attached sheet.

For the year 1961-62, a summary report has been pre­
pared of the number of students transferred according to 
the policy of the Board of Education regulating the trans­
fers. The summary report is included with the file of the 
individual student assignments to schools out of zone.

In the report of 1962-63 to the District Court on progress 
in desegregation, a listing was made of all children in 
grades 1-3 permitted to transfer between schools desegre­
gated at the beginning of the 1962-63 school year. In addi­
tion, a summary report of all other students permitted to 
transfer, accompanied by the individual records of the 
students, is submitted to substantiate the report.

In 1963-64, the report to the District Court listed all 
transfers between schools which were desegregated for

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3



137a

grades 1-4. A copy of this report is included. An additional 
report accompanied by the records substantiating the re­
port is prepared on transfers between all other schools.

The report for 1964-65 did not carry the listing of stu­
dents permitted to transfer between zones. A summary 
report has been prepared on all transfers for the 1964-65 
school year, and all individual student records are submit­
ted to substantiate the report.

The above reports cover grades 1-9. Since there are no 
school zones established for senior high schools, grades 
10-12, there is no question of transfer between these schools.

Respectfully submitted,

B e n ja m in  E. Carm ich ael  
Benjamin E. Carmichael

Superintendent

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

BECrrl



138a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

(See Opposite)^"



R E Q U E S T  F O R  C H I L D  T O  E N R O L L  O U T  O F  Z O N E

C h a t t a n o o g a  P u b l i c  S c h o o l s

T H I S  P A R T ~ O F  R E Q U E S T  T O  BE C ^ P L E T E D ~ B Y  P A R E N T  O R  G U A R D I A N

N a m e  o f  C h i l d  _________ _

H o m e  A d d r e s s  ____________________________

S c h o o l  Z o n e d  T o ________________________________________ ______________

S c h o o l  Y o u  W i s h  C h i l d  T o  A t t e n d  __________ ____ _________

S c h o o l  A t t e n d e d  L a s t  Y e a r  _______ ________________________ ___________

G r a d e  L a s t  Y e a r ______________________  G r a d e  T h i s  Y e a r

F u l l  N a m e  of: F a t h e r  ______ _

M o t h e r  

G u a r  d i a n

D a t e

T H I S  P A R T  OF R E Q U E S T T O  BE C O M P L E T E D  B Y  P R I N C I P A L

S P E C I F Y  B O A R D  P O L I C Y U N D E R W H I C H  A P P R O V A L  T O  A T T E N D S C H O O L  IS R E C O M M E N D E D

2. a. d. .. .. g. i. (1)
b. e. h. (2)
c. f. j.

C O M M E N T S  S U P P O R T I N G  R E C O M M E N D A T I O N  OF A P P R O V A L  U N D E R  P O L I C Y  i. (1) or (2)

R E C O M M E N D A T I O N  O N  R E Q U E S T :  Y e s ________  No,

P r i n c i p a l ______________________________________ S c h o o l _____________________________  D a t e _

THIS' P A R T  O F  R E Q U E S T  T O  BE C O M P L E T E D  BY S U P E R I N T E N D E N T

A P P R O V E D : Y e s :_______  N o

S u p e r i n t e n d e n t ________________________________ D a t e __________________



A d m i t t i n g  P u p i l s  W h o  
R e s i d i n g  W i t h i n  the C i t yi t y  L i m i t s  o f  C h a t t a n o o g a

SO-? T23U03H

m . , , , .aLnodoE s ild iif BgooimddarfO _ ,.T o  the e x t e n t  of r e a s o n a b l e  b u i l d i n g  c a p a c i t y ,  p u p i l s  w h o s e  p a r e n t s  or g u a r d i a n s
r e s i d e  w i t h i n  the c i t y  l i m i t s  of C h a t t a n o o g a  a r e  a d m i t t e d  as f o l l o w s :

— .1 ,  1 P u p i 't g  w h o s e #,p a r e n it 8 ',o r .
s c h o o l  c o n c e r n e d .  S u c h  p u p i l s ,  of c o u r s e ,  a r e  a d m i t t e d  as s o o n  as t h e i r  » „

, , » 1 1 1  QlIUJ I O  QshHW.

3 3 3 xJb h A oim H

t e m p o r a r i l y  a d m i t t e d  b y  p e r m i t  f r o m  the S u p e r i n t e n d e n t  u p o n  w r i t ^ i ^  r e q u e s t  .
b y  the parents-;...T h e s e ’ w r i t t e n ’ r e q u e s t s  'tmist" i n c l u d e  “t h e  -parent's * n a m e s ,
a d d r e s s ,  p u p i l ' s  n a m e ,  a l s o  the n a m e ,  a d d r e s s  a n d  re|-Atipi^sJii|); o f t h e p e o p l e
iwtthr>"w h oiirl:he,-efa±ld~ T e 8 i 'd e 'S" ‘fi-f'.p u pi t -ii v M - wrtflffe" parents'* h o m e  g i v e  t h e
r e a s o n  t h a t  p a r e n t s  a r e  r e q u e s t i n g  t h i s  s p e c i a l  permissipp.)^ a n ^  ^hje n ^ g  Rforfo?.
the""srhooi~th'e'''ptrpil"will“'atrte;nd“i f " * p e r m ± t “i s ‘‘gT'anted”.

„  , ,  . , r e a Y  a id !. o b s r D  . . . .  . ie $ ¥  d e a d  s h s ’iO. .a ■ e h i l d r e n ' " o r " a ,d o p t e d  c h i l d r e n ,  or othex-'mitror^ - rrring^— i n  t h e  h o m e  or s c h o o l
p e r s o n n e l .  i s d b s l  :1o sm&Vi I l u l

b. C h i l d r e n  p l a c e d  in e s t a b l i s h e d  n u r s e r i e s  f o r  b e f o r e -  a n d  a f t e r - s c h o o l  c a r e
tl^mrf^dTe~Bxdrocrir“±tr"wh'ircdr’ztTire-"'tlrarTiuirffery is* l o c a t e d , ( E x a m p l e :

P r o  R e  B o n a ,  M i s s  M a g ,  etc.) o e i b i ^ u O

c. C h i l d r e n  p l a c e d  in p r i v a t e  or c h u r c h  n u r s e r i e s  for b e f o r e -  a n d  a f t e r - s c h o o l  
c a r e  m a y  a t t e n d  the s c h o o l  i n  w h i c h  z o n e  the nu r s e r y - i s -  l o c a t e d . ( S u i t ­
a b i l i t y  of s u c h  n u r s e r y  is p r o p e r l y  d e t e r m i n e d . )

d . C h i l d r e n  f r o m  h o m e s  b r o k e n  b y  'iaparatlEotr"or ■̂ (i v o r c e r ~ {in iere q u e s t i o n s
rthe,child,, t h q  parent,, i n  w h o s e  home; the, c h i l d  
s t a t e m e n t  f r o m  the c o u r t  r e g a r d i n g  c u s t o d i a n s h i p . )

a r i s e  as to c u s t o d y  of 
r e s i d e s  m u s t  o b t a i n  a s

■ s' >, b
e. C h i l d r e n  of w o r k i n g  m o t h e r s  w h o s e  c h i l d  is p l a c e d  i n  the h o m e  of a

r e l a t i v e  for b e f o r e -  a n d  a f t e r - s c h o o l  c a re. — —  Sj

f . H a n d i c a p p e d ,  cji^ldrep whpj.pjay .^^vp avWa»-ifc
t h e m  for a s s i g n m e n t  to a s c h o o l  o u t s i d e  t h e i r  zone.

~^.™‘X h i^retr '‘frtW"hTm8B8''^ii’̂ 1:cft"'^HrltraF''l1intreffs~tnr-iiorffp4i:a±izatrttjrrr)f”'thr'-- ..~ ~
m o t h e r  or g u a r d i a n  p r o h i b i t s  a d e q u a t e  c h i l d - c a r e .

h. S i t u a t i o n s  r e q u i r i n g  w o r k i n g  m o t h e r s  to t ake c h i l d r e n  to p l a c e s  of
— .-~-lj-a^ ^ 'g ^ g --^ s- ’'l}^fgrE^ - atsd""'fffrer-s’ctro'ol'~'C'are"r~'" ...........

^ —pQpix^ih"Tire”'eOTe^'are^sslgtt^l3y""t*e“ StrperttrtendeTit“ Trf-Schools-.....
for r e a s o n s  of a d j u s t m e n t  a f t e r  t h o r o u g h  i n v e s t i g a t i o n  a n d  s t u d y  b y

— _--------OTd"W'^h^"TEcmBreTrd^rton,-'rrf“-the v is iting -TegdTer-S-ervt cgr — -

......  (Z)....T O r r o r s r a r ' i i m o i r i n r m - T r o i R m t t ^ ^ ......— .......
p e r m i t ,  h a s  always, p e p p g f t t ^  ^48tffA(ftfe»SJ8 5 6 ^ lue e n r o l l m e n t  ln a 

-----f S h o o l  b y  "'Choice w h e n  a z o n e  c h a n g e  w a s  m a d e  t h a t  w o u l d  m o v e  a
____ s t u d ffgQ to a  d i f f e r e n t  s c h o o l. Iootfae .................  laaionliS

j. C h i l d r e n  w h o s e  p a r e n t s  h a v e  p u r c h a s e d  or a r e  b u i l d i n g  a h o m e  in a g i v e n
— — School..zdhe."tSuch children .arp admipted ta the^ew: sphool pnly-aftep^ the '-'T ;-;;-
-------paT§hW'pta<5S"6tt“flie  a*letter from architect and/or"contractdr 'estatriishihg-—™*

the f a c t  t h a t  the h o m e  w i l l  be. r e a d y  for o c c u p a n c y  w i t h i n  a b r i e f  a n d  
specified period.)”

’ "5 bO ■♦/rsba**.. ‘ijciag-



139a



140a

C hattanooga P u blic  S chools 
1161 West Fortieth Street 

Box 2013
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37409

April 29, 1965

S u m m ary  of N umbers of T ransfers G ranted  S tudents 
in  C hattanooga P ublic  S chools, G rades 1-9 

for 1961-62 by  B oard P olicy  R easons

Board Policy Item Number of Students

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

2 a. 56

b. 38

c. 0

d. 11

e. 119

f. 93

g- 4

h. 9

i. 126

j- 0

Total 456



141a

C hattanooga P ublic S chools 
1161 West Fortieth Street 

Box 2013
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37409

April 29, 1965

S u m m ary  of N umbers of T ransfers G ranted  S tudents 
in  C hattanooga P ublic  S chools, Grades 1-9 

for 1962-63 by  B oard P olicy  R easons

Board Policy Item Number of Students

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

2 a. 28
b. 4
e. 4
d. 0
e. 24
f. 7

g- 2
h. 1
i. 129

j- 3

Total 202



142a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

Appendix A 
Page 1

Student Transfers Granted in 1962-63 For 
Pupils in Grades 1-3 Involving Schools 

Selected For Desegregation

Transfers Under Policy 2.a,
Student School

No. Name Race

1. Charles Goode, Jr. N
2. Esther L. White N
3. Yenetia B. Jarrett N
4. Michael S. Heard N
5. James R. Henry W
6. John A. Henry W
7. David H. Haynes w
8. Angela B. Park w
9. Francis X. Park w

10. Michael Davis w
11. Patrieia Davis w
12. Becky Davis w
13. Susan Davis w
14. Melinda Walker N
15. Francia R. Holloway N
16. Vickie C. White N
17. Norman E. Williams W
18. Renata L. Tyler N
19. Balm M. Tyler

Transfers Under Policy 2.b.

N

20. Giovanna B. Heard N
21. James A. Horn W
22. Kathy E. Horn W
23. Deborah Payne 

Transfers Under Policy 2.c.

N

24. Michael Dozier N
25. Marsha Ann Grimes N
26. Beverly Ann Wood N

Zoned to : Transferred to :

Orchard Knob East Fifth
Orchard Knob East Fifth
Orchard Knob James A. Henry
Orchard Knob Charles A. Bell
Glenwood Sunnyside
Glenwood Sunnyside
Glenwood Bidgedale
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Glenwood G. Russell Brown
Glenwood G. Russell Brown
Glenwood G. Bussell Brown
Glenwood G. Russell Brown
East Fifth Howard
C. Donaldson Orchard Knob
Clara Carpenter East Fifth
Henry L. Barger East Chattanooga
F. H. Trotter Orchard Knob
F. H. Trotter Orchard Knob

Sunnyside East Fifth
W oodmore Avondale
W oodmore Avondale
Glenwood East Fifth

Page
Glenwood Orchard Knob
Clara Carpenter Orchard Knob
Clara Carpenter Orchard Knob



11a

Progress Report on Desegregation of 
Chattanooga Public Schools, 1964-65

In the Adult Evening Program at the Clara Carpenter 
Center for Continuing Education there are five Negroes 
enrolled in commercial, high school review, and industrial 
electricity courses.

The Practical Nurse Training Program has enrolled 
eighteen Negroes and the instructor is a Negro. At the 
Driver Education Center one of the two instructors is a 
Negro. Students from the five high schools of the city, 
without regard to race, come to the Center for driver 
training.

Sound administrative planning, alert law enforcement 
agencies, and cooperative community efforts have been 
primarily responsible for the success of the efforts made 
and plans carried out in all areas and facets of desegrega­
tion in the Chattanooga Public Schools. Many problems 
which were not evident to all concerned, at least in the 
beginning, are being recognized and plans are being formu­
lated to solve them. With the continued combined efforts 
of the total community it is anticipated that desegregation 
in the Chattanooga Public Schools will continue to be not 
only an orderly process but, and more important, a process 
that will solve many related problems thus making the 
educational opportunities not only available to all students 
but available under better and improved conditions.

(A ppendix  O m itted )



Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

Transfers Under Policy 2.d. 

Student

Appendix A

School
No. Name Race Zoned to : Transferred to :
None

Transfers Under Policy 2,e.
27. James Daugherty W Sunnyside Barger
28. Joel K. Williams W Sunnyside Avondale
29. Doyle K. Williams W Sunnyside Avondale
30. Georgeanna Johnson N Orchard Knob Howard
31. Bessie B. Rice N Orchard Knob Howard
32. Daniel J. Windham, Jr. N Orchard Knob Howard
33. Phyllis D. Baker N Orchard Knob Joseph E. Smith
34. Sarah D. Fletcher N Orchard Knob Joseph E. Smith
35. Erna Rogers W Normal Park G. Russell Brown
36. Iris Stubbs N Glenwood Orchard Knob
37. Karen Stubbs N Glenwood Orchard Knob
39. Leroy Clark N Glenwood Clara Carpenter
40. Phyllis Ann Lamb N Glenwood Orchard Knob
41. Shirley L. Lamb N Glenwood Orchard Knob
42. Willie Armour N Clara Carpenter James A. Henry
43. Freda Armour N Clara Carpenter James A. Henry
44. Patricia Armour N Clara Carpenter James A. Henry
45. Johnnie Armour N Clara Carpenter James A. Henry
46. James Scruggs N Clara Carpenter James A. Henry

47. Debra Scruggs N Clara Carpenter
Page 3

James A. Henry
48. Elizabeth D. Shoup W Henry L. Barger East Lake Elementary
49. Jaequaline Patton N Orchard Knob Chattanooga Avenue
50. Debra E. Ellis N F. H. Trotter Charles A. Bell

Transfers Under Policy 2.f.
51. Claude Troxell W St. Elmo G. Russell Brown
52. Vernon Cooper W Normal Park G. Russell Brown
53. Geraldine Durham w Normal Park G. Russell Brown
54. Larry Durham w Normal Park G. Russell Brown
55. Virginia R. Greene w Sunnyside Missionary Ridge



144a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

Transfers Under Policy 2.f.

Student

(eont’d.)

No. Name Race

56. George R. Morgan W
57. Merle N. Camp W
58. Nadine G. Camp w
59. Mary C. Troxell w
60. Clarence Troxell w

Transfers Under Policy 2.g.

61. Kathy L. Garren w
62. Michael Perry N

Transfers Under Policy 2.h.
63. Thelma J. Hayes

Transfers Under Policy 2.i.
64. Albert B. Harden w
65. Elizabeth J. Stone N
66. Janet P. Griffith W

67. Karan Meroney w
68. James Doyle Davis w
69. Audrey L. Parker w
70. Linda Smidt w
71. Timothy C. Robinson N
72. Annie Mae Hill w
73. Wanda Sue Hill w
74. William T. Carter w
75. Alene Griffin w
76. William E. Hall w
77. Alfred S. Turner N
78. James L. Bell N
79. Linda M. Hale w
80. Paul Evatt w
81. John T. Erickson, Jr. w
82. Laura E. Walker w
83. Lisa G. Framm w

Appendix A

School

Zoned to : Transferred to :

Clara Carpenter Glenwood
East Fifth Glenwood
East Fifth Glenwood
St. Elmo G. Russell Brown
St. Elmo G. Russell Brown

Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Orchard Knob

Orchard Knob Joseph E. Smith

Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Normal Park East Fifth
Clara Carpenter Glenwood

Page
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Orchard Knob
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
East Fifth Glenwood
Eastdale Orchard Knob
Eastdale Orchard Knob
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge



145 a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

Transfers Under Policy 2.i. (cont’d.)
Appendix A

Student
No. Name Race

84. Robert W. Bowden, Jr. W
85. Karla G. Gothard W
86. Gus Kalanzis W
87. Don Reeves w
88. Bruce Gordon w
89. Glenn Kirk w
90. Craig Schmidt w
91. Joe Thompson w
92. Beth R. Baras w
93. Frank Bullock w
94. Jeanne Esch w
95. Tom R. Eyssen w
96. Rachel Epstein w
97. Dana Doyal w
98. Michael Brody w
99. Victor Rose w

100. Sam Griffin w
101. Susan Gilley w
102. David Ermer w
103. Connie Ellis w
104. James W. Davis w
105. Cynthia Brody w
106. Marcus Burrows w
107. Alvin L. Walker, Jr. w
108. Vickie D. Holloway w
109. Patricia D. Miller w
110. Connie Green w
111. Mercer R. Cagle w
112. Clyde E. Chandler w
113. Terry Wayne Chandler w
114. Raymond L. Chandler w
115. Joyce Ann Elmore w

School
Zoned to : Transferred to :

Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge 

Page
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
Woodmore Missionary Ridge
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo



146a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

Transfers Under Policy 2.i. (cont’d.)
Appendix A 

Page 6

Student

No. Name Race

116. Mary Lou Waters W
117. Deborah E. Cochren W
118. Teresa A. Erickson W
119. Freddie N. Jones W
120. Caroline Brymer W
121. Charles Brymer, Jr. W
122. Johnny R. Pruitt w
123. Ira W. Davis N
124. George Kight, Jr. N
125. Gloria Freeman N
126. Rhonda Jean Bell N
127. Edward E. Kittle W
128. Brenda Carter W
129. Jimmy Wong W
130. Richard A. Johnson w
131. Rosemary Chau w
132. Paul Chau w
133. Joan Lynn Peersley w
134. Michael W. Richards w
135. Charles L. Crabtree w
136. Twanna R. Adams w
137. Janet Smidt w
138. Robert H. Wilson w
139. Marshall G. Wilson w

140. Katy L. Henderson w
141. Debroa L. Boggs w
142. Kenneth Watkins N
Transfers Under Policy 2.j.
143. Duane L. Carver w

School

Zoned to : Transferred to

Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Louie Sanderson St. Elmo
Missionary Ridge Sunnyside
Missionary Ridge Sunnyside
East Fifth Glenwood
Glenwood Clara Carpenter
Eastdale Orchard Knob
Eastdale East Fifth
Eastdale Orchard Knob
East Fifth Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Avondale
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood

Pi
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Clara Carpenter Glenwood
Glenwood Clara Carpenter

Sunnyside Woodmore



147a

C hattanooga P ublic  S chools 
1161 West Fortieth Street 

Box 2013
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37409

April 29, 1965

S u m m ary  of N umbers of T ransfers Granted  S tudents 
in  C hattanooga P ublic  S chools, Grades 1-9 

for 1963-64 by  B oard P olicy  R easons

Board Policy Item Number of Students

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

2 a. 49
b. 10
c. 2
d. 0
e. 89
f. 23

g- 4
h. 13
i. 156

j- 3
Total 349



148a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

Appendix A 
Page 1

Student Transfers Granted in 1963-64 For 
Pupils in Grades 1-4 Involving Schools 

Selected For Desegregation

Transfers Under Policy 2.a.
Student School

No. Name Race

1. Ynez Ward N
2. Jacqueline Jones N
3. Tomas Jones N
4. Vanessa Jackson N
5. Frances Holloway N
6. Anthony Crutcher N
7. Samuel Crutcher N
8. Richard Gregory W
9. John Spruce, Jr. N

10. Venetia Jarrett N
11. Warnie Shaw, Jr. N
12. Harriet Whitten N
13. Esther White N
14. Walter Hurt, Jr. N
15. Darrell Harland N
16. Herman Grier, Jr. N
17. Victoria Goode N
18. Charles Goode N
19. Kim Covington N
20. Grady Covington, Jr. N
21. Norman Williams W
22. Vicki Griffith W

23. Gerald Smith N
24. Donnie Roberts N
25. Mary Hentz W
26. Rebecca Davis W
27. Michael Davis w
28. Patricia Davis w
29. Leonard Tigner N

Zoned to : Transferred to :

Sunnyside Orchard Knob
Avondale Orchard Knob
Avondale Orchard Knob
C. Donaldson Orchard Knob
C. Donaldson Orchard Knob
Orchard Knob Howard
Orchard Knob Howard
Woodmore Highland Park
Orchard Knob James A. Henry
Orchard Knob James A. Henry
Orchard Knob Glenwood
Orchard Knob East Fifth Street
Orchard Knob East Fifth Street
Avondale East Fifth Street
Orchard Knob East Fifth Street
Eastdale East Fifth Street
F. H. Trotter East Fifth Street
F. H. Trotter East Fifth Street
Ridgedale East Fifth Street
Ridgedale East Fifth Street
Henry L. Barger East Chattanooga
Elbert Long- East Chattanooga

Page
East Fifth Street C. Donaldson
Orchard Knob C. Donaldson
Glenwood Clifton Hills
East Fifth Street G. R. Brown
East Fifth Street G. R. Brown
East Fifth Street G. R. Brown
W. J. Davenport C. A. Bell



149a

Transfers Under Policy 2.a. 

