Fields v. City of Fairfield Transcript of Record

    TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD

Supreme Court of the United States
OCTOBER TERM, 1962

No. 566

EDWARD R. FIELDS, ET AL., APPELLANTS,

vs.

CITY OF FAIRFIELD.

APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT Op THE STATE OP ALABAMA

FILED OCTOBER 31, 1962 

PROBABLE JURISDICTION NOTED MARCH 18, 1963



SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
OCTOBER TERM, 1962

‘ No. 566

EDWARD E. FIELDS, ET AI... APPELLANTS,
vs.

CITY OF FAIRFIELD.

APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA

I N D E X

Record from the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, 
Alabama, Bessemer Division
Organization of the court _____________________
Complaint ______________________________________

Copy of hand bill distributed, entitled “White
Workers Meeting” ____________ ,------------------

Fiat ordering issuance of temporary injunction
W rit of injunction ____________________________
Summons _______________________________________
Bond ___________________________________________
Judgment of contempt _________________________
Notice of appeal ________________________________
Appeal bond to Supreme Court (Dr. Edward R.

Fields) _______________________________________
Appeal bond to Supreme Court (Robert Lyons)
Citation of appeal (Robert Lyons) ___________
Citation of appeal (Dr. Edward R. Fields) — 
Clerk’s certification to service of notices of appeal

Original Print

1 1
2 1

4 3
5 4
5 5
7 6
7 7
8 8
9 9

9 9
10 10
11 12
12 12
12a 13

R ecord P ress, P rinters, New  Y ork, N. Y ., Ma t  7, 1963



11 I5TDEX

Original Print
Record from the Circuit Court of Jefferson County,

Alabama, Bessemer Division— Continued
Transcript of proceedings— October 12, 1961 — 13 15

Appearances _________________________________  13 15
Colloquy ______________________________________ 14 16
Opening statement by Mr. Parsons ---------------  14 16
Response by Mr. Stoner ____________________  15 17
Testimony of Chester C. Pope—

direct ___________________  16 18
cross ____________________  17 19

Complainant’s Exhibit 1— Issue No. 35 of
“ The Thunderbolt”— October, 1961 -------------  19 21

Testimony of Philip L. Misso—
direct ___________________  20 22
cross ____________________  21 23

Clyde Morris—
direct ___________________  24 25
cross ____________________  25 27

Charles L. W o o d -
direct ___________________  28 29
cross ________ -___________  30 31

Philip L. Misso (recalled) —
direct ___________________  32 33
cross ____________________  33 34

Charles L. W ood (recalled)—
direct ___________________  34 35
cross ____________________  34 35

Claude Smithson—
direct ___________________  36 36
cross ____________________  40 41

Complainant’s Exhibit 6— Copy of hand bill 
distributed, entitled “ White Workers Meet­
ing”  ________________________________________  42 42

Testimony of Claude Smithson—
cross ____________________  43 43
redirect _________________ 44 44

Edward R. Fields—
direct ___________________  47 47
cross ____________________  53 53
examination by court ___ 58 59
recross __________________  58 59



INDEX 111

Original Print
Record from the Circuit Court of Jefferson County,

Alabama, Bessemer Devision— Continued 
Transcript of proceedings— October 12, 1961 

Continued
Testimony of Fred Short—

direct ——  ---------- — ------  60 60
cross ______________ ______  61 61
examination by court —  61 62

Mrs. Delores Fields—
direct ______________________  62 63
cross _______________________  63 64

Opening argument for the complainant ------  65 65
Final argument for the respondents - 65 66
Final argument for the complainant - 70 70
Reply for the respondents --------------------------------  70 71
Decree of Judge E. L. Ball and sentence ------  71 71
Judge’s and reporter’s certificate (omitted in

printing) _____________________________________  74 73
Clerk’s certificate ---------------------------------------------------  77 73

Proceedings in the Supreme Court of the State of
Alabama ___________________________________________  78 74

Assignments of error (Robert Lyons) ---------------------  78 74
Assignments of error (Dr. Edward R. Fields) ---------  80 76
Agreement of the parties as to the record ----------------  82 78
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court,

etc. _________________________________________________ 83 79
Exhibit A— Complaint (copy) (omitted in print­

ing) __________________________________________  88
Exhibit B— W rit of injunction (copy) (omitted

in printing) __________________________________  93 83
Exhibit C— Decree of Judge E. L. Ball and sen­

tence (copy) (omitted in printing) -------------  95 83
Motion to strike petition --------------------------------------  97 83
Order of consolidation and of submission ------------ 99 85
Opinion, Merrill, J. ------------------------------------------------  160 86
Judgment ------------------------------------------------------------------  161 91
Application for rehearing ---------------------------------------- 102 92
Order overruling application for rehearing -------------  104 93
Application for stay of execution -----------------------------  105 93
Order granting stay of judgment ---------------------------- 108 94



IV IUDEX

Original
Notice of appeal to Supreme Court of the United

States __________________________________________  109
Amendment to notice of appeal to the Supreme

Court of the United States -------------------------------  112
Clerk’s certificate (omitted in printing) -------------- 115
Order noting probable jurisdiction ______________  116

Print

95

98
99 
99



1

[fol. 1]
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF

JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA
BESSEMER DIVISION

The City of F airfield, a Municipal Corporation, Plaintiff,
v.

Dr. E dward R. F ields and National States 
R ights P arty, Defendants.

Organization of the Court

At a regular term of the Circuit Court of Jefferson 
County, Alabama Bessemer Division, at which the officers 
authorized by law to hold or serve such Court were serving, 
the following proceedings among others were had and done 
in a case styled:

The City of Fairfield, a Municipal Corporation, Plaintiff 
vs. Dr. Edward R. Fields and National States Rights Party, 
Defendants.

[fol. 2]
In the Circuit Court of J efferson County, A labama 

Bessemer D ivision

Complaint— Filed October 11,1961 
To the Honorable Judges of Said Court in Equity Sitting:

Comes the Complainant in the Above Styled Cause and 
Would Show Unto the Court the Following Facts as a 
Basis for the Relief Hereinafter Prayed:

1. Your complainant is a duly organized and incorpo­
rated municipality in the State of Alabama, located in Jef- 
ferson County, Alabama.

2. That the respondent, Dr. Edward R. Fields, is a resi­
dent of Jefferson County, Alabama, residing at 1509 Mims 
Street, S.W., Birmingham, Alabama, and is over twenty- 
one years of age. The respondent, National States Rights



2

Party, is a corporation, or unincorporated association, with 
its home office in Birmingham, Alabama.

3. The respondents, Dr. Edward R. Fields and National 
States Rights Party have called a public meeting at 5329 
Valley Road, Fairfield, Alabama, for Wednesday, October 
11,1961. They have announced said meeting by distributing 
hand bills of an inflammatory nature designed to create ill 
will and disturbances between the races in the City of Fair- 
field, Alabama, a copy of which hand bill is attached hereto 
and made a part hereof the same as if included herein. The 
purpose of said meeting as manifested by the attached hand 
bill is to create tension, ill will, disturbances, and disorderly 
conduct between the races in the City of Fairfield, Alabama.

4. The respondents have caused said hand bills to be dis­
tributed upon the streets of the City of Fairfield, Alabama, 
and placed in automobiles in the City of Fairfield, Alabama, 
in violation of and in utter disregard of sections 3-4 and 
3-5 of the General City Code of the City of Fairfield, Ala­
bama.

5. The respondents have announced said meeting with­
out having obtained a permit from the Mayor of the City 
of Fairfield, Alabama, and the respondent, Dr. Edward R. 
Fields, has informed the Mayor of the City of Fairfield 
that he will hold said meeting whether a permit is issued or 
not. Section 14-53 of the General City Code of the City of 
Fairfield, Alabama provides, “ It shall be unlawful for any 
[fol. 3] person or persons to hold a public meeting in the 
city of police jurisdiction without first having obtained 
a permit from the mayor, to do so” .

6. Said meeting will constitute a public nuisance, in­
jurious to the health, comfort, or welfare of the City of 
Fairfield and the inhabitants thereof. It is calculated to 
create a disturbance, incite to riot, disturb the peace, and 
disrupt peace and good order in the City of Fairfield, Ala­
bama.

Wherefore, Premises Considered, Complainant prays 
that the Court take jurisdiction of this bill of complaint, 
and that Dr. Edward R. Fields and National States Rights 
Party be made parties respondent to this Bill of Com­



3

plaint and that process issue requiring them to plead, an­
swer, and demur within the time required by law or suffer 
decree pro eonfesso herein, and that a temporary writ of 
injunction or restraining order be immediately issued by 
this Court directed to the respondents, their servants, 
agents, or employees, enjoining and restraining it and them 
from holding said meeting at said time and place, and from 
distributing said hand bills in the City of Fairfield, Ala­
bama, and that on a final hearing of this cause that the 
temporary writ of injunction or restraining order be made 
final and that a permanent injunction order be made en­
joining the respondents, Dr. Edward R. Fields and National 
States Rights Party, their servants, agents, or employees 
from holding such meeting in the City of Fairfield, A la -' 
bama, and from distributing such hand bills in the City 
of Fairfield, Alabama and complainant prays for such other 
and further relief, both general and special to which in 
equity it maybe entitled.

Frank B. Parsons, Attorney for Complainant.

[fol. 4]
A ttachment to Complaint 

(COPY OF HAND BILL)

W HITE WORKERS 
MEETING

* NIGGERS ARE TAKING OVER UNIONS!
* NIGGERS WANT OUR PARKS AND POOLS!
*NIGGERS DEMAND MIXED SCHOOLS!
Communists in NAACP and in WASHINGTON say
Whites HAVE NO RIGHTS!
The Nigger gets everything he DEMANDS!
W HITE SUPREMACY CAN be saved
Whites CAN STOP this second Reconstruction!



4

HEAR IMPORTANT SPEAKERS FROM 4 STATES
TIME—8 P.M. DATE—WED. OCT. 11
PLACE—5329 VALLEY ROAD
IN DOWNTOWN FAIRFIELD, ALABAMA 

Above the Car Wash
THUNDERBOLT Mobile Unit will Be Parked Out Front 
Sponsored by National States Rights Party 
Box 733, Birmingham, Alabama

P U B L I C  I N V I T E D  
COME AND BRING YOUR FRIEN DS!

Duly sworn to by C. J. Smithson, jurat omitted in print­
ing.

[fol. 5]
In the Circuit Court of J efferson County, A labama 

Bessemer D ivision

F iat Ordering I ssuance of T emporary 
Injunction— October 11,1961

This cause being submitted to the Court upon application 
of the complainant for temporary writ of injunction as 
prayed for in the original bill herein, and upon considera­
tion thereof the Court being of the opinion that the same 
should be granted:

It Is, Therefore, Ordered, Adjudged, and Decreed by the 
Court that upon the Complainant entering into good and 
sufficient bond, conditioned as provided by law, in the sum 
of One Hundred and 00/100 ($100.00) Dollars, same to be 
approved by the Register of this Court, that the Register 
issue a temporary writ of injunction as prayed for in the 
original bill in this cause,

It Is Further Ordered, Adjudged, and Decreed by the 
Court that a final hearing will be held on the application



5

for permanent injunction in the Circuit Courtroom of E. L. 
Ball, Circuit Judge at the Bessemer Courthouse, Jefferson 
County, Alabama, on the 17th day of November, 1961, at 
9 :00 A.M.

Bone and ordered, this the 11th day of October, 1961.
E. L. Ball, Circuit Judge, in Equity Sitting.

Isr the Circuit Court of J efferson County, A labama, 
Bessemer D ivision

W rit of Injunction—Filed October 11,1961 
To Any Sheriff of the State of Alabama—Greetings:

We Command You, that without delay you execute this 
Writ, and make due return how you have executed the same, 
according to law.

Elmore McAdory, Register.
T o : Dr. Edward R. Fields, and the National States Rights 
Party, their servants, agents, and employees:

Whereas, the City of Fairfield, a municipal corporation, 
has this day filed its Bill of Complaint in this said Circuit 
Court against Dr. Edward R. Fields, and National States 
Rights Party, their servants, agents, and employees, pray­
ing among other things that they be restrained and en­
joined from holding a public meeting at 8 P.M. on Wednes­
day, October 11, 1961, at 5329 Valley Road, Fairfield, 
Alabama, as announced, and from distributing further in the 
[fol. 6] City of Fairfield, on October 10, 1961.

And Whereas, on said bill being exhibited to the Honor­
able Edward L. Ball, one of the Judges of the Circuit Court 
of Jefferson County, Bessemer Division, Alabama, on the 
11th day of October, 1961, he did order, that upon com­
plainant’s entering into bond in the sum of $100.00 (One 
Hundred and no/100) dollars, and approved by the Register 
of this Court, payable and conditioned according to law, 
a writ of injunction issue out of this Court, according to 
the prayer of said bill;



6

And Whereas, bond has been given and approved as 
required by said order, these, therefore, are to command 
and strictly enjoin you from holding a public meeting at 
8 P.M. on Wednesday, October 11, 1961, at 5329 Valley 
Road, Fairfield, Alabama, as announced, and from dis­
tributing further in the City of Fairfield, handbills announc­
ing such meeting such as were distributed in the City of 
Fairfield, Alabama, on October 10,1961, until further orders 
from this Court; and this you will in no wise omit under 
penalty, etc.

Witness, Elmore McAdory, Register, Circuit Court, Bes­
semer Division Jefferson County, Alabama, this the 11th 
day of October, 1961.

Elmore McAdory, Circuit Clerk & Register, Bessemer 
Division, Circuit Court, Jefferson County, Ala­
bama.

Issued this 11th day of October, 1961.

[fol. 7]
In the Circuit Court of J efferson County, At.arama, 

Bessemer D ivision

Summons—October 11,1961 
To Any Sheriff of the State of Alabama, Greeting:

We command you that you summon Dr. Edward R. Fields, 
and National States Rights Party of Jefferson County to be 
and appear before the Judge of the Circuit Court, Bessemer 
Division, exercising Chancery jurisdiction, within thirty 
days after the service of this summons, and then and there 
to answer, plead or demur, without oath, to a Bill of Com­
plaint lately exhibited by City of Fairfield, a Mun. Corp. 
against said Dr. Edward R. Fields, and National States 
Rights Party and to further to do and perform what said 
Judge shall order and direct in that behalf. And this the 
said Defendant shall in no wise omit, under penalty, etc. 
And we further command that you return this writ, with 
your endorsement thereon, to our said Court immediately 
upon the execution thereof.



7

Witness, Elmore McAdory, Register of said Circuit 
Court, Bessemer Division, at office in Bessemer, this 11th 
day of October, 1961.

Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk and Register.

Executed this 11th day of October, 1961 by leaving a copy 
of bill and summons with Writ of Injunction with Dr. 
Edward R. Fields and Dr. Edward R. Fields as agent for 
National States Rights Party.

Holt A. McDowell, Sheriff, by Clyde Morris, Deputy 
Sheriff.

In the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, A labama 
B essemer D ivision

B ond— Filed and Approved October 11, 1961 
Know All Men by These Presents:

That we, The City of Fairfield, a municipal Corporation, 
are held and firmly bound unto Dr. Edward R. Fields and 
National States Rights Party in the sum of One Hundred 
and no/100 ($100.00) Dollars for the payment of which we 
bind ourselves, our heirs, assigns, executors or administra­
tors, jointly and severally by these presents.

The Condition of this bond is this: That whereas, the 
above bounden City of Fairfield, a municipal corporation, in 
a bill filed by it against said Dr. Edward R. Fields, and 
National States Rights Party, prayed for and obtained a 
[fol. 8] WTrit of Injunction out of the Circuit Court of said 
County upon the approval of this bond, restraining and 
enjoining the said Dr. Edward R. Fields, and National 
States Rights Party, their servants, agents, or employees 
from holding a public meeting at 8 P. M. on Wednesday, 
October 11, 1961 at 5329 Valley Road, Fairfield, Alabama, 
and from distributing further in the City of Fairfield hand­
bills announcing such meeting such as were distributed in 
the City of Fairfield, Alabama, on October 10, 1961.

Now, if, on the dissolution of such injunction, the said 
city of Fairfield, a municipal corporation shall pay the



8

amount of the judgment enjoined, with interest, and also 
such damages and costs as may be decreed against it, then 
this bond shall be null and void; otherwise, to remain in 
full force and effect.

In witness whereof the City of Fairfield, a municipal cor­
poration, has caused these presents to be executed by C. J. 
Smithson, its mayor, thereunto duly authorized this 11th 
day of October, 1961.

City of Fairfield, a municipal Corporation, by C. J. 
Smithson, Mayor.

Taken and approved this 11th day of October, 1961. 
Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk & Register.

In the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, A labama 
B essemer D ivision

J udgment of Contempt— October 12,1961
This matter now coming on to be heard before the Court 

on the question of the contempt of Dr. Edward R. Fields 
and Mr. Robert Ellsworth Lyons in distributing literature 
and holding a meeting or attempting to hold a meeting in 
violation of the terms of the temporary writ of injunction 
issued by this Court on October 11, 1961 and upon the testi­
mony which has been taken orally before the Court; and 
upon the consideration of the same the Court is of the opin­
ion that the said Dr. Edward R. Fields and Mr. Robert 
Ellsworth Lyons, knew the terms of said injunction and 
willfully and contemptuously distributed literature and held 
or attempted to hold said meeting, it is, therefore,

Ordered, Adjudged, and Decreed by the Court:
[fol. 9] 1. That said Dr. Edward R. Fields and Mr. Rob­
ert Ellsworth Lyons are in contempt of Court.

2. That as punishment for his said contempt each be 
confined in the jail of Jefferson County, Alabama, Bessemer 
Division, for a term of 5 days and that each be fined the 
sum of Fifty ($50.00) Dollars.



9

3. In the event of Certiorari or Appeal, bond is hereby 
set in the amount of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) for 
each said party.

Done this 12th day of October, 1961.
E. L. Ball, Circuit Judge.

I n the Circuit Court of J efferson County, A labama 
B essemer D ivision

Notice oe A ppeal— Filed October 12,1961
To the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Bessemer 

Division:
Comes Now the respondents, Dr. Edward R. Fields and 

Robert Lyons, and hereby file notice that they will appeal 
the judgment of this Honorable Court to the Supreme 
Court.

J. B. Stoner, Attorney for Respondents.

J. B. Stoner, P. 0. Box 48, Atlanta, Georgia, Phone 
451-1496.

In the Circuit Court op J efferson County, A labama 
Bessemer D ivision

A ppeal B ond to Supreme Court—Filed and 
Approved October 13,1961

Know All Men by These Presents, That we, Dr. Edward 
R. Fields, as principal, and D. Fred Short and Pearce S. 
Johnson, as sureties, are held and firmly bound unto the 
City of Fairfield for the use of City of Fairfield, in the 
sum of Five Hundred and 00/100 ($500.00) Dollars, for 
the payment of which, well and truly to be made, we bind 
ourselves and each of us, our and eaeh of our heirs, execu­
tors and administrators, jointly and severally and firm ly  
by these presents.
[fol. 10] The right of exemption under the Constitution 
and laws of the State of Alabama is hereby waived.



10

Sealed with our seals and dated this the ...... . day of
-.........................., 1961.

Whereas, on the 12th day of October, 1961, the said above 
bounded Dr. Edward R. Fields was convicted in the Circuit 
Court of Jefferson County, Bessemer Division of the offense 
of Contempt of Court and was fined $50.00 and costs and 
5 days imprisonment in County jail and whereas this day, 
the said Dr. Edward R. Fields as such Defendant has 
prayed for and obtained an appeal from said judgment of 
conviction to the Supreme Court of Alabama to be holden 
in and for said State.

Now, Therefore the condition of the foregoing obligation 
is such, that if the said Dr. Edward R. Fields shall prose­
cute said appeal to effect and satisfy such judgment or 
conviction both as to debt and costs, as said Supreme Court 
of Alabama may render in the premises and shall in the 
event said judgment or conviction is affirmed present him­
self before the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Bessemer 
Division, for sentence within Fifteen days from said affirm­
ance and pay all costs in this appeal, then the said obliga­
tions shall be null and void, otherwise to remain in full force 
and effect.

Dr. Edward R. Fields; D. Fred Short, 415 21st St., 
Ensley; Pearce S. Johnson, 2132 Maywood Dr., 
Ensley.

Taken and approved this the 18th day of October, 1961.
Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk.

In the Circuit Court or Jepeerson County, A labama 
B essemer D ivision

A ppeal B ond to Supreme Court— Filed and 
Approved October 13,1961

Know All Men by These Presents, That we, Robert 
Lyons as principal, and D. Fred Short and Pearce S. John­
son as sureties, are held and firmly bound unto the City of 
Fairfield, for the use of City of Fairfield, in the sum of



11

Five Hundred and 00/100 ($500.00) Dollars, for the pay­
ment of which, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves 
and each of us, our and each of our heirs, executors and 
administrators, jointly and severally and firmly by these 
presents.
[fol. 11] The right of exemption under the Constitution 
and laws of the State of Alabama is hereby waived.

Sealed with our seals and dated this the ...........  day of
......... ................. ,1961.

Whereas, on the 12th day of October, 1961, the said above 
bounded Robert Lyons was convicted in the Circuit Court of 
Jefferson County, Bessemer Division of the offense of Con­
tempt of Court and was fined $50.Q0 and costs and 5 days 
imprisonment in the County Jail and whereas this day, the 
said Robert Lyons as such Defendant has prayed for and 
obtained an appeal from said judgment of conviction to the 
Supreme Court of Alabama to be holden in and for said 
State.

Now, Therefore the condition of the foregoing obligation 
is such, that if the said Robert Lyons shall prosecute said 
appeal to effect and satisfy such judgment or conviction 
both as to debt and costs, as said Supreme Court of Ala­
bama may render in the premises and shall in the event 
said judgment or conviction is affirmed present himself 
before the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Bessemer 
Division, for sentence within Fifteen days from said affirm­
ance and pay all costs in this appeal, then the said obliga­
tions shall be null and void, otherwise to remain in full force 
and effect.

Robert Lyons; D. Fred Short, 415 21st St., Ensley;
Pearce S. Johnson, 2132 Maywood Dr., Ensley.

Taken and approved this the 13th day of October, 1961.
Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk.



12

In the Circuit Court or J efferson County, A labama 
B essemer D ivision

Citation oe A ppeal— October 16,1961 
To City of Fairfield

or

Frank Parsons, Attorney of Record

Whereas Robert Lyons has taken an appeal from the 
judgment and sentence by the Circuit Court, Bessemer 
Division, for the County of Jefferson, State of Alabama, in 
the cause of City of Fairfield Against Dr. Edward R. Fields 
and National States Rights Party.
[fol. 12] Now, you are, therefore, cited to appear at the 
present term, 1961, of the Supreme Court of Alabama, to 
defend on said appeal if you shall think proper to do so.

Witness, this 16th day of October, 1961.
Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk.

Executed this 16th day of October, 1961 by serving a copy 
of the within notice on Frank Parsons, Attorney.

Holt A. McDowell, Sheriff, by Stamps and Brown, 
Deputy Sheriff.

In the Circuit Court oe J efferson County, A labama 
Bessemer D ivision

Citation of A ppeal— October 16,1961 
To City of Fairfield

or

Frank Parsons, Attorney of Record

Whereas Dr. Edward R. Fields has taken an appeal from 
the judgment and sentence by the Circuit Court, Bessemer 
Division, for the County of Jefferson, State of Alabama, in 
the cause of City of Fairfield Against Dr. Edward R. Fields 
and National States Rights Party.



13

Now, you are, therefore, cited to appear at the present 
term, 1961, of the Supreme Court of Alabama, to defend on 
said appeal if you shall think proper to do so.

Witness, this 16th day of October, 1961.
Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk.

Executed this 16th day of October, 1961, by serving a copy 
of the within notice on Frank Parsons, Attorney.

Holt A. McDowell, Sheriff, by Stamps and Brown, 
Deputy Sheriff.

[fol. 12a]
In the Circuit Court op J efferson County, A labama 

B essemer D ivision 
6th Div. 801

I, Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk and Register of the 
Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama, Bessemer 
Division, do hereby certify that in the cause of

Dr. E dward R. F ields and National States 
R ights P arty, Appellants

vs.
City of F airfield, Appellee

which was tried and determined in this court on the 12th 
day of October, 1961, wherein a judgment and sentence 
was rendered in favor of the Appellee, wherein said Ap­
pellants prayed for and obtained an appeal to the Supreme 
Court of Alabama, for all costs of appeal, and that Robert 
Lyons, D. Fred Short and Pearce S. Johnson are sureties 
on said bond for all costs of appeal.

I further certify that on the 16th day of October, 1961, 
notice of said appeal was duly served on Frank Parsons, 
Attorney of Record for said Appellee.

Witness my hand and seal of office, this the 17th day of 
October, 1961.



14

Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk and Register, Cir­
cuit Court, Bessemer Division, Jefferson County, 
Alabama.

(Seal)

Filed, Oct. 18,1961, Supreme Court of Alabama, J. Render 
Thomas, Clerk.

[fol. 12b]
In the Circuit Court of J efferson County, A labama 

B essemer D ivision 
6th Div. 802

I, Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk and Register of the 
Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama, Bessemer 
Division, do hereby certify that in the cause of

Dr. Edward R. F ields and National States 
R ights P arty, Appellants

vs.
City of F airfield, Appellee

which was tried and determined in this court on the 12th 
day of October, 1961, wherein a judgment and sentence was 
rendered in favor of the Appellee, wherein said Appellants 
prayed for and obtained an appeal to the Supreme Court 
of Alabama, for all costs of appeal, and that Dr. Edward 
R. Fields, D. Fred Short and Pearce S. Johnson are sureties 
on said bond for all costs of appeal.

I further certify that on the 16th day of October, 1961, 
notice of said appeal was duly served on Frank Parsons, 
Attorney of Record for said Appellee.

Witness my hand and seal of office, this the 17th day of 
October, 1961.

Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk and Register, Cir­
cuit Court, Bessemer Division, Jefferson County, 
Alabama.

(Seal)
Filed, Oct. 18,1961, Supreme Court of Alabama, J. Render 

Thomas, Clerk.



15

[fol. 13]
1st the Circuit Court or Jefferson County, A labama 

B essemer D ivision 
No. 19249 
In Equity

In the Matter of: City of F airfield, 
a Municipal Corporation, Complainant,

vs.
Dr. Edward R. F ields, and National States B ights P arty, 

and Mr. R obert L yons, Respondents.

Transcript of Proceedings— October 12, 1961

at the hearing of the above-encaptioned cause before the 
Honorable Edward L. Ball, Judge of the said Court, on 
Thursday, October 12, 1961, commencing at about the hour 
of 2:00 P.M., the said date being one of the judicial days of 
the said Court, at Bessemer, Alabama, whereupon the fol­
lowing testimony was offered, evidence introduced and pro­
ceedings had, in due form of law:

A ppearances:
Harwood & Parsons, Fairfield, Alabama, B y : Mr. Frank 

Parsons, For the Complainant;
Mr. J. B. Stoner, P 0  Box 48, Atlanta, Georgia, For the 

Respondents.
Official Reporter: Mr. Sydney S. Eckstone.

Whereupon, the following proceedings were had:



16

[fol. 14]
Colloquy

The Court: Are you gentlemen ready ?
Mr. Parsons: Yes, your Honor.
Mr. Stoner: Yes, sir.
The Court: Does either side want the rule in this ease?
Mr. Stoner: We don’t want the rule, your Honor, please.
The Court: That is the rule to exclude the—
Mr. Stoner: Yes, sir.
The Court: ■—witnesses.
Mr. Stoner: Yes.
The Court: I don’t know your practice in the other 

states.
Mr. Stoner: Yes, sir.
The Court: Mr. Parsons? Do you desire the rule, Mr. 

Parsons ?
Mr. Parsons: No, sir.
The Court: All right, sir.
Will you bring Mayor Smithson up to represent the City?
All right, sir.
Now, Mr. Parsons, do you care to make an opening 

statement for the City as to what you expect to prove, 
here?

Mr. Parsons: Yes, sir.
The Court: All right, sir.

Opening Statement by Mb. P arsons

Mr. Parsons: If the Court please, we expect to show 
that—  Well, of course, the Court is acquainted with the 
fact that it issued an injunction yesterday morning and the 
court is acquainted with the terms of that injunction, 
which, I am sure, is before the Court.

We expect to prove that approximately at seven-thirty 
or a quarter of eight last night, after the injunction was 
served—and I believe that the record will show that the 
injunction was served, that Dr. Fields and this other gentle­
man, Robert Ellsworth Lyons, came to the vicinity of the 
place where the meeting was scheduled and contacted the 
[fol. 15] people there. They contacted the people there



17

about the meeting and distributed literature. All in the 
defiance of the Court’s order and in contempt of court.

Thank you.
The Court: Mr. Stoner?

R esponse by Mb. Stoner

Mr. Stoner: Your Honor, the injunction was served upon 
the defendants. They did not violate it in any respect. The 
only purpose of their going to Fairfield was so as to tell 
people who had already been invited to come there to go 
over to the City Hall at—what’s the name of that town?

Dr. Fields: Lipscomb.
Mr. Stoner: At Lipscomb. To the meeting there so as 

not to violate your order.
After your order was issued forbidding them to dis­

tribute any more handbills inviting people to the meeting, 
they did not distribute any more. The only thing that was 
distributed after that was the Thunderbolt here and that 
is not prohibited by your injunction.

And, so, the forbidden handbill was not distributed 
there and I think that the defendants should be compli­
mented for respecting your order to the extent that they 
went over to Fairfield to prevent the meeting from taking 
place in accordance with your order so as to re-route those 
people over to Lipscomb City Hall or City Park, where- 
ever it was supposed to be held, there, in Lipscomb, and to 
comply with your orders.

And I think it is outrageous for the City of Fairfield to 
come in and ask that two innocent white segregationists be 
put in contempt of court when they went out of their way 
to obey your order in the injunction.

Thank you, your Honor.
The Court: All right, sir.
Mr. Parsons, call your first witness, please.
Mr. Parsons: Officer Pope.



18

[fol. 16] Chester C. P ope having been called as a witness 
on behalf of the Complainant herein, and having been first 
duly sworn according to law, was thereupon examined and 
testified as follows:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. State your name, please, and address.
A. Chester C. Pope, 1620 Bryson Street, Midfield, Ala­

bama.
Q. By whom are you employed and in what capacity ?
A. I am a police officer for the City of Fairfield, Ala­

bama.
Q. I see.
Were you on duty at Fairfield, last night, about seven- 

thirty or a quarter to eight ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. At that time, did you see the parties here, Edward R. 

Fields and Robert Ellsworth Lyons ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Will you tell us what happened at that time ?
A. Well, sir—
Q. Tell us where it was, in the first place. Will you, 

please?
A. Yes, sir.
It was in the 5300 Block of Valley Road.
Q. All right, sir.
Will you tell us what transpired?
A. I was across the street at McGregor’s Car Wash and 

I noticed a commotion across the street and, of course, I 
immediately went over. And when I went over—when I got 
over there, Mr. Fields was distributing handbills or these 
circulars, Thunderbolts; whatever they are. And telling the 
people that the meeting was going to be at Lipscomb City 
Hall instead of there at Fairfield.

Q. I see.
He was contacting various people over there?
A. Yes, sir.
He was handing these Thunderbolts out and telling each 

person he handed it to that the—



19

Q. Was Robert Ellsworth Lyons there at that time!
[fol. 17] A. They brought him up after I—

Q. Well, you didn’t see him doing it?
A. No, sir.
I arrested Mr. Fields and carried him over to the Paddy- 

Wagon, and Mr. Morris, Chief Morris started talking to 
him.

Q. I see.
And what was Mr. Fields telling the people there?
A. He was telling them that the meeting had been called 

off over there and would be at a different—at Lipscomb 
City Hall.

Q. Said it would be held—had been called off over there 
and would be held at Lipscomb City Hall?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. That was the extent of the conversation?
A. Yes.
Q. All right.
I believe you can answer this gentleman’s questions.
A. Yes, sir.

Cross examination.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Was there any disturbance there that night that you 

saw while you were there? Did you see any kind of a 
disturbance there at Fairfield last night at the time that 
you arrested Dr. Fields ?

A. No, sir. There was no—■
Q. -—Before that time ? Or at that time ?
A. No, sir.
Q. You didn’t see him fighting with anybody?
A. No, sir.
Q. And there was no trouble at all?
A. No, sir.
Q. Very peaceful—
A. Yes, sir.
Q. —situation?
A. That’s right.
Q. There?
A. Yes.



20

[fol. 18] Q. He wasn’t attempting to hold any kind of a 
meeting there, was he!

A. No, sir.
He was just saying the meeting would be held in Mid­

field or Lipscomb-—at Lipscomb City Hall.
Q. Is this the leaflet? This the leaflet you are talking 

about? That he was exhibiting? The Thunderbolt?
(demonstrating)
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you see him distribute any other leaflets other 

than this ?
A. No, sir.
Q- And you told him that he gave them this and told 

them to go on over to Lipscomb ?
That correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Stoner: Thank you, sir. That’s all.
(Witness excused.)
Mr. Parsons: May I use this, please? This Thunder­

bolt?
Mr. Stoner: Yes, please.
Mr. Parsons: Have any objection to my introducing 

this?
Mr. Stoner: I was going to introduce it myself, unless 

you want to.
Mr. Parsons: All right.
W e’d like to introduce this into evidence, your Honor.
(Whereupon the document, The Thunderbolt, was marked 

for identification as the Complainant’s Exhibit 1 and was 
received in evidence as Complainant’s Exhibit 1 and said 
exhibit is attached herewith and made a part of this re­
port of proceedings as a true and correct copy of the docu­
ment it purports to be as certified to by this Official Re­
porter.)



[fol. 19] 21
I n t h e  C ircuit Court of J efferson County , A labama 

B essemer D ivision 
Co m plainant ’s E xhibit  1

KENNEDY STARTS SECOND RECONSTRUCTION ACT «EEp«E<>

"Freedom Riders" Burn Bus While Bobby
Kennedy Blames 9 Innocent White Alabamians

A N N IST O N  BUS BURNING 
TRIAL

The bus burning trial w ill be 
in October 30, Robert “ Bobbie 
Socks”  Kennedy, at that trial, 
intends to destroy nine innocent 
White Christian Americans in 
Anniston, Alabama so as to in­
timidate other White Christian 
Patriots throughout the South 
and all over Am erica. He in­
tends to mate an example out 
o f them even though he possess­
es positive proof that they are 
all innocent. Bobbie Kennedy 
and his FBI agents know that the 
communist “ freedom riders’ * 
set the Greyhound bus on fire - 
from  the inside near Anniston 
and that Kenneth Adams and the 
other eight defendants are all 
completely free o f  guilt.

Attorney General Kennedy

However, i f  Kennedy and his 
underlings could get convic­
tions, they believe it would help 
them to get an even higher per­
centage o f  the negro vote* in the 
large Northern states and all o f 
the others. Then, in 1964, Rob­
ert’ s b r o t h e r ,  John Kennedy, 
would get 100% o f the negro vote 
instead o f o ily  85%. That is why 
Bobbie Kennedy, the Attorney- 
General o f  the United States, 
and his so-called Justice De­
p a r t  m e a t, are determined to 
convict nine innocent White men 
in U.S. District Court to Annis­
ton and convict them with the 
full knowledge that they are Not 
guilty,

Bobbie Kennedy, J. Edgar 
Hoover, officials o f  CBS-TV, 
the NAACP, CORE and the
Communist party are the ptett 
ers  who conspired to send the 
integrated “ freedom”  buses to 
Alabama to cause trouble, and 
they are all a bunch of outside 
agitators. Quiet integration of 
buses in Alabama had already 
taken place ca a limited scale

without any violence. Diseased 
negro bus passengers had a l­
ready eaten in form erly White 
bus station restaurants and used 
formerly White bus station rest 
room s in violation o f Alabama 
laws, iw t w ith o u t , violence. 
Peacem l integration did not suit 
Robert Kennedy, CORE, et al, 
so they resorted to the loudly 
heralded “ freedom”  rides so 
as to insure violence. They gave 
much advance publicity to the 
so-called freedom riders and 
announced the time schedule of 
their trips. Naturally, a few 
White citizens along the way 
shouted their protests, as they 
had a Constitutional right to do, 
but they were law-abiding and 
did not use violence. However, 
the c o m m u n is t  “ freedom”  
riders on the bus that went to 
Anniston were determined to 
have violence that would get 
them world-wide publicity and 
cursed because the White people 
o f  Anniston had only protested 
in a peaceful way. The commu­
nists have always advocated and 
used violence. The communists 
on the G r e y h o u n d  bus had a 
remedy for the situation. After 
the bus had left the Anniston 
bus station and was about six 
mites out cm the highway, the 
communist “ freedom”  riders 
set the bus on fire from  the 
inside and then falsely accused 
the local White people o f taming 
the bus - an old c o m m u n is t  
trick.

The communist goal is to
destroy ail opposition to forced 
integration and that is  what 
Bobbie Kennedy and the FBI 
are helping diem to do. They 
intend to turn the South over to 
the negro bloc vote as part of 
their c o n s p i r a c y  to subject 
America to the bondage o f a 
communist dictatorship. They 
know that if  they can send nine 
in n o c e n t  White men to the 
f e d e r a l  penitentiary for 25 
years, all resistance to inte­
gration will cease and the White 
race in the South will be wiped 
out with a combination o f  negro 
violence against Whites and the 
injection o f negro blood into the 
White race through interbreed­
ing. The South would then be­
com e another mongrel "Cuba”  
under the communist yoke.

The communists intend to 
force  full integration on the 
White South. They will never be 
satisfied with “ token”  Integra­
tion. They only use “ token”  
m M ag as the opening wedge. 
T im ,  they would push the Whit® 
Saab into the cesspool o f  com ­

plete integration. That is  why 
the communists concocted the 
Anniston bus case. If the.y could 
convict nine White innocent de­
fendants, the' way would then 
be paved for thousands o f  so - 
called freedom buses to roll 
into every city and town in Ala­
bama and other Southern states. 
The c o m m u n is t ,  integrated 
buses would drive into every bus 
station. Droves of communists 
in racially mixed groups would 
pour out of the buses and go 
down the streets integrating 
everything. They would swarm 
into picture shows, private re ­
s t a u r a n t s ,  churches, dance 
halls, sw im m in g  pools and 
everywhere else. Such a black 
plague: would-destroy law and 
order in Alabama and through­
out the South. It would no long­
er be safe for White people to 
appear on the streets of their 
own towns and cities. The ne­
groes with their negro pawns 
would then control the streets. 
If the nine White citizens o f 
A n n is t o n  are convicted in 
federal court for a crim e that 
they did s ®  eotnmit, that is 
what will happen. If the nine 
innocent White defendants are 
found to be Not guilty by the 
trial jury, there will be no more 
t r o u b le -m a k in g  “ freedom”  
rides into Alabama. The object 
o f the so-called “ f r e e d o m ”  
buses is to give freedom to the 
communists to enslave us White 
Christian Americans. That Is 
why the future o f  America, to 
a very large extent, depends 
upon the verdict of the federal 
trial jury in the Anniston “ bus 
burning”  case. A verdict ofNoc 
guilty for the nine innocent 
defendants will be a victory for 
White Christian America and a 
major defeat for the Commu­
nist-Jewish Conspiracy.

The Congress o f  RacialEqual- 
ity (CORE) is the Communist - 
front organization that is being 
used by the Jew-communists 
and sell-out p o l i t i c i a n s  in 
Washington to invade the South 
and force White people to mix 
with black savages. CORE is 
actually directed by Its Execu­
tive Secretary, the Jew Marvin 
Rich. The President of CORE 
is  a negro, James L. Fanner, 
who belongs to many commu­
n is t - fr o n t  organ!
Farmer Is married to a white 
woman and has a mulatto child 
by her, thereby realising the 
dream o f every buck negro.

(continued page 2)

BOBBY KENNEDY vs KENN­
ETH ADAMS
On Sept.-1961, Bobby Kennedy,

Attorney General of the United 
States hurriedly called a press 
conference. Representatives o f 
toe Nations P ress, toe Wire 
Services and T.V. men were 
called in. Everyone wondered 
what toe urgent announcement 
would be. Bobby Kennedy step - 
ed before the microphones, hi* 
boyish hair bob drouping over 
his forehead. Staring straight 
ahead, Kennedy announced the 
indictment of nine Anniston Ala - 
bama citizens for toe burning o f 
a “ Freedom Rider”  bus load­
ed down with communist agita­
tors from New York.

This was an almost unpre­
cedented action. Why had Bobby 
Kennedy personally taken con­
trol o f  the arrest investigation 
and indictment o f 9 white men 
in Anniston, Alabama.

The entire "F reedom  Rider”  
movement was from toe beginn­
ing a pet Kennedy project. Bobby 
Kennedy favored, and had full 
knowledge o f the first Freedom 
Ride bus to leave Washington, 
D.C . He knew that James Peck, 
Dr. Walter Bergman and others 
on toe bus were dyed to toe 
wool, d ed ica ted com m u ois ts . 
But, they were to serve Ken­
nedy’ s purpose. The bus was 
followed by FBI cars and Ken­
nedy Justice Department men 
phoned each city police chief 
along toe route o f  toe Freedom 
a s s  ,Sfe demanded fail police 
p ro tect!*  for the communist 
riders as they r e c k l e s s l y  
m a r c h e  d across the South 
violating Southern Segregation 
laws as well as our traditions
fl:ffSJ& CUStOmS*

The Editor o f  “ U.S. News 
and World Report”  David Law­

rence, wrote. “ There are ru­
m or s that toe demonstrations 
were actually undertaken with
the knowledge, if  not the advice 
o f  the Department o f Justice. 
There is a suspicion growing 
that toe Department o f  Justice 
is  acting as a partisan o f  poli­
tical causes and playing poli­
tics with the whole problem of 
desegregation.”

INCIDENT CREATED

The Kennedy Plan was Diaboli­
cal:

(1) Before he could send armed 
Federal Marshalls and FBI men 
into Alabama - there had to be 
as incident.

(2) T o force the ICC to out­
law Segregation at buses and 
force the closing o f  Colored 
waiting rooms and forcing toe 
Blacks into toe White waiting 
room s -  there had to be an 
incident.

(3) T o  cow down Whiteman 
with brute force, so as to inti­
midate others to cease resist­
ance to Federal Race Mixta* -  
White Patriots had to be arrest­
ed and framed.

In order to receive national 
publicity toe communist free­
dom riders had to have violence 
so  they could bold mass meet­
ing in negro sections of toe 
N o r th  and t h e r e b y  r a i s e  
millions of dollars for more 
race mixing adventures.

This is  toe reason Bobby 
Kennedy sent, the communist 
F r e e d o m  riders rampaging 
torough the South. This is  why 
be has FBI stooges persecuting 
White Patriots in Anniston, Ala­
bama.

(coBtiuued page 2)



[fol. 19a]

" F R I I D O M
{continued)

Farm er Is a friend of Attorney- 
General Kennedy who Is usiaa 
the FBI to an effort to frame 
nite respectable White citizens 
o f  A aa iM o.T be so-called  free­
dom buses were loaded down 
with k n ow n  com xm lsta  and 
com m anst-frcsiters, such as 
James Peck who is  a regular 
writer for several communist 
publications. Instead o f being 
known as "freed om " buses, 
CORE’ S Integrated buses should 
be called communist buses, it 
is  a fact that Attorney-General 
" B o b b i e  Socks”  Kennedy and 
his FBI agents are working in 
alliance with communists to 
carry  out the platform o f the 
Communist Party which pro­
poses to turn the South over to 
black rate; that is  exactly what 
w ill happen if Kennedy, the FBI 
and CORE communists succeed 
in registering and voting every 
ignorant and illiterate negro in 
the South, Their goal is a black 
South under a national commu­
nist dictatorship, A conviction 
o f  the nine Anniston defendants 
would insure the success o f the 
communist race-mixing con­
spiracy In the South.

Robert Kennedy is deter­
mined to sew up the solid negro 
vote p e r m a n e n t ly  for his 
brother and himself. In 1968, 
John Kennedy won’t be able to 
run for re-election, soh isbrot- 
her Robert w ill then be a can ­
didate for President and intends 
to  get elected with the aid of 
the solid: negro bloc vote and the 
bloc votes o f other minorities. 
That is  why Robert has gotten 
the Interstate Commerce Com ­
mission (ICC) to outlaw all Seg­
regation practices in all buses, 
bus station waiting rooms, rest 
rooms and restaurants effective 
not later than January i, iS62, 
with heavy penalties for anyone 
who dares to offer the negroes 
separate facilities. That is why 
Robert Kennedy had his brother 
John to appoint Thurgood Mar­
shall, chief lawyer o f the NAA- 
C P , to be a Judge on the U.S. 
Court o f  Appeals. Bobbie Ken­
nedy and his co-conspirators 
are making an all-out effort to 
keep the solid negro vote by 
destroying the White Christian 
people o f  the South,

The national Democratic party 
#ad the n a t io n a l  Republican 
party are trying to outbid each 
a lter  in their efforts to corral 
the negro vote. In an effort to 
get that black vote, they are 
promising the negroes that they 
will take away all o f the Con­
stitutional rights that we White 
people have and that they will 
strip us Whites o f our GOD- 
given freedoms. Both old part­
ies have promised the negroes 
to take away the White race’ s 
right to survival. They are pro­
mising to give the negroes our 
White women. They tell them 
that they can go to school with 
White girls, sit by White women 
on buses and in restaurants and 
go swimming w ith  th e m . At 
school and public dances, Ken­
nedy, CORE, the NAACP and the 
communists assure the Negro 
that they will have the “ rij$it”  
to dance with White women and 
date them. In plain words, Ken­
nedy, CORE and the FBI de­
generates are promising our 
White women to the negroes in 
return lor their votes. They 
know that eonvictionsda Atm is?on 
w o u ld  Insure the success of 
their evil race-mixing conspir­
acy, That Is why there must be 
No convictions o f the nine inno­
cent White defendants.

Eve® though Robert Kennedy, 
J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI

PAGE TWO THE THUNDERBOLT OCTOBER 1961

RIDERS" BURN BUS

i n t e g r a t o r s  KNOW that the 
"freed om " feas was set or. fire 
from the inside by the CORE 
communist “  freedom " riders, 
they induced a federal grand 
jury to unjustly indict nine inno­
cent White citizens o f  the Annis - 
ton area. The federal grand jury 
in d i c t e d  K e n n e th  Adams, 
W i l l ia m  C h a p p e l l ,  Jerome 
Couch, Jerry Eason, Frank B. 
Johnson, C ecil Lewallyn, Frank 
Tolbert and Jerry Willingham. 
These nine men are leading 
citizens o f Anniston and highly 
respected by their neighbors 
mA the e n t i r e  c o m m u n ity .  
Every one o f them is a Christ­
ian who loves America and his 
White race. They are law-abid­
ing c  i t i z e n s and would not 
violate any law. America needs 
more citizens like them because 
they are Patriots on the order 
o f George Washington, Thomas 
Jefferson and Patrick Henry. 
It is the intent o f Robert Ken­
nedy and the FBI race-m ixers 
to destroy the lives of these 
nine men and then families so 
as to corral the negro vote. 
They have been unjustly indict- 
2d for conspiracy and burning 
a Greyhound bus near Anniston’ 
and conviction would carry pen­
alties o f five and twenty years 
and result in the ruination of 
their lives and the lives o f their 
innocent wives and children. If 
convicted, Kennedy would make 
certain that they never got out 
on parole. It would not be right 
for these r e s p e c t e d  White 
Christian Americans to be de­
stroyed in prison and then- 
wives and children put on relief 
just so that cheap sell-out poli­
tician and low-life tyrant, Rob­
ert Kennedy, can insure his 
future, control o f the negro vote.

The Anniston bus buriTtogcase 
is a political case. That is why 
Attorney-General Kennedy has 
sent his assistant, John Dear, 
from Washington to Alabama to 
unofficially direct the Prosecu­
tion. The trial will be in U.S. 
District Court for the Northern 
District o f Alabama - Arm 1st cm 
Division in the post office build­
ing in Anniston in October

Political
trials are out of place in Am eri­
ca. If Southern Senators and 
Congressmen are as strong for 
Segregation and our Southern 
way o f life as they claim , they 
will be happy to put pressure 
cm Kennedy to stop the perse­
cution o f nine of Anniston’ s 
leading citizens by nonprossing 
the indictments.

The grand jury should have 
indicted Bobbie Kennedy, J. Ed­
gar Hoover, the FBI, certain 
officials of C B S-T V , the NA­
ACP, CORE and the Commu­
nist party for conspiring to 
bum the bus instead of picking 
on nine innocent White men. The 
Kennedys are not willing to use 
force against the communists in 
Laos, Berlin or Cuba, but they 
unhesitatingly use armies of 
f e d e r a l  marshals and FBI 
agents against the White people 
of Alabama. In spite of their 
g ig a n t i c  conspiracy against 
Alabama Whites, and especially 
a g a in s t  the nine A n n is t o n  
Whites, they will never succeed 
in framing the innocent defend­
ants. The nine defendants are 
represented by Attorney J.B. 
S t o n e r  o f A t la n ta  who is 
thoroughly familiar with the 
illegal methods that the FBI uses 
to frame innocent White South­
erners. No amount of FBI sub­
orned perjury will persuade an 
honest jury to convict innocent 
men. When the case goes to 
trial, the evidence will show

4—Stiwtfay, Sspf, 23,1961 EVENING CimOOK

-that K e n n e th  Adams and cite 
bther eight defendants arecom - 
pletely innocent beyondthp sha­
dow of a doubt! BE SURE to 
write your Congressmen and 
Senators about this case NOW!

Join the N ational States Rights 
Party and help us fight such 
outrageous frame ups by the 
traitors m Washington. ■: Join 
now to save America and the 
White Race ,

Kenneth Adams

(continued)
Mr. Kenneth Adams, head of 

Alabama’ s Dixie Klans Knights 
of the Ku Klux Kian is rite main 
target of Bobby Kennedy Mr. 
Adams is a man of great leader­
ship ability and is loved by all 

_nis friends and —Rower3.- Sc-

Beth Sholom Speaker

SM  Rabbinical Student Tells 
Why He Became 'Freedom Rider'

By Anne morgenthaler . . „ ... _ , . , . . , , .Ev#fi!js» ovfteefc §?#?S9fem said Philip Posner who is *am s horn m the closing Yom
His experience as a “ Freedom free on a 5500 bond after Kippur service at the temple.

. ing 40 days in a Mississippi prison. He is a senior at UCLA and 
R.der has brought h.m personal The 50„  of Mr and Isa. also attends the Hebrew U n io n
satisfaction, declared a 22-year- dare Posner, 2312 25th St., Santa College in Hollywood, 
old rabbinical student. Monica, Posner described his ex- Posnfer was arrested July 30

“ I believe the work of ‘Freedom P«iences during the Friday sab- when he sat with Negro men on a 
Riders' has given the Southern bath service at Beth Sholom bench at the railroad station in 

i,„. t- u. Temple. Posner was also singled Jackson. He spent 38 days in a 9 
• g f , .  . , ®P out for the honor of blowing the by 6-foot maximum security cell
mg for his rights as a human at the state prisdn in Parchman,

[Miss. He plans to return for trial 
in a Haynes County court on April 
16.

Describes'Arrest 
“ We knew we were' breaking the 

laws of Jackson, but they are il­
legal laws,” Posner stated. “ A 
railroad station is a place for in­
terstate commerce. We were ar­
rested three minutes after we sat 
down. We did not disturb the 
peace as the arrest warrants 
charged.

“ I was motivated to join the 
Freedom Riders in a concern for 
justice and righteousness. In the 
Jewish faith-there is a belief that 
no person has a right to desist 
from doing work which must be 
done, even if he canpat complete 
the job by himself. In, the Old 
Testament Isaiah commanded 
that we open the blind eyes 
of those who sit in the darkness 
of the prison house.

“ Those who are ignorant have 
called us Communists. But what 
we are really fighting for is to 
make this a true democracy. 
With so many uncommitted na­
tions in the world our country 
.eiyes a poor impression to Negro

m m If
statesmen who cannot eat with 
white people in Washington, D.C
restaurants.

iiiii Riders’ has been effective. Some

1 ■KB! f t - ■ YYy 4 ■ Y. ' ■ 7-..■,;■;■- v.-V-':.. I®#!s

120 train stations have been in­
tegrated and another 20 communi­
ties integrated on their own.” 

Visited %  Rabbi,

naans work in Defending Segre- j 
gallon. Bobby Kennedy even a d -1 
mits that Kenneth Adams was® 
not even near the bus that was 'FREEDOM RIDER' Philip Posner relates his experience During his prison stay Posner 
burned. Kennedy has made the was grim but if has brought him personal satisfaction .aid he and other “ riders”  were 
false charge of ‘ conspiracy* (Evening Outlook Photo.)
against Mr. Adams, hoping that ~ 
paid pimps and FBI planted 
informers will perjur them­
selves and railroad Kenneth 
Adams into a Federal Pene- 
tentiary to serve a 25 year 
sentence. Bobby Kennedy thus 
intends to hold such a con­
viction over the heads of other 
White Patriots as to what will 
happen to them if they do not 
" p e a c e f u l l y  intefgrate with 
Freedom Riders, Sit ins, wade 
ins, kneel ins and School mix­
ing” . WE ARE GOING TO 
FIGHT BOBBY KENNEDY AND 
HIS TRAITOROUS GANG OF 
FEDERAL DICTATORS WITH 
E V E R Y  LEGAL MEANS AT 
OUR C O M  M AND. ARE YOU 
WITH US? IF SO, JOIN WITH 
US TODAY. USE THE COUPON
o n  t h e  B a c k  p a g e  t o
ORDER EXTRA COPIES OF 
T H IS  THUNDERBOLT FOR 
Y O U R  FRIENDS. WE WILL 
HOLD MASS PROTEST MEET­
INGS - IF YOU WANT TO HELP 
IN THIS URGENT WORK. - PICK 
UP YOUR PHONE AND CALL 
ME LONG DISTANCE (Station 
to Station will only cost you a 
few cents) .AND 1 WILL TELL 
YOU WHAT CITY IN NORTH­
ERN ALABAMA WHERE YOU 
CAN MEET WITH US FOR OUR 
NEXT MASS RALLY. TO PRO­
TEST B O B B Y  KENNEDY’ S 
VICIOUS ATTACK ON SOUTH­
ERN W H ITE PEOPLE. WE 
WILL NOT SURRENDER - IF 
YOU WANT TO HELP - PHONE 
ME, DR.EDWARDR. FIELDS 
AT: STATE 7-6818.