Student
No. Name

30. David Moore
31. Michael Heard
32. Bonita Cotton
33. Denise Cole
34. Jeffery Cargle
35. Richard West, Jr.

Transfers Under Policy 2.b.
36. Ray Hill
37. Richard Rogers
38. Janet Rogers
39. Steve Rogers
40. Mike Roach
41. Mark Grissom
42. Aurelia Richards
43. Ralph Patton
44. Alfred Jones
45. Andrea Dallas

Transfers Under Policy 2.e.
46. Kathy Hubbard

47. Billy Smith, Jr.

Transfers Under Policy 2.e.
48. Joseph Knowles, Jr.
49. Craig Irby
50. Craig Abbott
51. Angela Lattimore
52. Larry Watkins
53. John Wright
54. David Shropshire
55. Patricia Townsend
56. Cora Sales
57. Herona Robinson

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

(con’t.)

Race Zoned to :

N F. H. Trotter
N Orchard Knob
N Avondale
N F. H. Trotter
N Avondale
W Sunnyside

N Avondale
W Hemlock
W Hemlock
w Hemlock
w Garber
w Sunnyside
N Orchard Knob
N Sunnyside
N J. E. Smith
¥ Avondale

N Glenwood

W Ridgedale

w Sunnyside
w Barger
w Missionary Ridge
N Orchard Knob
N Avondale
N Avondale
N East Fifth Street
N Avondale
N Avondale
N Avondale

School

Transferred to :

C. A. Bell 
C. A. Bell 
C. A. Bell 
C. A. Bell 
C. A. Bell 
H. L. Barger

Howard 
Highland Park 
Highland Park 
Highland Park 
Highland Park 
Highland Park 
J. A. Henry 
East Fifth Street 
East Fifth Street 
East Fifth Street

Orchard Knob
Page 3

Hemlock

Woodmore 
Woodmore 
Woodmore 
J. E. Smith 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob

Appendix A



150a

Student

No. Name

58. Wallace Eoberson, Jr.
59. Barbara Eice
60. Jacqueline Porter
61. Linda Muckle
62. William Mosely
63. Iva Lanier
64. Jerome Lanier
65. William Johnson
66. Harris Toney
67. Calvin Toney
68. Teresa Toney
69. Gregory Toney

70. Mary Gott
71. Julius Poster
72. Gary Foster
73. Anthony Carter
74. Patrick Carter
75. Sylvester Pryor
76. Zeddie Pryor
77. July Wilson
78. Phillip Williams
79. Paula McAmis
80. Debborh McAmis
81. Kenneth Billings
82. Cecil Billings
83. Margaret Ashford
84. Dennis Wallace
85. Deborah Wallace
86. Kaymond Eogers
87. Sonia Finley
88. Connie Caldwell
89. Avery Dillard
90. Anthony Dillard
91. Judith Jenkins

Transfers Under Policy 2.e.

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

(con’t.)

Eace Zoned to :

N Sunnyside
N Avondale
N Avondale
N East Fifth Street
N Avondale
N Avondale
N Avondale
N W. J. Davenport
N Avondale
N Avondale
N Avondale
N Avondale

N Avondale
N Avondale
N Avondale
N Avondale
N Avondale
N Avondale
N Avondale
W Clifton Hills
W Hemlock
W G. E. Brown
W G. E. Brown
N Ft. Cheatham
N Ft. Cheatham
N Louie Sanderson
W G. E. Brown
W G. E. Brown
w East Fifth Street
N Sunnyside
w East Lake
N East Lake
N East Lake
W Avondale

School
Transferred to :

Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob

Page 4
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Orchard Knob 
Oak Grove 
Oak Grove 
Oak Grove 
Oak Grove 
Oak Grove 
Oak Grove 
Oak Grove 
Normal Park 
Normal Park 
Normal Park 
Howard 
Hemlock 
Ft. Cheatham 
Ft. Cheatham 
Eastdale

Appendix A



1.51a

Transfers Under Policy 2.e. 

Student
No. Name

92. Susan Trusley
93. Randall Trusley

94. Diane Jackson
95. Carl R. Daughtrey, Jr.
96. William Bell
97. Rhonda Lea Layne
98. Janice E. Toney
99. Gregory L. Toney

100. Gail R. Caldwell

Transfers Under Policy 2.f.
101. Pamela Stoker
102. Mike Stoker
103. Virginia R. Greene
104. Leroy Payne
105. Mary K. Little
106. Mack D. Milligan
107. David J. Milligan
108. Barbara Wilkins
109. Russell D. Wilhoite
110. Victoria D. Lee
111. Betty S. Dixon
112. Gary W. Culver
113. Steve R. Back

Transfers Under Policy 2.g.
114. Ronnie Hendley

Transfers Under Policy 2.h.
115. Harold L. Kendrick
116. Thelma J. Hayes
117. Cynthia Dunnigan
118. Lily Dunnigan
119. Grace A. Young
120. Francis C. Young

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

(con’t.)
Appendix A

School
Race Zoned to : Transferred to :

W Avondale East Chattanooga
W Avondale East Chattanooga

Page
W Avondale East Chattanooga
w Avondale East Chattanooga
N F. H. Trotter C. Donaldson
W Normal Park G. Russell Brown
N C. Donaldson C. A. Bell
N C. Donaldson C. A. Bell
N C. Donaldson C. A. Bell

W Eastdale Sunnyside
W Eastdale Sunnyside
W Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
N Joseph E. Smith East Fifth
W Avondale Eastdale
N C. A. Bell C. Donaldson
N C. A. Bell C. Donaldson
W East Fifth Avondale
W East Chattanooga Avondale
w East Fifth Avondale
w East Fifth Avondale
w East Chattanooga Avondale
w East Fifth Avondale

N East Fifth Orchard Knob
Page

w St. Elmo Sunnyside
N Orchard Knob Joseph E. Smith
N Eastdale Orchard Knob
N Eastdale Orchard Knob
N Missionary Ridge Howard
N Missionary Ridge Howard



152a

Student

No. Name

121. Margret A. Schmitt
122. Fred I. Clark, Jr.
123. Anne LeNoir
124. George B. LeNoir
125. Donna L. Snow
126. Jennie Leslie
127. Bonnie Diane Estes
128. Iris Faye Carthorn
129. Elizabeth Jean Stone
130. Judy Gail Cross
131. Raymond L. Chandler
132. Terry Wayne Chandler
133. Freddie Jones
134. Ruth Johnson Cagle
135. Mercer Reynolds Cagle
136. Dale Benson
137. Gail Benson
138. Ben Hill Webster III

139. Joe Thompson
140. Victor Rose
141. Craig Schmidt, Jr.
142. Donald Reeves
143. Glenn Kirk
144. Arthur Kamine, Sr.
145. Gus Kalanzis
146. Sam Griffin
147. Karla Gothard
148. Bruce Gordon
149. Susan Gilley
150. Rhonda Frainm
151. Tom Eyssen
152. Eva Esch

Transfers Under Policy 2.i.

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

Race Zoned to :

W Eastdale
W Hemlock
W Ridgedale
W Ridgedale
W Highland Park
N F. H. Trotter
W Sunnyside
N Chattanooga Ave.
N ■ Normal Park
W East Fifth
W Louie Sanderson
w Louie Sanderson
w Louie Sanderson
w Louie Sanderson
w Louie Sanderson
w Louie Sanderson
w Louie Sanderson
w Sunnyside

w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside
w Sunnyside

School
Transferred to :

Woodmore
Oak Grove
Missionary Ridge
Missionary Ridge
Hemlock
C. Donaldson
Henry L. Barger
Howard
East Fifth
Avondale
St. Elmo
St. Elmo
St. Elmo
St. Elmo
St. Elmo
St. Elmo
St. Elmo
Missionary Ridge

Page 7
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge 
Missionary Ridge

Appendix A



12a

(Filed March 29, 1965)

[ caption  om itted ]

Plaintiffs, by their undersigned attorneys, move this 
Court for an order granting further relief in this case. 
The further relief sought is an order directing defendants 
to: (1) accelerate desegregation in the Chattanooga school 
system, to the end that complete desegregation may be 
effected by September 1965; (2) assign teaching, super­
visory and other professional personnel to schools in the 
Chattanooga school system on the basis of qualification 
and need and without regard to the race of the personnel 
or of the children in attendance; (3) assign pupils in the 
Chattanooga public school system pursuant to geographical, 
capacity-related school zone lines for each school, such 
lines being drawn without regard to race; (4) eliminate 
all racial restrictions and discriminatory practices from 
all school-sponsored curricular and extra-curricular ac­
tivities, including R.O.T.C. training; (5) eliminate racially 
discriminatory policies with respect to the provision of 
free transportation for junior high school students; and 
(6) eliminate all other racial classifications from the opera­
tion of the Chattanooga public school system.

In support of this motion, plaintiffs show unto this Court 
the following:

1. On July 8, 1963, the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Sixth Circuit remanded this cause to this Court 
for further proceedings.

2. Further hearings were had before United States Dis­
trict Judge Frank W. Wilson. On December 21, 1963,

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Further Relief



153a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

Transfers Under Policy 2.i. (eon’t.)
Appendix A

Student School
No. Name Race Zoned to : Transferred to :

153. David Ermer W Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
154. Rachel Epstein W Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
155. Connie Ellis W Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
156. Frank Bullock, Jr. w H. L. Barger Missionary Ridge
157. Beth Baras w Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
158. Alan Brody w H. L. Barger Missionary Ridge
159. Cynthia Brody w H. L. Barger Missionary Ridge
160. Elizabeth Davis w Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
161. Catherine Doyal w Sunnyside Missionary Ridge
162. Roy Summey w Howard Hemlock

Page
163. Linda Frost w W. J. Davenport Hemlock
164. Eddie Beard w W. J. Davenport Hemlock
165. Jimmie Wong w East Fifth Street Glenwood
166. La Veal Webb w East Fifth Street Glenwood
167. Paulette Smith w East Fifth Street Glenwood
168. Roy Watson w James A. Henry Glenwood
169. Virgil Watson w James A. Henry Glenwood
170. William Watson w James A. Henry Glenwood
171. Janet Smidt w East Fifth Street Glenwood
172. Linda Smidt w East Fifth Street Glenwood
173. John Smith w East Fifth Street Glenwood
174. Novita Smith w Avondale Glenwood
175. Joyce Huggins w East Fifth Street Glenwood
176. Paula Lanier w East Fifth Street Glenwood
177. Michael Richards w East Fifth Street Glenwood
178. Linda Hale w East Fifth Street Glenwood
179. Kathy Garen w East Fifth Street Glenwood
180. Jerry Donaldson w Avondale Glenwood
181. Vicci Cox w East Fifth Street Glenwood
182. Gary Cohen w East Fifth Street Glenwood
183. Donald Rowe N East Lake Fort Cheatham
184. Sandra Rowe N East Lake Fort Cheatham



154a

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

Transfers Under Policy 2.L (con’t.)

Student

No. Name Race

185. Kathy Howell W
186. Jackie Wells W

187. Harry Thurman W
188. Frank Spangler, Jr. W
189. Jerry Shelby w
190. Kobert Roberts w
191. Jerry Roberts w
192. Mary Quarles w
193. Arvie Greene, Jr. w
194. Rickey Gann w
195. Danny Gann w
196. Debra Farmer w
197. Raymond Shelley w
198. Debra Polsky w
199. John Holland, III w
200. Charlene Lee w
201. Debra Lee w
202. Peggy Hand w
203. James Green w
204. Debbie Gallahan w
205. Fredrick Ferguson w
206. Richard Beach w
207. David Cross w
208. Patricia Barkley w
Transfers Under Policy 2.j.
209. Grover Rann, Jr. w

Appendix A

School

Zoned to : Transferred to :

Clifton Hills Cedar Hill
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown

Page
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown
Spears Avenue G. R. Brown
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale
East Fifth Street Avondale

Avondale East Chattanooga



155a

Chattanooga Public Schools 
1161 West Fortieth Street 

Box 2013
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37409

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3

April 29, 1965

Summary of Numbers of Transfers Granted Students 
in Chattanooga Public Schools, Grades 1-9 

for 1964-65 by Board Policy S easons

Board Policy Item Number of Students

2 a. 44

b. 9

c. 14

d. 3

e. 100

f. 4

g- 0

h. 18

i. 114

j- 2

Total 308



156a

(Filed August 5, 1965)

[caption omitted]

An order was entered in this case upon April 20, 1962, 
requiring that the Board of Education of the City of Chat­
tanooga and the Superintendent of Schools proceed to a 
complete desegregation of public schools of the City of 
Chattanooga, Tennessee, such desegregation to be accom­
plished within a period of not more than eight years. The 
plan of desegregation as approved by the Court, together 
with the reasons behind it, are fully set forth in the 
former opinion of the Court. Mapp v. Board of Education 
of the City of Chattanooga, 203 F.Supp. 843 (1962).

Under the plan adopted, all elementary schools were to 
be desegregated within not more than three years, be­
ginning in September of 1962, with the first three grades 
in 16 selected schools to be desegregated the first year, 
with the first four grades in all elementary schools to be 
desegregated by September of 1963, and with all grades 
of all elementary schools to be desegregated by September 
of 1964. Thereupon all junior high schools were to be de­
segregated within not more than two additional years, with 
the seventh grade in all schools to be desegregated by 
September of 1965 and with the remaining grades in all 
junior high schools to be desegregated by September of 
1966. Following the desegregation of all junior high schools, 
the first year in all high schools were to be desegregated 
by September 1967 and all remaining grades in all high 
schools were to be desegregated by September 1968. The 
Chattanooga Technical Institute was to be desegregated 
by September 1969. The foregoing plan of desegregation 
was approved upon appeal with the exception of technical

Opinion o f Wilson, D .J .



157a

and vocational courses, and the case was remanded for 
further proceedings with respect to them. Mapp v. Board 
of Education of the City of Chattanooga, 319 F.2d 571 
(1963). After a further hearing, an order was entered 
upon November 26, 1963, desegregating the Chattanooga 
Technical Institute as of December 9, 1963, and a further 
order was entered December 31, 1963, desegregating all 
vocational and technical courses, including those offered 
at Kirkman Technical High School, effective as of Sep­
tember 1964. In each of the foregoing orders jurisdiction 
was retained by the Court until full accomplishment of 
desegregation as provided in the respective orders.

The case is now before the Court upon the motion of 
the plaintiff seeking an acceleration of the foregoing plan 
and other relief. A  hearing was held upon the motion 
upon May 1, 1965, and the parties have since filed briefs 
in support of their respective positions.

The initial issue confronting the Court is whether the 
plan for gradual desegregation heretofore approved by 
the Court accords the plaintiffs their Constitutional rights 
with “all deliberate speed” in view of past progress and 
present circumstances. It appears that the defendants 
have now accomplished desegregation in all grades in all 
elementary schools. Under the plan as approved by the 
former orders of the Court, the seventh grade in all junior 
high schools would be desegregated in September 1965, 
with all remaining junior and senior high school grades 
to be desegregated in three additional annual steps. The 
plaintiffs, by their motion, seek to have the Court acceler­
ate this plan by ordering desegregation of all remaining 
grades in September of 1965.

It appears from the annual progress reports filed by 
the defendants in accordance with the orders of the Court

Opinion of Wilson, D.J.



158a

that the desegregation thus far accomplished has been 
accomplished after careful planning and effective admin­
istration, with no unanticipated or unusual problems having 
been encountered. It further appears from the evidence 
received at the hearing upon May 1, 1965, that considerable 
planning and groundwork had been performed by the de­
fendants for the preparation of the desegregation of the 
seventh grade in all junior high schools at the commence­
ment of school in September 1965. Included within this 
planning and preparation was a comprehensive training 
program conducted at Avondale School during the first 
half of this year for the preparation and training of 
teachers in the problems to be encountered in the deseg­
regation of the remaining grades, and in particular in the 
desegregation of the junior high school grades. It thus 
appears to the Court that the School Board and Superin­
tendent have thus far acted in good faith to accomplish 
desegregation in accordance with the requirements of the 
orders of the Court. However, the former orders of the 
Court specifically provided that the plan therein set forth 
should be considered only as the minimum requirements to 
assure the plaintiffs of all the protection and enjoyment of 
their Constitutional rights with “all deliberate speed” . The 
defendants appear to have taken no steps upon their own 
to accelerate the minimum plan of desegregation ordered 
by the Court. While it appears to the Court that the ob­
vious and careful planning and preparation for desegrega­
tion of the seventh grade in all junior high schools should 
not be disrupted by the acceleration of the desegregation 
plan heretofore approved for September 1965, the problems 
presented in desegregation of the remaining grades in sub­
sequent years do not justify an additional three years’ de­
lay in according the plaintiffs their full Constitutional

Opinion of Wilson, D.J.



159a

rights. After review of the two Brown v. Board of Educa­
tion decisions (347 U. S. 483 and 349 U. S. 294), this Court 
stated in its former opinion in this ease:

“It is apparent that the plaintiffs have a Constitutional 
right not to be excluded from any public school class­
room in Chattanooga, Tennessee, solely because of 
their race. This is a present and immediate right, and 
of equal importance to other rights secured to them 
and all other citizens under the Constitution. Any de­
lay in extending to them their rights in this regard 
must be justified only by the most impelling and cogent 
reasons. The defendants have the burden of showing 
the necessity or appropriateness of any further delay 
than has already occurred.”

Under the minimum plan heretofore approved, all re­
maining grades in all junior high schools would in any event 
be desegregated in September of 1966. With regard to the 
high schools, the defendants have testified that no zoning 
will be required upon desegregation of the high schools, but 
that all students will be admitted at any high school upon a 
city-wide basis. All students may therefore elect the high 
school which they will attend. The problems presented in 
the desegregation of the high schools are obviously not the 
same as the problems presented in the desegregation of ele­
mentary and junior high schools. Moreover, the expeiience 
thus far acquired, as well as the experience to be acquired 
with the desegregation of the seventh grade, should permit 
an acceleration in September 1966 of the desegregation of 
the remaining grades. It has now been ten yeais since the 
final decision in the Brown v. Board of Education case, 
supra. The same equitable considerations as have justified

Opinion of Wilson, D.J.



160a

the delay in according the plaintiffs their Constitutional 
rights with reference to elementary and junior high schools 
would not apply with respect to the desegregation of the 
high schools.

The Court accordingly concludes that, while no change 
should be made with regard to the desegregation to be ac­
complished in September 1965, the plan of desegregation 
heretofore ordered should be modified so as to require de­
segregation of all remaining grades in September 1966.

While each case must be judged in the light of its par­
ticular circumstances, it is not inappropriate to note that 
desegregation will have been accomplished and completed 
on or before September 1966 in the Knoxville, Nashville, 
and Memphis school systems, as well as in many other cities 
and counties in Tennessee, where the problems are not al­
together dissimilar from those presented in this case.

The next issue confronting the Court upon the present 
motion is whether the regulations permitting transfers of 
students have been so used by the defendants as to impede 
or defeat desegregation as heretofore ordered by the Court, 
and thus violate the plaintiffs’ Constitutional rights. It is 
not contended that the transfer plan is itself invalid or 
based upon race, but rather that in the exercise of the dis­
cretion permitted under paragraph (2)(i) of the plan, race 
was in fact the controlling consideration. The Court is of 
the opinion, however, that the record does not support the 
plaintiffs in this contention. The Superintendent of 
Schools testified that all transfers permitted had as their 
principal justification factors other than race. No evidence 
to the contrary was introduced, the plaintiffs relying only 
upon statistical data as to transfers. In the opinion of the 
Court this was not sufficient to refute the defendants’ evi­
dence.

Opinion of Wilson, D.J.



161a

Finally, an issue is presented by the plaintiffs’ motion as 
to whether the plaintiffs are entitled under the Constitution 
and the facts of this case to an order requiring the desegre­
gation of teaching, supervisory, and other professional per­
sonnel in the Chattanooga School System. The guideline 
for determining whether the plaintiffs are entitled to this 
relief is set forth in the opinion of the Court of Appeals 
upon a former appeal of this case (Mapp v. Board of Educa­
tion of the City of Chattanooga, 319 F. 2d 571 at 576) as 
follows:

“We agree that the teachers, principals and others are 
not within the class represented by plaintiffs and that 
plaintiffs cannot assert or ask protection of some Con­
stitutional rights of teachers and others, not parties to 
the cause. We, however, read the attack upon the as­
signment of teachers by race not as seeking to protect 
rights of such teachers, but as a claim that continued 
assigning of teaching personnel on a racial basis im­
pairs the students’ rights to an education free from any 
consideration of race. * # *

“ . . . We think it appropriate that the stricken allega­
tions of the complaint, insofar as they relate to the as­
signment of teachers and principals, should be restored 
to the pleading and that decision of the legal question 
presented await developments in the progress of the 
plan approved. Nothing we have said need call for any 
present taking of testimony on the subject of teacher 
and principal assignment. Within his discretion, the 
District Judge may determine when, if at all, it becomes 
necessary to give consideration to the question under 
discussion. We affirm, however, the order granting the 
motion to strike, to the extent that it applies to allega­

Opinion of Wilson, I).J,



162a

tions relating to the hiring and assignment of school 
personnel other than teachers and principals.”