Oklahoma
State Organiser Gary Smith 
Announces:

The N.S.R.P. o f  Oklahoma 
is starting an extensive mem­
bership drive here. We will 
appreciate any small personal 
contributions, or help in any 
other way such as suggesting 
new members, moral support, 
and common consideration of 
our views and proposals. This 
appeal is not only to local read­
ers, but to all friends of the 
White Race everywhere. If you 
can help in any way WRITE: 
National States Rights Party 
P. O. Box 774 Cushing, Okla­
homa.

Georgia
Rev. Henry G. White, State 

Chairman announces the ap­
pointment of Miss Letty Jane 
Walraven asGeorgia NSRP Secy 
Treas. Rev. White has had lit­
erature printed for local dis­
tribution and will be able to 
devote full time to organizing 
in the Peach State. A series of 

meetings are being planned. For 
more information write. 
National Slates Rights Party 
P.O. Box 604, Dalton, Georgia

visited by a rabbi 
“ The rabbi got in trouble for 

I visiting us. A member of his 
I synagogue’s board of directors re - 
I signed in protest to the visit. The 
jjews in the South are worried 
I about helping ‘Freedom Riders’
! because they feel there is a great 
j deal of anti-Semitism in the 
[South. They don’t want more ani­
mosity against themselves.

; “ The Negro churches in the 
i South provide the ideas for mera- 
jbers to work for their rights. Ex- 
I cept for a few clergymen like 
j Martin Luther King,. however, the 
leadership is pretty bad.”

Posner said he became inter­
ested in the plight of the Southern 
Negrp during his two-year mem­
bership in the National Associa­
tion for the Advancement of Col­
ored People. The NAACP branch 
met at UCLA until this fall. It 
has been barred from meeting on 
campus this fall.

He related he was not abused 
in prison. The diet was decent al­
though it lacked in protein 
and Vitamin C foods, he stated. .

When he returns for trial on 
April 16 Posner said he expects 
to be found guilty. He believes his 
bond will be raised to $1,500. Mon­
ey for bail and appeal is being 
■posted by the Congress of Racial 
Equality, he said,

Posner is a graduate of Santa 
Monica High School, Santa Mon­
ica City College and he also at­
tended religious school at Beth 
Sholom Temple.



[fol. 19b]

THE THUNDERBOLT

pj)ilabelpf)ta inquirer

CHILDREN

oftheNAACP

Some! imes a pit tare can- speak loutlcr than a thousand 
v uds. We believe that the one above sari. We call it the 

Pace of the NAACP.’ ' This picture shows Thurgood 
Marsha!!, mulatto special counsel for the N AACP, receiv­
ing a special NAACP Life Membership plaque from Kivie 
Kaplan, co-chairman o f the NAACP Life Membership Com­
mittee, while Arthur B. Spingarn, NAACP president looks 
on with approval. Take a good look at this picture. Thur­
good Marshall is no Negro-—he is a mulatto! Spingarn and

OCTOBER 1961

P PK

Workers and farmers fight communism and race mixing. Read-- 
THE THUNDERBOLT, is the official White Racial Organ of the National 
States Rights party. . . .This newspaper is published monthly free 
for members. Subscription rates for non-members is $3 per year. 

■•THE THUNDERBOLT"
P.G. BOX 183 

BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA
Or. Edward R. Fields................ .. ........................................................Editor
ISSUE aS . . . . . » ------ --------------------- • • • • • OCTOBER 1961
Fhone STate 7-6818.

EDITORIAL
My Dear Fellow Americans; 

On this page we give absolute 
proof that theNAACP and CORE 
are NOT negro organizations 
and NEVER have been negro 
organizations. They are Jewish 
organizations. Their officers 
are Jews, their financiers are 
Jews, the entire philosophy be­
hind mongrelization is imbedd­
ed in the e v i l  te n n a n ts  of 
Judaism.

The Jew believes in keeping 
the Jewish race pure. They 
fight against inter-marriage of 
their own people. They live in 
G h e t t o  neighborhoods, keep 
Gentiles out o f their Synago­
gues, stya together in Jewish 
Community centers, send their 
kids to p r iv a t e  J e w is h  Day 
Schools.

BUT THIS SAME FORM OF 
SEPARATION IS ALL TO BE 
FORBIDDEN TO WE WHITE 
P E O P L E . WE ARE TO BE 
THROWN TO THE WOLVESfthe 
negro animals, that is.)

Please read and re-read the 
Philadelphia r e p o r t  on t h is  
page. This Jewish Judge Gold, 
shrugs off the raping o f White 
Christian girls by negro rap­
ists.

The negro who actually is a 
school teacher (perhaps in a 
mixed school) pretended to be a 
policeman when he tricked the 
little girls into getting into the 
car. M o s tC h r is t ia n  Judges 
would have given the negro 
monsters the death penalty -

BUT NOT THE CHRIST HATING 
JEW. The Jew says “ So what 
she was o n ly  a White Christ­
ian.”

This filthy kike. Judge Gold 
actually tells the parents of 
these poor little raped girls, 
“ They will get over it ."  If this 
happened just 30 years ago, the 
White people probably would 
have dragged this rotten Jew out 
o f his black robes and hanged 
him from the nearest tree. But 
our people have weakened and 
if we have but one task left it 
is to give the Whiteman his 
honor, courage and strength 
back.

The satanic Jew is  the mortal 
enemy of the White Race, the 
J ew is o f astatic blood, and hates 
e v e r y t h in g  about the White 
Christian people.

I hope this page shows you 
the depths to which the Jew 
hates our .very being. How he 
finances and rules the organi­
zations seeking the mongreli­
zation o f our children. How to 
his warped mind he gets a per­
verted delight in nigger rapes of 
innocent little White girls. :

O’ GOD - HOW LONG WILL 
THY CHILDREN H AVE TO 
S U F F E R  AT THE HANDS OF 
TH E BLOOOTBURSTY JEW . 
WHITEMAN AWAKE - JOIN, 
WORK AND FIGHT. WE HAVE 
NOTHING TO LOSE BUT OUR 
NEGROES,PORTO RICANS AND 
JEWS. SAVE OUR SWEET IN­
NOCENT L IT T L E  W H ITE

MONDAY MORNING. OCTOBER 2. 1981

Deluge of Protests 
Hits Gold’s Leniency 
On 2 Sex Offenders

Henry Williams. Jr., girls’ 
moleste.r v, ho received leni­
ent treatment.

Judge Joseph E. Gold, who
placed confessed sex offend­
er on 10 years probation.

1 Irate parents voiced indignation Sunday because a con* 
Jessed sex offender was put on 10 years’ probation by Judge 
Joseph Gold in the face of a psychiatrist’s report that, he 
was sane and knew the dif- Goi 7 l i t t l e  girls 
ferenee between right and ••will get over" their experience, 
wrong at the time of the acts, and that he would "take his 

. Assistant District Attorney WU- wllh VVlUiams aart
ham D. Harris, who prosecuted .
the case, said he was deluged RII),Vr'  IN SP0RTS CAR 
with calls from persons "wanting The offenses to which the men 
to know’what we can do about ^  occurred on June
such outrages. * According to authorities, Wil­
li GIRLS.MOLESTED liams. a married man, said that

. The defendant Henry vy,l- he and Green were riding around 
jiams, J r . 24 of 46lh st. near in Williams* sports ear when 
Waja.Uf. pleaded guilty to molest- they decided to visit a West 
mg sexually'wo 12-year-old girls Philadelphia woman friend, 
last siunkier At the, time he The woman Was not at home, 

itaught at Walton. Elementary They cruised the streets. Shortly 
‘ School.28th and Huntingdon sts.. after U P. ,W. they spotted the 
but has sittce been fired by the two girls walking near the inter* 
Board of iducatjon. section of 53d and Woodland sts.

HR companion m the case. The men asked the little girls 
Edward F. Green. %  b! Wilton what they were doing out so late, 
st. near Arch, was sent to Nor- Both men said they were police 
ristown State'Hospital by Judge officers, the authorities continu- 
Gold for 99 dais’ observation. *d. The girls got inside the car.

: Judge Ge:id made his decision-' Williams said they drove to an
while sitting in Quarter Sessions alley near 47th st. and Spring- 
Court. He;is President Judge of field *ve.. where the girls were 
Common Plehs Court 6. forced to disrobe and then at*

tacked
PSYCHIATRIC TESTIMONY The girls’ parents have pro-

Gteen’ssentence was made'tested bitterly the leniency 
despite a repoi'l by Dr. John G shown by Judge Gold.

, TorneV. director of the neuro- • 
psychiatric department of Quar­
ter .Sessions Court, that the man 
needed no further treatment. Dr. j 
Tornev also wrote a report in- j 

. which he said Williams was sane.
In-passing the sentences Judge

REAL
ENEMY IN 
N il ORLEANS
JEWISH WOMEN SAY THANKS

On September 8, L'31. d *  
Greater New Orleans Section 
of National Council of Jewish 
Women thanked sell out city 
o f f i c i a l s  over the way six 
schools were integrated. The 
Jewish Women approved POii.ce 
barracades and .police brutality 
against White people . They ex­
pressed hope that these same 
police terror methods would be 
used to mix the rest of Louis ­
iana.

T h o u s a n t h

Rabbi Emmet A. Frank, 
above, has b e c o m e  the 
Hi.OSesh life membership 
subscriber to the National 
Association tor the Advance­
ment of Colored People, - A c ­

cording So NAACP officials 
in New York.

PAGE THREE

JACK GREENBERG
Succeeds Thurgood Marshall

White Lawyer 
New NAACP 

I Legal Counsel
I NEW YORK, Oct. 5 UB—The 
i National Association for the Ad­
vancement of Colored People has j 
named Jack Greenberg, a white

• lawyer, as its top legal repre­
sentative.

Greenberg, appointed Wednes­
day succeeds Thurgood Marshall, j
a Negro, who had served as the ; 
NAACP’s chef counsel since 1938.

President Kennedy has appoint- 
_ ed Marshal! to the U.S. Court of 
Appeals in the Second Circuit, 
which sits in New York City.

Greenberg. 36, has spent almost 
his entire career on the NAACP 
legal staff and has been Mar­
shall’s chief assistant,

* * *
MARSHALL, asked for com­

ment on the appointment of a 
white man as his successor, said: j 
"As those who are fighting dis* J 
crimination, we cannot afford to j 

I practice it.”
; Mrs. Constance Baker Molly, a ) 
Negro lawyer on the NAACPi 

| staff, was named as Greenberg'sj 
' chief assistant. She represented i 
Negro children in the recently j 

; successful effort .to break schoolj 
; segregation in Atlanta.

Greenberg now has responsibil-! 
ity for more than 400 pending

• civil rights cases involving more 
j than 2.000 persons.

NOW ITS OFFICIAL

We have always maintained 
that the Jew Jack Greenberg 
was real head of the NAACP 
legal attack against the White 
South. Now Its official, with 
Thurgood Marshall, a Kennedy 
Federal Judge - They have come 
out and announced Jack Green 
berg at the head o f  the NAACP 
legal Dept. This leaves them 
wsih .Arthur Spingarn, Jew P re­
sident o f NAACP and Kevte 
Kaplan as head o f the life mem­
bership fund raising committee. 
Thus, the NAACP is an ALL 
Jewish organization with no ne­
groes running it at alL

With CORE, Freedom Riders 
being headed by the l ew Marvin 
Rich - what more do we need 
to know? !i is the evil, C hm t 
hating Jew who is out to de­
stroy the White Race and mon­
g r e l !*  our blood for all time 
ro com e. Now that, we know 
who the enemy is, lets work to 
free America from his commu­
nist rule.



[f ol. 19c]

PAGE FOUR THE THUNDERBOLT

KENNEDY BROTHERS START 
S E C O N D  RECONSTRUCTION
OF THE SOUTH 
The I'Kenneth brothers came 

South, asked for our vote AND 
WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN 
E L E C T E D  WITHOUT THE 
VOTES THEY RECEIVED IN 
THE SOUTH.

Kennedy now has the Soviet 
FBI flooding the South, raiding 
voter register ration offfcies, 

forcing oar vexing officia ls to 
register thousands o f  illiterate 
negroes who cannot read or  
write. They hope to start a 
Second Reconstruction in the 
South. Kennedy wants us to have 
negro Governors, negro Sena­
tors and Congressman, legisla­
tures, Mayors, etc, Kennedy 
seek s  to  force  as under absolute 
Black rate. Take the Atlanta 
vote, Segregationist Maddox re ­
ceived 38,000 White voces, race 
mixed Ivan A l l e n  received 32, 
000 nigger votes, 25,000 Jew 
bloc voces and only a handful 
o f  White voces.

Atlanta is  completely under 
the heel o f  the Jew-negro bloc 
machine. (Never forget the Jew 
bloc vote In your community - 
the Jew sees to it that his wife 
and children i f  they are 18 or 
21 are registered to vote. Then 
the h i g h l y  organized J e w  1 sh  
community votes to the man, 
often achieving 100% turnout.) 
Always remember the Jew is 
the ‘ brains' behind all negro 
attacks cn. White Rights!

Kennedy, who is surrounded 
by Jews, R i b i c o f f ,  Douglas 
Dillon, Goldberg, his speech 
writer, press secy ., etc., are 
a ll Jews - we could go on and 
on listing them as Kennedy has 
placed more Jews in the Gov­
ernment than  any  o t h e r  
American President.

GREATEST SLAP OF ALL

The appointment o f Thurgood
Marshall to a life time, $25, 
000 a year Federal Judgeship - 
was the final, ultimate kick in 
the groin o f a already knocked 
down and battered Southland. 
This is  his final show o f con­
tempt and hatred for our people 
and customs and way o f life. 
It came as Congress recessed 
so White Congressman could 
not protest. Kennedy has proven 
to one and all that he is  the 
lowest, dirtiest, and treasoness 
political rat that ever lived.

’ Kennedy's family is worth 400 
million dollars from  the whisky 
racket. Neither o f the Kennedy 
brothers ever had a job in 
their miserable lives. They sit 
in Washington, their feet on the 
desk, arrogantly giving orders 
that we White People be ground 
into the dirt to be ruled by 
wild, raping negro beasts. ARE 
YOU FED UP TO HERE’ THEN 
JOIN NSRP NOW AND HELP 
FREE AMERICA FROM THIS 
-COURAGE.

KENNEDY'S START SECOND REC
THE PLOT TO IMPOSE "BLACK StTPREMACT" UPON THE SOOTH;...

I t  has n ot boen re p o r te d  by the com m ercial p r e s s , bu t the trou b le -m ak in g , 
a l ie r i^ o o n ^ o lI e y ^ a H o n a y T a s o o la t io n  f o r  the Advancement o f  C o lored  People 
{NAACP) has for  some time been prom oting a plan  w hich, i f  s u c c e s s fu l ,  w i l l  p la ce  
the South ’ s va st negro p op u la tion  (numbering ov er  11 ,00 0 ,00 0 } in  a p o s it io n  o f  
a b so lu te  dominance over the government end in s t i t u t io n s  o f  the Old South. The 
p la n , sim ply , i s  to  arouse the r a o ia l  and p o l i t i c a l  con sc iou sn ess  o f  Southern 
negroes In the .same way they have been aroused in  the North — and to  tra n s la te  
t h is  negro racism  in to  a c t io n  a t the p o l l s  w ith  the id e a  o f  w restin g  p o l i t i c a l  
c o n t r o l  from Southern whites*®®

The key fe a tu re  o f  th is  plan i s  the r e g is t r a t io n  o f  as many Southern n egroes  
as p o s iT S d ^  con n ection  i t  i s  s ig n i f i c a n t  to  not© that during
the past few y e a rs , negro v o te r  r e g is t r a t io n  in  most Southern s ta te s  has been 
q u ie t ly  on the In crea se  - - i n  some oases having d ou b led , t r ip le d  and wore than 
quadrupled a-lnce the la s t  p r e s id e n t ia l  e le c t io n  in  1 9 5 2 * ..S in ce  n egroes  c o n s t i ­
tu te  a very s u b s ta n tia l percentage o f  the S outh ’ s p o p u la tio n , and sine© -many 
Southern communities a c tu a l ly  have more n egroes than w h ite s , th is  means that 
u lt im a te ly , b lo c -v o t in g  negroes under NAACP lea d ersh ip  and a g ita t io n  can and 
w i l l  take over l o c a l  government in  many l o c a l i t i e s  - -u n le s s  something i s  donel 
E qually  im portant, they w i l l  w ie ld  a ba lan ce o f  power in “ XLL "the Southem ~s^ates 
as in  fa c t  they do in  the North a lrea d y  in  many in s ta n c e s .T h e  danger I s  that 
u n less  th is  th rea t I s  headed o f f ,  the South ’ s t r a d it io n a l  "w hite supremacy” w i l l  
n ot o n ly  van ish , bu t w i l l  b© re p la ce d  by  a m ilita n t  ” b la ck  supremacy” . . .

Those who doubt that the p eop le  o f  the South would in deed  ever submit to 
’’ b l io F '^ u ^ e S a cy ^ w o u ld  be w e ll ad v ised  to co n s id e r  the le sso n s  o f  h i s t o r y - -  
p a r t ic u la r ly  in  the l ig h t  o f  re ce n t  developm ents. Because i t  i s  im portant to
note  that w ith in  the memory o f  l i v in g  men, the South d id  undergo a period, o f  
’’ b la ck  supremacy” T~“̂ FoF T d was on ly  75 years ago that” r a d i c a l  N ortherners im­
posed a v ic io u s  regim e o f  F e d e ra lly  e n fo rce d  " in t e g r a t io n ” upon the South under 
which ONLY- negroes (and im ported Northern ’’ l i b e r a l s )  co u ld  vote  and h o ld  o f f ­
i c e .  TfJcT’w hite Southern man or  woman was perm itted  in  those years to  h o ld  o f f ­
i c e ,  v o te , perform  ju ry  duty or oth erw ise  en joy  c it iz e n s h ip  - - th a t 'w a s  the ex­
c lu s iv e  p r iv i le g e  o f  n e g ro e s . In Alabama, South C a ro lin a , G eorgia , Louisiana 
and o th er  Southern s ta te s  the s ta te  c a p ita ls  and le g is la t u r e s  were taken over 
by A fr ica n s  and Northern renegade w h ite s , as were law enforcem ent d u tie s  and 
oth er fu n ctio n s  o f  s ta te ,  country and c i t y  governm ents. This was the very 
apex o f  "b la ck  supremacy” . Two c o a l -b la c k  n egroes  rep resen ted  the s ta te  o f  
M is s is s ip p i in  the U .S . Senate between 1870 and 1880, Buck negroes rep resen ted
the s ta te s  o f  G eorg ia , Souttf C a ro lin a , ATabamsr and F lo r id a  during ' th is  p e r io d -----
in  the House o f  R epresen tatives in  W ashington. On one o c c a s io n , 5 years a f t e r

To many misguided Northerners the term, "White 
Supremacy” , describes a h atefu l, un~Aznorioan 
in s titu tio n  under which b igoted , prejudiced and 
ignorant Southerners oppress and abuse negroes, 
and otherwise deny them "equ a lity ” . But today 
there are s t i l l  men and women liv in g  in  the 
South who oan remember the time when Northern 
rad ica ls  o f  another day imposed a regime o f 
"BLACK SUPREMACY” upon the South under which no 
Southern white man or woman could vote , hold 
o f f i c e  or enjoy citizen sh ip  — a regime under 
which the negroes pictured on th is  page actually  
represented the state o f  M ississipp i in  the 
U»S. Senate. . . »

the end o f  the C iv i l  War, tne great J e ffe rso n  D avis h im se lf was ou sted  from 
h is  seat in  the U .S. Senate by  a r a d ic a l  northern  m a jo r ity , and a negro as b la ck  
as the ace o f  spades r e p la ce d  him as Senator from M is s is s ip p i . . . I t  was under 
these c o n d it io n s , w ith  w h ite Southerners n ot a llow ed  to  v o te , and w ith  negroes 
s i t t in g  as th e ir  re p re se n ta t iv e s  In the U .S . Congress, th a t fa n a t ic  Northern 
p o l i t i c i a n s  pushed through the infamous (and. i l l e g a l )  14th Amendment in  1868. 
E lg h ty -s lx  years  l a t e r , in  May o f  1954, n ine  modem fa n a t ic s  s i t t in g  on the U .S .

Roy Frankhouser Hearing Soon
Roy Frankhouser will have a 

jury hearing the end o f October 
in the H a r t s f i e l d  - Jenkins 
frame up case in Atlanta. Since 
our last Thunderbolt (#34) De­
tective Capt. R.E. Little (who 
assaulted Frankhouser - but 
claim s Frankhouser assaulted 
him) has added a new charge 
against Roy Frankhouser. He 
now c h a r g e s  that an empty 
fountain pen which can hold a 
tear gas cartridge is a case 
o f “ carrying a pistol without 
a license” . Another obvious 
frame up in ‘ East Berlin’ At­
lanta. Roy Frankhouser is now

free on Bond waiting his hear­
ing. Mr. Frankhouser is con­
tinuing his full time efforts o r ­
ganizing for N.S.R.P. This case 
has not discouraged him, but 
has instilled in him a further 
desire to continue with a re ­
doubled all out drive.

Mr. Frankhouser wishes to 
thank his many friends who have 
contributed, to his defense. We 
have retained two o f the South’ s 
foremost defenders o f White 
Patriots. Attorney James R. 
V e n a b l e  and Attorney J. B, 
Stoner. We therefore are con­
fident o f eventual acquittal to

this case. Contributions in this 
case should be sent direct to 
National States Rights Party. 
P.O. Box 783, Birmingham, Ala. 
We hope to be able to announce 
a V ictory in this case next 
month.

P.S. Note photostatic clipping of 
Jerry Dutton who also was as­
saulted by Dect. Little. Little 
him self lias been arrested by 
county authorities and is now 
awaiting trial.

Pennsylvanian Faces Trial 
In Klan Rally Flareup Here

An organizer for the National States Rights Party Friday waived 
preliminary hearing in Municipal Court and was ordered held for 
Fulton Criminal Court on charges of assault and battery and carrying 
a pistol without a license.

Judge James E — > vo,ved state law and asked thatWebb assessed
a $200 bond against Roy E. 
Frankhauser Jr., 21, of Reading, 
Pennsylvania.

Frankhauser was taken into 
custody Sept. 4 at a Ku Klux Klan 
rally at Almond Park. Detective 
Capt. R .E. Little charged Frank­
hauser kicked him on the leg and 
said he subsequently found a 
fountain pen-type tear gas gun 
in Frankha user’s possession.

Attorney James Venable said as
the scheduled hearing began that 
be understood the charges la­

the hearing be waived.

N.S.R.P. 

Stands I f

It’s iesulurs



[fol. 19d]

< ' ; r  HUNPERBOLT PAGE FIVE

INSTRUCTION OF No Mixing 
for Caroline

Supreme Court were destined to use the same 14th Amendment (along with the writ­
ings o f  certain pro-Communiat socio log ists) as the basis for foroing compulsory 
mongrellzation once again upon the South*,*

Due to the courageous e ffo rts  o f aroused Southern whites and the old Ku Klux 
Klan, the South eventually wrested p o lit ic a l control away from negro and carpet­
bag ru le , thus ending the era o f "b lack  supremacy" and restoring majority rule 
( i . e .  "white supremacy"). But within recent years Northern radicals in league 
with the NAiCP and other sim ilar groups have -undertaken a revived campaign to 
impose a new "b lack  supremacy" upon the South. This time they are using Sup­
reme Court decrees instead o f Federal bayonets to enforce their plan. And in ­
stead o f defranchising white voters, they are seeking to achieve the same goal 
through propaganda — mainly in the form of appeals for "to lerance", "moderation" 
"brotherhood", and other thinly disguised brain-washing d evices.. .The idea is  to 
take over the p olls  before white Southerners re a lize  what has happened...

of all Students to Wash­
ington DjC. s c h o o l s  are ne­
groes, As a resutt, Washington 
is the black capital o f  America, 
Its public schools are the low­
est, vilest, filthiest, and most 
disorderly in the nation. White 
girls, EVEN TEACHERS have 
been raped right an school pro­
perty. Elsenhower sent his 
grandchildren to an all White 
private school in Virginia,
Now com es P resident Kennedy, 

He is  building a private school 
. room right in the WhJtehouse, 

desks, blackboards and all. He 
has picked out a few White 
c h i l d r e n  from very wealthy 

1 families to attend these pri­
vate White classes with C aro- 

j line. Kennedy, with all Ms many 
| millions, looks down upon the 
| Patriotic W M teworkingclassof 
> people and feels we are no better 

thatmlggers.
How long will White people 

permit this arrogant snob to 
lord his wealth and‘ socia lposi­
tion’ over decent, honest hard
working Americans?

Atlanta
TO MUCH LAW ENFORCE­
MENT?

At one time America was 
sh ort ' o f Law Enforcement in 
the Far West and other places. 
Much has been written about 
lawlessness and the courageous 
Sheriffs and Deputies, vigilan- 
ties and other groups which 
fought for law and order.