The largely discretionary nature of the plaintiffs’ right 
to assert a claim for desegregation of principals and teach­
ers is supported by other authority. Augustus v. Board of 
Public Instruction of Escambia County, Florida, 306 F. 2d 
862 (C. C. A. 5,1962); Board of Public Instruction of Duval 
County, Florida v. Braxton, 326 F. 2d 616 (C. C. A. 5, 1964); 
Bradley v. School Board of Richmond, Virginia, 345 F. 2d 
310 (C. C. A. 4, 1965).

The evidence reflects that while the defendants have fol­
lowed a policy of segregation in the assignment of princi­
pals and teachers, steps have been taken toward modifica­
tion of this policy. It appears that since 1961 the number 
of Negro teachers within the school system has increased by 
88, while the number of white teachers has decreased by 25. 
It appears that since the initial order in this case, four 
Negroes have been employed upon the administrative staff, 
where formerly there were none. It appears that during the 
past year two Negro teachers have been assigned to a school 
formerly staffed only by white teachers. Finally, it appears 
that the desegregation of students in accordance with the 
plan herein approved will itself contribute to partially re­
solve the issue of teacher and principal assignments. Ac­
cordingly, it is the opinion of the Court that the defendants 
should be allowed additional time to resolve this issue and 
that no order with respect thereto should enter at this time. 
This decision of the Court will be without prejudice to the 
right of the plaintiffs to reassert the issue after a reason­
able time and after further progress under the desegrega­
tion plans heretofore and herein approved and is made

Opinion of Wilson, D.J.



13a

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Further Relief

Judge Wilson entered an opinion which related principally 
to the desegregation of schools offering technical and voca­
tional courses. Judge Wilson retained jurisdiction for the 
period of Chattanooga’s transition to a fully desegregated 
school system.

3. No administrative reasons are apparently present 
which would militate against immediate desegregation.

4. During the period since this Court’s last order in this 
case, defendants have done little or nothing to desegregate 
the teaching, supervisory, and other professional personnel 
in the Chattanooga school system.

5. The school zone lines adopted by the defendants have 
served to preserve segregation or, at the very least, to 
impede desegregation.

6. R.O.T.C. training and other curricular and extra­
curricular activities are presently not open to Negro stu­
dents on the same basis as to white students.

7. White junior high school students presently receive 
free transportation, whereas Negro junior high school stu­
dents do not receive free transportation.

W herefore, plaintiffs pray for an order directing defen­
dants to :

1. accelerate desegregation in the Chattanooga school 
system, to the end that complete desegregation may be 
effected by September 1965;

2. assign teaching, supervisory and other professional 
personnel to schools in the Chattanooga school system on



163a

without prejudice to the right of the School Board to under­
take on its own initiative a modification of its policies or 
practices with respect to teacher and principal assignments. 
The defendants will include in the annual report to be filed 
in accordance with the previous orders in this case a report 
with regard to any changes in its policies or practices with 
reference to assignment of teachers and principals by race.

All remaining issues in the plaintiffs’ motion, to the extent 
that they may not have been heretofore sustained or denied 
in this opinion, or to the extent that they were not with­
drawn upon the hearing, will be denied as not being sup­
ported by the record in this cause.

An order will enter accordingly.

Opinion of Wilson, D.J.

Frank W. W ilson 
United States District Judge



164a

(Filed August 11, 1965)

[ caption  om itted ]

This cause was heard the 1st day of May, 1965 before the 
Honorable Frank W. Wilson, United States District Judge, 
sitting without intervention of a jury, upon the motion for 
further relief filed by the plaintiffs, the desegregation 
progress reports filed by the defendants pursuant to prior 
order of the Court, the evidence introduced by the parties 
in open Court, arguments of counsel in open Court, briefs 
filed by counsel for the respective parties, and the entire 
record, from all of which the Court finds and holds that the 
plaintiffs are entitled to certain relief upon some of the is­
sues, but that the relief sought by plaintiffs should be de­
nied on other issues, as hereinafter provided, and as more 
fully stated in the Opinion filed by the Court on 5 August 
1965, which is hereby made a part of the record and is 
adopted as the Findings of Fact and the Conclusions of Law 
made by the Court upon said motion for further relief.

It is , therefore, ordered, adjudged, decreed and  enjoined  
by the Court as follows:

1. With reference to the application for acceleration of 
desegregation, no change will be made with regard to the 
desegregation to be accomplished in September, 1965, but 
the plan of desegregation heretofore ordered in this case is 
modified so as to require desegregation of all remaining 
grades in the school system of the City of Chattanooga, 
Tennessee in September, 1966.

2. With respect to the issue of whether the regulations 
permitting transfers of students have been solely used by 
the defendants as to impede or defeat desegregation as 
heretofore ordered by the Court, and thus violate the plain­

Order of Wilson, D.J.



165a

tiffs’ constitutional rights, the Court is of the opinion that 
the record does not support the plaintiffs in this contention, 
and their application for further relief is therefore denied 
as to this issue.

3. With respect to the issue of desegregation of teaching, 
supervisory, and other professional personnel in the Chat­
tanooga school system, the Court is of the opinion that the 
defendants should be allowed additional time to resolve this 
issue and consequently no order with respect thereto will 
enter at this time. However, this decision of the Court is 
without prejudice to the right of the plaintiffs to reassert 
the issue after a reasonable time and after further progress 
under the desegregation plans heretofore and herein ap­
proved, and is made without prejudice to the right of the 
school board to undertake on its own initiative a modifica­
tion of its policies or practices with respect to teacher and 
principal assignments. The defendants will include in the 
annual report to be filed in accordance with the previous 
orders in this case a report with regard to any changes in 
its policies or practices with reference to assignment of 
teachers and principals by race.

4. All remaining issues in the plaintiffs’ motion for fur­
ther relief, to the extent that they may not have been here­
tofore sustained or denied in this order, or to the extent 
that they were not withdrawn upon the hearing, are denied 
as not being supported by the record in this case.

5. Jurisdiction of the case is retained by the Court pend­
ing full implementation of desegregation in the City of 
Chattanooga school system, and either party may apply.

/ s /  Frank W. W ilson
United States District Judge

(Certificate of Service Omitted.)

Order of Wilson, D.J.



166a

Notice of Appeal

(Filed September 7, 1965)

[caption omitted]

Notice is hereby given that the plaintiffs, James Jona­
than Mapp and Deborah L’Tanya Mapp, by next friend, 
James E. Mapp, and James E. Mapp, hereby appeal to the 
Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit from the 
judgment entered in this action on the 11th day of August, 
1965.

Z. Alexander Looby and 
Avon N. W illiams, Jr.
327 Charlotte Avenue 
Nashville, Tennessee 37201
W illiam T. Underwood, Jr.
431 E. Ninth Street 
Chattanooga, Tennessee

Jack G-reenberg 
Derrick A. Bell, Jr.
10 Columbus Circle 
Suite 2030
New York, New York 10019
By /s /  Avon N. W illiams, Jr.

Avon N. Williams, Jr.
Attorneys for Plaintiff s-Appellants.

(Certificate of Service Omitted.)



MEIIEN PRESS INC. — N. Y. C . ^ ® n n



14a

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Further Relief

the basis of qualification and need and without regard to 
the race of the personnel or of the children in attendance;

3. assign pupils in the Chattanooga public school system 
pursuant to geographical, capacity-related school zone lines 
for each school, such lines being drawn without regard 
to race;

4. eliminate all racial restrictions and discriminatory 
practices from all school-sponsored curricular and extra­
curricular activities, including R.O.T.C. training;

5. eliminate racially discriminatory policies with respect 
to the provision of free transportation for junior high 
school students; and

6. eliminate all other racial classifications from the 
operation of the Chattanooga public school system.

Plaintiffs further pray that this Court set down this 
motion for immediate hearing, to the end that further re­
lief may be effective for the school year commencing in 
September 1965.

Avon N. W illiams, Je.
Z. Alexander Looby

McClellan-Looby Building 
Charlotte at 4th Street 
Nashville, Tennessee

Jack Greenberg
Derrick A. Bell, Jr.

10 Columbus Circle
New York, New York 10019

Attorneys for Plaintiffs



15a

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Further Relief 

Certificate of Service

This is to certify that on March , 1965, the under­
signed, one of the attorneys for plaintiffs, served a copy 
of the foregoing Motion for Further Relief on Raymond 
B. Witt, Jr., Esq., 401 Volunteer Building, Chattanooga, 
Tennessee, Attorney for Defendants, by mailing a copy 
thereof to him at the above address, United States air 
mail, postage prepaid.

Attorney for Plaintiffs



16a

Excerpts from Transcript of Hearing 
Held on May 1, 1965

[ caption  om itted ]

Benny Carmichael, having first been duly sworn, testi­
fies as follows:

Cross Examination by Mr. Williams:
—29—

Q. This is Dr. Benny Carmichael, I believe? A. Yes.
Q. Dr. Carmichael, you are the superintendent of the 

Chattanooga School system? A. Yes, I am.
Q. Dr. Carmichael, how many students do you now have 

in the Chattanooga school system? A. 27,400.
Q. How many of those are white and how many Negro? 

A. A little better than 12,000 of them are Negro, and the 
remainder are white.

Q. Has the number of students been relatively constant, 
the approximate number, since desegregation began? A. 
Approximately, this year we’ve had an increase of about 
300, but it has not been a large change in either direction.

Q. At the time desegregation was initiated, you had 
about—how many Negro schools did you have and how 
many white? A. I do not recall.

Q. You do not recall? A. No, sir.
Q. How many elementary schools do you have at pres­

ent? A. 33.
Q. How many junior high schools? A. 12.

—30—
Q. And how many high schools? A. 5.
Q. What are those high schools? A. Kirkman High 

School, Chattanooga High School, Brainerd High School, 
Riverside High School, Howard High School.



17a

Q. Three of those are white and— A. Two of them are 
Negro, yes.

Q. How many of your junior high schools are white and 
how many Negro! A. Four are Negro, the remainder 
white.

Q. What are those four Negro! A. Orchard Knob Ju­
nior High School, Riverside Junior High School, Howard 
Junior High School, Alton Park Junior High School.

Q. And you have two that are a portion of the Negro 
high schools, or located on the same premises! A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. Are any of the white junior high schools located on 
the same premises as the high school like that! A. Not 
on the high school but with an elementary school.

Q. Now, when was Riverside made a Negro.high school! 
A. For the 1963-64 school year.

Q. That was in the second year of the desegregation
—3 1 -

plan! A. Yes, it was.
Q. Were some Negro students transferred from a junior 

high school to that school! A. Yes, a junior high school 
was closed at East Fifth Street where there was an ele­
mentary school and a junior high school, and the junior 
high school division was opened at Riverside.

Q. East Fifth Street was a Negro school! A. Yes, it 
was.

Q. Prior to desegregation of the school system that was 
designated as a Negro school! A. Yes, sir.

Q. And at the time that it was an elementary school and 
a junior high school, where did the children go on to high 
school! A. They went to Howard.

Q. They went to Howard! A. Yes, sir.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



18a

Q. That school is in a predominantly Negro area? A. 
Yes, sir, it is.

Q. But there are some white children living in that area? 
A. Yes, sir, there are.

Q. Do you know approximately how many white children 
are residing in that area at present? A. Yes. The best

—3 2 -
figure I would use would be 105. Wait a minute. 80.

Q. Approximately 80? A. Approximately 80 white.
Q. Are you sure your first figure was not correct. A. 

Yes, sir, I ’m sure it wasn’t correct and the second is.
Q. All right. Approximately how many of those white 

children are actually attending— A. 35.
Q. 35? A. Yes, sir.
Q. The other 50 have been transferred? A. The other 

45 are attending other schools.
Q. And all 50 of those were transferred under paragraph 

2-i of your transfer regulations, weren’t they? A. I ’d like 
to review the transfer regulations. “The board, insofar as 
conditions and capacity of buildings would permit, has al­
ways permitted students enrollment in a school by choice 
when a zone change was made that would move the student 
to a different school.” You are right, they have been con­
tinued under that item.

Q. All told, as of the current school year, can you tell 
the Court how many white children zoned for Negro schools 
have been continued under that paragraph 2-i? Have been

—33—
transferred under that 2-i? A. All told, when I tell you 
how many white children have been continued—

Q. Have been continued in the same school and in effect 
transferred out of their zone? A. Have been continued in

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—-Cross



19a

their school because they were already enrolled in that 
school?

Q. Yes. A. For ’64-65?
Q. Yes. A. The record that I brought to court at your 

request today shows a total for the school year 1964-65 in 
grades one through nine, in the total school system, shows 
114 children permitted transfer out of their zone under 2-i. 
I should say i, the i has a # 1  and #2  under it. Now, of 
that 114, we have identified 45 of them.

Q. The others have not been identified? A. I mean I 
have just identified to you.

Q. Oh, I see, as being applicable to the East— A. To 
the East Fifth Street that you were just questioning about. 
1 can think of two or three instances in the total school sys­
tem that would account for some others. We have the indi­
vidual transfer record on every student here, it’s here, and 
we will examine it as far as you like. I know that we have 
two or three, or maybe half a dozen students left in the

—34—
school zone between the Sunnyside School and the Mission­
ary Eidge zone that were permitted to continue when the 
zone change was made, so I’m positive that their records 
will be in there. Where every one of those individual stu­
dents is, I don’t know, but I cannot think of an instance 
where the case is based on the desegregation, but we’ll ex­
amine them to the extent that you would like.

Q. Have you brought copies of that information? A. 
I’ve got the copy for you.

Q. May I have a copy of that, please, sir? A. This is 
the copy to the Court, which you would want to examine ?

Q. You just brought a single copy for the Court? 
A. No, I brought a copy for myself, one for the Court and 
one for our attorney.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



20a

Q. Well, may we use that for purposes of examination—

The Court: And then file it, is that what you wish 
to do?

Mr. Williams: I hadn’t planned to file it.

Q. I ’m not quite clear, Dr. Carmichael, and I would ap­
preciate it if you would clear this up. In your 1962-63 
progress report you stated that same thing in that report. 
In other words, all your transfers then under paragraph 
2-i of your progress reports are based on students being 
white students being permitted to continue in formerly 
white schools which they were attending at the time of the

—3 5 -
zone change, or Negro students being permitted to continue 
in formerly Negro schools? A. Not all, Mr. Williams, be­
cause that item 2-i has two parts. You are referring to the 
second part of it and I think you must have it before you, 
don’t you? The second part permits them to continue in a 
school in which they are already enrolled until they com­
plete the grades contained in that school. The first part, 
2-i-l, pupils in rare cases are assigned by the superintend­
ent of schools for reasons of adjustment after thorough 
investigation and study and the recommendation of teacher 
service. Now, in our report, as I indicated a minute ago, 
there is shown a total for i, and part might be on i-1 and 
part might be on i-2, but the majority would be on i-2, which 
is this thing that you have questioned.

Q. All right. Well, what would be your criterion in leav­
ing white children in the Negro zones, enrolled in the for­
merly Negro schools? A. I believe you said white chil­
dren enrolled in Negro schools, did you mean it that way? 
Would you please ask the question again?

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



21a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

Q. What was your criterion for leaving white children 
in the formerly Negro schools? Under this 2-i. A. Leav­
ing white children in the formerly Negro schools?

Q. Yes. A. I don’t follow you.
—36—

Q. Isn’t it true, as a matter of fact, that you transferred 
more than half of them out in every instance where you had 
a—how many Negro schools did you have affected by—how 
many Negro schools do you have now affected by desegre­
gation? A. How many Negro schools do we have white 
children in, is that what you—

Q. Yes. A. We have two, the East Fifth Street School 
and the Davenport School.

Q. The East Fifth Street School and— A. The Daven­
port School.

Q. And you say you don’t know how many Negro schools 
you have altogether? A. I can’t answer you.

Q. How many formerly Negro schools? A. No, you 
asked how many we had when we started desegregation and 
I didn’t recall.

Q. Well, how many predominantly Negro schools do you 
have? A. Now?

Q. Yes. A. I can’t answer you without stopping to count 
them up. I will count them up, if you like. Do you want me 
to?

Q. Yes. A. In the elementary schools we have the
—37—

Frank Trotter, the Piney Woods, the Charles A. Bell, the 
Calvin Donaldson, the Louis Sanderson, the Chattanooga 
Avenue, Howard Elementary, the Davenport, the James A. 
Henry, the Joseph E. Smith, the East Fifth Street, the 
Orchard Knob Elementary. That makes you 12 elementary 
schools, four junior high, which makes you 16, and two 
Negro high, which makes you 18 Negro schools.



22a

Q. Eighteen schools that are predominantly— A. Pre­
dominantly, yes, sir.

Q. And the only two that have any—actually, two pre­
dominantly Negro and 18 actual Negro schools, because the 
only two that actually have any whites in them are East 
Fifth and Davenport, is that right? A. Yes.

Q. And how many whites are at East Fifth? A. 35, 
to the best of our knowledge, 15 at Davenport, to the best 
of our knowledge.

Q. You have a total of— A. Wait a minute. One or two 
at Louis Sanderson.

Q. So that you have a total of 52 white children attend­
ing school in Negro schools? A. We had spoken in terms 
of 60. That figure I gave you for East Fifth should have 
been 45, and this is just as a principal may tell you, how 
many he has. I would want to point out at this point, I 
think you implied a question in this area a moment ago. 
That to my knowledge these are the only Negro school

—3 8 -
zones where there are white children residing.

Q. You mean there are only three zones where white 
children are— A. Yes, sir. If it is otherwise, it is not to 
our knowledge.

Q. Now, with regard to the white schools, you said you 
had a total of 33 elementary schools? A. I said that. I 
could be off one.

Q. Of the white elementary schools, how many are 
affected by desegregation? A. I ’d like to count those, too, 
because I don’t try to keep the number in mind. There is 
the Sunnyside School, the Eastdale School—

Q. Eastdale? A. Eastdale. The Missionary Ridge 
School, the Glenwood School, the Avondale School, the East 
Chattanooga School, the Ridgedale School, the Oak Grove

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



23a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

School, the Hemlock School, the G. Bussell Brown School, 
the St. Elmo School—

Q. I’m having you to do something needless, I ’ve got it 
in the report that is in the record, is it not ? A. It is in the 
report. I counted 11, I may have missed one or two. The 
Elbert Long School has had, I ’m not positive that it has at 
this time or not.

Q. Now, among those schools, the only two which have 
any really substantial proportion of Negroes attending

—39—
them are Avondale and Glenwood? A. Those are the 
largest, yes, sir.

Q. The others have proportions like two Negroes to 230 
whites at G. Bussell Brown and that sort of proportion, do 
they not? A. Uh huh.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, do you have any Negro teachers at 
all teaching at any of these predominantly white schools, or 
all white schools? A. We have two Negro teachers as­
signed to the Avondale School, they were not assigned, 
however, in regular teaching positions. They were assigned 
to assist teachers, they have taught in certain instances, 
generally to counsel and help in the total program, but I 
would not claim that they were assigned there as we regu­
larly assign teachers to groups of children.

Q. Are they actually working as guidance counselors 
there? A. They are working a great deal with parents 
and they are assisting teachers. They do teach some from 
time to time in certain instances, but they are not in charge 
of a homeroom, would be the better way to explain that.

Q. Now, how many white teachers do you have assigned 
to Negro or predominantly Negro Schools. A. Only the 
ones at Avondale, 22 teachers, considering that it is pre­
dominantly Negro now.



24a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

—40—
Q. Actually Avondale is a formerly white school? A. 

That’s right.
Q. In a sense it has become and is becoming more a pre­

dominantly Negro neighborhood, the whites are moving 
out? A. Yes, sir.

Q. You are still maintaining your white faculty there? 
A. Yes, we are. The only other instance is one referred to 
by the school hoard’s attorney, the case of a teacher, a white 
teacher, who teaches Russian at the Howard High School, 
and has been for three or four years.

Q. This is kind of a special case? A. A special case, yes, 
sir.

Q. Your policy is not to assign white teachers to Negro 
schools? A. It has been.

Q. The Clara Carpenter School is no longer in existence ? 
A. No, it isn’t.

Q. Was that a Negro school at the time? A. Up through 
the school year ’59-60 it was a white school, and the school 
year ’60-61 it was changed to Negro, it was operated three 
years as a Negro elementary school, and closed two years 
ago.

Q. Well, you had whites residing in that area? A. We 
did, we had approximately 200 when we closed it as a white 
school, we had approximately 200 white elementary

- 4 1 -
children.

Q. And how many Negro children did you have in that 
area? A. We opened it up with 500 Negro children, after 
closing it to the white children.

Q. When the desegregation came into effect, the first 
three grades in this plan, was this one of the schools that 
was selected? A. It was included, yes.



25a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

Q. You had just the year before made this a Negro 
school? A. Two years before, I believe. ’60-61 and ’61 ’62 
it had been operating and we desegregated in ’62-63.

Q. But that was while this suit was pending, wasn’t it? 
A. Yes.

Q. The actual neighborhood had a complexion of approxi­
mately 500 Negroes and 200 whites? A. Right.

Q. Now, where did you send those 200 whites! A. We 
sent them to Grlenwood and Avondale. Those are the ones 
that are included in this 45 that I reported on a wdiile ago.