Now there is  a reverse 
situation. Many cities have built 
huge police departments, (A t­
lanta Georgia has the largest 
police force of any city of its 
size in the WORLD). Atlanta

The above C u rr ie r  k Ivee  draw in g  (made in  1872) warn r e c e n t ly  fe a tu r e d - in . the n eg ro  m a ga zin e ,
EBONY. It shows s e v e n  n e g r o e s  who r e p r e s e n te d  th e  s t a t e s  o f  M is s is s ip p i ,  Alabama, South Car­
o l i n a ,  F lo r id a  and G e o rg ia  in  C on gress  d u r in g  th e  infam ous, era  o f  "B la ck  Supremacy” w h ich  
f o l l o w e d  th e  C i v i l  War® I t  s e r v e s  as a rem in d er t o  S ou th ern  b la ck s  t h a t  th e y  w ere on ce  dom i­
n an t i n  th e  S o u th , and ca n  be a g a in  i f  th e y  a l l  becom e a c t iv e  v o t e r s *  Ons n eg ro  m agazine,
r e c e n t ly ,  c a r r ie d  an NAACP c h a r t  show ing th e  trem endous in crea se  in  S ou th ern  n eg ro  v o t e r  r e g -  1 has policemen lo ite r in g  on 
i s t r a t i o n  in. ra o e n t  y e a r s ,  and p r e d ic t e d  a v a s t l y  s tep p ed -u p  r e g i s t r a t i o n  in  th e  near f u t u r e . . .  1 ! ; ‘cr .̂,.COI?!f!L

... <}are not miss the cross walkor
CONCLUSION: Today a r e la t iv e l y  sm all number1 o f  m ilita n t , b lo c -v o t in g  North­

ern negroes are a lready  w ie ld in g  a dangerous balance o f  power in  the North. In 
the South, where they are v a s t ly  more numerous (and where the w hite pop u la tion  
i s  r e la t iv e l y  much sm aller than in  the North) negroes can and w i l l  l i t e r a l l y  
take over i f  the NAACP plan fo r  mass negro vo ter  r e g is t r a t io n  i s  implemented - -  
as in  fa c t  i t  i s  a lready  in the p rocess  o f  being implemented. Southerners must 
n ot fo r g e t  that o n ly  75 years ago r a d ic a l  Northerners turned the South in to  an 
in t e r r a c ia l  H ell where "b la ck  supremacy" was the order o f  the day - - o r  that a 
new crop  o f  Northern r a d ic a ls ,  backed by the U.S. Supreme Court, and spearheaded |tw’ coM d^ore^reranniJai 
by the N AACP, is  in ten t upon r e s to r in g  the b less in g s  o f ' a  new, stream lined v e r -  It has now come to the point 
sion  o f  "b la o k  supremacy" once again in  the South. Thus, whether w hite Souther- when we must seek new meas- 
ners want i t  o r  n o t ,  they are being fo r c e d  to choose between "w hite supremacy" W es to protect the people Iron 
o r  "b la ck  supremacy"; there i s  no m iddle ground. One thing i s  c e r ta in : u n less the police. Russia is anarmed 
the S ou th 'a cts  at once to head o f f  the forthcom ing massive negro r e g is t r a t io n  at camp with i « s ° f “  few and or

spit on the street for fear of 
immediate a r r e s t .  Constitu­
tional Rights are surpressed 
when White pickets are immed­
iately arrested if they protest 
mixing. White rallies are sur­
rounded by police cars and pat" 
die wagons to intimidate the 
public from “ peaceibte assem-

tha p o l l s ,  the issu e  
"w hite supremacy"

Police Officer 
Faces Charge 
Of Assault
Atlanta Police Capt, R. E. Little 

will appear in Decatur Recorder's 
Court next Thursday to face 
charges of assault and battery 
against a teen-ager arrested on 
Aug. 30 when Atlanta desegre­
gated four high school-.

Capt. Little has posted $300 
bond on a warrant sworn out by 
Jerry Dutton, one of four DeKalb 
County youths arrested near Mur­
phy High School and sentenced 
to 30 days in the city stockade. 
The four were released several 
days later.

Dutton charges he was man­
handled by Capt. Little.

Tiie officer will appear before 
| Recorder’s Court Judge John E. 
j Veraer, who signed toe warrant. 
I It was served on Capt. Little by 
> the Fulton County sheriff’s office.

w i l l  be d ecid ed  fo r  them--and i t  won’ t be in favor o f

Loiilsfille
O.K, FOR NEGROES TO AGIO­
TAGE?

Everytime one of us Segre­
gationists speaks out for White 
Rights or hands out a leaflet - 
the Race mixing enemy shouts 
“ agitator, agitator” .

One o f the worst race mixing 
traitors is one Barry Bingham 
owner o f monopoly control of 
both L o u i s v i l l e  newspapers,
“ The C o u r i e r  Journal”  and 
evening “ Tim es” . Mr. Bingham 
who braggs how quickly his 
city sold out to the mixers 
states! “ Without the agitation 
(sit - ins. stand-ins, wade-ins, 
etc) I don't think we would 
have come along quite so fast".

This low life scoundrel would 
take away all our rights and 
give our d a u g h t e r s  to the 
niggers, WHITE MAN STAND
UP AND FIGHT THIS DiSPIC- R iot Arrest sv Oh ;
ABLE ENEMY. Ons incident cor i-,o to

T̂~ Negro Ceps
WHrrE YOUTH CLUBED 
UNCONSCIENCE BY BRUTA' 
NEGRO COPS

The White group should hay- 
stormed and stomped these Me 
gro c o p s  into the g u t t e r  
Negroes will beat our Whin 
policemen and rescue their owi 
kind when a rrested .STAND UI 
AND FIGHT NEGRO COPS. NC 
WEGRO EVER HAS THE RIGH? 
TO ARREST A WHITE MAN 
The Negro says he will “ mee 
violence with violence." Wha 
more do we need to hear? Thi 
means open war fare betwee 
Blacks and Whites. ARE YO! 
R E A D Y  TO DEFEND YC--E 
n\vN PEOPLE?



[fol. 19e]

THE. THUNDERBOLT OCTOBER 1961

THE INTERNATIONAL IEW
The Jew in Character and 

Business

Ti ll ',  Jew to again l»eing singled out for critical at­
tention throughout the work!. His emergence 

in the financial, political and social spheres has been 
so complete and spectacular since the war, that his 
place, jxjwer and purpose in the world are being given 
a new scrutiny, much o f it unfriendly. Persecution is 
not a new experience to the Jew, but intensive scrutiny 
of bis nature and super-nationality is. He has suf­
fered for more than 2,000 years from what may be 
called the instinctive anti-Semitism of the other races, 
but this antagonism has never been intelligent nor has 
it been able to make itself intelligible. Nowadays, 
however, the Jew is being placed, as it were, under the 
microscope of economic observation that the reasons 
for his power, the reasons for his separateness, the rea­
sons for his suffering may be defined and understood.

In Russia he is charged with being the source of 
Bolshevism, an accusation which is serious or not ac­
cording to the circle in which it is made; we in Amer­
ica, hearing the fervid eloquence and perceiving the 
prophetic ardor of young Jewish apostles of social and 
industrial reform, can calmly estimate how it may be, 
In Germany he is charged with being the cause of the 
Empire’s collapse and a very considerable literature 
has sprung up, bearing with it a mass of circumst antial 
evidence that gives the thinker pause. In England he 
is charged with being the real world ruler, who rules 
as a super-nation over the nations, rules by the power 
o f gold, and who plays nation against nation for hi - 
own purposes, remaining himself discreetly in the back­
ground. In America it is pointed out to what extent 
the elder Jews of wealth and the younger Jews of 
ambition swarmed through the war organizations— 
principally those departments which dealt with the 
commercial and industrial business of war, and also 
the extent to which they have clung to the advantage 
which their «x|« rienee as agents of the government 
gave them

in simple words, the question of the Jews has come
m the fore, but like other questions which lend them­
selves to prejudice, efforts will be made to hush it up 
as iniftolitie for ojx-n discussion. If, however, expert 
erne Juts taught us anything it is that, questions4 has 
suppressed will sooner or later break out in undesirable 
and unprofitable forma.

The Jew is the world’s enigma Poor in his masses,
fee yet controls the world's finances. Scattered abroad 
without country or government, he yet presents a 
unity of race continuity which no other people has 
achieved. Living under legal disabilities in almost, 
every land, he haft In-come the power behind many a 
throne. There are ancient prophecies to the effect 
that the Jew will return to his own land and from that 
center rule the world, though not until lie has under­
gone an assault by the united nations of mankind.

The single description which will include a larger 
percentage of Jews than members of any other race is 
this: he is in business. It may be only gathering rags 
and selling them, but he is in business. From the sale 
of old clothes to the control of international trade and 
finance, the Jew is supremely gifted for business. More 
than any other race he exhibits a decided aversion to 
industrial employment, which he balances by an 
equally decided adaptability to trade. The Gentile 
boy works his wav up, taking employment in the pro­
ductive or technical departments; but the Jewish boy 
prefers to ltegin as messenger, salesman or clerk— 
anything—-so long as it is connected with the commer­
cial side of the business. An early Prussian census 
illustrates this characteristic: of a total population of 
269,400, the Jews comprised six per cent or 16,164. 
Of these, 12,000 were traders and 4,164 were workmen. 
Of the Gentile population, the other 94 per cent, or 
153,236 people, there were, only 17,000 traders,

A modern census would show a large professional 
and literary class added to the traders, but no diminu ­
tion of the percentage of traders and not much if any 
increase in the numlx-r of wage toilers. In America 
alone most of the big business, the trusts and tin- 
banks, the natural resources and the chief agricultural 
products, especially tobacco, cotton and sugar, are 
in the control of Jewish financiers or their agents. 
Jewish journalists are a large and powerful group here. 
‘Large numbers of department stores are held by 
Jewish firms,”  says the Jewish Encyclopedia, and 
many if not most of them are run under ( lentile nane-s. 
Jews are the largest and most numerous landlords of 
residence property in the country. They are supreme 
in the theatrical world. They absolutely control the 
circulation of publications throughout, the country. 
Fewer than any race whose presence among us is 
noticeable, they receive daily an amount of favorable 
publicity which would be impossible did they not have 
the facilities for creating and distributing it them­
selves. Werner Sombart, in his “ jew  and Modern 
Capitalism” says, ‘ ‘ If the conditions in America con­
tinue to develop along the same lines as in the last 
generation, if the immigration statistics and the pro­

introdectioa
HENRY FORD -  ONE OF THE 
GREATEST AMERICANS WHO 
EVER LIVED;

Henry Ford was tfeefirat ®  
produce an automobile for die 
masses. He started with nothing 
and built m e o f  the W orld's 
g r e a t e s t  business empires. 
Ford found that at every turn, 
Jews were always fighting him. 
On one hand they would try and 
buy him out, while as the other 
they were trying to force him 
out o f business. The Jews hated 
to see a Gentile becoming so 
successful. Hairy Ford also 
saw that the Jew w a s  also, 
cheating, tying and swindling 
the average White American in 
the street. In 1919 the Ford 
Motor Co., started an official 
c o m p a n y  newspaper, “ The 
Dearborn Independent", to ex­
pose the Jews. He hired a staff 
o f experts cn the Jewish menace 
headed by William J. Cameron. 
Ford spent millions Investigat­
ing every aspect o f the Jew and 
his activities. In 1922 All this 
informaticn was combined into 
book form in four volumns under 
the title “ The lnte  r n a t i o n a l  
Jew” . Now, for the first time 
in 40 years we will reproduce 
to serial form the entire Ford 
r e p o r t  on the J e w s .  This 
material is so rare that we have 
been offered up to $200 for our 
copy of the Ford report. At ene 
time “ The International Jew " 
was on sale at every local Ford 
Dealers showroom. Long since 
oat Trf-r^t'^BBb'desntuyBl bjr  
the Jews, you will want to save 
this valuable mate rial and order 
extra copies for your friends.

portion of births among all the nationalities remain 
the same, our imagination may picture the United 
States of fifty or a hundred years hence as a land in­
habited only by Slavs, Negroes and Jews, wherein the 
Jews will naturally occupy the position of economic 
leadership. Sombart is a pro-Jewish writer.

I he question is, i f  the Jew is in control, how did it 
happen? This is a free country. The Jew comprises 
only about three per cent of the population; to every 
Jew there are 97 Gentiles; to the 3,000,000 Jews in the 
United States there are 97,000,000 Gentiles. If the 
Jew is in control, is it because of his superior ability, 
or is it because of the inferiority and don’t-care at­
titude of the Gentiles?

it would be very simple to answer that the Jews 
came to America, took their chances like other people 
and proved more successful in the competitive struggle. 
But that would not include all the facts. And before 
a more adequate answer can be given, two points 
should be made clear. The first is this: all jews are 
not rich controllers of wealth. There are poor Jews 
aplenty, though most of them even in their poverty are 
their own masters. While it may be true that the 
chief financial controllers of the country are Jews, it is 
not true that every Jew m one of- the financial con­
trollers of the country. The classes must be kept 
distinct for a reason which will appear when the 
methods of the riefi Jews and the methods of the 
poor Jews to gain power are differentiated. Sec­
ondly, the fact of Jewish solidarity renders it. difficult 
to measure Gentile and Jewish achievements by the 
same standard. When a great block of wealth in 
Anieriea was made possible- by the lavish use of an­
other block of wealth from across the seas: that is to 
say, when certain Jewish immigrants came to the 
United States with the financial backing of European 
Jewry behind them, it would. Is- unfair to explain the 
rise of that class of immigration by the same rules 
which account for the rise of, say, the Germans or 
the Poles who came here with no resource but their 
ambition and strength. To be sure, many individual 
Jews come in that way, too, with no dependence but 
themselves, but it would not be true to miy that the 
massive control of affairs which is exercised by Jewish 
wealth was won by individual initiative; it was rather 
the extension of financial control across the sea.

That, indeed, is where any explanation of Jewish 
control must begin. Here is a race whose entire 
period of national history saw them peasants on the

land, whose ancient genius was spiritual rather than 
material, bucolic rather than commercial, yet today, 
when they have no country, no government, and are 
persecuted in one way or another everywhere they go, 
they are declared to be the principal though unofficial 
rulers of the earth. How does so strange a charge 
arise, and why do so many circumstances seem to 
justify it?

Begin at the beginning. During the formative 
period of their national character the Jews lived under 
a- law which made plutocracy and pauperism equally 
impossible among them. Modern reformers who are 
constructing mode! social systems on paper would do 
well to look into the social system under which the 
early Jews were organized. The Law of Moses made 
a “ money aristocracy,”  such as Jewish financiers form 
today, impossible because it forbade the taking of in 
terest. It made impossible also the continuous en­
joyment of profit wrung out of another’s distress. 
Profiteering and sheer speculation were not favored 
under the Jewish system. There could bo no land- 
hogging; the land was apportioned among the people, 
and though it might be lost by debt or sold under 
stress, it was returned every 50 years to,its original 
family ownership, at which time, called “ The Year «f 
Jubilee,”  there was practically a new social beginning. 
The rise of great landlords and a moneyed class was 
impossible under such a system, although the interim 
of 50 years gave ample scope for individual initiative 
to assert itself under fair competitive conditions.

If, therefore, the Jews had retained their status as 
& nation, and had remained in Palestine under the 
Law of Moses, they would hardly have achieved the 
financial distinction which they have since won. Jews 
never got rich out of one another. Even in modern 
times they have not become rich out of each other but 
out of the nations among whom they dwelt. Jewish 
law permitted the Jew to do business with a Gentile 
on a different basis.than that on which he did business 
with a brother Jew. What is'called “ the Law of the 
Stranger”  was defined thus: “ unto a stranger thou 
mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou 
shalt not lend upon usury.”

Being dispersed among the nations, but never merg­
ing themselves with the nations and never losing a very 
distinctive identity, the Jew has had the opportunity 
to practice “ the ethics of the stranger”  for many cen- 

Tuhes. Being strangers among 'strangers, and often' 
among cruelly hostile strangers, they have found this 
law a compensating advantage. Still, this alone would 
not account for the Jew’s preeminence in finance. The 
explanation of that must be sought in the Jew him­
self, his vigor, resourcefulness and special proclivities.

Very early in the Jewish story we discover the tend­
ency of Israel to be a master nation, with other 
nations as its vassals. Notwithstanding the fact that 
the whole prophetic purpose with reference to Israel 
seems to have been the moral enlightenment of the 
world through its agency, Israel’s “ will to mastery” 
apparently hindered that purpose. At least such 
would seem to be the tone of the Old Testament. 
Divinely ordered to drive out the Canaanites that 
their corrupt ideas might not contaminate Israel, the 
Jews did not obey, according to the old record. They 
looked over the Canaanit ish people and perceived 
what, great amount of man-power would be wasted if 
they were expelled, and so Israel enslaved them— “ And 
it came to pass, when Israel was strong, that they put 
the ( ’anaanites to tribute, and did not utterly drive 
them out.” It was this form of disobedience, this 
preference of material mastery over spiritual leader­
ship, that marked the beginning of Israel’s age-long 
disciplinary distress.

The Jews’ dispersion among the nations tempora­
rily (that, is, for more than 25 centuries now) changed 
the program which their scriptures declare was divinely 
planned, ami that dispersion continues until today. 
There are spiritual leaders in modern Judaism who 
still claim that Israel's mission to the nations is spir­
itual, but their assertions that Israel is today fulfilling 
that mission are not as convincing as they might he if 
accompanied by more evidence. Israel throughout 
the modern centuries is still looking at the Gentile 
world and estimating what, its man-power can he 
made to yield. But the discipline upon Israel still 
holds; he. is an exile from his own land, condemned to 
be discriminated against wherever he goes, until the 
time when exile and homelessness shall end in a re­
established Palestine, and Jerusalem again become the 
moral center of the earth, even as the elder prophets 
have declared.

Had the Jew become an employe, a worker for 
other men, his dispersion would not probably have 
been so wide. But becoming a trader, his instincts 
drew him round the habitable earth. There were 
Jews in China at an early date. They appeared as 
traders in England at the time of the Saxons. Jewish 
traders were in South America 100 years before She 
Pilgrim Fathers landed at Plymouth Rock. Jews 
established the sugar industry in the Island of St. 
Thomas in 1492. They were well established in 
Brazil when only a few villages dotted the eastern 
coast of what is now the United States. And how far-



[ f o l .  1 9 f ]

OCTOBER 1961 THE THUNDERBOLT PAGE SEVEN

By Henry Ford FOUNDER .  FIRST president o f  t h e  f o r d  m o t o r  c o m p a n y

Ht FEARED NO MAN
ll'cy penetrated when once they came here is indicated 
by tilt' fact that tlie first white child horn in ( icorgia 
was a Jew—-Isaac Minis. The Jew’s presence round 
the earth, his clannishness with his own people, made 
him a nation scattered among the nations, a corpora­
tion with agents everywhere.

Another talent, however, contributed greatly to his 
rise in financial power— his ability to invent new de­
vices for doing business. Until the Jew was pitted 
against, the world, business was very crudely done. 
And when we trace the origins of many of the business 
methods which simplify and facilitate trade today, 
more likely than not. we find a Jewish name at the end 

, of the clue. Many of the indispensable instruments 
of credit and .exchange were thought out by Jewish 
merchants, not only for use between themselves, but 
to cheek and hold the Gentiles with whom they dealt. 
The oldest Sail of exchange extant was drawn by a Jew 
—line Simon Rubens. The promissory note was a 
Jewish invention, as was also the check “ payable to 
hearer.”

An interesting bit of history attaches to the “ pay­
able to bearer” instrument. The Jews’ enemies were 
always stripping them of their last ounce of wealth, yet 
strangely, the Jews recovered very quickly and were 
soon rich again. How this sudden recovery from loot­
ing and poverty? Their assets were concealed under 
“ hearer” and so a goodly portion was always saved, 
in an age when it was lawful for any pirate to seize 
goods consigned to Jews, the Jews were able to protect 
themselves by consigning goods on policies that bore 
no names.

The influence of the Jew was to center business 
around goods instead of persons. Previously all 
claims had been against persons; the Jew knew that 
the goods were more reliable than the persons with 
whom he dealt, and so he contrived to have claims laid 
against, goods. Resides, this device enabled him to 
keep himself out, of sight as much as possible. I his 
introduced an element, of hardness into business, inas­
much as it was goods which were being dealt in rat her 
than men being dealt with, and this hardness remains 
Another tendency which survives and which is of ad- 

: vantage in veiling the very large control which Jew- 
i have attained, is of the same origin as “ bearer” bills, 
\ it permits a business dominated bv Jewish capital to 

appear under a name that gives no hint of Jewish 
• emit ml.

The Jew is the only and original international cap­
italist, but as a rule he prefers not to emblazon that 
faet upon the skies; he prefers to use Gentile banks 
and trust' "companies as his agents and instruments. 
The suggestive term “ Gentile front” often appears in 

connection with this practice.
The invent ion of the stock exchange is also credited 

to Jewish financial talent. In Berlin, Paris, London, 
Frankfort and Hamburg, Jews were in control of the 
first stock exchanges, while Venice and Genoa were 
openly referred to in the talk of t he day as “ Jew eit ics” 
where great trading and banking facilities might be 
found. The Bank of England was established upon 
the counsel and assistance of Jewish emigrants from 
Holland. The Bank of Amsterdam and the Bank of 
Hamburg both arose through Jewish influence.

There is a curious fact to he noted in connection 
with the persecution and consequent wanderings of 
the Jews about Europe and that is: wherever they 
wandered, the center of business seemed to go with 
them. When tin- Jews were free in Spain, there was 
the world's gold center. When Spain drove out the 
Jews, Spain lost financial leadership and has never 
regained it. Students of the economic history of 
Europe have always been puzzled to discover why the 
center of trade should have shifted from Spain, Portu­
gal and Italy, up to the northern countries of Holland, 
Germany and England They have sought for the 
cause in many things, but none has proved com­
pletely explanatory. When, however, it is known t hat 
the change was coincident with the expulsion of the 
Jews from the South and their flight to the North, 
when it is known that upon the Jews’ arrival the 
northern countries began a commercial life which has 
flourished until our day, the explanation does not 
seem difficult. Time and again it has proved to be 
the faet that when the Jews were forced to move, the 
center of tin* world’s precious metals moved with them.

This distribution of the Jews over Europe and the 
world, each Jewish community linked in a fellow­
ship of blood, faith and stiffeimg with every other 
group, made it possible for the Jew to be international 
in the sense that no other rare or group of merchants 
could be at that time. Not only were they every­
where (Americans and Russians are cverywhen . too) 
but they were in touch. They were organized before 
the days of co i i sc ions internal ional commercial organi­
zations, t hcv were hound together by the sinews of a 
common hie. It was observed by many writers in the 
Middle Ages l tiat the Jew- knew more of what was 
tfans;tinug m Europe than the governments did. They 
tdsn had belter knowledge of w hat was iikelv to occur.
riscv knew

did. H-
more about 
information

at
the ) t

•li I
impart

group to group, country to country. In 
mav be said thus t• • have originated unruns

S :i i •
. u. r
iced, 1 
riolls lv

-men
from

Jcr lr

the

financial news-letter. Certainly the information they 
were able to obtain and thus distribute was invaluable 
to them in their -arecnlctive enterprises Advance 
knowledge was an immense advantage in (lays when 
news was scarce, -low and unreliable.

This enabled Jewish financiers to become the agents 
of national loans, a form of business which they en­
couraged wherever possible. 1 he Jew has always de­
sired to have nations for his customers. National 
loans were facilitated by the presence of members of 
the same family of financiers in various countries, thus 
making an interlocking directorate by which king 
could be played against king, government against 
government, and the shrewdest use made of national 
prejudices and fears, all to the no small profit of the 
fiscal agent.

One of the charges most commonly made against 
Jewish financiers today is that they still favor this 
larger field of finance. Indeed, in all the criticism that 
is heard regarding the Jew as a business man, there is 
comparatively little said against, him as an individual 
merchant serving individual customers. Thousands 
of -mall Jewish merchants are highly respected by 
I heir trade, just as tens of thousands of Jewish families 
are respected as our neighbors. The criticism, insofar 
as it respects the more important financiers, is not ra­
cial at all. Unfortunately the element of race, which 
so easily lends itself to misinterpretation as racial prej­
udice, is injected into the question by the mere fact 
that the chain of international finance as it is traced 
around the world discloses at every link a Jewish cap­
italist, financial family, or a Jewish-controlled banking 
system. Many have professed to see in this circum­
stance a conscious organization of Jewish power for 
Gentile control, while others have attributed the cir­
cumstance to Jewish racial sympathies, to the con­
tinuity of their family affairs down the line of descent, 
and to the increase of collateral branches. In the old 
Scriptural phrase, Israel grows as the vine grows, ever 
shooting out new branches and deepening old roots, 
hut always j»trt of the one vine.

The Jew’s aptitude for dealing with governments 
may also be traced to the y* nrs of his persecution. He 
early learned the power of gold in dealing with mer­
cenary enemies. Wherever lie went, there followed 
him like a curse the aroused antipathy of other peoples. 
The Jew was never popular ns a race; even the most 
fervid Jew will not deny that, howsoever he may ex­
plain it. Individuals have been popular, of course; 
many phases of Jewish nature are found to be very 
lovable when known; but never!hcless one of the bur­
dens the Jews have had to bear as a race is tliis burden 
;,f racial unpopularity. Even in modern times, in 
civilized countries, in conditions which render persecu­
tion absolutely impossible, this unpopularity exists. 
An-1 what is more, the Jew has not seemed to care to

cultivate the friendship of the Gentile masses, due 
jierhaps to  the fa ilu res  o f  experience, but due 
more likely to his inborn persuasion that be belongs to 
a superior race. Whatever the true reason, he has 
always placed his main dependence on cultivating 
friendship with kings and nobles. What cared the 
Jew if the people gnashed their teeth against him, 
so long as the king and the court were his friends? 
Thus there was always, even through most of the 
severely trying times, “ a court Jew,”  one who had 
Itought by loans and held by the strangle-hold of debt 
an entrance to the king’s chamber. The policy of the 
Jews has always been to “ go to headquarters.”  They 
never tried to placate the Russian people, but they did 
endeavor to enlist the Russian court. They never 
tried to placate the German people, but they did suc­
ceed in permeating the German court. In England 
they shrug their shoulders at the outspoken anti-Jew 
reactions of the British populace— what care they? 
Have they not all of lorddom at their heels, do they not 
hold the strings of Britain’s purse?

Through this ability of theirs to "go to headquar­
ters” it is possible to account for the stronghold they 
got u[H»n various governments and nations. Added to 
this ability was, of course, the ability to produce what 
the governments wanted. If a government wanted a 
loan, the Jew at court could arrange it through Jews 
at other financial centers and political capitals. If one 
government wanted to pay another government a debt 
without risking the precious metal to a mule train 
through a roblier-infested country, the Jew at court 
arranged that too. He transferred a piece of paper 
and tin' debt was paid by the banking house at the for­
eign capital. The first, time an army was ever fed in 
the modern commissary way, it was done by a Jew— 
he had the capital and he had the system; moreover he 
had the delight of having a nation for his customer.

And this tendency, which served the race so well 
throughout the troublous centuries, shows no sign of 
abatement. Gertninly, seeing to what an extent a race 
numerically so unimportant influences the various 
governments of the world today, the Jew' w'ho reflects 
upon the disparity between his people's numbers and 
their power may be pardoned if he sees in that facta  
proof of their racial superiority.

It may be said also that Jewish inventiveness in 
business devices continues to the present time, as 
well as Jewish adaptability to changing conditions. 
The Jew is credited with being the first to establish 
branch houses in foreign countries in order that respon­
sible representatives of the home office might be on the 
gruuild (.aMifg"'tuvuStit. advantage of every opening. 
During the war a great deal was said about the “ peace­
ful penetration”  which the “ German Government” 
had effected in the United States by establishing here 
branch offices and factories of German firms. The 
fact that there were many German branch houses here 
is unquestionable. It should be known, however, that 
they were not the evidence of German enterprise but of 
Jewish enterprise. The old German business houses 
were too conservative to “ run after customers”  even 
in the hustling United .States, but the Jewish firms were 
not, and they came straight to America and hustled. 
In due time the competition forced the more conserv­
ative German firms to follow suit. But the idea was 
Jewish in its origin, not German.

Another modern business method whose origin ia 
credited to Jewish financiers is Hint by which related 
industries are brought, together, as for example, if an 
electrical power company is acquired, then the street 
railway company using the electricity would lie ac­
quired too, one purpose being in this way to conserve 
all the profit accruing along the line, from the origina­
tion of the power down to tin* delivery of the street ear 
ride; but perhaps the main purftose being that, by the 
control of tin* power house the price of current could lie 
increased to the ear company, and by the control of 
th(> car company the cost of a ride could be increased 
to the public, the controllers thus receiving an addi­
tional profit all down the line. There is much of this 
going on in the world today, and in the United States 
particularly. The portion of the business immediately 
next to the ultimate consumer explains that its costs 
have risen, but it. does not explain that the costs 
wen* increased by the owners and not by outsiders who 
were forced to do so by economic pressure.