Q. And those were white schools at that time? A. Yes, 
they were.

Q. When the plan went into effect and applicable to Clara 
Carpenter in 1962-63, these white children had been attend­
ing Glenwood and Avondale for how many years, one year

—42—
or two? A. Two years.

Q. Some of them, depending on what grade they were in? 
A. Yes.

Q. But yet you permitted transfers, you permitted those 
children, under your paragraph 2-i, you permitted those 
white children to remain in the white school, the predomi­
nantly white school, rather than back to Clara Carpenter, 
did you not? A. Yes, we did.

Q. Now, I suppose, Dr. Carmichael, that was on the 
theory, you felt it was educationally sound where there was 
a zone change to allow the child to continue in his zone ? To 
continue in the school he was attending, is that correct? 
A. The board has a long precedent of trying to do that. 
It has done it in many instances where there was no in­
volvement of race.

Q. But you can’t always do it, can you, administratively? 
It’s not always possible, is it? A. I guess it isn’t. We



26a

don’t have an example where we haven’t, I don’t believe, 
since I have been here.

Q. Ordinarily, though, when you do it administratively, 
don’t you simply allow the child to remain in—the same 
child lived in zone A and a zone change puts him actually 
in Zone B. Where you do it administratively, don’t you 
ordinarily just let him stay in zone A until the end of the 
school year and then let him enter school B the beginning

—43—
of the next year. A. No, sir, the practice is to let him con­
tinue in that school through the grades that are provided in 
that school. We permit what you say during the school 
year if a child moves, he changes his residence over a zone 
line, we permit him to continue in his first school until the 
end of the year, but at the end of that year he must then 
transfer to his new school.

Q. Were any of these children first graders who received 
transfers out of Clara Carpenter that first year, under 2-i? 
A. I think there were, the first year, because I think there 
is something you should be reminded of for the school year 
’62-63. ’62-63, I believe we were operating under a different 
transfer order than we were the school year ’63-64, after it 
had been taken to the Supreme Court and eliminated. You 
know what I mean by that?

Q. No, sir, I don’t, because—you are talking about the 
racial minority transfer feature that you had in your plan 
and it was understanding that this court eliminated that in 
its order? A. I don’t believe that that was clear at all dur­
ing the first year of desegregation.

Q. In other words the board proceeded on the theory 
that although the court had deleted that portion of the plan 
and substituted a more general statement which specifically 
excluded race or color, that the board still went ahead and

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



27a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

—44—
used race or color? A, I’ll put it this way, that for the 
’62-63 school year we did not force even any first graders 
into formerly all-Negro schools. I held conferences, I re­
call, with better than 20 parents and children who were first 
graders, and if I was not operating under what I considered 
somewhat misunderstood or indefinite requirement with re­
gard to that, I was certainly using i-1 in which I had the 
discretion to place a child, based on what I thought his edu­
cational need was. So I did not force even first graders in 
’62-63 into formerly all Negro schools. Beginning with the 
school year ’63-64 we forced them all. If they were new to 
that community and did not have a record in a previous 
school, they had to go to that school, and that accounts for 
the number of white children who are in the Negro schools 
that we are talking about. But our report showed that there 
were no white children in formerly all Negro schools when 
we submitted it to the court for the school year 1962-63.

Q. You didn’t submit that until ’63, when we had the pre­
trial conference? A. No, sir.

Q. Did you submit us a copy of that? A. No, sir, I was 
not requested to.

Q. We weren’t advised of that in 1963. I thought the 
Court ordered— A. No, sir, it says to submit it to the

- 4 5 -
Court. We have submitted three reports for ’62-63, ’63-64 
and ’64-65.

Q. Yes, sir. But you thought it wasn’t necessary to sub­
mit a copy of the report to counsel for the plaintiff? A. 
No, sir, I didn’t think it was necessary.

Q. Now, Dr. Carmichael, in this material that you have 
here, do you show how many new teachers have been em­
ployed? A. I have a separate set of material as far as the



28a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

new teachers, it would be intended for use the same as the 
other. This cover memorandum on this material explains 
what it is and how it is presented, and then according to 
the request it is submitted for the past five years, beginning 
with 1960-61. It shows the number of new teachers em­
ployed by schools, the number of teachers discharged, and 
whether or not they were assigned for replacements or for 
new positions. There is another column provided which 
can answer some questions which you might have, trying to 
show the number of positions that are gained or lost by 
individual schools and the accumulation of them in the total 
school system. That is not basically not a part of the data 
which you requested, but it may be needed to answer some 
questions which you might have. They are shown in each 
year, broken by white teachers and then Negro teachers, 
for each year.

Q. In the school year 1964-65, I note that you employed 
five new teachers at Avondale Elementary School! A.

- 4 6 -
Yes.

Q. And all those teachers were necessitated by the trans­
fer of Negro children to that school! A. Yes, they were 
placed in new positions as you can see under the new posi­
tion column.

Q. Before I get to that, the teacher question, Dr. Car­
michael, the Riverside High School was converted to a 
Negro high school when? A. At the beginning of the 1963- 
64 school year.

Q. Why was that done? A. Because the large number 
of Negro senior high school students was exceeding the 
capacity that we had for them at Howard High School, and 
a larger proportion of them were residing in the general



29a

vicinity and area of the school which was made the River­
side Junior High School.

Q. Did yon build a new white high school that year! 
A. Yes, we did, completed one and entered it that year.

Q. Where was that? A. That was located in North 
Chattanooga. There was no high school in North Chatta­
nooga.

Q. That is an area, where this high school is located, an 
area that is predominantly white? A. Yes, sir. That 
building had been in the plans of the board of education 
since 1958-59.

Q. What is the name of this new high school! A. Chat-
—47—

tanooga High School. It was a transfer of the old school 
from the Riverside building to the new school building.

Q. Do you plan to zone high schools in this plan? A. No, 
sir.

Q. Do you have any idea how many negroes reside in the 
vicinity of Chattanooga High School? A. Yes, I have an 
idea.

Q. Approximately how many? A. Of high school age?
Q. Yes. A. Senior high school age, probably 10 to 12.
Q. What is the capacity of that high school? A. It de­

pends on which board member is interpreting it as to what 
the capacity would be. It’s a 1,200 pupil capacity building. 
It has got slightly in excess of 1,200 pupils in it. We call it 
anywhere from 1,000 to 1,400 in capacity, but it is basically 
about a 1,200 capacity building.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, has the board taken any cognizance of 
the population shift as relates to race in the city of Nash­
ville? A. City of Chattanooga?

Q. Chattanooga, yes. A. Taken any—

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

Q. Cognizance'? A. I think so, it has watched it, fol-
—48—

lowed it very carefully.
Q. For instance, in your urban renewal program, has 

there been any development that has had the effect of con­
centrating Negroes and whites into specific areas'? A. Into 
specific areas?

Q. Yes. A. Yes.
Q. Would you tell us about those, briefly, as much as you 

know about them? A. Well, the greatest effect, I think, 
has been the movement of the Negroes toward East Chatta­
nooga or into the East Chattanooga area in this Avondale 
area, and here we have made no adjustment. We have used 
the buildings already existing, but have been aware that the 
Negroes were shifting in this direction and therefore there 
were going to be high concentrations of Negro children in 
the Glenwood-Avondale school, Hardy Junior High School, 
and we’ve used the buildings that are available to us. The 
shift toward South Chattanooga and into South Chatta­
nooga has required new building construction and we have 
constructed the Charles A. Bell Elementary School, the 
Alton Park Junior High School, the Piney Woods Elemen­
tary School, to accomodate the influx of Negroes moving in 
that direction. And I feel, in fact I ’m positive, that these 
are all developing from the redevelopment primarily.

—49—
Q. Do you have any idea what portion of the city the 

Negroes came from? A. They came from all over. We 
opened the Piney Woods Elementary School in the middle 
of 1963-64, and we had them come from Orchard Knob all 
the way back, we had them coming from Chattanooga Ave­
nue. They come from many sections.



31a

Q. What I ’m asking, though, is what areas have Negroes 
been removed from by virtue of the urban renewal? A. 
From the west side area, the West Main Street School and, 
the H. Clay Evans School.

Q. And what school? A. H. Clay Evans was one closed 
even before I came. And the enrollment in the James A. 
Henry School had been reduced considerably.

Q. As a matter of fact were the Negroes not also re­
moved prior to the construction of this Chattanooga High 
School? Doesn’t the high school stand on a spot where 
there were Negro residences, the new high school? A. Oh, 
no.

Q. It does not? A. It does not.
Q. All right. What is the number of white children that 

were transferred out of the Avondale School, the number 
transferred out of East Fifth? A. None. You mean white 
students transferred out?

—50—
Q, You mean all white children who reside within the 

zone of Avondale School are attending— A. Yes, sir. Yes, 
sir.

Q. Let me ask you this. You said that all white—you are 
saying that no transfers have been allowed under para­
graph 2-i of white children out of Negro schools or Negro 
children out of white schools since the school year 1962-63? 
A. No, we have continued to use 2-i-2. Let me put it this 
way, Mr. Williams, there have been no new ones because 
you were either enrolled in a school when you started de­
segregation or you weren’t. Let me explain this. If you 
move into the community new, you haven’t been previously 
enrolled in that school, so you have got to go to the school 
in your new zone.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



32a

Q. Well, all right. That’s going back, then, to what I was 
asking you. How many white children have been trans­
ferred out of Avondale out of 2-i-2? A. None.

Q. You mean there were no white children who elected in 
’62-63 to attend some other school? A. They couldn’t, be­
cause they weren’t enrolled in some other school.

Q. This was a white school? A. Sure, they were en­
rolled in the Avondale School and they would have to stay.

Q. And how many Negro children were transferred out?
—51—

A. None.
Q. Do you have any criteria or standard for permitting 

transfers under the first sub-section of paragraph 2-i? A. 
They are subjective, certainly.

Q. You just decide, right? A. Yes, sir.
Q. But thus far you haven’t made any decisions which 

resulted in the transfer of a white child out of a Negro or 
predominantly Negro school— A. I don’t remember any 
since 1962-63. I had those in ’62-63 that I did make some 
transfers, and there were instances in which I am sure race 
was a part of it. The parent did not tell me necessarily, but 
I realized it.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, do you have any explanation to the 
Court as to why, under the zone lines which have been 
drawn by the board, there are so few formerly Negro 
schools which have any white children residing in the zone 
at all, and so few white schools, formerly white schools, who 
have any substantial number of Negroes residing? A. 
Yes, sir, I have an explanation. There just aren’t the op­
posite race living in the zone, and the zones were not drawn 
to make it this way.

Q. Well, what we’ve asking you is what factors did 
you use? A. We drew the zones as closely as we could to

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



33a

the school building to include enough children to fill the
— 52-

school, and to make it as convenient as possible for chil­
dren to attend the school, and try to draw it to the size of 
the capacity of the building.

Q. And you attempted to make it approximately an even 
geographical area around each school? A. Yes, sir, to the 
best of our ability.

Q. And you’re saying because of residential segregation 
that resulted in this near complete segregation? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. "Would you have a similarly segregated residential 
pattern if you zoned the high schools? A. Not as much so. 
As you increase the size of zones you tend to incorporate 
greater pockets of various groups.

Q. Of course you don’t intend to zone the high schools at 
all? A. No, sir.

Q. How do you intend to operate them, freedom of 
choice? A. Fredom of choice, as they have been all along.

Q. Have you made any preparation for the desegregation 
of junior high schools? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Have you already prepared your zones ? A. Yes, sir, 
they are ready to be recommended to the board of educa­
tion.

— 53—

Q. Do you know how many white and Negro students 
are approximately in each zone? A. I don’t know very 
much about the number in each zone, I do know that every 
white junior high school would be affected with the excep­
tion of one.

Q. Yes, but how much affected, approximately? A. I 
don’t—I know roughly numbers of individual schools, but 
I couldn’t—

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



34a

Q. You have how many white junior high schools? A. 
Eight. Seven of them would be affected.

Q. Seven of them, one of them wouldn’t have any Ne­
groes at all, is that right? A. That’s right.

Q. Do you have any idea as to the approximate number, 
the total number, of Negroes who would be entitled to be 
assigned to one of those seven others? A. I know by 
individual schools approximately how many it would be.

Q. Could you give me some of those, the ones you know? 
A. I know one school where the number would be slightly 
over 100. This would be for the seventh grade only. I 
know of another where the number would be 22.

Q. Which one is that, where it would be 100? A. Hardy 
.Junior High School would have approximately 100 in the 
seventh grade.

—54—
Q. What is the total enrollment in that school? A. It 

is now 465.
Q. And the next one is what? A. 22 is the number Im  

thinking of.
Q. And what school is that? A. That is Lookout. That 

would be out of—the present enrollment of that school 
is 155.

Q. Now do you remember any others? A. No, I don’t.
Q. Would it be fair to say that this is probably similar 

to the elementary schools, that you have these two schools 
that are in areas where— A. Not the second one, the 
second one—I just happen to know about the second one 
because we have been doing some specific work with the 
community on it. There are other junior high schools that 
would have more than it. The Eastside Junior High School 
would have Negro children coming from the—it has a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



35 a

relatively large number but I don’t know what number. 
It would be 50, something like that.

Q. Would you say that the seven of them would have an 
average of more than 50? The seven that would have 
Negroes. A. I don’t know, because I don’t know numbers 
of white and Negro children in the previously segregated 
schools. We do not keep it.

Q. Well, you have a pattern in your elementary schools,
—55—

though, haven’t you, Dr. Carmichael? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Giving us an educated approximation, can you say 

approximately, not in exact figures but approximately— 
A. No, I can’t.

Q. Well, would you say as many as 1,000 Negro children? 
A. No, this is the best estimate that I can give you. You 
have got approximately 900 children in six grades, 
presently. That is an average of 150 per grade.

Q. 900 children all told in junior high schools? A. 900 
Negro children are presently in grades one through six, 
you see. That is an average of 150 desegregated per grade, 
isn’t it?

Q. Yes. A. We are going to desegregate the seventh 
grade next year, so we stand to carry forward—however, 
you don’t know what that means when you incorporate 
greater areas and pick up new schools which may be 
predominantly and all-Negro now. Louis Sanderson 
School, for example, now I think lias one white child in 
it, but the entire school zone next year would be in what 
is now a white junior high school. So that I have not made 
an attempt to make an estimate of it.

Q. Well, would it be a fair approximation to say that 
there would be—projecting the thing from the elementary

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



36a

schools, that there would approximately be not more than
—56—

150 or 200! A. I don’t know whether it would be fair or 
not, Mr. Williams.

Q. You haven’t given it thought or consideration at all? 
A. Not in terms of actual number.

Q. Then the actual number of Negro children involved 
doesn’t constitute any real problem? A. It can, if you 
get number conscious.

Q. Of course you haven’t given it any consideration? 
A. I have in two places, where I ’ve had to give it con­
siderable attention, and that’s the reason I know.

Q. Where were the places? A. Hardy and Lookout.
Q. Well, you’ve already taken care of that? A. I ’ve 

started taking care of it.
Q. Let me ask you this. How many schools did you 

change from white to Negro schools between 1960 and 
19— and the current year? A. White to Negro schools?

Q. Yes, sir, how many schools in the Chattanooga school 
system? A. Only the Clara Carpenter School, that I told 
you about, which was early in ’60-61.

Q. What about the Riverside High School? A. I did 
not think of that one.

—57—
Q. Are there any others now? A. I don’t think of any 

others.
Q, Clara Carpenter was changed in what year? A. ’60- 

61.
Q. And the Riverside was changed— A. ’63-64.
Q. ’63-64? A. I think it rather unfair to put the River­

side—and this is the reason I don’t, in a change from a 
white to a Negro. Chattanooga High School was not dis­

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



37a

continued, you see. That’s the difference. It was not 
stopped as a school, it was continued as a school only at 
a new location, and a new school was established, mainly 
the Riverside School. It is not the same kind of thing.

Q. Oh, I see, I didn’t understand that. What you did, 
Chattanooga High School was the old white high school? 
A. That’s right.

Q. And you took that old building and gave it to Negroes 
and created a new Riverside High School? A. Right.

Q. Which is the old building for the white children? 
A. Right.

Q. And built a brand new 1,200 capacity high school out 
here for the white children in a neighborhood that has, 
by your estimation, not more than 10 or 12 Negroes in it?

—58—
A. Right.

Q. And you did that not while this suit was pending but 
tendered the implementation of this plan in 1963-64? A. 
The plans for it were already established when I came to 
Chattanooga. And, I would point out, let me point this 
out. There is no area considered dezoned for a given 
school. The Chattanooga High School draws a good por­
tion of its student body from Brainerd, which is east of 
Missionary Ridge, from. East Chattanooga, the Hardy 
area, from Eastlake, which is as far south as you can get 
in the city.

Q. And that’s the white school you are talking about 
now? A. It is the only Chattanooga High School and it 
is white.

Q. And it draws its pupils from all around? A. Yes, 
all of the schools do, all the high schools.

Q. Now, how many pupils did it have assigned to it when 
it was in this old building assigned now to Negroes? A.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



38a

It has gone as high as 1,600, It was at about 1,200 at the 
time it made the move.

Q. Incidently, are you getting ready to make some addi­
tions to that school now? A. Which school?

Q. Riverside? A. No.
Q. Have any been made to it? A. No. There have been

—5 9 -
renovations inside the building but no additions.

Q. Now, Dr. Carmichael, at the time when you made the 
change over, from the white to the , Negro school, all of 
those 1,600—well, I guess the graduating class didn’t, but 
all except the graduating class of that 1,600 had to be re­
assigned, didn’t they? A. From Howard, you mean?

Q. No, the white children were attending the Chat­
tanooga High School, and had to be reassigned from the 
Riverside, from that old building to the new Chattanooga 
High School, didn’t they? A. The student body moved as 
a group, it was not a matter of reassignment. Same rec­
ords, same teachers—

Q. You moved how many students as a group in con­
nection with that? A. It remained at about the same en­
rollment.

Q. 1,600 students? A. No, about 1,200 enrollment. I 
said the 1,600 was about the highest I remember the school 
being.

Q. This Riverside is located in what part of town, did 
you say? A. On East Third Street, which is near the 
Clara Carpenter—East Fifth Street School area.

Q. The new Chattanooga High is over in— A. North
—60—

Chattanooga.
Q. Did you have to make any arrangements for trans­

portation? A. No, sir.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants■—Cross



39a

Q. Didn’t have to make any arrangements for transporta­
tion? A. No, sir.

Q. You had to reassign teachers, didn’t you? A. No, 
sir.

Q. You mean the white teachers are still over at that 
old building? A. They went with the principal, there 
was no reassignment, no changes were made, no change 
in records of anything.

Q. Well, they were reassigned to a new building, were 
they not? A. They were.

Q. They had to move? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Their records had to be moved? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there some change in the composition of the 

students as a result of the change in location of this high 
school? A. No.

Q. You say there was absolutely no change? A. No.
—6 1 -

No difference than any other year.
Q. I see. Now, when the Clara Carpenter School was 

closed, that was formerly an elementary and junior high 
school? A. Formerly elementary white school.

Q. It was the East Fifth that was formerly elementary 
and junior high, right? A. Right.

Q. Now, the East Fifth and Clara Carpenter are in the 
same general neighborhood are they not? A. Yes, they 
are. About five blocks of each other.

Q. Incidently, is Riverside in a Negro neighborhood? 
What part of Chattanooga is that in? A. It’s in the area 
of Clara Carpenter and East Fifth.

Q. East Chattanooga? A. No, it’s not considered East 
Chattanooga, it is considered more nearly downtown Chat­
tanooga.

Q. All right. When you changed that, then you sent all

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



40a

the Negro junior high school students from East Fifth 
Street over to Riverside! A. Yes.

Q. And you sent the overflow from the Negro high school 
students and junior high students out at Howard up to 
Riverside? A. Right. Not junior high, just senior high.

Q. Didn’t you in effect zone the two— A. Yes, we did, 
for purposes of dividing the schools. We drew a line along

— 62-

Main Street at a point which would approximately divide 
the student body in half, leaving half at Howard and taking 
half to Riverside, with the stipulation that in the event 
there was any program of study underway in one that was 
not provided in the other, they could go back, or if a child 
required a program of studies that was in one and not 
in the other, that he could go to that school. And it is 
my understanding we have had some. It is not a zone as 
such, in the way we prescribe a total zone, it’s a division 
line, trying to divide the student body.

Q. But you do require children, Negro children, living 
on one side the line to go to Riverside, unless there is some 
special program— A. That’s right.

Q. And the other side goes to Howard? A. That’s right.
Q. Do you recall saying at a previous hearing in this 

ease, when we were trying to get some further relief or 
something, at a pre-trial conference or something, that 
those two schools were not zoned? Did you just zone them 
recently? A. No, we zoned them before we made the divi­
sion.

Q. But you don’t zone any white high school children? 
A. No, we don’t.

Q. So the zoning here is used in order to retain the 
Negro high schools, retain these two schools as Negro high

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



41a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

- 6 3 - .
schools and junior high schools— A. It doesn’t apply to 
the junior high schools.

Q. Well, Riverside has a junior high school? A. Yes, 
but it does not—the junior high school is not affected by 
the division line at 15th Street. These are separate zones.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, when you were operating Riverside 
as Chattanooga High School for the white children, it did 
not have a junior high? A. No, it did not. There were 
no students available for it.

Q. Now, when you made these arrangements last year, 
you were thereby enabled to close down Clara Carpenter 
School? A. Yes, but not for that purpose, that was not 
the basis for closing it down.