There is apparently in the world ’today a cefitral 
financial force which is playing a vast and closely or­
ganized game, with the world for its table and univer­
sal control for its stakes. The people of civilized coun­
tries have lost all confidence in the explanation that 
“ economic conditions" arc responsible for all the 
changes that occur. Under the camouflage of “ eco­
nomic law” a great many phenomena have been ac­
counted for which were not due to any law whatever 
except tiic law of the selfish human will as operated 
by a few men who have the purpose and the power to 
work on u wide scale with nations as their vassals.

Whatever else may be national, no one today be­
lieves that finance is national. Finance is interna­
tional. Nobody today Itelieves that international

(continued next page)



[fol. 19g]r*

Henry Ford (coatfnoed)
nance is in Any way competitive. Then* are some 
Kk’pendcnt hanking houses, I Hit few strong itnlepend- 
nt ones. The great masters, the few whose minds 
re clearly the entire play of the plan, control mimcr- 
ua banking bourn's and trust companies, and one is 
i»pd for this while another is uwd for that, but there 
s no disharmony between them, no correction o f each 
>lher*s methods, bo competition in the interests of the 
>usmess world. There is as much unity of policy be- 
,wwt» the principal (tanking bouses of every country 
»«then- m I**tween the various branches o f the United 
states Post Office— and f( >r the same reason, namely, 
hey are ail operated from the same source and for the 

-•»me purpose.
J w t  Indore tin' war Germany twilight very heavily 

*  Atnmran cotton and had huge quantities of it tied 
up here for export. When war came, the ownership 
of that mountainous mass of cotton wealth changed 
in one eight from Jewish names in Hamburg to Jewish 
namm in London. At this writing cotton is selling in 
England for less than it is selling in the United States, 
and the effect of that is to lower the American price. 
When the price lowers sufficiently, the market is 
cleared of cotton by buyers previously prepared, and 
then the price soars to high figures again. In the 
meantime, the same powers that have engineered the 
apparently causeless strengthening and weakening of 
the cotton market, have seized upon stricken Ger- 
-gnanj to be the sweatshop of the world. Certain 
groups control the cotton, lend it to Germany to be 
manufactured, leave a pittance of it there in payment 
for the labor that was used, and then profiteer the 
length and breadth of the world on the lie that "cot­
ton is scarce.”  And when, tracing all these anti­
social and eolossally unfair methods to their source, it 
m found that the responsible parties all have a com­
mon characteristic, is it any wonder that the warning 
which comes across the sea— “ Wait until America 
becomes awake to the Jew!” — has a new meaning?

Certainly, economic reasons no longer explain the 
condition in which the world finds itself today. Neither 
does the ordinary explanation o f  “ the heart less ness o f 
cap ita l,”  Capital has endeavored as never before to 
meet the demands of labor, and labor has gone to 
extremes in leading capital to new concessions— but 
what has it advantaged either of them? Labor has 
heretofore thought that capital was the sky over it, 
am! it made the sky yield, but behold, there was yet an 
higher sky which neither capital nor labor had scon in 
their struggles one with another. That sky is so far 
unyielding.

That which we call capital here in America is usual­
ly money used in production, and we mistakenly refer 
to the manufacturer, the manager of work, the pro­
vider of tools and jobs— we refer to him as the “ capi­
talist.” Oh, no. He is not the capitalist in the real 
sense. Why, he himself must go to capitalists for the 
money with which to finance his plans. There is a 
power yet atrnve him—a power which treats him far 
more callously and holds him in a more ruthless hand 
than he would ever dare display to labor. That, in­
deed, is one of the tragedies of these times, that “ la- 
ttor” and “ capital”  are fighting each other, when the 
conditions against which each one of them protests, 
and from which each one of them suffers, is not within 
their power to remedy at all, unless they find a way to 
wrest world control from that group, of international 
.financiers who create and control both these condi­
tions.

There is a super-capitalism which is supported 
wholly by the fiction that gold is wealth. There is a 
super-government which is allied to no government, 
which is free from them all, and yet which has its ham! 
in them all. There is a race, a part of humanity, 
which has never yet been received as a welcome part, 
and which has succeeded in raising itself to a power 
that the proudest Gentile race has never claimed— not 
even Rome in the days of her proudest power. It is 
becoming more and more the conviction of men all over 
the world that the labor question, the wage question, 
the land question cannot be settled until first of all this 
matter of an international super-capitalistic govern­
ment is settled, ,

“ To the victor belongs the spoils”  is an old saying. 
And in a sense it is true that if ail this power of con­
trol has been gained and held by a few men of a long- 
despised race, then either they are super-men whom it 
is powerless to resist, or they are ordinary men whom 
the rest of the world has permitted to obtain an undue 
and unsafe degree of power. Unless the Jews are 
super-men, the Gentiles will have themselves to blame 
for what has transpired, and they can look for rectifica­
tion in a new scrutiny of the situation and a candid ex­
amination of the experiences of other countries.

. . .  ,i M.r a  >m

(DON’T MISS THE NEXT ISSUE WHEN HENRY 

FORD TELLS WHAT MADE GERMANY TURN 
AGAINST THE JEW AFTER WORLD WAR I) 

Extra Copies 10 For $1,00,

40 For $3.00, 80 For $5.00, 400 For $20.00.

New Orleans Meeting Success
MS a H H

f T"r

N.S.R.P.

C©r®mc5i|

Frankhovser

Speaks

W Internal's 

Monument
On Friday September 8,1961, 

at 3; 00 P.M. 2 representatives 
o f the National States Rights 
Party, Mr. Roy James Leabart 
and Mr. Albert Joseph Belsoin 
p i c k e t e d  the Orleans Parish 
School Board office at 703 Car- 
rodelet St. N.O. La., calling cm 
the school board to resign.

The La. Legislature has add­
ressed this board out of office 
a number of times and oily the 
cold steel o f the F ederal bayonet 
holds them in power.

The New Orleans Police de­
partment represented by 2 offi­
ce rs  o f  the so called phoney 
'* Inteligence Division” , made 
it plain about 30 minutes after 
they started that they would be. 
arrested if  they didn’ t stop. 
Faced with arrest for exercis­
ing their constitutional rights 
they had to step. The high school 
situated next dew  reportedly

c la ir  told them that their rights 
were not valid during the inte­
gration cris is . Mr. Leahart in­
formed the police that just as 
Gov. Faubus o f Arkansas said 
a fe w  days e a r l i e r  that the 
people o f  Hungary may still live 
underCommunlsmbut that didn’ t 
mean they likea u.

We may live under Integration, 
but we will never like it.

The “ Tim es Picaune” which 
always prints every little detail 
about integration activities and 
points out every angle o f their 
side, never gave this activity on 
behalf o f the white race a men­
tion.

The New Orleans members 
o f the La. NSRP. will continue 
to resist integration knowing 
full well that their resistance is 
part o f a gigantic struggle to 
save all white Americans from 
mongrelization.

Portrait Of 

Leader

detained its pupils for 30 nain  ̂ Anyone to La. and especially 
utes to avoid their being let: out ~ *' ~  ® -*r
in the middle o f the picket line.

This story was mentioned as
W.D.S.U. TV and pictures of the 
picketing were on W.W.L..TV 
in New Orleans.

After leaving the scene, Mr. 
Leahart and Mr. Be Isom went 
to Police Hq, to protest to the 
Supt. o f Police Mr. JcsephGiar- 
russo, their not being able to 
exercise t h e i r  constitutional 
rights. The >$upt. was no* in and 
Intelligence fSic) Capt. T ras-

the New Orleans aTiaJiffibTrantir 
to do something to help save 
their race and nation should 
contact the La. NSRP at Box 
4342 New Orleans 18, La. for 
Race, - Nation - Faith.

Signed

R.J. Leahart, Secy. 
The NSRP also distributed 100 

\ Thunderbolts around each o f  6 
schools that were to be kite - 
grated. The work was done 
house to house on Labor Day.

■S I S

IRVING THACKER

SUBSCRIBE 1 0 1  

m m  MISS ANOTHER 

"THU iD llBOLT” NOW 

ENTERING OUR I I I  

YEAR Of C O N IlieO IS  

PUBLICATION

p .

(Mai! To)
NATIONAL 

STATES 
RIGHTS 
PARTY
0 ,  Box 783, Birmingham, Ala.

name

ADDRESS

Phone ST 7-6818 end We Will Bit! You,

g Thacker was born in 
Hindman Ky. 1903, his parents 
were o f the Christian Faith and 
were decendants o f  the early 
settlers o f  Old Virginia. Attend­
ed public schools and taught 
one year o f  Elementary school 
at the early age o f 18 years, 
Ended his teaching career early 
and entered the Armed Forces 
(US Army) was Honorably Dis­
charged after 3 years service, 
Then worked as salesman and 
collector for many years in 
Kansas City, Mo.

Moved to Ohio in 1946, where 
he has lived and worked ever 
since. Has beat active in num­
erous Patroitic organizations 
such as The Constitution Society 
o f Ohio, etc. An active member 
o f  the J u n i o r  O r d e r  United 
American Mechanics at pre­
sent Treasurer o f the Dayton 
Council, Over the past years 
has held numerous state and 

local offices in the j  r. O.U.A.M.
Dissalifted with the leader­

ship of the republican Party 
after the death o f Sen. Robert 
A. Tall, And finding the Demo­
crat p a r t y  l e a d i n g  us into 
Socialism. Mr. Thacker could 
not support either major party. 
The B l a c k  Monday Supreme 
Court (decision o f 1954 com ­
pletely destroyed his faith In 
either the Democrat or  Repub­
lican pan ics far I knew either

o f them could have enfiuencec 
this Court and caused theCoun 
not to render the unconstitu­
tional decision.

Seeing the need for a new' 
Political party and finding the 
NSRP to his liking he joined 
to March 1959.

In School my favorite subject 
was history, he is proud o f our 
f o r e f a t h e r s  who struggled 
against insurmountable odds to 
build this Great nation o f  ours 
Mr. Thacker says “ N o w  ap­
proximately 175 years from  the 
time our Constitution was put 
into effect, we find ourselves 
governed by O fficials, Who are 
so  weak as to succumb to the 
threat o f  any Minority at home 
or abroad. Unless we talk! a 
new Political Party and elect 
men and women to leadership 
with the faith and vision of. our 
forefathers, our C o u n t r y  is 
doomed and our grandchildren 
will live under Communism.”  

(Irving Thacker, Soldier, Bus- 
-inessman. E d u c a t o r ,  and Pat­
riot, the New LeaisE reed Out to 
Rebuild a Nation.)

The Ohio Branch o f National 
States Rights Party meets re­
gularly in Dayton, Ohio. All 
Ohio supporters should find out 
how they can help by w riting,. 
National States Rights Party, 
Ohio Unit, Box 42, Walnut St., 
Sta., Dayton 2, Ohio.



21

[fol. 19]

In the Circuit Court of J efferson County, A labama 
B essemer D ivision

Complainant’s E xhibit 1



22

[fol. 20] Mr. Parsons: Mr. Misso. Officer Misso. 
The Court: All right, sir.

Me. P hilip L. Misso having been called as a witness on 
behalf of the Complainant herein, and having been first 
duly sworn according to law, was thereupon examined and 
testified as follows:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Mr. Misso.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Give us your full name and address, please.
A. Philip Misso, Philip L. Misso. I live at 1609 57th 

Street, the City of Birmingham.
Q. And by whom are you employed and in what capacity, 

please.
A. City of Fairfield, Alabama; patrolman.
Q. I see.
Last night, October 11, at about 7 :30 or a quarter till 

eight, were you on duty in Fairfield?
A. Yes, sir; I was.
Q. And where were you on duty at that time, please.
A. In the 5300 Block of Valley Road.
Q. Did you see either one of these parties, Edward R. 

Fields or Robert Ellsworth Lyons at that time?
A. Yes, sir, I did.
Q. Which one did you see?
A. I saw both. Both of them. Both of the gentlemen.
Q. I see.
Will you tell us what transpired at that time?
A. I heard someone call for an officer and I crossed the 

street and Mayor Smithson was over there and Mr. Lyons 
was there. He was distributing these handbills. I arrested 
Mr. Lyons; took him across the street and put him in the 
patrol wagon.

Q. Is that the handbill that you speak of?
A. YTes, sir. This is the Thunderbolt.



23

[fol. 21] Q. The Thunderbolt?
A. Yes.
Q. That it?
A. Yes.
Q. All right.
Did you hear any conversation between Mr. Lyons and 

the people around him there ?
A. No, sir.
Q. You did not?
A. I did not.
Q. Did not hear any conversation?
A. No, sir.
Q. You just saw him handing out those ?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Parsons: That’s all.
The Court: Answer Mr. Stoner’s questions.
A. Yes, sir.

Cross examination.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Did you by any chance search any automobiles there 

at the scene of the arrest ?
A. Not at this time. I didn’t. No, sir. I did earlier in 

the afternoon.
Q, You did earlier in the afternoon?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I see.
Have you read this copy of the Thunderbolt, this Thun­

derbolt here?
A. No, sir. I have not.
Q. You don’t know whether there is, whether it is any 

invitation to that, to any meeting—you don’t know if there 
is any invitation to any meeting last night in here or not, 
then?

A. I have read it since last night.
0. Well, is there anything about a meeting in Fairfield 

in it? In that?
A. I didn’t see anything.



24

[fol. 22] Q. There was no attempt to hold a meeting in 
Fairfield, was it ? By these two defendants ?

A. I don’t—I couldn’t testify as to that. They were in 
the presence—

Q. You didn’t see them holding a meeting, did you?
A. There was no meeting held. They were there.
Q. And they did route people to the other meeting place?
A. I didn’t hear them inviting them.
Q. You didn’t hear anything like that?
A. No.
Q. You just called them when they told you to make an 

arrest?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who told you to make the arrest?
A. Mayor Smithson was across the street and I went 

over and arrested Mr. Lyons.
Q. On what charge did he tell you to arrest him?
A. Contempt of court. By reading this—I had read this 

injunction myself.
Q. Yes, sir.
And Mayor Smithson told you to arrest Mm?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On the charge of contempt of court?
A. He told me to arrest him.
Q. I see.
This the only leaflet Amu suav out there last night in the 

hands of either one of these gentlemen here or Dr. Fields 
or Mr. Lyons?

Is that correct ?
A. That is the only one I sarv last night.
Q. I see.
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Stoner: That’s all.
(Witness excused.)
The Court: All right, sir.
Let me see Exhibit 1.
(Court Examines Complainant Exhibit 1.)

[fol. 23] Mr. Stoner: If I may—
The Court: Yes, sir.



25

Mr. Stoner: If I may interrupt, your Honor.
The Court: All right.
Mr. Stoner: There is nothing, your Honor, in the

Thunderbolt about any meeting in Fairfield.
The Court: It is in evidence, Mr. Stoner. It speaks for 

itself.
Mr. Stoner: Yes, sir.
The Court: All right, sir.
Call your next witness, Mr. Parsons.
Mr. Parsons: Mr. Morris. Chief Morris.

[fol. 24] Ms. Clyde Morris called as a witness on behalf 
of the Complainant herein, and having been first duly 
sworn according to law, was thereupon examined and testi­
fied as follow s:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Chief, will you give us your name and address, please, 

sir?
A. Clyde Morris, Chief Officer, Bessemer, Chief Deputy 

in charge of the Bessemer Division of Jefferson County.
Q. Chief, will you tell— Were you over in the 5300 block 

of Gary Avenue in Fairfield yesterday evening around 
seven-thirty or a quarter of eight ?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you at that time see— Well, let me ask you this, 

first:
Prior to that time, had you seen or talked to either one 

of these parties, Edward E. Fields or Eobert Ellsworth 
Vines?

A. Yes, sir.
I served an injunction on Mr. Fields at 415 41st Street, 

Ensley, yesterday, about ten minutes until twelve.
Q. Yes, sir.
Did you have any conversation with him at that time ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You did?
A. I did.



26

Q. Will you tell us what was said?
A. Yes, sir.
He said: “What’s this for?”
I said: “ It ’s an injunction against a meeting in Fair- 

field, tonight.”
“What if I decide to have one!” He said.
I said, “Well, come on out and see what will happen.”
And, I said, “ and that’s a good way of breaking in jail.”
And so he kept on following me out there and talking and 

I told him:
“Don’t just keep talking. Just talk to the telephone post 

out there; you’ll get more information out of that than 
[fol. 25] you would out of me.”

By Mr. Parsons, continuing:
Q. All right.
Did you see him again before seven-thirty?
A. No.
Not until they brought him over to the wagon.
Q. Then you did— Will you tell us what transpired then 

about seven-thirty, that evening ?
A. Yes.
When he brought him over I told him:
“ Didn’t I tell you to stay out of Fairfield?”
He said: “Yes. You told me that.”
And he said: “ All I ’m doing is directing them over to 

Lipscomb.”
Q. Did you see what they were doing before they were 

brought over there?
A. They were congregating across—congregated across 

the street, milling around; a fairly good crowd.
Q. Were they over there in the crowd across the street?
A. I am sure they was. I didn’t see them, recognize them, 

over there but they did bring them from across the street.
Q. I see.
Brought them over, brought them from the crowd across, 

over there?
A. Yes.



27

Q. A crowd had congregated across the street from the 
meeting place, the proposed meeting place!

A. Yes.
Q. I see.
All right.
Mr. Parsons: Your witness.

Cross examination.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Chief, do you find anything in the injunction that said 

that Dr. Fields and Mr. Lyons couldn’t come into the City 
of Fairfield, last night?

A. That is up to the Judge to determine about that.
[fol. 26] Q. Well, you made the statement to Dr. Fields, 
you told Dr. Fields, you made the statement to Dr. Fields 
that he should stay out of Fairfield ?

A. I did tell Dr. Fields that; yes.
We didn’t want any trouble over there. We try to keep 

down trouble in this Cut-off. Wre don’t want these people 
coming in here creating any trouble in our county. W e’re 
not—•

Mr. Stoner: Your Honor, I object to him expressing 
all these kind of opinions.

The Court: Yes, sir.
Don’t volunteer, Chief Morris.
A. All right, sir.

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. You said, you admit that you told him to stay out of 

Fairfield ?
A. Yes, sir.

_ Q- Do you think that you had a right to tell an American 
citizen that he can’t come into Fairfield?

Mr. Parsons: We object to that, your Honor. We object.
The Court: You don’t have to answer that, Chief Morris.
That is an improper question, Mr. Stoner.
Mr. Stoner: It seems to me that it’s violating his Con­

stitutional rights. Excuse me, your Honor.



By Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. How many police officers were at the scene there last 

night ?
A. I don’t know. I didn’t count them.
Q. How many of your officers were there?
A. I imagine there was 12 or 15.
Q. And were any police officers there from the City of 

Birmingham?
A. I couldn’t answer that.
Q. Did you see any F.B.I. agents there?
A. I did not.
Q. You did not.
Did you see any leaflet passed out by Dr. Fields or Mr. 

Lyons other than this Thunderbolt?
A. No, sir.

[fol. 27] Q. Did you hear what they were telling other peo­
ple that came up ?

A. I heard what they told me when they came across the 
street.

That’s all I heard. I can’t testify to what happened across 
the street because I wasn’t over there.

Q. I just wanted to know what you actually heard.
What did they tell you when they came across the street?
A. They said they were over there to ask the people to 

go on to Lipscomb and they were trying to get the crowd 
over to Lipscomb.

Q. They told you, then, that they— They didn’t say any­
thing to you to indicate that they were trying to violate 
the ordinance ?

A. I would think so because they knew they didn’t have 
any business in Fairfield last night.

Q. That’s all.
Thank you.
The Court: Anything further, Mr. Parsons, from this 

witness ?
Mr. Parsons: I don’t believe so, your Honor.
The Court: All right, Chief. You may stand aside.
(Witness excused.)



29

[fol. 28] Charles L. W ood having been called as a witness 
on behalf of the Complainant herein, and having been first 
duly sworn according to law, was thereupon examined 
and testified as follows:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Have you given your name and address, Mr. Lvons?
A. Wood!
Q. I mean, Mr. W ood!
A. No.
Q. Would you tell the court your name and—your full 

name and your address, please, sir?
A. Charles L. Wood. I live at 209 7th Street, Fairfield 

Highlands.
Q. By whom are you employed and what capacity, please, 

sir?
A. I am employed by the City of Fairfield as a police 

officer.
Q. Were you on duty in Fairfield around seven-thirty last 

night ?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. And what place were you on duty at that time?
A, At that time I was in the 5300 block of Valley Road.
Q. Did you see any of these people—any of these pieces of 

literature here at that time ?
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. Will you tell us the circumstances?
A. Yes, sir.
Well, I heard a commotion across the street. I started 

over there and I saw this gentleman here being brought 
over by two officers.

Q. Which gentleman ?
A. Him. (indicating)
Q. The first gentleman ?
A. The first one here.
Q. Nearest to you?
A. Sir?
Q. The one nearest to you?
A. Yes, sir.



30

[fol, 29] (Indicating Dr. Fields)
The Court: Let the record show he pointed to Fields.

By Mr. Parsons, continuing:
Q. At that time what—
A. At that time I went across the road, Yalley Road, over 

into the parking lot and two other officers had Mr. Lyons. 
They were taking him across the road. Sergeant Bishop 
and I started looking through the cars for anything we 
could find, pamphlets or magazines and what have you, and 
we ran across a white ’59 Ford with these Thunderbolts in 
it. There were at least a hundred or more. I never did 
count them.

I know there was quite a few of them in the car.
I was instructed to check the car, by Sergeant Bishop.
Q. Did you find anything else besides the Thunderbolts 

in the car ?
A. Yes. Yes, sir.
Q. All right.
A. I found four shotgun shells in the glove compartment.
Q. Would you—
A. One of these shells—
Mr. Stoner: Your Honor. I object to that. That is 

irrelevant, incompetent, immaterial for this—
The Court: Over-ruled.

By Mr. Parsons, continuing:
Q. I think this—I show you these—
A. One of the shells was a rifle slug; the other three were 

normal, regular shotgun shells. I have them in this envelope 
here I turned over to the clerk on the desk. The shells 
are in the envelope and sealed—he sealed them in the en­
velope.

Q. Will you identify those as being the—
A. I put a mark on each one, a check mark on these 

shells.
Q. One on each one of these?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. This is the rifle slug—



31

A. This is the rifle slug I found in the ear. We searched 
the car; the front seat and couldn’t find anything else other 
than that.

Q. What kind of shot, of shells are those, can you tell?
A. I don’t know, sir; this is a number 8 Buck, but I don’t 

know what these are. These two. This is a rifle slug here, 
(indicating)
[fol. 30] Mr. Parsons: We introduce those into evidence, 
your Honor, and offer them into evidence as City’s Ex­
hibits 2, 3,4, and 5.

The Court: All right, sir.
(There having been no objection, the items referred to, 

having been marked as Complainant’s Exhibits Numbers 
2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively, for identification, were then re­
ceived in evidence as Complainant’s Exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5 
respectively, and made a part of this record. Their nature 
being such that they cannot be copied into this report of 
proceedings, the said exhibits will be forwarded by the 
clerk of this court to whichever court appeal may be taken.)

By Mr. Parsons, continuing:
Q. Did you see Dr. Fields then—did you see Dr. Fields 

do anything at that time ?
A. No, sir; I didn’t.
Q. You just saw him there. You didn’t see him do any­

thing ?
A. No, sir. I saw him there but I hadn’t seen him do any­

thing.
Q. All right.
Answer this gentleman’s questions.

Cross examination.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Were you standing in front of the car wash place 

right on the sidewalk in front of it when you first saw Dr. 
Fields ?

A. I was on the sidewalk but I was just a little off from 
the building; I wasn’t directly in front.

Q. You were on the same side of the street as the car 
wash?



32

A. That’s right.
Q. You saw Dr. Fields being brought across the street 

from the other side, is that correct ?
A. Yes, sir.

[fol. 31] Q. I see.
When you went to Dr. Fields’ car, was anyone in his car? 
A. No, sir. Not when I got there.
No, sir.
Q. Did you have a search warrant to search it with ?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you take those Thunderbolts because you con­

sidered them to be illegal?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What about the shotgun shells?
Why did you take them?
A. The rifle slug in Alabama is illegal.
Q. Now these other shotgun shells that are colored red— 

they are not illegal, are they?
A. No, sir.
Q. What color is the shotgun shell that has the—that 

apparently has the rifle slug in it ?
A. Green.
Q. Green. It ’s green.
A. It’s green? Yes, sir. Green.
Q. And the others are all red?
A. Yes.
Q. That right ?
A. Yes. That’s right.
Q. Where in the car did you find them?
A. All in the glove compartment.
Q. Did you find any kind of a gun?
A. No, sir ; I did not.
Q. Did you see Dr. Fields passing out any copies of any 

publication or literature or leaflet?
A. No, sir, I didn’t.
Q. Did you hear him saying anything to anyone standing 

around ?
A. Not to my recollection. No, sir.
Q. Where are all the Thunderbolts that you took out of 

his car now?
A. Turned into the office. They are still in the office at 

the, in the City Jail.



33

[fol. 32] Mr. Stoner: That’s all. Thank you sir.
The Court: Anything further from this witness!
Mr. Stoner: No, sir.
Mr. Parsons: I believe no.
The Court: All right.
You may stand aside.
(Witness excused.)
Mr. Parsons: Your Honor, I would like to recall Officer 

Misso.
The Court: All right.

P hilip L. Misso having been previously sworn as a wit­
ness on behalf of the complainant herein was recalled for 
further examination and was examined and testified fur­
ther as follows:

Further direct examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
The Court: You are still under oath, Mr. Misso, from 

your previous testimony. Have a seat.
A. Yes, sir.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Mr. Misso, had you looked into this matter—had any­

thing to do with this matter earlier in the evening?
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. In the course of your activities, did you notice the 

car of Dr. Fields ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you notice anything that—
Will you tell us what you saw in that car?
A. Yes, sir.
Approximately one-thirty yesterday afternoon I relieved 

our two detectives down at the car wash in the City of Fair- 
field in the 5300 Block of Valiev Boad, and I was watching 
the door that goes to the upstairs part of McGregor’s Car 
Wash when a gentleman who identified himself to me as Dr. 
Fields and this—
[fol. 33] Q. Is he here?



34

A. Yes, sir.
Q. In here?
A. Yes.
Q. All right.
A. And Mr. Lyons.
At that time, Mr. Lyons did not say who he was and 

another gentleman, a black-headed white man. And they 
wanted to go into the building.

I told them that they couldn’t go into the building; that 
there was an injunction against them and he—Dr. Fields— 
instructed this other gentleman, whom I don’t see in court, 
to go across the street and bring a flag and he brought the 
flag and a shotgun that was wrapped up. I asked him what 
it was and he said it was a shot gun.

And said that the other gentleman had stayed in the 
building the night before and needed the shotgun for pro­
tection.

Q. I see.
What kind of car was this Dr. Fields in?
A. It was a white 1959 Ford.
Mr. Parsons: I believe that is all. You can examine.

Further cross examination.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Have you read the injunction?
A. Why, yes, sir, I read the injunction.
Q. Did you find anywhere where it said that Dr. Fields 

or anyone else couldn’t go into the building during the day 
yesterday ?

A. The building was pad-locked and the injunction was 
on the door. My orders were to keep everybody out.

Q. Did you discuss this situation yesterday any time with 
Mayor Smithson?

A. No, sir. Personally, I did not; no, sir.
Q. Who did you receive your orders from?
A. The Chief of Police.
Mr. Stoner: That’s all; thank you.
The Court: All right, sir.
(Witness excused.)



35

[fol. 34] Mr. Parsons: The City will recall Mr. Wood. 
The Court: All right, sir.

Charles L. W ood having been previously sworn as a wit­
ness on behalf of the complainant herein was recalled for 
further examination and was examined and testified further 
as follow s:

Further direct examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Mr. Wood—
The Court: You are still under oath from your previous 

testimony, Mr. Wood.
A. Yes, sir.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Mr. Wood, will you tell us what type of or describe 

the automobile that you found these shot gun shells in, 
please, sir ?

A. It was a 1959 Ford, four door; it was white; a four 
door.

Q. All right, sir.
Mr. Parsons: That’s all I wanted to ask him.
The Court: All right, sir.
Mr. Stoner?
Mr. Stoner: Yes, sir.

Further cross examination.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Do you know the address of McGregor’s Car Wash?
A. I am not sure of it, but I believe I do. I don’t know, 

I don’t recall ever seeing a—
Q. Do you know if it’s the same address as specified in 

the injunction here?



36

A. The only address that I have ever seen on the build­
ing was 5329. I have never noticed any other number on it 
since I have been working for the City.

Q. Did you by any chance— can you by any chance recall 
if the correct address of that building is 5327% ?

A. No, sir. I ’ve never seen it. I never seen the address 
other than 5329 on the building.
[fol. 35] Mr. Stoner: That’s all.

Thank you.
Mr. Parsons: All right, sir.
The Court: All right. You may stand aside, Mr. Wood. 

You are excused.
(Witness excused.)
Mr. Parsons: That’s the City’s case, your Honor.
The Court: All right, sir.
Anything for the Respondents, Mr. Stoner?
Mr. Stoner: Your Honor, if they are not going to call 

the Mayor I would like to call him as a hostile witness.
The Court: You may call him but you leave yourself 

open. You take him as your witness,
Mr. Stoner: I can’t treat him as a hostile witness and 

cross-examine him?
The Court: You can announce that and I will give you 

some latitude in your examination of him but he is still 
your witness.

Mr. Stoner: All right.
I would like to call Mayor Smithson.
The Court: All right.

[fol. 36] Mayor Claude Smithson called as a witness on 
behalf of the Respondents herein, having been first duly 
sworn, according to law, was thereupon examined and testi­
fied as follows:

Examination.
By Mr. Stoner:

Q. Mayor Smithson, have you ever had any dealings with 
Dr. Fields, who is sitting right here?

A. Yes.



37

Q. Could you tell us what that business was about?
A. Yes. I can tell you what it was about.
Q. Did he ask you to give him a permit to hold a meeting 

in Fairfield?
A. He didn’t ask me. He wanted to know if I was going 

to give him one.
Q. What was your answer?
A. Well, before I give that, I want to—I would want to 

state—I want to state what transpired before it.
Q. Very well.
Go ahead.
A. Dr. Fields called me. Let’s see—today is Thursday— 

Wednesday— Tuesday'—Tuesday evening at my residence, 
about six o ’clock in the evening, and told me who he was 
and he wanted to know if he was going to be allowed to 
have a meeting in Fairfield.

And I told him that I didn’t care to discuss this matter 
over the telephone and if he would come to my office I would 
be glad to discuss the matter with him.

He told me that he didn’t have time to come to my office.
He says: “ I want to know if you’re going to let me have 

that meeting in Fairfield.”
He said, “ let me tell you this” , he said. “ If you don’t” , 

he says, “ you’ll never be mayor of Fairfield again because 
I ’ll see to it” , he says, “ that you are never the Mayor of 
Fairfield, and”, he says, “ I ’ll smear your name all over the 
State of Alabama.”

And I said, “ Now, Mr. Fields, let me tell you one thing,”  
I says, “ you or nobody else is going to intimidate Claude 
[fol. 37] Smithson” , and I said, “don’t you attempt it.”

And I said, “ especially over the telephone.”
That’s the best I remember I told him.
Well, from that, I—well, I couldn’t—I wouldn’t attempt 

to say in this court room all that he—
Q. Had you had any conversations with him before that 

time?
A. No, sir.
But I wouldn’t attempt to say what he—it’s not my policy 

to say the—
Q. Now, I didn’t ask you what your policy is.



38

A. Now, you asked me a question, to tell you about my 
conversation and I want to finish it.

Q. All right.
A. If it pleases the court.
The Court: All right.
Go ahead and finish it.
A. I wouldn’t attempt to say all that this fellow said over 

the telephone in this court room but it was every vile thing 
that almost a person could think of in just a few minutes 
and then he slammed the receiver up in my face, in my ear, 
at least; and during this conversation of all these vile 
things he said:

“ I ’ll tell you this” , he said. “ I ’ll have that meeting in Fair- 
field and, damn it, you can’t stop me.”

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. Was that before the injunction was issued!
A. Yes.
And I said, “ Well, you won’t have the meeting in Fair- 

field.”
Q. All right.
And by what authority did you—
A. And then-— Now, you wait. You wait. Just a minute. 

Let me get through.
Q. All right. Go ahead.
A. I ’ll let you know when I ’m finished, when I get through 

talking now.
Q. Very well.

[fol. 38] A. You can sit down, if you want to, because it 
may take a few minutes.

Q. I ’ll stand.
The Court: All right, sir. Go ahead.
Mayor, don’t have any—let’s don’t have any colloquy 

going back and forth.
A. Excuse me, Judge.
The Court: Go ahead and say what was said.
A. Yes, sir.
And in about ten minutes he called me back again, very 

mild—in a very mild tone. Very nice. And again he said:



39

“ I want, to talk to you about this meeting.”
And I told him, again, that I didn’t care to discuss the 

matter over the telephone. I said, “ If you’ll come to my 
office, I ’ll be glad to discuss it with you.”

And he said, “well” . He said, “will it do me any good to 
come to your office!”

And I said, “my office is open to anyone at any time.”
And he said, “Are you going to let me have that meet­

ing!”
And I said, “now, I don’t care to discuss this matter with 

you any more over the telephone.”
He said, “Well, I ’ll tell you this” , he said, “ I ’m going to 

have the meeting in Fairfield.”
And I said, “Well, I ’ve already stated my position on 

this matter to you.”
And I told him that I would see him the next morning 

and I didn’t never see him, Dr. Fields, any more during 
the morning.

Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. Have you finished your narrative ?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you have the authority to refuse to allow people 

to hold meetings in Fairfield!
A. Public meetings ?
Mr. Parsons: We object to that. It calls for a legal 

question. It is a legal question, your Honor.
The Court: I will over-rule the objection. If he knows 

whether he has the authority.
[fol. 39] Mr. Parsons: We except.

The Court: And it has been delegated to him. You may 
answer.

A. According to the Code of the City of Fairfield, I have 
the authority to determine whether a public meeting, 
whether public meetings are held in Fairfield.

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. Do you know whether that law is constitutional or not!



40

Mr. Parsons: Object to that, your Honor. That is a con­
clusion.

The Court: I sustain the objection to that. On some of 
these ordinances, even this court doesn’t know if they are 
constitutional or not. That calls for a conclusion of this 
witness.

Mr. Stoner: Well, the basis, your Honor, if I may say 
so, is on the legal presumption that every one knows the 
law, is presumed to know what the law is.

The Court: I don’t think anybody in this country, Mr. 
Stoner, knows now what the Supreme Court of the United 
States will say about any ordinances in the southern state 
municipalities.

Mr. Stoner: I agree with your Honor about that.
The Court: All right, sir.
I sustained the objection; you don’t have to answer that.
Q. All right, sir.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. You refused to tell Dr. Fields—you did not tell Dr. 

Fields that he could have a meeting; did you?
A. When?
Q. When you were—when Dr. Fields and you were talk­

ing on the telephone? You never did tell him that he could 
hold a meeting in Fairfield?

A. No, sir.
Q. Did you?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you tell him that you were not going to allow any 

[fol. 40] segregationists or white supremists to hold meet­
ings in the City of Fairfield?

A. I did not.
Q. Have you made any—have you made that kind of a 

statement to the newspaper men?
A. No, sir.
I have not.
Q. Do you have an ordinance, a city ordinance in Fair- 

field that prohibits the distribution of literature sent by 
permit?

A. (to Mr. Parsons) Want me to answer that?



41

Mr. Parsons: You can go ahead.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. It’s the same as the other question.
Mr. Parsons: You can go ahead and answer it. The 

Judge over-ruled me before.
The Court: You can answer it.
A. Yes. We have an ordinance. It covers more than a 

hand bills; more than handbills.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Were you directing the Fairfield police last night when 

they made the arrests ?
A. No.
Mr. Parsons: We object to that. It calls for a conclu­

sion of the witness and—
The Court: Over-ruled. He’s answered.
Mr. Parsons : Oh.
Mr. Stoner: That’s all.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Parsons: One moment.
The Court: Anything further, Mr. Parsons f 
Mr. Parsons : Yes, sir.
The Court: All right, sir.

Examination.
By Mr. Parsons :

Q. Prior to this conversation with Dr. Fields, had you 
sent him a notice that—

Well, let me ask you this, before that:
Prior to your meeting with Dr. Fields, had there been 

[fol. 41] some pamphlets distributed around the City of 
Fairfield announcing a meeting?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you have one of those pamphlets?
A. Yes.
Q. All right.
Mr. Parsons: We would like to introduce that pamphlet 

as City’s Exhibit 6.



42

The Court: Exhibit 6?
Mr. Parsons: Yes.
The Court: Any objection? Mr. Stoner?
Mr. Stoner: No objection.
The Court: All right.
(Whereupon the document referred to was received in 

evidence and marked as the Complainant’s Exhibit Number 
6 and is made a part of this record, said exhibit being in 
words and figures, as follows, to-wit:
[fol. 42]
In the Circuit Court of J efferson County, A labama 

B essemer D ivision

Complainant’s E xhibit 6
W HITE WORKERS 

MEETING!
* NIGGERS ARE TAKING OVER UNIONS!
* NIGGERS WANT OUR PARKS AND POOLS!
* NIGGERS DEMAND MIXED SCHOOLS!
Communists in NAACP and in WASHINGTON say 
Whites HAVE NO RIGHTS!
The Nigger gets everything he DEMANDS!
White Supremacy CAN be saved!
Whites CAN STOP this second Reconstruction!
Hear Important Speakers from 4 States 
Time—8 P.M. Date—Wed. Oct. 11
Place— 5329 Valley Road 
In Downtown Fairfield, Alabama 
ABOVE THE CAR WASH

THUNDERBOLT Mobile Unit Will Be Parked Out Front!
Sponsored by National States Rights Party 
Box 783, Birmingham, Alabama

PUBLIC INVITED 
Come And Bring Your Friends!

End of Complainant’s Exhibit 6.



43

Q. Would you read that pamphlet, please, sir?
A. “White workers meeting; niggers are now taking over 

our unions; niggers wants our parks and pools; niggers 
demand mixed schools. Communists and NAACP and 
Washington say ‘Whites have no rights’. The niggers gets 
everything he demands. White supremacy can be saved. 
Whites can stop this second reconstruction. Hear important 
speakers from four states. Time: 8 PM. Bate: Wednesday, 
October 11. Place, 5329 Valley Road in downtown Fairfield, 
Alabama, above the car wash. Thunderbolt mobile unit will 
be parked out front. Sponsored by the National States 
Rights Party. Box 783, Birmingham, Alabama. Public in­
vited. Come and bring your friends.”

Q. When did that come to your attention, please, sir!
A. It came to my attention about 3 :30 in the evening.
Q. What evening, please, sir?
A. That was Tuesday evening.
Q. Had a permit been issued by the City of Fairfield for 

the distribution of these pamphlets?
A. No, sir.
Q. Or these leaflets?
A. No, sir.
No permit and no application for one.
Q. Had a permit at that time been issued by the city 

of Fairfield for holding such a meeting?
A. No.
Q. Had there been an application for such?
A. No.
Q. Now after that was brought to your attention, did you 

send a written notice to Mr. Fields or Br. Fields?
A. I had a notice sent to Mr. Fields notifying him to the 

best of my—I don’t have a copy of it—to the best of my 
knowledge the notice notified him that he had already vio­
lated or had violated one of the ordinances of the City of 
Fairfield and that we had an ordinance—we have an ordi­
nance in regard to public meetings in Fairfield and the best 
of my knowledge the ordinance was so stated in this and 
it was carried to him by—in person by a Fairfield officer 
to Mims Street in Powderly.
[fol. 44] Q. I see.

[fol. 43] By Mr. Parsons, continuing:



4 4

And that was prior to this first conversation you had 
with him?

A. Yes, sir.
That was to the best of my knowledge between five and 

five-thirty whenever it was delivered to him.
Q. Yes.
And, thereafter, when was this conversation that you 

had!
A. Possibly six-ten in the evening.
Q. All right, sir.
Mr. Parsons: You may ask him.

Ee-examination.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Mr. Smithson, you quoted this leaflet entitled “White 

Workers Meeting.”
Was that distributed, to your knowledge, at any time, 

after the injunction was issued in the City of Fairfield?
A. I understand that they were put all over Fairfield at 

various times. I don’t know what time they were dis­
tributed. I couldn’t say after—I couldn’t say positively they 
were distributed after the injunction.

I wouldn’t say that.
Q. Who else did you consult with in deciding to get this 

injunction?
Mr. Parsons: What was that question, please ?
Mr. Stoner: “ Whe else he consulted with in deciding to 

go get this injunction” .
Mr. Parsons: “ Who else did he consult with” ? Object to 

that. Irrelevant. Immaterial.
Mr. Stoner: He’s the Mayor and they have a city coun­

cil, your Honor.
The Court: Over-rule the objection.
Mr. Parsons: We except.
The Court: You may answer that, if you can.
A. I consulted with the City Attorney, Mr. Frank Par­

sons, the Chief of Police, Mr. Thomas Ward.



45

Q. Who is Mr. Frank Parsons, please, sir?
A. Mr. Frank Parsons is the City Attorney of the City 

of Fairfield.
[fol. 45] Mr. Parsons: That’s me. That’s me.

Mr. Stoner: Yes, sir.
A. Chief WTard is chief of police.
And Mr. George Farr, city councilman. Mr. W. 0. John­

son, city councilman and Mr. W. Finley—-I can’t think of 
his initial—he is city councilman.

Q. Yes.
And when did those consultations take place?
A. I refuse to answer that question.
Mr. Parsons: No. We—
A. Is it all right ?
Mr. Stoner: Your Honor, I request that you make the 

witness to—
Mr. Parsons: We object to that as being irrelevant, im­

material, your Honor.
The Court: “When did they take place” ?
Mr. Stoner: When did the consultations take place.
Yes, sir.
It is relevant because it has to do with them, about them 

getting the injunction and I want to ask him a question 
next to get him to admit that the night before at the same 
place there was a peaceful meeting and no trouble at all 
and why would he hold consultations to stop the meeting 
on Wednesday night when there had been a peaceful segre­
gationists—white supremasists, supremists meeting on 
Tuesday night.

The Court: I ’ll sustain the obejction to it. I don’t think 
he has to give his reasons.

I ’ll sustain the objection.
Mr. Stoner: As to the time? Your Honor? As to when 

he held the consultations ?
The Court: I sustain the objection.
Mr. Parsons: I object. We object.
The Court: I sustained the objection.

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:



46

Q. Are you familiar with the meeting on Tuesday night 
or the night the States Bights Party at the—up above that 
[fol. 46] car wash place in Fairfield?

A. Nothing but hearsay.
(To the court.)
Can I insert something here, Judge, to make a statement ?
Mr. Parsons: Don’t volunteer.
The Court: I  wouldn’t volunteer any statement, Mr. 

Smithson.
A. Oh.

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. Can you tell us who told you that there was any 

trouble at that meeting?
Mr. Parsons: We object to that. Irrelevant. Immaterial, 

your Honor. I don’t know of any trouble at any meeting 
that I have heard.

The Court: I ’ll sustain the objection.
What’s the relevancy, Mr. Stoner?
Mr. Stoner: To find out what the—to find out what the 

basis was for the injunction in the first place, your Honor.
The Court: The basis for the injunction is set out in the 

bill itself. It is sworn to. It says “ they didn’t apply for a 
permit, in violation of that City Ordinance” .

Mr. Stoner: That’s all.
Thank you.
That’s all, unless, Mr. Smithson, he wants to ask you 

some more questions.
Mr. Parsons: No questions.
(Witness excused.)

[fol. 47] Mr. Stoner: Your Honor, I wish to now place 
Dr. Fields on the stand.

The Court: All right, sir.

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:



47

Dr. E dward R. F ields one of the respondents herein, 
called as a witness in his own behalf and having been first 
duly sworn, according to law, was thereupon examined and 
testified as follows:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Please state your name and address, please, sir?
A. Dr. Edward R. Fields. 1509 Mims Street.
Q. Dr. Fields, when did you first hold your first meeting 

in Fairfield, please?
Mr. Parsons: Object to that. Irrelevant, immaterial, 

your Honor.
Mr. Stoner: As to the basis for them getting, the basis, 

your Honor, for them getting an injunction up there?
The Court: I ’ll over-rule the objection; he may answer 

that.
Mr. Parsons: Except.
A. We held our first meeting Tuesday night, sir, the 

night before this meeting on the hand bill.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Was there any trouble at that meeting?
A. No.
It was a very peaceable, normal meeting.
Q. Were hand-bills such as this entitled “White Workers 

Meeting” distributed in Fairfield to advertise the meeting 
for Wednesday night?

A. They were strewed over a wide area prior to our 
being served with the injunction.

Q. Were any of these leaflets entitled “ White Workers 
Meeting” distributed after the injunction was served—

A. Absolutely—•
Q. —upon you?
A. —not.
Q. Was any meeting held in Fairfield up above that car 

[fol. 48] wash there in Fairfield?



48

Did the States Eights party hold any meeting there at 
all Friday night—I mean Wednesday night?

A. It was Wednesday.
Q. Wednesday?
A. Wednesday night.
Q. Yes.
A. No.
No meeting was held; the meeting was called off and at 

that location—on that occasion and transferred to the Lips­
comb City Park.

Q. Did you talk to Mayor Smithson of Fairfield about 
getting a permit to hold the Wednesday night meeting?

A. Yes.
The night before the Wednesday night meeting, Tuesday 

night, a letter was delivered to me by a Fairfield officer. I 
read the letter.

I had held many letters—many meetings. I was not 
aware of any city ordinances of any kind. I was surprised 
that there were such ordinances.

So, after reading the letter, which stated that since we 
had no permit that his Honor the Mayor said that no meet­
ing could be held.

So I called Mayor Smithson up and I talked to him for 
several minutes. I asked him if he would—I can’t remember 
everything that was said. We both had a lot to say.

I asked him if he would under any circumstance let us 
have a meeting and he said “ absolutely not.”

He would not, under any circumstances, issue us a permit.
Q. And did you use any vile language or curse such as 

he indicated ?
A. I have never in my life used vile language to anyone.
Q. When you went out to Fairfield, Wednesday night, 

what was your purpose in going there?
Mr. Parsons: We object to that, your Honor. It is call­

ing for a conclusion and—
The Court: Over-ruled. He may answer.

[fol. 49] Mr. Parsons: We accept.
A. We sent, I sent two men to the park in Lipscomb 

and—



49

Mr. Parsons: Object. Your Honor, we object to that. 
It is not responsive to the question. It is not responsive, 
your Honor.

A. I went there with Mr. Lyons to—for the sole purpose 
of directing anyone who responded to the handbill before 
the injunction was issued to go to the Lipscomb City Park 
and I informed around ten or twelve people to go to 
Lipscomb for the meeting before I was arrested.

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. Do you know the correct address of the place in Fair- 

field where the National States Bights Party planned to 
hold its meeting Wednesday night?

A. 53271/2 Valley Road.
Q. In other words, you are saying that the address speci­

fied in the injunction is incorrect?
A. That’s right.
Q. After you were served with the injunction, where was 

it then decided that the meeting would be held?
A. Mayor—the Mayor—Mayor Olney was contacted and 

he volunteered both the city hall for the meeting or the 
city park. The park if the City hall is not large enough 
for the crowd. And that the lights would be turned on 
when we got out there.

Q. Is that place in Lipscomb ?
Is that in any part of the Citv of—
A. No.
Q. -—Fairfield?
A. No. It’s not.
Q. What time did you arrive there at the place in Fair- 

field to direct people to the Lipscomb park?
A. Seven—to the best of my knowledge, exactly seven- 

thirty.. I was arrested almost immediately.
Q. How many police officers were there?
A. At least forty.
Q. Had you been by there earlier in the day?
A. Yes, I had.
Earlier in the day; yes.

[fol. 50] Q. Had the injunction said anything about not 
going in Fairfield, or not?



50

A. We had left a care-taker at the hall and I went back 
by to pick him up and he was waiting on the street and I 
wanted to take our literature out of the hall and carry 
it to the new meeting place but I was arrested—I was 
refused entrance to the hall to pick up the literature by 
two officers. The gentleman straight back there, on the 
right side—the other side—the right side of her. Here—I 
was speaking from the rear. On the right.

Mr. Stoner: Can someone identify who that is?
A. Second from the—■ The heavy-set gentleman, red­

headed gentleman.
Q. What’s his name?
A. The one who testified.
Mr. Parsons: Stand up, Mr. Misso.
That the gentleman you are talking about?
Mr. Stoner: Mr. Misso.
Mr. Parsons: Misso, yes.
A. Yes. He was on the door.
Mr. Parsons: All right.

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. He was—that is Mr. Misso?
A. He was there, on the door, and he told—
Q. What was the other one that—
A. —he told us that this injunction, that under this in­

junction no one could come, could enter the hall that day 
to take any literature out for any purpose.

Q. Had you read anything like that in the injunction?
A. No. No. There’s nothing in the injunction like that.
Q. On which side of the street were you arrested?
On the same side of the street with the hall or the op­

posite side?
A. No one could cross the street to the hall and there 

were some white people standing around on the other side 
of the street and I was telling all who had come to attend 
the meeting to go to Lipscomb.

Q. Did you ever at any time last night go on the side 
of the street where the meeting had originally been sched­
uled before you were arrested?



51

A. No.
[fol. 51] Q. When yon were arrested, were yon carried 
across the street almost in front of the—

A. —building! Yes.
Q, Building!
A. Yes and placed in the paddy wagon.
Q. Where the car wash—
A. Yes.
Q. —was?
A. Yes.
Q. Dr. Fields, do you know whether or not ordinances 

such as the two that Mr. Smithson mentioned are consti­
tutional or unconstitutional?

Mr. Parsons: We object to that, Judge. It’s a conclu­
sion, your Honor, and the man’s not shown that he’s quali­
fied.

Mr. Stoner: Every citizen should know what the con­
stitution says, your Honor.

The Court: I don’t know that he is— Is he a lawyer?
Mr. Stoner: Well, he’s read the Constitution.
The Court: I tell you, I don’t know whether you have 

got a license to practice in Alabama but the Supreme Court 
of Alabama has held that this identical ordinance con­
stitutional and there is a case going up out of this court 
that is—

Mr. Stoner: It wasn’t heard in the United States Su­
preme Court then ?

The Court: No.
Mr. Stoner: There are many cases it has handed down 

on both those types of ordinances.
The Court: This witness wouldn’t be qualified to state 

whether or not it is constitutional.
I ’ll sustain the objection.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. You didn’t have any intention whatever of violating 

that—this injunction—
A. No.
Q. Did you, Dr. Fields ?

[fol. 52] A. No.



52

That is the—that is why we got the other hall, the other 
park.

Q. Did you not— You did not actually do one single act 
in violation of this ordinance, did you?

A. We tried to do everything to avoid violating the 
ordinance, the injunction.

Q. Is the National States Eights party an organization 
that stands for law and order?

A. Yes, it is.
We never have had a member convicted of any crime.
Q. Now what are the principles of the National States 

Rights Party?
Mr. Parsons: We object to that, your Honor. It’s ir­

relevant, immaterial and now we—*
The Court: Yes, sir.
I sustain the objection.

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. What was the purpose of the meeting to be held on 

Wednesday night, the night you were arrested?
A. The Wednesday night meeting, we were—
Mr. Parsons: We object to that, your Honor, as ir­

relevant, immaterial.
The Court: I ’ll over-rule the objection to that, Mr. 

Parsons.
Mr. Parsons: We except.
The Court: He can answer that.
Go ahead.

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. Go ahead.
A. The meeting was to be a public meeting to inform 

the people on a number of subjects. We had four speakers. 
Mr. Lyons was one of them, who’s returned from a trip 
to London, England, and you had been invited to explain 
the Kenneth Adams case in Anniston, Alabama, and two 
other people had been invited and had accepted to speak.

Q. What you told us is who was going to speak; but what 
was the purpose of the meeting other than that?



53

A. Well, more or less to acquaint as many of the new 
people who are not members— It wasn’t a membership 
meeting; it was going to be a public meeting, as to the aim 
of our organization, the States Eights Party, and to see 
[fol. 53] if we could possibly recruit newr members after the 
meeting was held.

Q. You intend, as does the National States Rights Party 
intend, to sponsor candidates for public office in future 
elections in Alabama?

A. Yes.
Q. Is the National States Eights party for wdiite suprem­

acy and segregation ?
A. Yes. It is.
Q. Just a minute. Excuse me, your Honor.
In your conversations with Mayor Smithson, did he tell 

you that he was not going to allow any segregationist or 
white supremist meetings in the city of Fairfield?

A. He said that he wouldn’t issue a permit for any such 
organization to hold such a meeting in Fairfield.

Mr. Stoner: That’s all, thanks.
Mr. Parsons: That all?
Mr. Stoner: Yes.

Cross examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. He said in such—such an organization as your or­

ganization, did he not ?
A. “Any such organization” is what he said.
Q. You were speaking, at that time—he was speaking 

at that time of your organization.
Does this pamphlet that you passed out, does it—does it 

correctly state the purposes of the meeting and the tone 
of the meeting and so forth that was projected or planned 
and as announced in the leaflet.

A. The meeting was written to try to get a maximum 
number of people to attend the meeting and we had a num­
ber of speakers who would have spoken on numerous sub­
jects.