Q. But at the same time Clara Carpenter happened to 
be one of the major trouble spots—well, let me put it 
another way. It happened to be one of the two major- 
schools from which you transferred white children in the 
previous year of desegregation, didn’t you? Yes, that was 
the school where you actually used your racially predicated 
transfer to get white children out of this zone and into 
their white zones? A. The point you are trying to make, 
Mr. Williams, can’t stand. I ’m sorry you don’t understand 
the relationship of schools to schools. You’re pointing 
toward the fact that we intentionally closed Clara Carpen-

—64—
ter in order to move these white children out. This is not 
the case. You see, the Clara Carpenter School and the 
East Fifth Street School are located on the same street, 
just a few blocks from each other. We needed only one 
of the schools to accommodate all the children in the com­
munity, both white and Negro, and so the old Clara Car­



42a

penter zone became a part of the East Fifth, and that 
applied to white and Negro children just alike. So that 
is the reason the white children immediately started going 
to East Fifth.

Q. But that was true only if you removed the junior 
hig’h school students over to Riverside, wasn’t it! A. No, 
it had no relationship.

Q. You mean you would have had room at East Fifth for 
all of these children at Clara Carpenter in any event? 
A. Mr. Williams, the Clara Carpenter School was operated 
for the extra children who were out in East Chattanooga, 
in the Avondale area, to be specific, and they were trans­
ported back there.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, I don’t believe that is quite respon­
sive. Would you have had room at East Fifth for—to 
continue East Fifth Junior High School and at the same 
time receive all of the children, both Negro and white who 
were assigned to Clara Carpenter-— A. Yes, sir, we would 
have.

Q. You would have? A. Yes, sir. It had nothing what-
—65—

soever to do with it.
Q. Then you are under capacity at East Fifth Street 

now? A. Yes, we are.
Q. With your junior high school students going to River­

side, is that correct? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You were going to close Clara Carpenter anyway? 

A. Surely, it wTas not serving the children in that com­
munity, it was serving the children being transported in, 
until desegregation started at Avondale. When desegrega­
tion started at Avondale, the children stayed at home and 
went to Avondale instead of coming to Clara Carpenter 
School.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



43a

Q. Dr. Carmichael, isn’t the Orchard Knob School, and 
hasn’t it been for years, just terribly over-crowded? A. 
Are you talking about the elementary or junior high? No, 
sir, it hasn’t.

Q. It hasn’t been over-crowded? A. I have a letter in 
my files now from the principal of the school asking that 
the zone be enlarged so that it would receive additional 
students.

Q. You have no over-crowded Negro schools at all? A. 
Yes, it’s possible that we have schools that are a little 
more over-crowded than I would like, in terms of 30 stu­
dents, something of this order. I would never say that we

— 66—

don’t have a school that is over-crowded somewhere, I can’t 
keep them that way. But we have no critical over-crowTded 
condition anywhere, we have no double sessions, we have 
even no requests for relief on the basis of crowded con­
ditions.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, in view of the fact that your zoning 
lines have tended to result in almost exclusively segregated 
schools, have you made any provision or established any 
standards for pupils who desire to attend a school pre­
dominantly of another group, of another race, to obtain 
a transfer? A. No, sir. My interpretation of such is that 
would not be legal.

Q. And if a Negro pupil sought to transfer from one of 
these Negro schools to a white school, or a school that was 
formerly white, that transfer would be denied? A. It 
would not be denied if he had conditions meeting the board 
policy for transfer, no, sir.

Q. You’re talking about meeting all these—one of these 
conditions other than paragraph 2-i? A. Yes.

Q. But you would not grant that request under para­

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



44a

graph 2-i, if you had such a request? A. Wouldn’t need 
it because he hadn’t been enrolled in that school previously.

Q. You had two sub-sections of paragraph 2-i, you have 
the discretionary one and it gives you almost absolute dis-

—67—
cretion? A. Yes. If I believe this was essential to his 
education or important to it, I would do it. In fact, I be­
lieve we may have that prevailing in an instance or two 
now, with regard to special education classes.

Q. But, as a matter of fact, it has been your policy not 
to grant— A. I haven’t thought of it as being a color-line 
question at all.

Q. Have you had some applications from Negro children 
to transfer— A. No, sir.

Q. Have you made any publication in the newspaper 
that the superintendent and the board of education have 
this authority under its transfer policy to grant transfers 
in special instances? A. No more than is done regularly 
with all policies. There has not been an intention to pub­
licize it nor hide it. It has been on the books for years 
and years.

Q. But you haven’t publicized it in the newspapers? 
A. No, sir, and feel no obligation to.

Q. And shortly after the Court’s order, original order 
in this case, you went around, I believe, you went around 
and consulted with a lot of parents, didn’t you? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. And a lot of Negro parents? A. Yes, sir.
— 68—

Q. And at that time you told them and you also told 
some white parents who were in Negro zones that their 
children didn’t have to go to the school where they were 
zoned unless they wanted to, didn’t you? A. I told them

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



45a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

that they had the right to continue in the school in which 
they were presently enrolled, under i-2.

Q. And the effect of their exercising that right would 
have been to tend to keep the school system segregated? 
A. It would have prevented as many from going, and I 
know of an instance or two where some did not go that first 
year.

Q. But you did not and you never have advised any 
parent, either personally or through the newspapers, that 
they have the right to ask you for a transfer from a 
desegregated—from a zone to which they are assigned to 
another zone? A. I don’t have any right to express that 
to anybody on that basis, because that cannot be the basis 
for it. I have always advised parents, if they ask if they 
could transfer, that there was a set of board policies, their 
procedure was to go to the school to "which they would like 
admission, fill out the request, and it would come to my 
office for consideration. And the policies are printed on 
the application they make or request that they make.

Q. Well, Dr. Carmichael, since that first year you say
—69—

that has not been the basis. I think you have admitted that 
during that first year you interpreted the Court’s order 
as permitting you to apply racial standards in transfers? 
A. We were not sure on it.

Q. You said you wouldn’t require any Negro child to go 
to school with a white child, or any white child to go to 
school with a Negro child? A. I did not say that, I have 
never said that.

Q. I misunderstood you, I ’m sorry, sir. What was it 
you did say in that regard? A. I said we were very un­
clear during the first year as to how we ought to operate



46a

it, because the wording, I believe you’ll find, in the order 
would indicate that I was not obligated to ignore all prob­
lems of children who would be zoned to a new school, and 
I didn’t ignore them.

Q. So that actually what you did, though, was admit 
any white child zoned in a Negro zone transfer to a for­
merly white zone, and any Negro child zoned to a formerly 
white school to transfer to a Negro or formerly Negro 
school? A. I permitted them to continue.

Q. And you advised them of that, didn’t you? A. Yes, 
I did.

Q. But you did not advise anybody that they had a right 
to request transfer, in the case of a Negro, from a Negro 
zone to a white, formerly white zone? A. I believe it

— 70—
would be true, Mr. Williams, to say that in any conference 
that I ever had with parents, I advised them that I had 
discretionary powTer with regard to assignment, that I 
would have to consider them carefully, it would only grow 
out of a conference, I held conferences, many of them, 
with both white and Negro parents and made it clear to 
them that I had the power to make an assignment based 
upon that i-1 that you are talking about.

Q. You mean you said to parents you talked to that 
you had the authority to permit a Negro child in a Negro 
school to apply for a white school? A. If there was a 
Negro parent talking with me about the question, I did. 
I ’ve never tried to prevent anyone from knowing it.

Q. Well, did you make any public— A. I made no pub­
lic announcements of it, there have never been any public 
announcements made of any board of education policy with 
regard to transfers that I know of.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



47a

Q. You stated in various papers that you filed here in 
court that principals and various staff members had various 
meetings with Negro parents! A. Yes.

Q. Now, are you representing to the Court that you 
know of your own knowledge that they advised these Ne­
gro parents—let me ask you this. These were Negro parents

—71—
of children who were assigned to white zones, weren’t they, 
that they had these conferences with! A. We requested 
them to meet with us prior to the opening of school the 
first year.

Q. Did you request the parents of Negro children who 
were assigned to Negro schools to meet with you, to tell 
them about this discretionary power that you were exer­
cising! A. I didn’t meet with­

er Did you request any parents of white children who 
resided in zones of white schools to meet with you so you 
could tell them that they had a right to transfer—to ask 
you to let them transfer to the Negro schools! A. No, I 
didn’t. The question or the point you are making is not 
germane, Mr. Williams, because the Negro parents that 
already had the right to go to that school by the zone, 
they didn’t need to make any request to go to it, they were 
there.

Q. What I asked you about, and I wanted to make sure 
you knew what you were answering, did you have any 
meetings with Negro parents of Negro children who under 
your unitary zoning were assigned to Negro or formerly 
Negro schools, did you advise them that under this 2-i— 
A. No, I was meeting with parents of Negro children who 
had the right to go to a new school because of the change 
in zoning.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



48a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

—72—
Q. And actually those were the only parents you met 

with, wasn’t it! A. Surely.
Q. You did not meet with any individual parents of any 

white children who were zoned to a Negro school, did you! 
A. No.

Q. You never let it be known through the PTA that 
those children could automatically be transferred— A. T 
never let anything be known through a PTA pertaining 
to this.

Q. How did they all get automatically transferred back 
to the white schools? A. They came to my office, they 
made the request, they stayed out of school and the visiting 
teachers brought them in, they came in for one reason 
or another.

Q. The visiting teachers brought all of these parents in, 
in a group? A. No, we would find that a child was not 
attending school. Where is he, why isn’t he? We would 
send the visiting teachers for them, and some of these cases 
drifted along for four and five weeks, trying to get them 
located and get them in school. I would meet with them in 
conference by individual parents.

Q. Hadn’t you notified these white parents that their 
children were assigned to Negro schools? A. Yes, we

—73—
had, we had done everything we knew to do.

Q. Except meet with them like you did with the Negro 
parents? A. Yes. We had done everything we knew, 
though, to make it knowledgable to them as to where they 
were supposed to go to school.

Q. And what did that consist of, Dr. Carmichael? A. 
Publishing it in the paper. If I ’m not mistaken we printed



49a

some leaflets and so on and distributed them from the 
schools.

Q. You didn’t send individual notices to them? A. I 
think I did, yes.

Q. I want you to state positively? A. I cannot state 
positively that I did.

Q. All right. Now, can you state how many Negro 
children would be attending the schools if you desegregated 
all your high schools next fall? A. No, I can’t.

Q. Do you have any approximate idea? A. No, sir. 
There is no way you could tell that, because there are 
no zones for them.

Q. Well, at least thus far you say you had no applica­
tions from Negroes to attend schools outside their zones? 
A. I ’ve had none that qualified. I ’ve had an application 
for a Negro child to attend a grade that was not yet

-—74—
desegregated. That to me does not apply.

Q. Then you have had some applications, then, from—at 
least one application. Who was that child, do you know? 
A. The Mapp child, the defendant in this case.

Q. Now, his child was zoned for a Negro school, is that 
right? A. Yes.

Q. And she made application to go to a white school? 
A. She made application to go to a school that had not 
yet been desegregated. As I recall, the application was to 
go either to Brainerd Junior High School or to Brainerd 
High School, neither of these schools were desegregated 
yet.

Q. What school is she attending? A. She’s at River­
side Junior High School and/or Riverside Senior High 
School, if I ’m not mistaken.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



50a

Q. Have you invariably denied and have denied the 
request of Negro children to go to—for any assignment 
which is outside the scope of this immediate plan? A. I 
would, yes. I ’m obligated to do that by the policies of the 
board of education.

Q. You’re obligated to do that. The only authority that 
you have ever exercised under this 2-i has been toward 
segregation, hasn’t it? A. No, sir, I don’t think so.

Q. Well, what authority have you exercised under that 
2-i that has tended to eliminate segregation? A. I don’t

—7 5 -
recall any, because I don’t interpret 2-i to have any mean­
ing with regard to segregation or desegregation.

Q. But you have used it with the effect of retaining 
segregation? A. Only the second part of it on continuing 
school. The other part, I have not used it in that direction.

Q. Except the first year? A. Yes, sir. I didn’t inter­
pret it that I used it that way the first year.

Q. The first year you were just using racial minority 
transfers, is that right? A. No, sir, I was using the judg­
ment of what was good for this child, also.

Q. Sir? A. I was using my best judgment with regard 
to what might be good for a child, also.

Q. But your judgment, Dr. Carmichael, was that it was 
best for every white child zoned for a Negro school to leave 
that school and go to a white school? A. No, I don’t think 
my judgment was that.

Q. At least that was the result of your judgment, wasn’t 
it? A. Yes.

Q. When was Mr. Mapp’s child, when did he make ap­
plication for transfer? A. During the 1963-64 school year,

—76—
as I recall. I don’t think it was this school year.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



51a

Q. So that his child then will be in the eighth grade 
next year? A. I don’t know which grade his child is in.

Q. You don’t know what grade? A. No, sir.
Q. Well, you said she was in the seventh grade, didn’t 

you? A. No, sir, I didn’t.
Q. I thought you said she made application for a grade 

above the plan? A. She did.
Q. She made application for admission to the seventh 

grade? A. No, sir, not that I know of. I don’t recall. You 
can make application for a grade above the plan that isn’t 
the seventh grade. The eighth grade is above the plan. 
I don’t recall which grade she was in. As I recall, we had 
both a junior high school student and a senior high school 
student, but I do not know their grades.

Q. Let’s suppose that she is in the seventh grade— A. 
This year?

Q. —of course that will be desegregated— A. Next 
year.

— 77—
Q. Next year? So that next year she will be in— A. 

The eighth grade, yes, sir.
Q. And then the eighth and ninth will be desegregated 

the following year? A. Yes, sir.
Q. So the effect of your ruling will be that she will be re­

quired to attend a segregated school in the first two years 
of her junior high school education, but then the third year 
she may transfer to another school under your desegrega­
tion plan? A. I would like you to change it, it is not the 
effect of my ruling.

Q. Under the effect of the desegregation plan which has 
been approved by the Court. All right. Now, Dr. Car­
michael, would you explain to the Court how this disruption 
of this child’s junior high school education necessitated, if

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



52a

she desires to enjoy her constitutional rights, can be 
squared with your contention regarding leaving the child 
in the same school she has attended, and that that is the 
basis for mass transfer of all these white children out of 
Negro schools and vice versa! A. I think it is generally 
wise and sound for a child to continue through the school 
in which they are enrolled if at all possible. I think this gets 
more important as you move to the junior and senior high 
school levels, perhaps, than it is in elementary. It all de-

—78—
pends upon how that youngster’s program has shaped up, 
how many credits they have won and they have earned and 
this sort of thing. It’s an individual matter. In many in­
stances, if I were a parent I would probably leave the child 
through that school because a child gains certain recogni­
tion in a school that mean an awful lot to his education. 
But, again, it’s individual parents prerogative. There is a 
clean break between the junior high level and the senior 
high level and this is not involved because the child in all 
likelihood is going to change schools anyway. This is quite 
different, in my opinion, than changing between seventh 
and eighth grade or eighth grade and ninth grade. But, it 
is the prerogative of a parent.

Q. But there are and have been and continuing now large 
numbers of transfers being allowed on this basis that the 
child should remain in the same school. It is educationally 
sound to allow him to remain in the same school! A. Sir, 
I would not, and I don’t believe anyone would agree with 
you that there are large numbers and mass transfers being 
allowed. There is a reasonably small number, very small 
number.

Q. That is caused by the small number of white children 
in your Negro school zones, Dr. Carmichael! A. If I am

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



53a

not mistaken, there are probably more transfers allowed 
under that which are not based on race than are based on

—7 9 -
race. I have cited for you the 45 cases that are based on 
race which grew out of the Clara Carpenter—old Dickinson 
Junior High School case.

Q. Just this year, though, in one school, was it the Avon­
dale—East Fifth, where you had 80 whites, you first said 
105 and then you came down to 80, you had 80 whites who 
lived in that zone and that only 35 or 45 are actually attend­
ing there, you said the other 35 or 40 were transferred to 
Glenwood or some white school over here, some formerly 
white school, under this paragraph? A. Mr. Williams, of 
those 45, 31 of them are junior high school students and 
schools have not been desegregated at the junior high level 
yet, specifically, as is shown by the data, there are seven 
elementary children going to Glenwood and seven going to 
Avondale. That’s in the report.

Q. This is a desegregated school ,isn’t it? A. Which 
school?

Q. East Fifth Street? A. Yes, it is.
Q. I thought you transferred all the Negro junior high 

school students out to Riverside ? A. Yes.
Q. And you transferred all the white— A. Out to 

Hardy.
Q. Out to Hardy? A. And of this 45 that is being trans-

—80—
ferred out there, 31 of them are junior high, 14 are ele­
mentary.

Q. But as fast as the provisions of the plan reach them, 
they will also have available to them 2-i, because they have 
been treated just as you did East Fifth, they have been as­
signed to a white school? A. These that are in junior high

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



54a

would have that prerogative, the elementary ones close this 
year, because this is the end of the grade.

Q. It still works that way? A. It has the chance to work 
that way on 31 pupils presently enrolled in Hardy Junior 
High School. A third of those will graduate from the 
junior high this year and it would actually start applying 
to 18 to 20 students.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, what administrative factors would 
prevent the board of education from desegregating all the 
schools next September? A. I would like to take consider­
able time to discuss this question. We, as I have already 
indicated, have begun the discussions, the attempts to ar­
range and talk with patrons in some junior high schools 
where there is tremendous and great concern with problems 
with regard to the desegregation of them next year. We en­
counter the same kind of feeling with regard to broader 
zones of students that we’ve encountered in the beginning 
of any school. This is the first instance for some children

- 8 1 -
being in a desegregated school, in that their junior high 
schools will have Negroes in them, whereas their elemen­
tary schools may have had no Negro children in them. 
There are instances of this sort. The continuation of the 
Negro children into the junior high schools in terms of in­
structional programs is a little different from, a little more 
difficult, really, to make adjustments to the junior high 
school level even than it has been at the elementary level, 
and this has been exceedingly difficult, and we’ve spent 
tremendous time and money on it, in that junior high 
schools are more nearly departmentalized, secondary 
schools start holding to a fixed standard regardless of the 
ability of the children, and are almost inflexible in adjusting 
to it. So, we got, in the area of instruction, the area of

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



55a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

counseling and guidance, the adjustment of instructional 
level to students in a proper way. We’ve got a tremendous 
problem in adjusting to children that go there. Beyond 
this, I think that our areas, our responsibilities are greatly 
increased in the area of guidance and counseling with chil­
dren, both races, about their performance and participa­
tion in the individual schools. This is our experience based 
upon what we have done the past three years, and based 
now upon rather careful studies of the kinds of problems 
we encounter, with regard to our teachers and students and 
the adjustment of instruction to them. I ’m not talking 
about my projection, now, I ’m talking about our actual

- 8 2 -
experience with it and our survey and study of it by 
experts and consultants, which creates a problem differ­
ent from and greater than that which we had really an­
ticipated and that which we had—were prepared to work 
with. It is these kinds of things that consume my time, 
the time of the staff, to a high degree, and the kinds of 
things that I would represent in reaction to the question 
that you asked.

Q. The problems that .you are talking about, the major 
problems that you are talking about center around the 
problem of adjustment, is that correct! A. Partially.

Q. Well, your Honor, one of these days I’m going to get 
a superintendent to say “Wholly” when I ask him a ques­
tion like that. Tell me what problems other than these 
problems? A. Did you mean social adjustment?

Q. Well, that’s what you were talking about? A. No, it 
isn’t.

Q. With regard to school buildings, I think you said that 
none of the buildings are over-crowded? A. There would 
be no problem in terms of capacities of buildings.

Q. All right, with regard to school transportation, you



56a

have no problems, because if you accelerate you get rid of 
the problem of transporting these white junior high school 
children from the East Fifth Street area— A. This would

—83—
not affect that.

Q. Incidentally, you are transporting those children, 
aren’t you! A. Yes, we are.

Q. Free transportation? A. Yes, we are.
Q. How far do they travel? A. It’s approximately four, 

four and a half miles over there.
Q. Now, the Negro junior high school children living in 

that same area have to go to Riverside? A. Yes, some of 
them.

Q. How far is Riverside? A. Approximately the same 
distance.

Q. Do you furnish them free transportation? A. No.
Q. Why do you have that differential? A. Because we 

didn’t close their school. We closed the school of the other 
group.

Q. I see. A. That was action taken in 1958-59.
Q. You closed the school for these white children which 

was in the same locality, and they therefore get free trans- 
portation four and a half miles to the white school, hut the 
Negro children for whom you eliminated the junior high—

—84—
A. That doesn’t apply, the department had nothing to do 
with it.

Q. Well, they were attending junior high school at East 
Fifth? A. Yes, hut East Fifth Junior High is about three 
blocks from Riverside Junior High School, so that if you 
closed East Fifth Junior High you didn’t create a transpor­
tation problem, to go three blocks over to Riverside Junior 
High.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



57a

Q. But they actually are going about the same distance? 
A. No, they aren’t, they are within three blocks of the 
junior high school. It’s the Negro children who live out 
near Hardy that are coming back to Riverside that are 
traveling this distance.

Q. Oh, I see. But they don’t get transportation? A. No, 
sir. They moved there by choice, the board of education did 
not have anything to do with that.