Q. This does not indicate the type of subject and the tone?



54

A. That is the type of subject; yes, sir. Yes.
Q. The type of subject?
A. Yes.

[fol. 54] Q. And type of tone ?
A. Yes.
Q. Type of subject and tone?
A. Y es; generally.
Q. And generally the approach to the subject?
A. Yes. I ’d say generally.
Q. Yes.
And that is the pamphlet that was passed out before the 

meeting on the day or the day before the meeting?
A. Before the injunction; yes.
Q. How many of these were passed out after yesterday 

afternoon?
A. None to my knowledge, after the injunction wTas sent.
The newspaper was passed out afterwards.
Q. Yes.
Now you did cause these to be served, these pamphlets to 

be served though before the injunction was—before it was 
passed out—it was passed out before the injunction was 
issued ?

A. That’s right; yes.
Q. And you had come over there, then, last evening, about 

7 :30, you had come over there and—•
A. Exactly 7 :30.
Q. And you say there was a crowd of people across from 

the meeting place there ?
A. Yes.
And I recognized a number who were—
Q. And you went over there and fraternized with them 

or mixed with them?
A. I went as quickly as I—I went—I wasn’t there more 

than two and a half minutes at the most.
Q. But you met with them and communicated to them 

the message you had there for them and gave them this, 
did you not?

(Indicating)
A. Yes. To go to Lipscomb.
That’s correct.



55

Q. And passed this out1?
A. And I gave them a newspaper.

[fol. 55] Q. Among the various people that were gathered 
congregating across from the place.

A. Approximately not more than twelve people.
Q. And how far was that from the place where the 

meeting was projected, where it was to—
A. It was next to the drug store along side a parking lot 

across the street from the proposed hall.
Q. Directly across the street.
Does the meeting place as announced on this pamphlet 

correctly identify it or correctly give it as the street 
address?

A. No.
There is an error in the street address.
Q. But that is 5329, the announced meeting place.
Is it not ?
A. Yes.
But that is not the meeting place. The address is incor­

rect on the—■
Q. How close is the correct meeting place to the address 

on the-—■
A. It is next door to that address.
Q. Right next door to it?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you threaten Mayor Smithson when you talked to 

him?
A. Absolutely not.
Q. Did he ask you to come to the city hall to see him?
A. He invited me and I said I would accept his invitation.
Q. But you never came, did you?
A. After the injunction was served, his secretary made 

an appointment with me to see him at 2 o’clock.
Q. Did you?
A. I called him that morning and he—she made the ap­

pointment for two o’clock and I was served with the in­
junction around noon and after receiving the injunction 
I saw that no further good could be made out of the meeting 
with the Mayor so I spent the rest of the afternoon trying 
to arrange for another hall.

Q. But you did not go and meet with him then?



56

A. No. Because the meeting was called off then; the 
meeting was off then.
[fol. 56] Q. I see.

Did you tell Mr. Smithson, or Mayor Smithson, that if 
he didn’t issue the permit that you would smear his name 
all over the State ?

A. I have never told Mr. Smithson or anybody, or any 
one else that I would smear anybody’s name.

Q. Just what did you tell him in that connection, then, 
please, sir!

A. I told him that I thought, that if he was banning 
segregation meetings out there I thought that it would hurt 
him politically.

Q. Did you tell him that you would see to it that he was 
not ever elected Mayor of Fairfield again?

A. No. I didn’t tell him that I would see to it that he 
would never be elected Mayor.

Q. Dr. Fields, did you notify the national T.V. networks 
of the trouble over in Birmingham recently ?

Mr. Stoner: I object. I object to that question, your 
Honor. Irrelevant and immaterial to this hearing here.

The Court: Yes. I ’ll sustain the objection.

By Mr. Parsons, continuing:
Q. Well, let me ask you this: Were you formerly in the 

Citizens’ Council over in Birmingham?
A. I still am.
Mr. Stoner: I object. Object to that too, your Honor.
The Court: Over-ruled; it’s cross examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Let me ask you this, then:
Were you thrown out of the Citizens’ Council in Birming­

ham?
A. No. I am still an active member.
Q. You are?
A. Yes.
And I have the chairman of the Citizens’ Council of



57

Birmingham who is here right now and I am an active 
member of that organization.

Q. All right, sir.
Were you involved in blowing up a Jewish synagogue 

over in Atlanta ?
A. Absolutely—absolutely not. I was not.
Mr. Stoner: I object. Object to that.

[fol. 57] By Mr. Parsons:
Q. You were not.
The Court: Sustained.
A. I was not. Absolutely not.
The Court: Sustained. Keep your voice down.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. How many of these did you distribute last night, 

please, sir.
A. Well one to a person and I saw twelve people. Twelve 

papers, I guess.
Mr. Stoner: Your Honor, I would—
A. Well it was—

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. How many of the Thunderbolts was that?
Mr. Stoner: Yes, sir.

By Mi-. Parsons:
Q. How many of the Thunderbolts did you distribute 

last night?
A. No more than twelve.
Q. Was there anyone else there to distribute—dis­

tributing Thunderbolts at that time with you?
A. Mr. Lyons was distributing.
Q. Was Mr. Lyons in any way connected with your 

organization ?
A. Yes, he is.



58

Q.. What is his connection!
A. Yes, he is a member and he is a Yonth organizer.
Q. A Member and a Youth Organizer!
A. Yes.
Q. For your organization.
A. Yes.
Q. Of the National States Eights party?
A. Yes.
Q. Is he so employed?
A. He receives no pay or anything like that.
Q. But that is his—•
A. He is a volunteer; yes.
Q. A volunteer?
A. Yes.
Q. In that capacity—
A. Yes.

[fol. 58] Q. —connected with the—■
A. Yes.
Q. —this organization?
A. Yes.
Q. I see.
Did he know of the injunction?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Where is he from?
Mr. Stoner: Your Honor, that is irrelevant as to where 

he is from. He is an American citizen.
The Court: I will over-rule the objection.
You may answer. It’s a proposition of identity.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. What’s your answer ?
A. He is from Reading, Pennsylvania, originally.
Q. Where is his home now?
A. He is staying in my—with me in my home now.
Q. Visiting with you?
A. Yes.
Mr. Parsons: I believe that’s all.



59

Examination.

By the Court:
Q. Where are the headquarters of the National States 

Rights party !
Mr. Stoner: Sir, we—•
A. We have two main offices. One in Knoxville and one 

right here, mainly operated out of my home.
Q. Have you qualified with the Secretary of State!
A. Yes. Yes, sir. We were on the ballot for the last 

election.
Q. You have a charter!
A. No. Our paper is—•
Q. For Alabama!
A. Our paper is licensed, has a sales tax license.
Q. All right.
Mr. Parsons: Let me ask you this.

Recross examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Are you qualified to do business in the State of Ala- 

[fol. 59] bama, with the Secretary of State!
Mr. Stoner: Your Honor, a political party such as the 

Democratic, Republican and National States Rights don’t 
have to have a license to do business—*

A. They don’t have a license either.

By Mr. Parsons, continuing:
Q. Didn’t ask you that. I didn’t ask you that.
Mr. Stoner: It’s irrelevant, your Honor.
The Court: I will over rule the objection.
A. A political party has no license—



60

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Do yon know if you have one?
A. License? A license? To do what?
Q. You ever qualified with the Secretary of State to do 

business in the State of Alabama.
That is the question.
A. We are recognized as a legal political party on the 

ballot.
Q. You don’t know whether you are qualified or not, 

do you?
A. Yes. We are on the ballot.
Q. You don’t know—
A. W e’re on the ballot. We are on the ballot.
Q. Well—all right. Let it go.
Let it go.
All right, your honor.
The Court: All right, sir.
(Witness excused.)
Mr. Stoner: Your Honor, I would like to call Mr. Fred 

Short at this time, as a witness, now.
The Court: All right. Mr. Short?

[fol. 60] Mr. F red Short called as a witness on behalf of 
the respondents herein, and having been first duly sworn, 
according to law, was thereupon examined, and testified 
as follows:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. How, state your name, please, sir?
A. My name is Fred Short.
Q. Mr. Short, did you go to a meeting of the National 

States Rights Party last night?
A. I went to Lipscomb for it, where I had been told that 

there would be a meeting yesterday; yes.



61

Q. Had you been advised that the meeting would no 
longer be held in Fairfield!

A. Yes.
Q. Are you chairman of the Birmingham Citizens’ Coun­

cil?
A. I am Chairman of the Jefferson County Citizens’ 

Council, sir.
Q. Ho you know Dr. Fields here ?
A. Yes.
Q. Is he a member in good standing of the Citizens’ 

Council of Birmingham?
A. Yes.
Of Jefferson County.
Q. Jefferson County, I mean.
A. Yes.
Q. Excuse me.
A. Yes.
Q. Did you expect to see Dr. Fields at the meeting in 

Lipscomb ?
A. Yes. I expected to see him.
Q. What time did you get to the meeting in Lipscomb?
A. About five till eight, I suppose. Around five or ten 

minutes to eight.
Q. That’s all.
Thank you, sir.
A. Ail right.
The Court: Wait a minute. Mr. Parsons may want to 

cross-examine.

[fol. 61] Cross examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Have you ever been suspended from the Jefferson 

County Citizens’ Council?
A. Have I ever been suspended from the Jefferson 

County Citizens’ Council?
Q. Yes.
A. No, sir. I have been president for three years.
Q. All right.
A. I mean, I ’ve been—



62

Q. All right.
A. —chairman. Chairman. I ’ve been chairman.
Q. Has Dr. Fields ever been suspended from it!
A. No, sir.
Q. Okay.
Mr. Parsons: I believe that’s all.
The Court: Let me ask you this, Mr. Short.
A. Yes, sir.

Examination.

By the Court:
Q. Are you a member of this National States Rights 

party ?
A. No, sir. I am not. No. No, sir. I am not.
Q. Do you know what— or why the meeting—why it was 

decided to hold the meeting in Fairfield or in Lipscomb 
rather than in Birmingham ?

A. I don’t know why it was decided to be held in Birming­
ham— or was not decided to be held in Birmingham.

I know that' they told me there had been an injunction 
was the reason they moved it to Lipscomb.

Q. I meant the original meeting?
A. I don’t know about that.
Q. Scheduled in Fairfield?
A. I don’t know about that. I don’t know about that. 

I  didn’t have anything to do with scheduling it.
Q. All right.
(Witness excused.)

[fol. 62] Mr. Stoner: Is Mrs. Fields— she is outside in 
the hall with the little baby because the little baby was 
making noise and I would like to call her to the stand, 
please.

The Court: All right, sir.
Mrs. Fields.



63

Mbs. Delobes F ields called as a witness on behalf o f the 
respondents herein, and having been first duly sworn, was 
thereupon examined and testified as follow s:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. State your name, please, ma’m.
A. Mrs. Delores Fields.
Q. Who is your husband?
A. Edward R, Fields.
Q. Where do you live?
A. 1509 Mims Street.
Q. Do you have any children?
A. One child.
Q. What’s his age?
A. He’ll be three next month.
Q. What’s his name ?
A. Allen Fields.
Q. Did you intend to go to a meeting of the National 

States Rights Party last night, Wednesday night?
Mr. Parson: Object.
The Court: Over-ruled; you may answer.
A. Yes. But not in Fairfield.

By Mr. Stoner:
Q. Where did you intend to go to the meeting?
A. To Lipscomb.
Q. Why did you go to Fairfield first?
A. Because we were going to go there to tell the people 

that might come there that there wasn’t going to be a meet­
ing.

Q. When you were there, did some police officers take 
you and your baby into custody ?
[fol. 63] A. Yes. They marched me across the street.

Mr. Parsons: We object to that; it’s irrelevant and im­
material, your Honor.

Mr. Stoner: It shows what the officers—
The Court: She’s already answered.



64

Mr. Stoner: Part of the res gestae.
The Court: I over-rule it. She’s answered.

By Mr. Stoner, continuing:
Q. Did they change their mind?
A. Yes.
After I got across the street, they did.
Q. Had you passed out any kind of leaflets there?
A. No, I didn’t.
Q. Had you talked to anybody?
A. No. '
Q. Did they tell you why they were arresting you?
A. No.
Q. Have you ever seen this leaflet entitled “ White Work­

ers Meeting” ?
A. Yes.
Q. Were any copies of it to your knowledge passed out 

after the injunction was served on Dr. Fields?
A. No.
Q. What did you say?
A. No.
Q. And after the injunction was served, were there any 

plans whatever to hold the meeting in Fairfield?
A. No.
Q. That’s all.
Thank you, Ma’m.

Cross examination.

By Mr. Parsons:
Q. Let me ask you this, please, Ma’m.
Didn’t the officers tell you that you were not under arrest 

at that time you just told us about?
A. Not under arrest?
Q. Yes, ma’m.

[fol. 64] A. Well, they didn’t say anything until after 
they hauled me across the street and then they didn’t actu­
ally say anything and then they just decided to let me go. 

Q. They didn’t tell you you were not under arrest?
A. No.



65

Q. All right.
That’s all.
(Witness excused.)
Mr. Stoner: That’s all the evidence that the defendants 

—the defendant wishes to present, your Honor, except for 
argument and so I am ready after he gets through.

The Court: Do you have anything in rebuttal, Mr. Par­
sons?

Mr. Parsons: If the court please, no, sir.
The Court: All right, sir.
You like to argue?

■ Mr. Parsons: Yes, sir. I would like to make two or three 
remarks.

The Court: Well, how much time you want, as to each 
side?

Mr. Parsons: It won’t take me more than 3 minutes for 
my part.

The Court: All right, sir.
I will give you three minutes to open and I will let Mr. 

Stoner argue his, and if you want any more time to reply, I 
will let him argue as long as he wants to and if you want to 
reply to it I will let you have adequate time to reply to it.

Mr. Parsons: Thank you.
The Court: All right, sir.

[fol. 65]
Open in g  A rgum ent  for th e  C om plainant  

By Mr. Parsons:
If it please the court, we have here an injunction issued 

forbidding Dr. Fields or Ms agents, servants or employees, 
or the servants, agents or employees of this organization, 
to hold a meeting in the City of Fairfield on October 11, or 
to distribute handbills such as had been distributed on Oc­
tober 10th in Fairfield and a copy of which was attached to 
the complaint.

Dr. Fields was served with that. And yet he came on out 
there just shortly prior to the time of the meeting in close 
proximity to the location that he had been enjoined from 
having the meeting and he just as effectively had a meeting



66

as if the injunction had not been issued because he went out 
there and he talked to all these people up and down.

He spread his literature. He accomplished his purpose. 
And, if the court please, in so doing he was in contempt of 
court.

The Court: All right, sir.
Mr. Stoner? You may reply.
Mr. Stoner: Yes, sir.

F in a l  A rgu m en t  eob th e  R espondents 

By Mr. Stoner:
Your Honor, Dr. Fields in this injunction was enjoined 

from circulating any of these leaflets entitled “White Work­
ers Meeting” . After he received this injunction he did not 
distribute any of them and neither did anyone else. There 
has been no testify (sie) here whatever today that one single 
leaflet such as this that was forbidden in the injunction was 
distributed at any time after the injunction was served.

Now, of course, there is an error about the street address 
of the meeting hall but counsel for the City of Fairfield 
says the fact that he came across the street and talked to a 
few people over there, that that constituted a violation of 
[fol. 66] the injunction; whereas that was across the street 
from the place where he had been enjoined from holding a 
meeting.

Further more, he only went there to carry out your or­
ders in your injunction. If he had not of arrived on the 
scene there would have been people congregated there and 
waiting and a lot of them could have started talking and 
speaking among themselves. The crowd was already there.

There were some policemen there last night, so many— 
there were so many policemen there last night that they at­
tracted additional people that otherwise wouldn’t have been 
there. I had been notified myself that the—about the change 
in the meeting place and I just happened to be passing 
through there and wasn’t even looking for the old location 
and I recognized that that was the place because of so many 
police officers—an unusually excessive number of police 
officers.



67

The odd thing, about this whole case, is that all of the 
evidence or practically all of the evidence produced by the 
City of Fairfield shows that Dr. Fields and Robert Lyons 
did not violate the injunction in any way. They did not 
distribute any more of the leaflets. They were forbidden 
in the injunction to.

There was nothing in the injunction to forbid the distribu­
tion of the Thunderbolt which was admittedly distributed, 
as it’s been admitted by the defense and without any objec­
tions at all because there was nothing in the injunction to 
prohibit the distribution of the Thunderbolt.

So, also, the testimony of the witnesses for the City of 
Fairfield show that no meeting was held in violation of your 
injunction. Furthermore, the ordinances that they claim 
were violated prior to that time are unconstitutional in ac­
cordance with numerous decisions of the United States 
Supreme Court.

Like your Honor, I often disagree with the United States 
Supreme Court but when it comes to some kinds of deci­
sions such as in the case of McNab versus United States and 
[fob 67] Knapp versus Ohio—and I think they have done 
a good job of up-holding liberty in this country and those 
freedoms that are guaranteed by the United States Con­
stitution.

The Constitution of the United States and the Constitu­
tion of Alabama guarantee freedom of speech and assem­
blage and that is what the respondents and defendants here 
in this hearing were doing. They were exercising their 
rights as recognized and guaranteed by both the Bill of 
of Rights in the State of Alabama and the Bill of Rights 
of the United States..

Now there are federal laws, Civil Rights Acts that were 
passed many years ago which say that anyone who violates 
the rights of any citizen is guilty of violation of federal 
law. One such law being Section 241, Chapter 13, Title 18 
of the United States Code. There are some others in that 
same chapter, Chapter 13.

It appears to me that the people who conspired to pre­
vent this meeting that was being held and the man who or 
men who conspired to prevent the distribution of this leaflet 
that was distributed prior to the serving of the injunction



68

are the ones who should he prosecuted. Not for contempt 
but for violation of certain sections in Chapter 13 of Title 
18 of the United States Code and I ask your Honor to rule 
in accordance with the Constitution of the United States, 
the 14th and 1st Amendments of the Constitution of the 
United States, and also in accordance with the Constitution 
of the State of Alabama and uphold the rights of these two 
gentlemen here. Dr. Fields and Mr. Lyons.

I don’t think we will have much freedom left in Alabama 
or anywhere else if before anybody could hold a meeting 
or distribute a leaflet they had to go get permission from a 
chief of police or the mayor of a town and the same thing 
has been stated several times in the United States Supreme 
Court decisions.

If that were the case, every time the Baptist Church got 
ready to hold a meeting in Fairfield they would have to run 
to the Mayor and ask him “may they have a meeting” and 
[fol. 68] then the Mayor will say:

“Well, I ’ll have to think about it. This is Saturday but 
I ’ll tell you Monday morning whether you can have a meet­
ing Sunday.”

And that wouldn’t be freedom.
The way Fairfield is trying to express freedom over 

there, it is more like what goes on in certain foreign coun­
tries than in the spirit of George Washington and Patrick 
Henry.

So, on constitutional grounds, I ask you to dismiss these 
contempt charges.

The Court: Mr. Stoner, let me interrupt you there. Sup­
pose the ordinances were unconstitutional. Can you attack 
the constitutionality of an ordinance collaterally in a con­
tempt hearing!

Mr. Stoner: Well, if it’s part of the—
The Court: I f your remedy is to go ahead and obey the 

temporary writ and then on your final hearing come in with 
a motion to dissolve that, to dissolve it on the grounds that 
the ordinance in question is unconstitutional rather than 
just disregarding the order of the court.

Mr. Stoner: Well, there are grounds for getting the in­
junction there, on the basis of two of their city’s ordinances



69

were violated and I contend they were void ab initio and 
complete nullities.

The Court: Well, be that as it may, but does that au­
thorize the person to whom the writ is directed to com­
pletely disregard it?

Mr. Stoner: Well, in one situation, I would say that the—
The Court: Well, isn’t the proper procedure for the 

person to whom the writ is directed or to whom the—the 
person to whom the writ is directed to file a motion to dis­
solve it on the grounds that the ordinance is unconstitu­
tional ?

Mr. Stoner: That will be done, your Honor.
The Court: All right, sir.
Well, I was just thinking about that, about the constitu- 

[fol. 69] tion— Can you collaterally attack the constitution­
ality of an ordinance in a proceeding on a contempt?

Mr. Stoner: Well, since the injunction is based upon the 
violation of the—of an unconstitutional ordinance, of un­
constitutional ordinances, it would seem to me that the 
injunction itself is unconstitutional and so I object to what 
they are trying to do on constitutional grounds and I also 
object in accordance with the evidence.

They haven’t produced one iota of evidence here to show 
that there is— on the presumption—that the presumption 
is— In the first place, I think it unconstitutional and con­
trary to the United States and Alabama constitutions; but 
then, secondarily, presuming that the injunction is legal 
and constitutional, the evidence shows that they did not 
violate the injunction and that not only did they not violate 
the injunction but they went out of their way to obey that 
injunction by re-routing the people out to—to go outside of 
the City of Fairfield over to Lipscomb.

And, so, on the basis of constitutional law and the facts 
and evidence, I think—I can’t see how they can be held in 
contempt. In fact, I think that actually we didn’t need to 
put up any defense witnesses because the City of Fairfield’s 
witnesses proved our case, that there had been no violation 
of your injunction and not only that but the officers testified 
that they heard Dr. Fields telling people to leave Fairfield 
and go to Lipscomb to the meeting.



70

And so I make a motion to dismiss the charges on the 
grounds that the injunction is unconstitutional because it 
is—because in obtaining it, it was based upon unconstitu­
tional ordinances of the City of Fairfield.

And, further, I make a motion that the charges be dis­
missed on the grounds that all of the— that practically all 
of the evidence, including practically all of the evidence of 
the City of Fairfield proves that there was no violation 
of the injunction.

Thank you, your Honor.
[fol. 70] The Court: Mr. Parsons, do you want to reply?

Mr. Parsons: Yes, sir; please, sir.
Briefly.
The Court: All right, sir.

F inal , A rgu m en t  eob th e  Co m plain an t  

By Mr. Parsons:
Mr. Parsons: The grounds for the injunction, not only 

are— are not only the violation of the ordinances, your 
Honor, but the inflammatory nature of the leaflet that was 
passed out, the character of it designed to create troubles, 
disturbances between the races and designed to incite 
breaches of the peace and what not and I would like to 
point out to your Honor also that the Thunderbolt here, 
which was passed out among those people there last night, 
when these parties here met with them on the street near 
the place of the proposed meeting, right across the street 
from it, has the same sort of agitation in it, the same sort 
of tendency to induce a breach of the peace, to induce dis­
turbances between the races, to induce disorderly conduct.

We would just like to say that beyond a doubt the pro­
cedure is constitutional, the procedure is in order, and 
these parties here, both of whom knew of the injunction, 
came in spite of it and, as we said initially, met with the 
people there on the street in close proximity to the pro­
jected place of meeting in violation of the injunction and 
in defiance of it.

The Court: All right.



71

R eply fob the R espondents

Mr. Stoner: Your Honor, I would like to say a few more 
words.

He has called this inciting to trouble and all. The same 
thing could be said about many daily newspapers that they 
incite defiance. There was a TV program recently, “ Walk­
ing In My Shoes”, or something like that, that some people 
said incited violence but I don’t know of anybody getting 
out and trying to get out and get out an injunction against 
it. And people are entitled to their opinions and beliefs 
and they are entitled to the right to express themselves 
and there he is saying now that he objects to the expression 
[fol. 71] of opinions and beliefs and facts and that is where 
the constitutional question comes in.

In his argument he admits that he is trying to suppress 
the freedom of speech and of the press and of assemblage 
of Hr. Fields and Mr. Lyons and he says that the injunction 
was violated because they went across the street from 
where the meeting was to have been held and where it had 
been cancelled.

They didn’t go to the meeting hall over there to hold 
any meeting. And, so, since they didn’t go over there to 
hold any meeting, they didn’t violate the injunction and I 
think that the City of Fairfield should compliment them 
for re-routing the people that did come to Fairfield over to 
the other town.

The Court: All right.
Let’s take a five minute recess, gentlemen.
(Whereupon a recess was taken after which the pro­

ceedings continued as follows.)
All Present:

As before.

Decree of J udge E. L. B all and Sentence

The Court: Well, gentlemen, before I give you my de­
cision, I have a remark or two I would like to make.

First, I don’t believe it is the law of this State that you 
can collaterally attack the constitutionality of an ordinance



72

in a contempt proceeding without first purging yourself 
of that contempt, if there is any there.

And, second, it has been, either through good luck or 
the grace of somebody bigger than all of us here in the 
Bessemer Cut-off, that we have been singularly blessed 
with not having any race incident here in this area; and, 
particularly, I think, Fairfield has never had one. Back 
several years ago we did have a movement to move into 
one of our public parks here but that was straightened out 
within a matter of a few weeks by the City Attorney for 
Bessemer and other people. And since that time I don’t 
believe we have had a single clash between the races, 
[fol. 72] either in Bessemer, or Fairfield, or any of the 
other city—cities of the Bessemer Division of this County. 
And it is the intention, I know, of the public officials, both 
of this county and of the various municipalities of the 
Bessemer Division of this County that we are going to do 
everything we can to maintain that status quo. We are 
going to try to keep peace between the races here and we 
are going to do everything that we can to keep people 
from agitating trouble.

Getting down to this case here:
While there is no evidence that the pamphlet was re­

distributed, the writ of injunction says “ distribute further 
handbills, announcing such meetings, as were distributed 
in the city of Fairfield” .

I am impressed by the tone and the context of the paper 
that was admittedly distributed and I simply think that 
was an artifice on the part of someone to bring home the 
fact that the meeting was going to be held while artfully 
evading the exact language of the handbill that had been 
previously distributed.

If these respondents were of the opinion and so advised 
that these ordinances were unconstitutional they could 
have filed their motion to dissolve it and had their day in 
court and the final hearing on this injunction was to have 
been set down or was set down on November 17th, giving 
everybody adequate time to prepare their cases to come in 
and test the constitutionality of these ordinances.

It is my opinion that the ordinances are a legal exercise 
of the police power of the municipality.



73

Therefore, Dr. Fields and Mr, Lyons, if you will stand:
It is the judgment of the court that you are in contempt 

of this court and it is the judgment of the court that you 
be and are hereby adjudged in contempt and you are fined 
$50.00.

And as additional punishment you are ordered to be 
confined in the county jail for five days.
[fol. 73] If you want to appeal, I will set your bond, or 
for writ of certiorari, at $500.00, in each case.

Mr. Stoner: We wish to appeal, your Honor.
The Court: All right, sir.
Your bond is set at $500.00 for each one.
Mr. Stoner: Yes.
The Court: That’s all.

—Which Was All of the Evidence Heard and Testimony 
Presented in the Hearing in the Above Cause—

[fol. 76] Judge’s and Reporter’s Certificate to foregoing 
transcript (omitted in printing.)

[fol. 77]
In the Circuit Court oe J efferson County, A labama, 

Bessemer D ivision

Clerk’s Certificate

I, Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk and Register of the 
Circuit Court, Jefferson County, Bessemer Division, do 
hereby certify that the foregoing pages numbered one to 
twelve, both inclusive, contain a full, true, correct and 
complete transcript of all proceedings in this court; that 
pages numbered from thirteen to seventy-six, both inclu­
sive, contain a transcript of evidence together with all 
proceedings thereon, as filed in this office, all being in a 
cause wherein the City of Fairfield, a Municipal Corpora­
tion is Plaintiff vs. Dr. Edward R. Fields and National 
States Rights Party, Defendants.