Q. Now, you have no problem of drawing zone lines be­
cause your zone lines are drawn because of residential 
factors? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And your transfer policies is going to be at a mini­
mum in terms of numbers, isn’t it? A. It would not be a 
minimum—

Q. It wouldn’t be unmanageable in terms of numbers, is 
it? A. I think it is.

—85—
Q. Why? A. I ’ve tried to tell you.
Q. Well, I didn’t understand, you go on? A. All right, 

I ’ll take one school situation in which the kind of thing you 
are talking about would mean approximately 300 Negro 
children. I have already spent three sessions with people in 
this particular community trying to make the adjustment to 
approximately a third that number. This group’s concern 
is not that there will or will not be desegregation, they are 
prepared for that. They are concerned about what happens 
to their community in terms of the number of white children 
they are going to lose. They are much more positive about 
wanting to maintain their community and keep it a strong 
community than are some desegregationists, but if they are 
going to lose 200 whites, gain 300 Negro, as this transpires 
rapidly and no time for adjustment is made in the school, 
this is a great concern of theirs, and it is a concern to me

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



58a

because it will determine in large measure the quality of 
this school. Beyond that, I have worked already with try­
ing to make staff adjustments to the teaching of Negro 
children. This has required endless time and expenditures 
of money, and we have been able to do it in a reasonable 
way, up to this point. We cannot do it on a major scale. 
These are difficult things to do, I ’ve got the reports here 
and the material from tapes with individual teachers to 
observations by consultants, by working with them myself

— 86—

personally and all of my staff, to account for the time that 
it has taken, and the kinds of things that have to be done in 
order to make the kind of adjustment we’ve made to this 
point, and the kind of adjustment that I thought ought to 
be made in such situations.

Q. Now, Dr. Carmichael, when you said the people in the 
community didn’t want the community to sustain the loss 
by virtue of the white people moving out of the community, 
you are referring to white people in the community? A. 
Yes, I am.

Q. Now, as a matter of fact, that is actually what has 
happened under—in the past three years under the gradual 
plan you have ? A. It happened in this one—

Q. It happened in the Clara Carpenter area? A. That 
didn’t have any effect at Clara Carpenter. Clara Carpenter 
was changed before desegregation started.

Q. Well, this desegregation suit had been filed, hadn’t it? 
This suit was filed in 1960, wasn’t it? A. Yes.

Q. And it happened in the East Fifth Street area, did it 
not, sir? A. I can’t associate anything that has happened 
in the East Fifth Street area with what you are talking 
about.

Be,nny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



59a

Q. You’re saying that white people are not moving out
—87—

and have not moved out of the East Fifth Street area? 
A. They have been moving out over a long period of time 
but it has never been related or associated necessarily with 
desegregation.

Q. Let me see if I can, by getting some facts, demon­
strate this. In the Avondale School, how many white 
children did you have in that school? A. Approximately 
400.

Q. How many have you got there now? A. 28.
Q. Now, how many other areas do you have like that? 

A. No other.
Q. Well, you’ve got another school involved where some­

thing similar to that happened, have you? A. Nothing 
similar.

Q. What about Glenwood? A. Not similar.
Q. When this suit was filed, how many white students 

did you have in Glenwood? A. About 168.
Q. How many do you have now? A. About 100.
Q. So, as a matter of fact, one would have to conclude 

that the gradual nature of your plan has not had much 
effect in helping this desire on the part of the 'white com-

— 88—

munity to keep the community intact? A. No, but the con­
ditions three years ago and four years ago and now are 
not the same.

Q. Well, did the number of white children at Glenwood 
and Avondale decrease between last year and this year? 
A. Slightly. Specifically at Avondale and slightly at Glen­
wood.

Q. And, as a matter of fact, a logical conclusion would

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



60a

be this, that what the gradual plan does is in effect is to 
give you time to keep some Negro children from enjoying 
their rights while white children get out of the Negro 
school as fast as they can? A. No, sir, I would not, Mr. 
Williams, I would point out to you that the kind of thing* 
you are talking about for Avondale, I wouldn’t consider 
gradual. This was 386 Negro children at one time into 
a community where it was known that there were not 
more than 125 whites, at the time the desegregation began. 
This was the best example I would know of, of your swift 
saturation of a school with large numbers of Negro children. 
The white children were in a minority from the beginning, 
and they have continued to leave rapidly.

Q. Well, regardless of all that it does tend to demon­
strate, does it not, Dr. Carmichael, that the white children 
have tended to move out of these zones— A. No, I don’t 
think it demonstrates it because I don’t think we have

—89—
an adequate case.

Q. Well, three years is not an adequate— A. It is not 
something that happened in three years, it happened in 
one year, Mr. Williams. When the Avondale School opened 
last year, ’63-64, it opened with 385 Negroes, 125 whites.

Q. Avondale wasn’t one of the original schools that you 
desegregated? A. No, sir.

Q. Well, you had more whites— A. We had more there 
the year before. But the point that I ’m making, and trying 
to make to you, is they moved out in the face of large 
numbers, not moving out in the face of gradual small 
numbers.

Q. Well, would you explain how you expect to change 
the numbers of Negroes who will attend the white schools

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



61a

by waiting! How will time affect the number? A. I don’t 
think it is a major issue, that is not of the greatest con­
cern to me, but I think it is appropriate for you to reason 
that you will have larger numbers in a case as severe as 
the one we are trying to discuss here. You will have 
larger numbers of Negro children remaining and staying 
as a part of that school indefinitely, as opposed to having 
larger numbers of them exit from the school immediately. 
This is your biggest problem in terms of even doing the

—9 0 -
kind of thing you are most interested in doing.

Q. Well, I am only interested in complete compliance 
with the constitutional requirements, Dr. Carmichael. Let 
me get off that subject for a moment. Your point about 
the fact of your having to have guidance counselors and 
the matter of adjustment, are you familiar with the Mem­
phis school system? A. Not very well.

Q. Well, that is more or less in the same kind, or at 
least in a similar kind of locality as this, is it not? That 
is in southwest Tennessee, next to Mississippi, this in 
southeastern Tennessee, next to Georgia and Alabama? 
A. There’s a lot of difference between Georgia and Mis­
sissippi and there is a lot of difference in east Tennessee 
and west Tennessee.

Q. All right. Were you aware that the Memphis school 
system has over 110,000 pupils in it? A. Yes, sir, I am. 
And I am aware that they have fewer Negro students in 
all-white schools than we have.

Q. Are you aware that the proportion of Negroes to the 
population in Memphis is greater than it is here— A. I 
don’t believe it is, what is it?

Q. It’s about 40 or 45 per cent. A. Ours is 45.5.

Benny Carmichael—-for Defendants—Cross



62a

Q. Then it’s about the same. Did you know that the 
Memphis school system has been ordered to desegregate

—9 1 -
all junior highs in ’65 and all high schools in ’66! A. I ’ve 
heard it, I didn’t remember exactly which steps were to be 
taken.

Q. You feel like the Chattanooga school system, which 
is about as third as big, takes more time for you to effect 
the necessary—employ the necessary guidance counselors 
and take the necessary administrative steps to desegregate? 
A. No, sir, Mr. Williams, that’s not the question. We 
can desegregate this school system as quickly as you can 
desegregate any school system. The real question is what 
you do when you desegregate. This school system can do 
anything that Memphis can, but nobody has chosen or has 
proven what the value and what the procedure will be in 
Memphis. This is something still unknown. We’re arguing 
in terms of what we want to do and what we think ought 
to be done, not in terms of what can be done.

Q. Are you familiar with the Knoxville school system? 
A. Yes, I am.

Q. Do you know it has desegregated all grades as of 
last September of last year? A. Yes, but in reading the 
reports from the hearing this week I was somewhat con­
cerned about what was really done up there. It’s still in 
the courts.

Q. Yes. A. And it was not as you represented here, 
as I recall.

—92—
Q. In other words you feel like they have not actually de­

segregated? A. I do not pass my feelings and judgment 
on somebody’s school system.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



63a

Q. Well, all right. Did you know the court had an order 
up there desegregating teachers? A. No, sir, I didn’t.

Q. You didn’t know that! A. No, sir. May I comment 
just one moment on your question a moment ago? In re­
lation to administrative responsibilities, I think is the most 
significant thing I can say. I put it this way to you, Mr. 
Williams, and to this Court. I could spend whatever time 
my philosophy about education will lead me to spend in 
dealing with this. I can desegregate a school system in 
all 12 grades and spend less time with it than if we de­
segregate two grades. It all depends on what I try to do. 
If you want to desegregate a school system, and the super­
intendent just wants to keep everything hush-hush and 
advise the principals they don’t carry switchblade knives 
or something of this sort, keep it under cover as many 
of your communities have outside of the south, I can do 
this with a minimum amount of time and time for my 
staff, because we will not express much concern as to what 
happens to children. If, on the other hand, I am greatly 
concerned about what happens to children and I am de­
termined we treat children the way they ought to be

—93—
treated, and we give them the kind of understanding that 
we ought to give them, this could consume more time than 
I could get, a staff could get, and that you could possibly 
buy as a school system. Now, it’s just a matter of what 
you want the superintendent to do. If you want to do it 
all by directives and tell principals you do this and you 
do that, that’s one thing. If you want to use a process which 
uses intelligence in doing it, it’s another thing.

Q. Of course that is the way you bring about other 
administrative changes, isn’t it? A. Which!

Q. That you study a matter and you don’t take five or

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



64a

six years to study it, but you study it in a reasonable 
amount of time. Then you give a directive to your staff 
people and your supervisors and— A. I rarely give a 
directive, I rarely give one.

Q. How do you govern your school system f A. I govern 
a school system by a high degree of understanding and 
self-motivation on the part of people who have responsi­
bilities and a minimum amount of directives to people.

Q. But there are at least some guiding directives issued? 
A. Truely, we formulate policies and agreements under 
which we work.

Q. And it doesn’t take several years to get— A. You
—94—

would be surprised how many years it takes to just a 
simple thing of the approach toward retaining children. 
This has taken five to this point.

Q. What I ’m saying it doesn’t take several years to get 
a directive out to your principals, A. It’s not the ques­
tion of the directive itself, it’s the question of the study 
given to that directive.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, are you acquainted with Dr. Harris, 
the superintendent over in Nashville? A. I have met him 
twice.

Q. Are you aware that the board over there has agreed 
to desegregate on the recommendation of the superin­
tendent, the superintendent has recommended to the board 
and they have accepted, that that plan will be accelerated 
and the entire high school system will be desegregated in 
September of 1966? A. I was not aware of that.

Q. And that they are already beginning faculty deseg­
regation over there? A. I was not aware of that.

Q. You didn’t discuss that with Dr. Harris? A. No, sir.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



65a

Q. Dr. Carmichael, you consider this desegregation so 
important, don’t you discuss it with other superintendents? 
A. Mr. Williams, I have spent all told approximately 30 
minutes with him. This is not time to open up the dis-

—95—
cussion of desegregation.

Q. But the upshot of it is that you just feel like actually 
it is just a matter of community acceptance you’re talking 
about, isn’t it? A. No, sir, it’s not a matter. That’s one 
aspect of it.

Q. Tell me what you mean about treating the children 
right and understanding the children’s feelings and all this 
sort of thing? A. Mr. Williams, we are in the process of 
spending $50,000 of federal funds which are provided under 
the Civil Rights Act to attempt to help one school of teach­
ers and other teachers brought in, 50 other teachers brought 
in, to understand how to deal with the problems occa­
sioned by desegregation, and this is specifically the way 
the language is written in the Civil Eights Act, to deal 
with the problems occasioned by desegregation. We suffi­
ciently described the problems in such a proposal to the 
U. S. Office of Education that such problems did exist to 
get that much money to study this sort of thing. It in­
volves the values of individual teachers, it involves their 
feelings about how the outside world looks at them and 
how their families consider them. We have taped inter­
views on all teachers who have been trying to cope with 
this problem. They do not understand Negro children, 
they cannot understand why Negro children must continue 
to miff and wrestle with each other, miff as they call, and 
on and on and on. They are concerned about their readi-

—96—
ness levels, their background levels to do the teaching.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



66a

These are kinds of things that take an indefinite amount 
of time and money to deal with. We are not going to solve 
it by continuing to ignore it. We can put the children in 
the school and we can put the teachers with them and 
ignore accomplishing these kinds of things, this takes less 
time. But you’ll be hearing from it five years, ten years 
and fifteen years, just as you are hearing from it across 
this nation now. This is the result of desegregating with­
out moving into the secondary stages of really effecting 
integration of children.

Q. May I ask you something, Dr. Carmichael. Assuming 
that you have some problem with regard to the feelings 
of white teachers and their inability to understand Negro 
children, why wouldn’t it help to resolve this problem if 
you assigned Negro teachers to white schools? A. It 
sounds like a beautiful solution, but let me explain it this 
way. The first concern or the first willingness of teachers 
is yes, we’re willing to teach and we’ll adapt our teaching 
to Negro children. I ’ve had that experience already, in 
which a whole staff, white staff, remained to teach the 
Negro children. Beginning with the second year, as will 
be borne out by school board members and the board of 
education, I made a strong effort to move Negro teachers 
into this staff to help with just this problem. That is a

—97—
greater resistance by far than the original one was. Now, 
let me carry it a little bit further. Finally, however, out 
of a compromising situation I did make the assignment of 
two Negro teachers as I have explained to you already. 
I spent time with those teachers before the opening of 
school, saying that you understand why we are assigning 
these people, we want to be sure we get the best possible

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



67a

results from it, explaining that they are here to help you, 
they are to help you understand children, they are to 
help you understand parents, so on and so forth, empha­
sizing the importance of exchanging ideas with one an­
other. Less than two months ago I found a situation in 
which these people had been entirely unwilling to exchange 
ideas with one another. The question of whether or not 
you exchange honest ideas is more than just putting people 
together at a given school. They will hide their ideas, they 
will not exchange them, and it takes an awful lot of time 
and understanding to bring them out.

Q. You’re basing this conclusion on that special situa­
tion where you took two Negro teachers and put them into 
a special situation? A. Yes.

Q. You have not made any effort to assign teachers on 
an objective basis without regard to race or color, and 
just assign Negro teachers and say here is a teaching job 
over here, you haven’t done that? A. No, sir.

—98—
Q. Dr. Carmichael, will you look at that document that 

I have just handed you, can you identify that document or 
the contents of it? A. Yes, sir.

Q. What is that? A. It’s an item that appeared in the 
morning paper as a result of Union 428, Mountain City 
Teachers Organization.

Q. That is a Negro professional teachers’ organization 
here? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Does it represent all or most of the Negro teachers 
in the city of Chattanooga? A. I ’m not sure what the 
membership is.

Q. You say it probably represents— A. I wouldn’t say 
it probably does.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



68a

Q. Now, did you know that was a resolution that was 
actually passed by the Negro teachers! A. No, sir.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, will you permit that to be marked 
Exhibit A for identification to your testimony? You will 
identify that as an article that appeared in the paper! A. 
It appears to be the one that was in this morning’s paper. 

Q. All right. May it please the Court, we’d like to
—99—

introduce that.

The Court: Exhibit #1.
Mr. Williams: If the Court please, I wanted to 

introduce this because I wanted to ask Dr. Car­
michael some questions about it, I intend actually 
to authenticate it later by an official of this associa­
tion.

The Court: All right.

A. I’m assuming it is the same article which I read in the 
paper this morning.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, this appears to be a statement on 
the part of Negro teachers that continued segregation of 
the teachers is not compatible with your expressed belief 
in quality education. Do you agree with that? A. I would 
not agree with the statement made there.

Q. In other words you believe you can further the cause 
of quality education by continuing to segregate teachers? 
A. I didn’t say that.

Q. Then you do agree that teacher segregation in as­
signments is to some extent inconsistent with the quality 
of education? A. It’s relative to the proposal that would 
be made by this particular article here. Segregated teacher

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—-Cross



69a

staffs in my opinion would maintain a higher quality of 
education than the impact or the point that is made by this 
particular release.

Q. A higher quality of education for who? A. I
— 100—

wouldn’t doubt that it would be for all children in the 
system.

Q. Then do you have any explanation as to why—didn’t 
you introduce proof here upon a hearing in this case that 
Negro children in your schools had lower achievement— 
A. No, sir, I didn’t, I have never introduced—

Q. You never introduced any such proof? A. No, sir, I 
didn’t.

Q. You’re saying that the education is substantially the 
same? A. No, sir, I ’m not saying it is substantially the 
same, I ’m saying I have never introduced proof on it.

Q. Well, these Negro teachers say: “This continued prac­
tice of segregation can only result in low moral and a feel­
ing of insecurity of a large segment of teachers.” Do you 
disagree with that, Dr. Carmichael? A. I don’t know about 
that.

Q. Well, have you considered that problem? A. Yes, 
sir, I ’ve considered it.

Q. But notwithstanding that, you have decided to con­
tinue segregation? A. I think the attorney for the board 
of education made the most—

Q. All right. Wait a minute, you think what? A. I think 
the attorney for the board of education made the statement

— 101—

that is most appropriate in relation to that question.
Q. What’s that? A. About the board’s position with re­

gard to desegregation of staff.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



70a

Q. You mean the board takes the position that it is not 
going to do anything until somebody has convinced them 
that the Supreme Court has said— A. I’m not referring 
to that.

Q. Now, these Negro teachers say “dissatisfied and in­
secure instructors do not beget quality education. It is the 
opposite.” Would you disagree with that, Dr. Carmichael? 
A. No. I couldn’t disagree with the fact that dissatisfaction, 
so on.

Q. They say the continued hiring of white teachers to 
teach the extra classes brought about by the transfer of 
Negro pupils into the so-called white schools creates a sur­
plus of teachers in the heretofore Negro schools, it de­
creases the study body in certain schools and may well lead 
to the closing of the schools and the abolition of some teach­
ing positions. Is that actually a fact or likely to be a fact? 
A. No, it isn’t a fact and isn’t likely to be a fact.

Q. None of that is a fact? A. Read the first part—
Q. You are hiring white teachers to teach these extra

— 102-

classes, aren’t you? A. Yes, sir, but it is not creating a 
surplus of Negro teacher's nor is there any likelihood that 
it would create conditions which would close Negro schools.

Q. You say the decrease in the student body of some of 
the schools, it is not going to lead to their closing? A. No, 
sir. For the record, Mr. Williams, since 1960-61 there has 
been an increase in the number of positions of Negro 
teachers of 88, and a decrease in white teachers of 25. Now, 
that is the record, for the five-year period.

Q. Already more than 30 white teachers have been hired 
because of a 900 or more Negro pupil—well, first, let me 
ask you. Is that true? A. It would be reasoned that if

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



71a

yon were teaching 900 Negro children with white teachers, 
that it would take approximately 30 teachers,
_ Q- In other words the state board of education estab­

lishes a minimum number, at least a maximum number of 
pupils per teachers? A. Approximately 30, yes.

Q. They say his has already cost the taxpayers money 
for surplus teachers in this system— A. No, sir, that is 
completely in error. There has been no teacher paid who 
has not been teaching. That is in complete error. That is 
an irresponsible thing for educators to put in items such as

—103—
this.

Q. You mean that there are no Negro teachers who are, 
because of the transfer of Negro students from Negro 
schools, teaching understaffed classes? A. No, sir.

Q. None in the city? A. No, sir. None have been dis­
missed, none are laid out for a year for any condition, and 
none are assigned to smaller classes or anything like this. 
In fact, we had to employ new teachers this year. Why 
would we do this when we were still employing new Negro 
teachers this year.

Q. You had a net gain in employment of Negro teachers? 
A. Yes, sir. We’ve had a net gain of 88 in the past five 
years, while the Negro student population increased only 
five per cent, this is an increase in the number of Negro 
teachers by 21 per cent.

The Court: Gentlemen, it’s about time for the 
noon recess, let’s see where we stand with regard to 
the hearing. We can continue this hearing until 
about three o’clock this afternoon, if that is satisfac­
tory with counsel, and if we cannot complete by that 
time we’ll have to set another date. What are the

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



72a

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross

prospects of being able to complete by that time, do 
yon think?

Mr. Williams: I ’m nearly through, your Honor.
(Further discussion between Court and counsel)

—104—
Afternoon Session

Benny C. Carmichael recalled 

By Mr. Williams:
Q. Dr. Carmichael, we were on this matter of the Moun­

tain City Teachers’ press release. Have you read this press 
release in its entirety? A. I read it in the morning paper.

Q. In particular did you read that portion of it which dis­
cussed the pressure on the children of not having a teacher 
of their own color assigned to the school they were attend­
ing? A. Yes, sir, I did.

Q. Did you agree that this could cause some frustrations 
in children, some emotional problems, psychological prob­
lems, which could affect their education? A. If pressures 
were created I would agree that it could affect it, but that 
doesn’t assume that the pressures are created.

Q. But there is more of a likelihood that the pressures 
might be created where you don’t have someone there of 
their own color ? A. I don’t have any evidence of this and 
I have evidence of teachers being all white with a group of 
Negro children and having Negro teachers there, and I 
haven’t discovered or identified any change in this element.

Q Would you or would you not consider these statements
—105—

that white teachers have made to you about their inability 
to understand certain propensities of Negro children as be­



73a

ing some evidence of possible pressures being created which 
might affect the children’s education! A. Yes, there were 
pressures building up.

Q. I see. A. The point I would want to make, though, 
Mr. Williams, is that with the assignment of two Negro 
teachers there, these didn’t necessarily start dropping. It 
is more than just having the teachers there.

Q. Yes, sir, but you haven’t assigned Negro teachers to 
any schools on a general basis, you. simply assigned two 
Negro teachers as sort of guidance counselors or helpers to 
white teachers or something at a single school, is that cor­
rect! A. Yes.

Q. These teachers actually have no regular teaching 
duties? A. No regular teaching duties, they do have re­
sponsibilities for children, however, in certain activities of 
the school.

Q. To discipline them and that sort of thing? A. Yes.
Q. And is this in a school where the majority of the chil­

dren are Negroes? A. Yes, it is.
—106—

Q. And there are just a few whites? A. Yes.
Q. What school is this? A. This is Avondale.
Q. Avondale, where I believe you had 70 Negroes and 65 

whites, is that correct? A. What?
Q. You had 70 Negroes enrolled there and 65 whites? 

A. 650 Negroes and 28 whites.
Q. And 28 whites. While we are on that, I notice your 

report for this year does not include the figures regarding 
transfers broken down by race. Can you state the reason 
for that, Dr. Carmichael? A. No, sir. In this report I pre­
pared today and brought with me on transfers I pointed 
out that we did not make that report in it. We considered 
it to have reached the point of not being significant for that 
report at the first of the year.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



74a

Q. So we are now in a position of not being able to tell 
from your records what transfers are being made by race? 
A. No, sir, not by what I submitted to the Court this year.

Q. Well, do you keep any records on that at all? A. Yes, 
sir, we have the file on all of them.

Q. You could submit a report to the Court similar to the 
report that you have submitted in previous years? A. Yes,

—107—
I could.

Q. Regarding this? A. Yes, I could.
Q. Would it take a long period of time to do that? A. 

Not an unusually long period of time.
Q. Also, while I ’m on that subject of that, do you have 

any—did you keep records which would show the number 
of transfers which you granted on these other criteria, the 
purely objective criteria? A. Yes, sir, the information 
I ’ve given you shows the number granted on each item of 
the policy. For each year.

Q. Yes, and does that show whether the proportion of 
those transfers that were of a Negro child from a white 
school back to a Negro school, and of a white child back to 
a white school? From a Negro zone. A. It just shows the 
school zone in which he resides and the school to which he 
is permitted to go.

Q. In other words we would have to formulate that in­
formation from your— A. That’s right, you’d have to 
prove that it is getting from a Negro school back to a white. 
That is not involved in this case, Mr. Williams. I mean, it 
is not involved in the transfers.

Q. Well, would you furnish us a report for this year and 
furnish the Court a report for this year similar to that that

—108—
you furnished for previous years so that at least that infor­

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



75a

mation may be formulated from the report? A. I have the 
report here, Mr. Williams.

Q. You haven’t considered in granting these transfers 
on these other criteria how many of them actually resulted 
in the increase of segregation? A. No, sir, I haven’t.

Q. You haven’t utilized race at all in making those trans­
fers? A. No, sir.

Q. You already have a report for the ’64-65 school year 
that shows this information? A. I have given it to you 
already.

Q. You gave it to me? A. Yes, sir. In the information 
you requested I bring to court today, if you’ll look on the 
last page—

Q. Well, what I intend to do, as I might as well do it 
right now, is introduce these two documents. I ’ve looked 
them over and I ’d like to introduce them as the next two 
exhibits to your testimony. A. Teacher employment is the 
first one—

The Court: Exhibit #2.

A. Transfers, #3. That showed in connection with this 
question, Mr. Williams, that we permitted transfers of 44 
children based on 2-A, 9 on 2-B, and down the line, 100 on

—109—
2-E and 114 on the i, and finally two on the j. And we have 
each individual pupil’s record there in the file to substanti­
ate any question you have about those.

Q. Now, Dr. Carmichael, you said you didn’t have any ad­
ditional copies of that here today, but will you furnish 
counsel for the plaintiff copies of those two exhibits so we 
may have them for our files? A. It’s not a great deal of 
trouble. In fact one of my staff members has an additional 
copy which we will make available to you at the close of 
the hearing.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



76a

Q. Thank yon. Now, carrying on with this report, and 
I ’ll be through with it in a minute, Dr. Carmichael, the 
complexion, the racial complexion in Chattanooga has 
changed quite a bit in the past year or so, hasn’t it? A. Do 
you mean in terms of numbers—

Q. Desegregation of downtown hotels— A. It has con­
tinued toward a higher degree of desegregation, yes, sir.

Q. Well, as a matter of fact, aren’t all public facilities in 
the city of Chattanooga and Hamilton County now fully in­
tegrated and open to the public? A. I think so.

Q. And that includes parks, playgrounds, the library, the 
city hall and all other facilities? A. I think so.

— 110—

Q. Likewise, aren’t all commercial public accommoda­
tions, virtually all, open to the public now without regard to 
race or color? A. They’re supposed to be.

Q. Virtually everybody is complying with the Civil 
Rights Act in Hamilton County, that’s correct? A. Offi­
cially I think it is correct.

Q. Well, as a matter of practice you don’t know of any 
instances— A. No, sir.

Q. So that as a matter of fact—well, and as a matter of 
fact is there a college located here? A. The University of 
Chattanooga is located here.

Q. Hasn’t that institution fully desegregated? Didn’t I 
read somewhere that the University of Chattanooga was 
now open to all persons? A. I would rather have our at­
torney answer that. I think so.

Q. You’re not positive but you think so? A. I think they 
passed that beginning with next year, but he can advise you 
specifically.

Q. He said that’s right. All right. Are there any paro­
chial schools here? A. Yes, there are. There are three

- I l l -
private schools and four or five parochial schools.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



77a

Q. Have the parochial schools been desegregated? A. 
One has, Notre Dame.

Q. So that as a matter of fact in continuing partial deseg­
regation the city school system is lagging somewhat behind 
other facilities here in Chattanooga? A. No, sir. It’s the 
most advanced of any institution or operation that I know 
of in Chattanooga.

Q. You say it’s advanced? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Although the other facilities are open completely and 

the schools are segregated, you say the schools are ad­
vanced? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Would you explain that? A. In terms of the numbers 
that it is dealing with, in terms with the effort it has made 
to make it a condition. You were talking about your com­
plexion and that’s what I would base this on, that the com­
plexion of the desegregation of the school system is quite 
different from the complexion of the desegregation of many 
other facilities and institutions, and I ’m not talking about 
color, I ’m talking about attitude.

Q. Still you are talking about attitudes, community atti­
tudes, are you not? A. I ’m talking primarily about school 
officials, teacher attitudes—

— 112—

Q. You’re talking about attitudes of teachers and that 
sort of thing? A. Yes, sir.

Q. You don’t have any difficulty in finding and employing 
teachers, do you? A. Yes, I do.

Q. How many applications of Negro teachers do you have 
on file at present? A. A large number.

Q. About how many? A. I would say 100 to 150.
Q. And how many applications of the white teachers do 

you have on hand? A. A smaller number, perhaps.
Q. You can’t approximate— A. I can’t approximate it 

because there is never a cut-off date. What you may have

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



78a

on file as an application may be a teacher who took another 
job last week and that sort of thing.

Q. How many vacancies did yon fill this past year! A. 
We filled 86 replacements and 40 new positions for a total 
of 120.

Q, 120? A. Yes, sir.
—113—

Q. You had better than 200— A. I guess all told over 
the year of one sort and another that we had 200 applica­
tions. This is taking into consideration your total number 
of applications, out of 200 there might be only 100 that 
would fit the particular job that you have available and so 
on.

Q. And you are conducting in-service training programs 
for your teachers? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And have been doing that right along? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You don’t feel like it is just going to take forever to 

get your teacher attitudes changed, do you? A. No, sir.
Q. You don’t feel, do you, Dr. Carmichael, that any sound 

educational benefits or values to the children should be de­
layed while you change attitudes on the part of the teachers, 
do you? A. No.

Q. Now, with regard to Mr. Mapp, the plaintiff, isn’t it 
true as a matter of fact that he applied for transfers for 
three of his children last year? A. May have been.

Q. Four, rather. Three who were in junior high school 
and one in high school? A. It may have been.

—114—
Q. Did you know, Dr. Carmichael, that he asked trans­

portation for that high school child to attend Riverside, 
more than two miles from where he lived, while he lived 
right in the vicinity or less than a mile from Brainerd and 
his child could have walked to Brainerd High School? A.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



79a

He doesn’t live within walking distance of Brainerd High 
School nor within a mile of that high school.

Q. You don’t say he lives within a mile! A. No, sir.
Q. So that’s the reason you denied his transfer? A. No, 

sir, it wasn’t.
Q. You denied a transfer because that school wasn’t de­

segregated? A. Surely. I cannot under an existing policy 
of the board of education admit a child where the policy 
says you don’t admit him. The question was easy for me. 
It’s not my prerogative to do these kinds of things.

Q. It was established on your advice, wasn’t it? A. No, 
sir.

Q. Was it established against your advice? A. No, sir. 
You’re talking about that sort of thing which is policy of 
the board of education. It is my responsibility to formulate 
the administrative regulations to implement that policy, 
but not to establish that sort of community policy. That’s

—115—
a board function.

Q. Hr. Carmichael, is it true that the enrollment out at 
Riverside High School is about 2,000 or more? A. It’s 
1,900, I think.

Q. And you list in a report that you filed in this court in 
1960, you listed the capacity of that school as being 1,630, 
didn’t you? A. I don’t recall.

Q. Well, is the capacity of it about 1,600? A. No, sir.
Q. What is the capacity of that school? A. It’s a little 

better than 2,000.
Q. Well, has there been any change or addition— A. 

Yes, sir, there has, surely.
Q. When was that change or addition? A. It has been 

made since the beginning of the opening of it. For example, 
the high school contained a large armory for ROTC when

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



80a

Chattanooga High School was there. This armory was con­
verted into shops. This gives considerable more capacity 
to a building for space for instruction. Also, one large room 
which was always used for an auditorium was divided up 
into six classrooms during this past summer. I submitted 
a full report to Mr. Mapp and to one of your attorneys, Mr. 
Underwood, on the capacity of this building and the enroll­
ment of the children in it, and it is within the capacity of the

—l i e -
building by a pretty good number of children. And that is 
taken from the principals of that school.

Q. But this was all makeshift for the purpose of provid­
ing a segregated Negro high school? A. No, sir, it wasn’t.

Q. You hadn’t made a shop out of the armory for the 
white students? A. Didn’t need it.

Q. And when you had the white students you had an 
ROTC? A. Yes.

Q. Why did you remove that? A. Because the unit is 
attached to the school, it is an agreement dating many years 
back with the United States government that this is an 
ROTC unit for Chattanooga High School.

Q. So you had a situation where you had Negro pupils 
being required to come to an old white school, with the 
armory converted to a shop and the auditorium converted 
to six classrooms? A. Not an auditorium, no, sir.

Q. What was it? A. Study hall.
Q. Study hall? A. Yes, sir.
Q. So that these Negro students now have no study hall?

—117—
A. Their program does not require a study hall.

Q. Negro students don’t require a study hall? A. Not 
in this particular school. There aren’t many high schools 
now that provide a study hall.

Benny Carmichael—-for Defendants—Cross



81a

Q. But Chattanooga High School does? A. No, it 
doesn’t now. It doesn’t have a study hall in the new build­
ing.

Q. It doesn’t? A. No, sir.
Q. Why was the study hall in the old building? A. Be­

cause that was the pattern of four classes and two study 
halls in those days when that building was built and that 
school was operated. But that is not the pattern in many 
high schools now.

Q. You’re not using that in any high school? A. Don’t 
believe we are. We’re not at Howard, I’m relatively sure.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, how many students does Orchard 
Knob have now? A. Orchard Knob? Between 900 and 
1,000, I believe.

Q. And you deny that that school is or ever has been over 
crowded, is that right? A. Yes, I deny that it has ever 
been over crowded.

Q. What is the pupil-teacher ratio there? A. One to 30, 
based on actual assignments. I would have to make an ex-

—118—
planation to you on this, too, Mr. Williams. You are at­
tempting to discuss or describe each school situation in 
terms of some fictitious standard for it. This particular 
school, as are I believe four other schools, is organized on 
the basis of using team teaching and using four teacher 
aides and a combination of large group, small group in­
struction. So that you get a different utilization of your 
building, you can employ fewer teachers. In this case this 
school elects to employ two less teachers than if you as­
signed them one per 30, and to put the money that would 
be spent on the salaries of those teachers into teachers 
aides. It greatly the enriches the staffing of the school, and 
this is the pattern used over several years with your 
schools, it’s used in your Nashville schools, for example.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



82a

Q. How many white schools in the city system in Chatta­
nooga have that? A. Just one.

Q. Which one is that? A. Dalewood Junior High 
School. Which is the newest school organized for white 
children. If you could, you would be organizing all of your 
schools in this direction.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, you mentioned—how many white chil­
dren are there, junior high white children, who are receiv­
ing this transportation from the East Fifth area? A. 31.

—119—
Q. How many Negro high school children are there out 

in the Hardy area, I believe you said, who are coming five 
miles in to Riverside? A. I don’t know how many there 
are.

Q. Approximately? A. I don’t know approximately. I 
do not know the areas that high school students come from 
in any part of this city.

Q. Do you know where the Second District Junior High 
School was? A. Yes.

Q. That was a Negro junior high school? A. Yes it was.
Q. It has been closed down? A. Yes, it was.
Q. When was it closed down? A. At the beginning of 

the 1962-63 school year.
Q. Where was that school located? A. It’s located just 

on the other side of the expressway in the west side area.
Q. That’s how far from Riverside? A. They don’t go to 

Riverside.
Q. Where do they go? A. They go to Howard.
Q. And how far are they from Howard? A. In the 

neighborhood of a mile.
— 120—

Q. Do they receive any transportation? A. No, they 
don’t.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants Cross



83a

Q. Dr. Carmichael, I have one final question. Reading 
to you from this Exhibit # 1  which is a statement of the 
Negro teachers here, they say: “We feel that it is impos­
sible for teachers to teach democracy without practicing it 
in the classroom as well as in everyday living. Psychologi­
cally, children understand democracy when they experience 
it in action rather than through abstraction.” Would you 
agree with that? A. Yes, I would agree that the greatest 
influence on the development on concepts consistent with 
democracy are the opportunities to practice them, hut it is 
my observation over the many years that there doesn’t seem 
to he higher degrees of attitudes of democracy where people 
are associated with both races as opposed to where they are 
not. And I would cite for you the attitudes and concepts of 
the late President Kennedy.

Q. So that what you are saying is that you disagree with 
the Supreme Court? A. I ’m not saying that. I am trying 
to say, Mr. Williams, that to me the basic concepts we’re 
talking about for developing understanding of and attitudes 
toward democracy are deeper than just some surface rela­
tionships.

Q. Yes, hut don’t you feel, assuming that to be true, that 
one must at least begin to experience a contact before one

— 121—

can even begin to get into the depth involved here? A. No, 
it is not necessary to experience the first surface associa­
tion before you get into the depth involvement.

Q. You feel, then, that democracy can be achieved 
through segregation of the races? A. No, not for the na­
tion as a whole, but I think attitudes of individuals toward 
democracy may or may not be developed just as well in 
one instance as another. But for the image of the nation or

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



84a

the community and so forth, no, you’ve got to overcome this 
problem.

Q. Didn’t yon tell us a while ago that you were having 
trouble with your white teachers not understanding some 
of the actions and attitudes of the Negro children? A. 
Yes.

Q. Don’t you feel, Dr. Carmichael, that this is an illustra­
tion of the lack of ability to understand and comprehend 
without contact? A. Yes, they had been denied the con­
tact.

Q. And don’t you feel that democracy does involve under­
standing of people of different ethnic backgrounds and cul­
ture? A. Yes, sir, but just an exposure or two will not help 
them understand it, in fact it drives them in the other direc­
tion unless you take the additional steps.

Q. I would agree, but you do have to have the exposure,
— 122—

too, that is an essential requisite, isn’t it? A. Not essen­
tial. I feel that I ’ve had them, Mr. Williams, without the 
exposure.

Q. You say, then, that you can develop the necessary 
understanding of the other race without having any con­
tact with it at all? A. It’s possible.

Q. You’re saying that as a scientist, an educational sci­
entist? A. If you want me to, I will.

Q. Do you consider yourself a social scientist? A. No, 
I consider myself an educator.

Q. An educator? And as an educator you are stating 
that you feel one can acquire an experience, an educational 
experience, without the experience? A. No, sir. I ’m not 
saying that you acquire an educational experience in the 
case. Mr. Williams, I am saying that there are ways for 
me, and there have been ways for me, and there have been

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



85a

ways for other people, to develop basic values in life which 
give complete understanding to any human being regard­
less of his race. Race has never been a question to me, be­
cause you are an individual. My concepts were built around 
individuals, not whether or not they were white, Negro, or 
the other kinds of people that I ’ve come in contact with 
over my life. And that is more essential than just my

—123—
exposure to someone of a different race. That is far more 
valuable.

Q. Well, the other thing is, Dr. Carmichael, that whatever 
understanding you have been able to develop has been 
developed through the standpoint of separation, has it not? 
A. By and large it has.

Q. Now, will you explain to the Court how you have 
experimentally verified that that is a valid understanding? 
A. I would explain it this way, Mr. Williams. That as I 
reached the level when I began my associations with people 
of a different race, because of the concepts and values that 
I had with regard to people, I made the application to Negro 
people just the same without having previously tried them 
out. In other words, I developed the respect for the worth 
and dignity of the person, I assumed that the Negro was a 
person, and I moved on from there.

The Court: Gentlemen, aren’t we getting into an 
area of expressing personal viewpoints upon matters 
that are really unrelated?

Mr. Williams: I have no further questions.
Witness excused.
Mr. Williams: If the Court please, the plaintiffs 

call Mr. Patton.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Cross



86a

Napolean B. Patton—for Plaintiffs—Direct

N apolean B. Patton having first been duly sworn, testi­
fies as follows:

—124—
Direct Examination by Mr. Williams:

Q. Will you state your name? A. My name is Napolean 
B. Patton.

Q. What is your age, sir? A. My age is 44.
Q. Where do you live? A. I live at 106 Halsey Street, 

Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Q. How long have you lived here? A. For 44 years.
Q. What is your occupation? A. Public school teacher. 
Q. By whom are you employed? A. The City Board of 

Education.
Q. And at what school? A. At the East Fifth Street 

School.
Q. You said the city board, you meant Chattanooga? A. 

The City of Chattanooga Board of Education.
Q. How long have you taught there? A. Sixteen years. 
Q. What grade do you teach? A. Grade six.
Q. Now, are you an official of any teacher’s organization 

here in Chattanooga? A. Yes, I am.
Q. What is that organization? A. Mountain City Teach-

—125—
ers’ Association.

Mr. Williams: I ’d like to have the witness handed 
Exhibit # 1  to the testimony of the Superintendent.

Q. I ’ll hand you that press release and request you to 
identify it, if you can? Before that, my attention has been 
called to the fact that I overlooked something. What is your 
office in the Mountain City Teachers’ Association? A. 
President.



87a

Q. How long have you been president of that organiza­
tion? A. One year.

Q. Does that organization represent the majority of the 
Negro teachers in the city school system? A. Yes, it does.

Q. Now, I ’ll request you to identify the document you 
have been handed. A. I do recognize this document.

Q. What is that? A. This is a statement or press re­
lease of a resolution that we drew up in the executive com­
mittee of the Mountain City Teachers’ Association and 
presented to the representatives and the officials for their 
approval.

Q. Does that resolution—was that resolution duly and 
properly adopted? A. It was.

Q. And does that resolution represent the thinking, the
—1 2 6 -

general thinking, of Negro teachers here in the City of 
Chattanooga in your opinion? A. It does. Also it repre­
sents the thinking of some of the persons who do not belong, 
some of the teachers who do not belong to our organization.

Mr. Williams: Cross examine.

Cross Examination by Mr. W itt:

Q. Approximately how many members does you union 
have, Mr. Patton? A. Approximately 70 to 75 percent of 
the Negro teacher personnel.

Q. And how many would this be? A. Offhand, I cannot 
say, because our membership fluctuates from month to 
month.

Q. When was the meeting—when was this resolution 
adopted? A. April 6.

Q. What year? A. 1965.

Napolean B. Patton—for Plaintiffs—Cross



88a

Q. What is your procedure for adopting such a resolu­
tion? A. The procedure for adopting such a resolution?

Q. Yes. A. We went about it in the manner that this 
was a discussion—various teachers and various people that

- 1 2 7 -
contact our office and contact us as individuals, and through 
this discussion the motion was offered that we take some 
position on desegregation of the schools by the various 
teachers.

Q. Where was this meeting of April 6 held? A. The 
meeting of April 6 was held at East Fifth Street School.

Q. How many members of the union were present? A. 
This particular meeting, I don’t have the figures with me, 
but this was an executive meeting of the executive body 
and the representatives from each school.

Q. How many members of the executive committee? A. 
How many members of the executive committee?

Q. Yes, sir. A. You mean that make up our entire—
Q. Yes, sir. A. Twenty-one make up our entire execu­

tive committee.
Q. Was this resolution presented to the membership in 

writing prior to its adoption by the executive committee?

Mr. Williams: I object to that, if your Honor 
please. He said it was duly and properly adopted— 

The Court: Over-rule the objection.

Q. Was the general membership advised of this resolu­
tion in writing prior to its adoption by your executive com­
mittee on April 6? A. I assumed that it was because we

- 1 2 8 -
have a committee that handles the publication of all docu­
ments.

Napolean B. Patton—for Plaintiffs—Cross



89a

Q. As president do you know whether this was done or 
not! A. I assume that it was done.

Q. In other words you don’t know? A. In other words, 
I think it was.

Q. But can you state positively that it was done? A. 
No, I cannot.

Mr. Witt: No further questions.

Redirect Examination by Mr. Williams:

Q. Mr. Patton, are you positive that this press release 
was given wide publicity among the Negro people? Have 
you heard them discuss it? A. Yes, we have.

Q. In the period of nearly a month since it was passed? 
A. Yes, it was.

Q. You heard it discussed among your members? A. 
Yes.

Q. And among your non-members? A. And among non­
members.

Q. Have you heard one single adverse comment against 
this resolution by any Negro teacher in the whole town? 
A. Our office has not heard one dissenting comment.

Q. Have you received favorable comments? A. Quite a
—1 2 9 -

bit of favorable comments.

Mr. Williams: That’s all.

Recross Examination by Mr. Witt:

Q. Can you explain, Mr. Patton, the delay in the publica­
tion of this resolution from April 6 until the morning of 
May 1, 1965? A. Explain the delay.

Napolean B. Patton—for Plaintiffs—Recross



90 a

Q. Yes, sir. A. Of why it was not published in the news­
paper before now?

Q. Yes, sir. A. There was several reasons, I say sev­
eral, there was two main reasons. Number one, our office 
was undergoing a renovation. Number two, our secretary 
had been out of—

Q. Who decided to give it to the Chattanooga Times on 
April 30? A. This was adopted by the group executive 
committee.

Q. Who made the decision to the Chattanooga Times on 
April 30? A. The committee.

Q. The committee? A. Yes, the executive committee.
Q. The executive committee met yesterday? A. No, we 

met before yesterday.
—130—

Q. When was the decision made by the executive com­
mittee? A. The executive committee was made April 6.

Q. Oh, the executive committee made the decision April 
6 and decided to release this to the general public on April 
30? A. No, it was decided we would release this before 
time, but due to the office being renovated it was delayed.

Q. You heard Dr. Carmichael’s testimony with regard 
to factual statements set forth in this statement, did you 
not? You were in the courtroom, I believe? A. Yes.

Q. How do you explain the inaccuracies set forth in this 
press release? A. I don’t know of any inaccuracies in the 
press release.

Q. How did you secure the factual information or how 
did your committee secure the factual information as re­
flected in the press release?

Mr. Williams: That is objected to, the Superin­
tendent hasn’t denied a single thing in the—a single

Napolean B. Patton—for Plaintiffs—Recross



91a

fact stated in there except a matter of opinion, if 
your Honor please.

The Court: I think it would be more appropriate 
to call the witness’s attention to any specific state­
ment you wish to ask him about.

—131—
Q. The statement says: “Already more than 30 white 

teachers have been hired because of the 900 or more Negro 
pupils tied to so-called white schools.” This is in the be­
ginning sentence of the third paragraph. From where did 
you secure this information?

Mr. Williams: That is objected to, the Superin­
tendent has admitted . . .

Mr. Witt: No, he did not.
The Court: I’ll allow the witness to answer, if he 

knows.

Q. Your statement said: “Already more than 30 white 
teachers have been hired because of the 900 or more Negro 
pupils tied to the so-called white schools.” Just where did 
you get this information from? A. From the newspaper. 
Teaching personnel in the city of Chattanooga is always 
published in the newspaper.

Q. The first sentence of the second paragraph states: 
“The continued hiring of white teachers to teach the extra 
classes brought about by transfer of Negro pupils into the 
so-called white schools creates a surplus of teachers in the 
heretofore Negro schools.” In what school is there a sur­
plus of Negro teachers? A. Wherever the Negro pupil 
has moved out from a predominantly Negro school to a 
white school.

Napolean B. Patton—for Plaintiffs—Recross



92a

Q. Name the school, please? A. That I cannot give you
—132—

the name of.
Q. You can name no school where there is a surplus of 

Negro teachers? A. I cannot name any school where there 
is a surplus of Negro teachers.

Q. I’m asking you that question? A. I ’m speaking as a 
teacher and as a leader in the community rather than an 
administrator. These details will have to come from the 
administration.

Q. Your executive committee, you have testified, adopted 
this resolution. You are testifying there is a member of 
each school on this executive committee, that it was con­
sidered on April 6 and that it has been handed to the 
newspapers. You heard Dr. Carmichael testify that this 
particular part of this is irresponsible. Now, tell me, name 
a school, where there are surplus Negro teachers? One 
school? A. I said I could not give you a name.

Mr. Witt: No further questions.
Witness excused.
Mr. Williams: The plaintiff rests.
The Court: All right.

Dr. Benny Carmichael recalled.

Direct Examination by Mr. W itt:

Q. Dr. Carmichael, the Avondale School has been men-
—133—

tioned prior in today’s testimony. I direct your attention 
to the beginning of school, the few months prior to the 
opening of school in 1963-64, the first time there was any

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



93a

degree of desegregation in Avondale School. What prep­
aration was made administratively by your staff for the 
desegregation of the Avondale School! A. The other 
schools of the school system which had been selected for 
the initial desegregation, of course, had been operating as 
desegregated schools during 1962-63. By the close or near­
ing the close of ’62-63 school year, as was known at the 
time we were planning the first desegregation, one of our 
greatest concerns was the beginning of desegregation of 
the Avondale School. We knew with the first desegrega­
tion of it that we were going to have a large number of 
Negro children enrolled. As I recall we estimated 150 
white and approximately 350 Negro children. I began in 
the spring of ’62-63 of the school year, which would have 
been April or May of 1963 talking with the Avondale 
faculty. I requested the faculty and principal, who were 
all white, to remain as a body in that school if at all pos­
sible. I gave as my reasoning that the teachers had taught 
in that school for many years—

Mr. Williams: May it please the Court, I object— 
frankly I don’t see the relevance of our going back 
into this long thing that we had in 1962 and ’63. I 
submit that it is irrelevant for the Court to sit here

—134—
and listen to this Superintendent go over a long- 
resume of what has done and what people he talked 
to back in 1962 and ’63 to effect desegregation back 
then. The question is what exists now, what the 
problems are now.

The Court: I don’t see the relevance of it but I’ll 
allow you to put it in the record.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



94a

Mr. Witt: Perhaps we should state the relevance 
of it. I am attempting- to use a special situation 
that exists at the Avondale School to simplify the 
proof to indicate the kinds of administrative prob­
lems that Dr. Carmichael and his staff have had to 
address themselves to, so that the Court can be aware 
of the many factors in this problem that bear upon 
the quality of education in the classroom.

The Court: The problem confronting the Court, 
of course, is the situation that may or may not exist 
with reference to the junior high and high schools 
which are the remaining areas.

Mr. Witt: Well, what I purport to show to your 
Honor through the testimony of Dr. Carmichael, 
the kinds of things that must be done with regard 
to the seventh grade, eighth grade and ninth grade, 
the kinds of things they have learned will work and 
will create the kind of atmosphere in which the first 
desegregation experience will be a good one, and 
this is the reason.

The Court: I’ll allow you to continue.
—135—

Q. Dr. Carmichael, just what problems were—came to 
your attention during the first year of desegregation with 
regard to Avondale? A. By mid-year of the first year of 
desegregation of Avondale, which was ’63-64, while I had 
picked up certain questions from the principal from time 
to time as to the feelings of teachers, the first major one, 
I would say, was the request by the principal of the Avon­
dale School that the total staff be removed from that school 
for the following year and that the staff be made all Negro. 
That was during the Christmas holidays of that ’63-64 
school year. I did not attempt to convince the principal

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



95a

that it should be one or the other, I did at that meeting, 
which, as I say, is the first time I had taken time to discuss 
the question in detail, but at this time I held out to him 
that there were probably several considerations that ought 
to be given to the nature of the staff for the following year. 
His contention was that he and his staff were of the opin­
ion that they had been requested to remain that first year 
only for the purpose of making the transition, and that 
thereafter the staff would be made all Negro.

Mr. Williams: I object to all this hearsay, if your 
Honor please.

The Court: Of course we have been receiving 
hearsay in connection with the motion and in con-

—136—
nection with the hear, I believe I will over-rule the 
objection.

Mr. Williams: I just wanted to call the Court’s 
attention to hearsay if not objected to as competent 
evidence.

The Court: All right.
Mr. Carmichael: I think you will find most of this 

verified, Mr. Williams, in the minutes of the board 
of education and in my correspondence. Soon after 
this meeting with the principal, I drew up in letter 
form, and on February 20, 1964, took it to the school, 
presented it to the total staff, as to my position. 
And I made the position, just to put it quickly, that 
I felt the staff—there were three alternatives with 
regard to staffing the school for the following year. 
It could be continued as an all-white staff, adding 
additional white teachers as they were needed for

Benny Carmichael-—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



96a

additional numbers of Negro pupils; that it could 
be switched to an all-Negro staff with the coming of 
the next year, or, that we could start introducing 
Negro teachers to that staff in order to move toward 
a transition or breaking this down. I gave my rea­
soning with regard to each plan and stated that I 
felt it would be unsound to make a complete shift 
in the staff to an all Negro, that we identified, and 
the teachers were analyzing, concerned about the 
kinds of problems they were facing, therefore one 
of our biggest jobs, as it will be pointed out, is for 
us to undertake to understand those problems and 
adapt our instructional methods to them. Therefore, 
I was of the opinion the best staffing could come

—137—
from the introduction of Negro teachers to the staff. 
I pointed out that this was not something approved 
by the board of education, I sent copies of it to the 
board of education, however, and this was just 
going to be the reasoning that I was going to use 
on it.

Q. What was the date of that letter"? A. That letter 
was February 20, 1964. I did this at that time for the 
primary purpose of getting this cleared for teachers be­
cause they were being asked if they wanted to make trans­
fers, just as they always are at this time of the year, and 
I was leaving for Brazil and felt obligated to get it done. 
This action of course I reported to the board of educa­
tion as I had by carbon copy, but in discussion with the 
board of education. This was followed up with a meeting 
of the total Avondale staff with the board of education 
in a conference meeting on April 30. There are minutes

Benny Carmichael—-for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



97a

here covering- that meeting. The purpose here, again, was 
for the board to understand the concerns of this staff and 
to help them, understand an appropriate decision for staff­
ing it for the following year. Quickly, I followed that meet­
ing up with another letter to Mr. Reese and his faculty 
on May 14, in which I tried to summarize where we were 
at that point, and the proposals that I would make with 
regard to the staff and the school for the following year, 
primary of which was the launching of a study involving 
the staff of that school in actually learning how to cope

—138—
with the problems rather than deserting the school and 
leaving them for someone else, and still tried to keep it 
clear to them what their prerogative should be with re­
gard to transferring from this school. I think that is as 
much as perhaps I should say about that. Going into 
budget session, we recommended a small amount to sup­
port a study there for testing purposes, for the additional 
Negro teachers to start this sort of thing. Then, as I have 
testified already, I met with them before school trying to 
develop a rapport within this staff that would make these 
people effective in the school. In the fall, actually prior 
to the opening of the school, an outline of a proposal had 
been developed to engage these teachers in a very depth 
study of teaching Negro children. We used Dr. Irwin 
Ketz of New York University as an observer and con­
sultant, and here is a seven-page report from him as to 
what his observations are at the school, and some indica­
tion of the kinds of things he felt needed to be done to 
cope with the problem, definitely stating that there is a 
problem. We used Dr. Gertrude Norr who is a director 
of education for the Anti-defamation League here on No­

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



98a

vember 17, to state to her what we were trying to do, 
what ideas would she have. Finally, this was moved on 
to a formalized proposal which was approved by the 
United States Office of Education and a very specific pro­
gram has been initiated and we’ve been working on it 
since February—the program has been in existence since 
February 9. All of this designed to help these teachers

—1 3 9 -
in dealing with the problems that they encounter. As a 
part of the study taped interviews were conducted with 
every teacher involved, getting their reactions, they kinds 
of things they find problems with, and I ’m prepared to 
read statements from these interviews.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, let’s relate this to the seventh grade. 
How did you involve any junior high school teachers in 
this study? A. We have one junior high teacher, in some 
instances two, and we have Negro teachers from East 
Fifth where we have white children, who have been par­
ticipating in this, that we have even taken them to Avon­
dale for a week to observe and to get some experience with 
teaching. This is just one teacher from a junior high 
school, and from seventh grade, trying to help them get 
a preunderstanding of something that they were going to 
be dealing with. Your situation in dealing with this prob­
lem is this: you cannot work effectively with teachers until 
they move into the situation and get an understanding of 
what they are actually dealing with. Now, we made as 
much preparation as anybody before the opening of school. 
You’ve got to get on into it far enough for teachers to 
identify their real problems, and this is when you take 
hold of it.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



99a

Q. What kinds of problems? A. The teachers have 
cited and reviewed problems all the way from speech pat­
terns, from children not being able to control their be-

—140—
havior to participate in independent study, to having being 
dealt with in their discipline by their parents and other 
teachers in certain ways that make it exceedingly difficult 
for them to give them freedom, to relieve the tensions 
that they have, to their mental abilities, to their achieve­
ment levels, to their attention span. I ’ve named their 
language patterns. To their specific use of—here is : “She 
has also made some change in reading instruction and 
she finds the need to stress simple words such as is and 
are.”

Q. Do these problems have any impact upon the quality 
of education?

Mr. Williams: I object to that. I object to his 
answering a general question like that.

The Court: Well, sustained.

Q. What reason did you have for this expenditure of 
time and effort? A. Why did we do it? It’s my frank 
opinion that the school would not have continued without 
considerable trouble and damage through this year if we 
had not given this school this kind of attention, this kind 
of assistance. You do face this kind of thing, and I have 
emphasized it in the reports to the Court each year. After 
desegregation began, I do not like to put an over-emphasis 
on help to that school, because your teachers feel you are 
looking over their shoulders, that you don’t trust them, 
that they can’t carry out desegregation instruction and

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



100a

- 1 4 1 -
plans, but when they really begin encountering problems 
you’d better help them, because I ’ve had teachers to talk 
about this problem and cry, not in terms of disliking Negro 
children or anything of that sort. It’s quite the contrary. 
But, being concerned about their effectiveness in teaching 
them.

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct

Mr. Williams: I object—he is now talking about 
what is in the minds of teachers and concluding 
that teachers are not prejudiced, and I might very 
well conclude that they are, based on my experience, 
if your Honor please, and I object to it.

A. One of our assumptions in the study is that they are 
prejudiced.

The Court: I believe I will over-rule the objection.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, have you or any member of your 
staff had any conferences with representatives of the 
Department of Health, Education and Welfare? A. Yes. 

Q. With regard to the Avondale project? A. Yes.
Q. What individuals did you have conferences with or 

contacts with? A. Dr. Stanley Kruger in the U. S. Office 
of Education has been our primary contact person in dis­
cussing this and talking this. The first contact, however,

—142—
was with Commissioner Kepler when they ŵ ere trying to 
formulate the provisions and the implementation of the 
section with the Civil Rights Act, in relation to these kinds 
of experiences. This is part of the reason this sort of 
thing was used in establishing the provision for technical



101a

systems under Section 403, Title 4, the the grants to boards 
of education, which your board of education has, under 405.

Q. What does Title 4 authorized? A. Title 4 is the dec­
laration that schools shall be desegregated and further 
provides the assistance to deal with the problems or cope 
with the problems occasioned by desegregation.

Q. Does it authorize the expenditure of several [sic] 
funds to effect this? A. Yes, it does.

Q. When did the school board make this application? A. 
Officially December 30.

Q. Were there other proposals submitted to H.E.W. on 
this line ? A. Apparently there were some coming through, 
however, this was the first proposal approved in the United 
States under this section.

Q. What is the size of this particular study? A. The 
first phase of it will be concluded next Friday, that’s

—1 4 3 -
training for 75 teachers in the school system. There is a 
second phase of it for 10 days this summer in which an­
other number of our teachers will be involved and we will 
invite teachers in from the outside, still using Avondale 
as a laboratory situation for this study.

Q. Would you describe the early steps in this study? 
A. Quickly the steps are these.

Q. Take your time if necessary. A. Of the teachers 
selected to participate in in, and they were selected ac­
cording to need, presently teaching desegregated classes 
or were going to be this fall. We used a sociologist as a 
consultant, and this was Dr. Gertrude Norr of the Anti­
defamation League, who came to the school system begin­
ning the week of February 15, and spent every day observ­
ing each of the teachers participating in the program,

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



102a

observing their classroom instruction, their reaction to 
children, childrens reaction to them, all of the practices of 
operating a school, and then met with them on three fol­
lowing Saturdays. She came back a week later each time 
and met with small groups.

Q. Were these elementary teachers? A. Elementary— 
50 of them were elementary and 25 were junior high. First 
it was all the teachers in Avondale, then 25 other ele­
mentary teachers from other schools, then 25 junior high 
teachers from schools that will be desegregated this fall.

Q. Did the junior high teachers actually teach? A.
—144—

Later, just about three weeks ago, we brought the junior 
high schools to Avondale for a weeks time, and they ob­
served for about two or three days and then the teachers 
at Avondale turned the teaching over to them and they 
visited in some other Negro schools, while the junior high 
teachers took over. But, Dr. Norr will come back next 
Wednesday, I think, for the final meeting with the group. 
The following week, after she was here, Dr. Larry Wrights- 
man, a social psychologist from George Peabody College 
came and went through the same pattern of observation 
and meeting with teachers and personal conferences with 
them. The whole object being to first identify the socio­
logical setting of children, analyze the home conditions, 
the cultural disadvantage and all this sort of thing you 
are dealing with it, secondly for the social psychologist to 
pick up and interpret this in terms of what does this mean 
for personal behavior of children, and the influences upon 
learning. He went through the same pattern with the 
children, and, finally, during the following week which got 
down to the last of February and the first of March, some­

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



103a

where in there, Dr. Dorothy Johnson, from the Washing­
ton D. C. schools, where they had supposedly developed 
very adequate program of dealing with this, went through 
the same pattern with the children for the purpose of 
translating the sociological understandings, findings, the 
personal or psychological ones, into a curriculum and 
method of instructing children in a desegregated situation.

—145—
That, with the meetings which will be concluded this week, 
that’s the development of that phase of it to this time. This 
summer it will follow with a new group of teachers, the 
same kind of pattern, but it will be all day instead of— 
and will not have the classroom observations involved. 
We’re going to operate four classes in Avondale this sum­
mer for observation purposes by the teachers who will be 
in training.

Q. Where will these teachers come from! A. 75 of them 
approximately will come from our own schools, 25 of them 
will be invited from other school systems in the state. 
Memphis will be sending four, Nashville, I believe, will be 
sending four.

Q. Incidentally, did Knoxville avail itself of this Title 4 
funds! A. No, it did not.

Q. Did Memphis avail itself of this— A. No, it hasn’t.
Q. Did Nashville involve itself in this kind of training! 

A. No, it hasn’t.
Q. Why were the tapes with the individual teachers felt 

necessary! A. The nature of the study itself does ex­
actly what Mr. Williams was implying a minute ago. We 
assume that a great deal of our problems stem from the 
fact that we are prejudiced, that we have values which 
are prejudiced, and we were trying to nail this down in

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



104a

- 1 4 6 -
terms of what does a teacher feel and think with regard 
to this whole question at this time, so that as we move for 
a program such as this, that we can identify what changes 
have teachers been able to make with regard to dealing 
with her own prejudices with regard to this. Did what 
she think was a race-caused problem really not turn out 
to be that at all, but, rather, a cultural disadvantage prob­
lem and so on and so forth.

Q. What have you identified with regard to attitudes on 
teachers, as a result of this study? A. I think certainly 
fewer teachers feel that their problems stem from race 
as such. They assumed that it did in large measure, but 
it’s not a child’s race that is causing these particular prob­
lems.

Q. Did they have fears? A. Yes, they’ve had fears.
Q. Did these fears affect their classroom performance? 

A. Yes. They did not know what they felt toward Negro 
children. In fact, some of them still don’t. I think it is 
safe to say that our consultants have raised the question 
as to whether or not some teachers can ever adapt to that 
teaching situation. They even, in a meeting with our 
board of education, proposed the possibility of consider­
ing transfers. This is how difficult the problem becomes. 
This is not my word, in fact I object to doing it, I don’t

- 1 4 7 -
think the transfer should be made, but this grows out of 
really looking at teachers’ adaptation to children, the need.

Q. Do these attitudes restrict themselves to Negroes in 
white situations? Do these attitudes that you have iden­
tified restrict themselves to a situation where there is a 
white in a Negro situation, or does it have other applica-

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct



105a

tionsf A. Well, in this particular case we assume that 
it is because of the white-Negro situation.

Q. What about the term culturally disadvantaged? A. 
I can’t follow you in terms of relating it to the race ques­
tion.

Q. Do teachers have prejudices toward— A. Culturally 
disadvantaged children ?

Q. Yes. A. Yes, they do.
Q. Whether they are white or Negro? A. Yes, we do.
Q. Do these prejudices interfere with their capacity to 

adjust to a new situation? A. Yes, they do.
Q. Do these prejudices affect the quality of their per­

formance? A. Yes, they do.
Q. Is there any evidence that these attitudes can be

—148—
changed? A. There is some accumulating. I do not have 
it specifically but it is reported that these kinds of atti­
tudes are being changed—

Mr. Williams: Your Honor, I object—
The Court: Sustain the objection.

Q. Dr. Carmichael, it was testified to, I believe, that the 
Memphis program of desegregation, I believe the junior 
highs next year and the senior highs the following years? 
A. Yes, that would be 7, 8 and 9, because their organiza­
tion is the same as ours, and 10, 11 and 12.

Q. How do you relate the knowledge you have gain in 
the Avondale project to this program? A. I wouldn’t 
restrict it to the Avondale project alone, I would restrict 
it to our total experience with this. I think it is regretable, 
and I think it is proper for me to say the Court made the 
decision in this case. I think it is regretable that it moved

Benny Carmichael—for Defendants—Recalled—Direct