I further certify that on the 13th day of October, 1961, 
the defendants prayed for and obtained an appeal to the



74

present term of the Supreme Court of Alabama; and that 
Dr. Edward R. Fields and Robert Lyons are principals 
and D. Fred Short and Pearce S. Johnson are sureties 
for all costs and that said sureties in writing have waived 
their rights to claim personal property as exempt under 
the laws of the State of Alabama all of which appears of 
record in this Court, and all of which I hereby certify 
to the Clerk of the Supreme Court of Alabama.

Witness my hand and seal of said Court this the 29th 
day of November, 1961.

Elmore McAdory, Deputy Clerk and Register of the 
Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama, 
Bessemer Division.

(Seal)

[fol. 78]
I n Supreme Court oe the State oe A labama 

6th D ivision 
No. 801

R obert Lyons, Appellant, 
vs.

City oe Fairfield, Appellee.

A ssignments oe E rror

The Appellant says that there is manifest error in the 
foregoing transcript of the record of the proceedings had 
and done in the Honorable Circuit Court of Jefferson 
County, Alabama, Bessemer Division In Equity, to the hurt 
and prejudice of this Appellant, and for error assigns 
each of the following, separately and severally:

1. The lower Court erred in rendering the decree of 
conviction for contempt of court. The same was not sup­
ported by any legal evidence.



2. For that such judgment is void.
3. For that the Circuit Court had no authority to render 

said judgment in the premises.
4. For that the said Circuit Court was without author­

ity to act in this proceeding.
5. For that there was no evidence to support said judg­

ment.
6. For that the proceeding for which the alleged con­

tempt was committed was a proceeding void ab initio.
7. That the injunction which was allegedly violated was 

vague, indefinite, uncertain and void.
8. For that the judgment deprives these petitioners, 

separately and jointly, of their liberty and property with­
out due process of law, contrary to and in violation of the 
Fourteenth, First, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments to the 
Constitution of the United States.
[fol. 79] 9. For that the judgment deprives the petition­
ers, separately and jointly, of their inalienable rights con­
trary to and in violation of Sections 1, 2, 4, 6, 25, and 36 of 
Article I of the Constitution of Alabama, which rights are 
the right to speak, write, and publish their sentiments on all 
subjects, the right to engage in political activity, assemble 
in a peaceable manner, and to enjoy their liberty and 
property.

10. For that the punishment imposed in said judgment 
is excessive.

11. For that punishment imposed by said judgment 
bears no relation to the offense, if any offense be shown.

Conclusion
Appellant respectfully submits that the contempt decree 

in its entirety should be reversed.
That the respective costs should likewise be against Ap­

pellee.



76

Further, Appellant prays that this Honorable Court will 
consider this Appeal, 6 Div. 801, with his Petition for a 
Writ of Certiorari which is numbered 6 Div. 809, so that 
only one transcript will be required in this, the Supreme 
Court of Alabama.

Respectfully submitted,
J. B. Stoner, Attorney for Appellant, P. 0. Box 48, 

Atlanta, Georgia, Phones 948-6620 and 451-1496.

Appellant requests oral argument and hereby endorses 
said request hereon.

J. B. Stoner, Attorney for Appellant.

Certificate of Service (omitted in printing.)

[fol. 80]
In Supreme Court oe the State oe A labama 

6th D ivision 
No. 802

Dr. E dward R. F ields, Appellant, 
vs.

City oe F aireibld, Appellee.

A ssignments oe E rror

The Appellant says that there is manifest error in the 
foregoing transcript of the record of the proceedings had 
and done in the Honorable Circuit Court of Jefferson 
County, Alabama, Bessemer Division In Equity, to the 
hurt and prejudice of this Appellant, and for error assigns 
each of the following, separately and severally:

1. The lower Court erred in rendering the decree of 
conviction for contempt of court. The same was not sup­
ported by any legal evidence.



77

2. For that such judgment is void.
3. For that the Circuit Court had no authority to render 

said judgment in the premises.
4. For that the said Circuit Court was without author­

ity to act in this proceeding.
5. For that there was no evidence to support said judg­

ment.
6. For that the proceeding for which the alleged con­

tempt was committed was a proceeding void ab initio.
7. That the injunction which was allegedly violated was 

vague, indefinite, uncertain and void.
8. For that the judgment deprives these petitioners, 

separately and jointly, of their liberty and property with­
out due process of law, contrary to and in violation of the 
Fourteenth, First, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments to the 
Constitution of the United States.
[fol. 81] 9. For that the judgment deprives the peti­
tioners, separately and jointly, of their inalienable rights, 
contrary to and in violation of Sections 1, 2, 4, 6, 25, and 
36 of Article I of the Constitution of Alabama, which rights 
are the right to speak, write, and publish their sentiments 
on all subjects, the right to engage in political activity, as­
semble in a peaceable manner, and to enjoy their liberty 
and property.

10. For that the punishment imposed in said judgment 
is excessive.

11. For that punishment imposed by said judgment 
bears no relation to the offense, if any offense be shown.

Conclusion
Appellant respectfully submits that the contempt decree 

in its entirety should be reversed.
That the respective costs should likewise be against Ap­

pellee.



78

Further, Appellant prays that this Honorable Court will 
consider this Appeal, 6 Div. 802 with his Petition for a Writ 
of Certiorari which is numbered 6 Div. 809, so that only 
one transcript will be required in this, the Supreme Court 
of Alabama.

Respectfully submitted,
J. B. Stoner, Attorney for Appellant, P. 0. Box 48, 

Atlanta, Georgia, Phones 948-6620 and 451-1496.

Appellant requests oral argument and hereby endorses 
said request hereon.

J. B. Stoner, Attorney for Appellant.

Certificate of Service (omitted in printing.)

[fol. 82] [File endorsement omitted]

l x  Supreme Court oe the State of A labama 
R e : 6th Div. 801, 6th Div. 802 and 6th Div. 809

A greement of the P arties as to the R ecord 
—Filed November 22,1961

It Is Hereby Mutually Agreed by the parties, without 
waiver of any rights, that the transcript in the appeal 
cases will be transmitted in one record and that the appeals 
and the Writ of Certiorari will be considered on one tran­
script.

I f it appears that Writ of Certiorari is the proper rem­
edy, then the record will be considered to have been certi­
fied up in response to the Writ of Certiorari.

This the 22nd day of November, 1961.
J. B. Stoner 

Frank B. Parsons



79

In Supreme Court oe the State of A labama 

Ex Parte:
Dr. E dward R. F ields and R obert L yons

Petition for W rit of Certiorari to the Circuit Court 
T enth J udicial Circuit of A labama, B essemer D ivi­
sion, in E quity— Filed November 13,1961

April 24, 1962 =  Consolidated with 801 and 802 and 
Argued and Submitted on Motions and 
on Merits.

[fol. 84] To the Honorable Judges of the Supreme Court 
of Alabama:

Humbly complaining come your petitioners, Dr. Edward 
R. Fields and Robert Lyons, by their attorney, J. B. 
Stoner, and respectfully show unto this Honorable Court 
as follows:

1. On the 11th day of October, 1961, a bill of complaint 
for a Writ of Injunction was filed in the Circuit Court of 
Jefferson County, Alabama, Bessemer Division in Equity, 
Tenth Judicial Circuit, which said complaint was styled 
City of Fairfield, a Municipal Corporation, Complainant, 
vs. Dr. Edward R. Fields, and National States Rights 
Party, Respondents, and was numbered 19249. On said 11th 
day of October, 1961, a fiat was made by E. L. Ball, Circuit 
Judge, ordering that, upon the complainant entering into 
a good and sufficient bond, the Register issue a temporary 
injunction as prayed for in the complaint.. A copy of said 
original complaint together with the fiat endorsed thereon 
is attached hereto, identified as Exhibit A and incorporated 
herein by reference the same as if herein set out.

2. On the 11th day of October, 1961, a bond was executed 
by, and in the name of City of Fairfield, a Municipal Corpo­
ration, as principal, with others as sureties. On the 11th 
day of October, 1961, a temporary injunction was issued 
as prayed for in said original bill of complaint. A Copy

[fol, 83] [File endorsement omitted]



80

of said preliminary injunction is hereto attached, identi­
fied as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference the 
same as if herein set out.

3. On the 11th day of October, 1961, in said cause num­
bered 19249, your petitioners, Dr. Edward R. Fields, and 
Robert Lyons, were arrested by policemen of the City of 
Fairfield and officers of the Bessemer Division of the Jef­
ferson County Sheriff’s Office and then charged with being 
in contempt of the Circuit Court of the Tenth Judicial 
Circuit, Bessemer Division In Equity.

4. On the 12th day of October, 1961, the said Dr. Edward 
R. Fields and Robert Lyons were brought before Judge 
E. L. Ball, the hearing having been set for 2 P. M. on the 
12th day of October, 1961. The said Judge Ball entered 
an order adjudging said Fields and Lyons in contempt of 
Court and fined each of said named parties $50 and ordered 
[fol. 85] them to be confined in the county jail for five days, 
on the 12th day of October, 1961, at the conclusion of the 
hearing on the charge of contempt of court. A  copy of the 
decree adjudging the said Fields and Lyons in contempt 
of court is hereto attached, identified as Exhibit C, and 
incorporated herein by reference the same as if herein set 
out.

5. On the 12th day of October, 1961, bond for appeal, 
or Writ of Certiorari, was set at $500 each by said Judge 
Ball and petitioners were released on the 13th day of Octo­
ber, 1961, upon the petitioners entering into a good and 
sufficient bond.

6. On the 12th day of October, 1961, petitioners, by 
their attorney, filed a notice with the Clerk of the Circuit 
Court of Jefferson County, Tenth Judicial Circuit, Bes­
semer Division In Equity, that they would appeal the con­
tempt judgment of said Court to the Supreme Court of 
Alabama. Said Clerk has certified two notices of appeal 
to this Honorable Court where the cases have been num­
bered 6 Div. No. 801 and 6 Div. No. 802. However, this 
petition for Writ of Certiorari is the proper remedy and 
the transcript of the proceedings is the same for either 
remedy.



81

Your petitioners aver, separately and jointly, that the 
judgment, or decree, is erroneous, unwarranted and op­
pressive, unjust and void as to each of your petitioners. 
As grounds for charging that such judgment or decree is 
erroneous, unwarranted and oppressive, unjust and void, 
your petitioners separately and jointly, set down and as­
sign, and insist upon the following, separate and several 
grounds:

(1) For that such judgment is void.
(2) For that the Circuit Court had no authority to 

render said judgment in the premises.
(3) For that the said Circuit Court was without author­

ity to act in this proceeding.
(4) For that there was no evidence to support said 

judgment.
(5) For that the proceeding for which the alleged con­

tempt was committed was a proceeding void ab initio.
(6) That the injunction which was allegedly violated 

was vague, indefinite, uncertain and void.
(7) For that the judgment deprives these petitioners, 

separately and jointly, of their liberty and property with­
out due process of law, contrary to and in violation of the 
Fourteenth, First, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments to the 
Constitution of the United States.
[fob 86] (8) For that the judgment deprives the peti­
tioners, separately and jointly, of their inalienable rights, 
contrary to and in violation of Sections 1, 2, 4, 6, 25 and 
36 of Article 1 of the Constitution of Alabama, which rights 
are the right to speak, write, and publish their sentiments 
on all subjects, the right to engage in political activity, as­
semble in a peaceable manner, and to enjoy their liberty 
and property.

(9) For that the punishment imposed in said judgment 
is excessive.

(10) For that punishment imposed by said judgment 
bears no relation to the offense, if any offense be shown.



82

Wherefore, petitioners, separately and jointly, pray that 
this Honorable Court will cause to issue to the Circuit 
Court, Tenth Judicial Circuit of Alabama, Bessemer Divi­
sion In Equity, a Writ of Certiorari asking that all records 
and proceedings in said cause numbered 19249, including 
the contempt proceedings incidental to said cause, be certi­
fied to this Honorable Court for review to the end that 
the same may be duly revised, and that this Court will 
fix the amount of a Supersedeas Bond, or other bond, if 
bond be required to be executed by petitioners to stay the 
judgment or order rendered by said Court pending con­
sideration of same by this Court.

Further, petitioners, separately and jointly, pray that 
this Honorable Court will combine their appeal which has 
been certified to this Court as 6 Div. 801 and 6 Div. 802 
with the number that will be assigned by the Clerk of this 
Honorable Court to this Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, 
so that only one transcript of the proceedings of said 
Circuit Court will be required in this, the Supreme Court 
of Alabama.

Petitioners submit themselves to this Court and offer 
to perform its judgment hereinafter rendered.

If your petitioners are mistaken in the relief herein asked 
for, then they, separately and jointly, pray for the relief 
to which they may be entitled in the premises.

Respectfully submitted,
Dr. Edward R. Fields 

Robert Lyons

J. B. Stoner, Attorney for Petitioners, P. 0. Box 48, 
Atlanta, Georgia, Phones 946-2865 and 451-1496.

[fol. 87] D uly sworn to by R obert L yons and Dr. Edward  
R. Fields, jurats om itted in printing.



[fol. 88]
E xhibit A  to P etition— Complaint, F iat, and Handbill 

[Omitted. Printed at pages 1-5, ante]

[fol. 93]
E xhibit B to Petition— W rit of Injunction 

[Omitted. Printed at pages 5-6, ante]

[fol. 95]
E xhibit C to P etition— Decree of 

J udge E. L. Ball and Sentence

[Omitted. Printed at pages 71-73, ante]

[fol. 97] [File endorsement omitted]

I n  Supreme Court of the State of A labama 

6th. Div. 809

Ex P arte, Dr. E dward B. F ields ) 
and B obert L yons )

M otion to Strike P etition— Filed November 22, 1961
To the Honorable Chief Justice and the Associate Jus­

tices of the Supreme Court of Alabama:
Comes the City of Fairfield, a municipal corporation, by 

and through its attorneys, J. Clewis Trucks and Frank B. 
Parsons, and moves this Honorable Court to strike appel-



84

lants’ petition for certiorari and for grounds of said motion 
assigns the following separately and severally;

(1) For that it affirmatively appears that appellants seek 
to have two separate judgments reviewed on single writ 
of certiorari.

(2) For that it does not appear in said petition wherein 
the Circuit Court was without authority.

(3) For that it does not appear in said petition wherein 
the action of the Circuit Court was void.

(4) For that it does not appear in said petition wherein 
the judgment of the Circuit Court violates the due process 
clauses of the Constitution of the United States.

(5) For that it does not appear in said petition wherein 
said judgment deprives petitioners of their rights in viola­
tion of the Constitution of Alabama,

(6) For that it does not appear in said petition wherein 
said punishment is excessive.

(7) For that it does not appear in said petition wherein 
said punishment bears no relation to the offense.

Respectfully submitted.
Frank B. Parsons 
J. Clewis Trucks

[fob 98] Certificate of service (omitted in printing).



85

[fol. 99]
In Supreme Court op the State of A labama 

The Court Met Pursuant to Adjournment 

Present: All the Justices

6th Div. 801
Dr. E dward R. F ields and National States R ights P arty

vs.
City of F airfield

6th Div. 802
Dr. E dward R. F ields and R obert Lyons and National 

States R ights P arty

vs.
City of F airfield

6th Div. 809
Ex P arte : Dr. Edŵ ard R. F ields and R obert L yons, 

Petitioners

Petition for Writ of Certiorari to Jefferson Circuit Court, 
in Equity, Bessemer Division 

 ̂  ̂̂

Order of Consolidation and of Submission—April 24, 1962
It Is Ordered that the above styled causes be and the 

same are hereby consolidated pursuant to the agreement 
of the parties,

Whereupon, come the parties by attorneys and argue and 
submit these causes on motions and merits for decision.



86

[fol. 100]
I n S upreme Court of the State of A labama 

October Term, 1961-62 
6 Div. 801:802:809

Dr. Edward R. F ields and National States R ights Party

v.
City of F airfield, a Municipal Corporation

Appeal from Jefferson Circnit Conrt 

Opinion— June 14, 1962
Merrill, Justice.

Dr. Edward R. Fields and Robert Lyons were adjudged 
to be in contempt of circuit court because they had been 
found guilty of violating a temporary injunction issued by 
the court against them as individuals, and against the 
National States Rights Party, of which they were officers, 
[fol. 100a] enjoining them from conducting an advertised 
meeting in Fairfield. Fields and Lyons were each fined $50 
and sentenced to five days in jail.

Petitioners “ appealed” their judgment of conviction to 
this court and later their attorney “ discovered that writ of 
certiorari is the proper remedy in this case,” and asked that 
the purported appeal be considered as a petition for writ of 
certiorari. We have complied with the request and so treat 
the cause now under review.

Petitioners were distributing handbills in the City of 
Fairfield, which read:

“ WHITE WORKERS
“ MEETING

“ * NIGGERS ARE TAKING OVER UNIONS!
“ * NIGGERS WANT OUR PARKS AND POOLS!
“ * NIGGERS DEMAND MIXED SCHOOLS!



87

“ Communists in NAACP and in WASHINGTON say 
“Whites HAVE NO RIGHTS!
“ The Nigger gets everything he DEMANDS!

“ White Supremacy CAN be saved!
“ Whites CAN STOP this second Reconstruction!
“ Hear Important Speakers from 4 States
“ Time—8 P.M. Date—Wed. Oct. 11

“ Place— 5329 Valley Road 
“ In Downtown Fairfield, Alabama 

“ ABOVE THE CAR WASH
“ THUNDERBOLT Mobile Unit Will Be Parked 

Out Front!
[fol. 100b]

“ Sponsored by National States Rights Party 
“ Box 783, Birmingham, Alabama 

“ PUBLIC INVITED 
“ Come And Bring Your Friends!”

The attorney for the city sought a temporary injunction 
to enjoin petitioners from holding the advertised meeting 
because they had not complied with an ordinance of the 
City Code which provided “ It shall be unlawful for any 
person or persons to hold a public meeting in the city or 
police jurisdiction without first having obtained a permit 
from the mayor to do so.” The judge issued the temporary 
injunction and a copy was served on Fields at Noon, 
Wednesday, August 11th. Lyons also had notice of the 
temporary injunction which enjoined them “ from holding 
a public meeting at 8 P.M. on Wednesday, October 11, 1961, 
at 5329 Valley Road, Fairfield, Alabama, as announced, 
and from distributing further in the City of Fairfield, hand­
bills announcing such meeting such as were distributed in 
the City of Fairfield, Alabama, on October 10, 1961, until 
further orders from this Court; and this you will in no wise 
omit under penalty, etc.”



Fields and Lyons were arrested that night where a crowd 
had gathered across the street from the advertised place 
of meeting. Fields was making announcements to the crowd 
and both he and Lyons were distributing copies of “The 
Thunderbolt,” the newspaper of the Party.

The petitioners make two points in brief. They say first 
that the evidence shows they did not violate the terms 
[fol. 100c] of the injunction. There is evidence to support 
the finding that they did violate the terms of the temporary 
injunction, and we have held that upon petition for cer­
tiorari, the court does not review questions of fact but 
only questions of law; but if the court below misapplies 
the law to the facts as found by it or there is no evidence 
to support the finding, a question of law is presented to be 
reviewed upon the petition for certiorari. E x  parte W etzel, 
243 Ala. 130, 8 So. 2d 824.

We come now to the main point argued by petitioners— 
“ that the temporary injunction was void ab initio on ac­
count of being contrary to and in violation of both the 
United States and Alabama Constitutions.” This argument 
is based upon the premise that the ordinance of the City of 
Fairfield is unconstitutional. We cannot say that it is un­
constitutional on its face.

In E x  parte National A ss ’n fo r  A dv. o f Colored P eop le, 
265 Ala. 349, 91 So. 2d 214, we said:

“ On the petition for certiorari the sole and only re- 
viewable order or decree is that which adjudges the 
petitioner to be in contempt. Certiorari cannot be made 
a substitute for an appeal or other method of review. 
Certiorari lies to review an order or judgment of con­
tempt for the reason that there is no other method of 
review in such a case. Ex parte Dickens, 162 Ala. 272, 
[fol. lOOd] 50 So. 218, 220. Review on certiorari is 
limited to those questions of law which go to the va­
lidity of the order or judgment of contempt, among 
which are the jurisdiction of the court, its authority 
to make the decree or order, violation of which resulted 
in the judgment of contempt. It is only where the court 
lacked jurisdiction of the proceeding, or where on the 
face of it the order disobeyed was void, or where pro­



89

cedural requirements with, respect to citation for con­
tempt and the like were not observed, or where the 
fact of contempt is not sustained, that the order or 
judgment will be quashed.”

Here, the circuit court had jurisdiction of the parties and 
the subject matter. It had the authority to make the decree 
or Order, and on its face, the order disobeyed was not void. 
It is not contended that any procedural requirements were 
omitted.

In the face of this, petitioners, without moving to dissolve 
the temporary injunction, seeking a hearing, or in any 
way contesting the writ, proceeded to meet a crowd gathered 
across the street from the advertised place of meeting and 
distributed inflammatory literature.

As a general rule, an unconstitutional statute is an abso­
lute nullity and may not form the basis of any legal right 
[fol. lOOe] or legal proceedings, yet until its unconstitu­
tionality has been judicially declared in appropriate pro­
ceedings, no person charged with its observance under an 
order or decree may disregard or violate the order or the 
decree with immunity from a charge of contempt of court; 
and he may not raise the question of its unconstitutionality 
in collateral proceedings on appeal from a judgment of 
conviction for contempt of the order or decree, or on appli­
cation for habeas corpus for release from imprisonment 
for contempt. United S tates v. United Mine W orkers o f  
Am erica, 330 U. S. 258, 91 L. Ed. 884, 67 S. Ct. 677; H owat 
v. K ansas, 258 U. S. 181, 66 L. Ed. 550, 42 S. Ct. 277; P eople  
v. Bouchard, 6 Misc. 459, 27 N. Y. S. 201; M cLeod  v. M ajors, 
5th Cir., 102 F. 2d 128; Pure Milk A sso. v. W agner, 363 111. 
316, 2 N. E. 2d 288.

In the United Mine W orkers  case, supra, the court said:
“ Proceeding further, we find impressive authority 

for the proposition that an order issued by a court 
with jurisdiction over the subject matter and person 
must be obeyed by the parties until it is reversed by 
orderly and proper proceedings. This is true without 
regard even for the constitutionality of the Act under



90

which the order is issued. In H owat v. K ansas, 258 
U. S. 181, 189-90 (1922) this Court said:

‘An injunction duly issuing out of a court of gen­
eral jurisdiction with equity powers upon plead- 
[fol. lOOf] ings properly invoking its action, and 
served upon persons made parties therein and within 
the jurisdiction, must be obeyed by them however 
erroneous the action of the court may be, even if 
the error be in the assumption of the validity of a 
seeming but void law going to the merits of the case. 
It is for the court of first instance to determine the 
question of the validity of the law, and until its de­
cision is reversed for error by orderly review, either 
by itself or by a higher court, its orders based on 
its decision are to be respected, and disobedience of 
them is contempt of its lawful authority, to be 
punished.’

“Violations of an order are punishable as criminal con­
tempt even though the order is set aside on appeal, 
W orden  v. Searls, 121 U. S. 14 (1887), or though the 
basic action has become moot, Gom pers v. Bucks S tove  
& Range Co., 221 U. S. 418 (1911).

“We insist upon the same duty of obedience where, 
as here, the subject matter of the suit, as well as the 
parties, was properly before the court; where the 
elements of federal jurisdiction were clearly shown; 
[fol. lOOg] and where the authority of the court of first 
instance to issue an order ancillary to the main suit 
depended upon a statute, the scope and applicability 
of which were subject to substantial doubt. * * * ”

Under these authorities, petitioners were guilty of con­
tempt, as they chose to disregard the temporary injunction 
rather than contesting it by orderly and proper proceedings.

Affirmed.

Livingston, C.J., Simpson and Harwood, JJ., concur.



91

[fol. 101]
I n Supreme Court oe the State oe A labama

The Court Met Pursuant to Adjournment 
Present: All the Justices

J efferson Circuit Court 
B essemer D ivision 

6th Div. 801: 802: 809

Dr. Edward R. F ields and National States R ights Party

vs.
City o e  F a i r f i e l d , a Municipal Corporation

J udgment— June 14, 1962
The said causes having been consolidated, Whereupon,
Come the parties by attorneys and the record and matters 

therein assigned for errors, being argued and submitted 
on motions and merits and duly examined and understood 
by the Court, it is considered that in the record and pro­
ceedings of the Circuit Court there is no error.

It Is Therefore Considered, Ordered and Adjudged that 
the judgment of the Circuit Court be in all things affirmed.

It Is Further Considered, Ordered and Adjudged that 
the Appellants-Petitioners, Edward R. Fields and Robert 
Elsworth Lyons, and D. Fred Short and Pearce S. Johnson, 
sureties on the appeal bond, pay the costs of appeal of this 
Court and of the Circuit Court.

And it appearing that said parties have waived their 
rights of exemption under the laws of Alabama, it was 
ordered that execution issue accordingly.



92

[fol. 102] [File endorsement omitted]

[fol. 103]
In Supreme Court oe the State oe A labama 

Sixth Division, No. 801, No. 802, No. 809

[Title omitted]

A pplication for R ehearing— Filed June 28, 1962
Comes Dr. Edward R. Fields and Robert Lyons, peti­

tioners and appellants in the above styled cause, and move 
this Honorable Court to grant them a Rehearing, and to 
reverse, revise and hold for naught its judgment rendered 
on, to wit: the 14th day of June 1962, and affirming the 
judgment of the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Bes­
semer Division in Equity, and to enter its order reversing 
and revising said judgment.

Petitioners and appellants further move the Court, in 
accordance with Rule 34, Revised Rules of the Supreme 
Court of Alabama, 1 February 1955, that the judgment 
of the Court be stayed or suspended during the pendency 
of the application for rehearing.

Submitted herewith is brief and argument in support of 
said motion.

J. B. Stoner, Of Counsel for Petitioners and Ap­
pellants.

Certificate of Service (omitted in printing).



93

[fol. 104]
I n Supreme Court of the State of A labama

The Court Met in Special Session 
Pursuant to Adjournment
Present: All tlie Justices 

[Title omitted]

Order Overruling A pplication for R ehearing—  
July 12,1962

It Is Hereby Ordered that the applications for rehearing 
filed in the above causes on June 28, 1962, be and the same 
are hereby overruled.

[fol. 105] [File endorsement omitted]

[fol. 106]
In Supreme Court of the State of A labama 

Sixth Division, Case Nos. 801, 802, 809 
Special Term, 1962

Ex P arte Dr. E dward R. F ields and R obert Lyons, 
Petitioners-Appellants

vs.
City of F airfield, Appellee

A pplication for Stay of E xecution—Filed July 25, 1962
Now come Dr. Edward R. Fields and Robert Lyons, 

Petitioners-Appellants in the above styled cause, who do 
hereby move this Honorable Court to grant them a stay 
of execution and a suspension of judgment for a period of 
ninety (90) days from July 12, 1962, on which date this 
Honorable Court did deny the Motion for Rehearing herein. 
Petitioners-Appellants do assign as grounds for the said 
stay of execution and suspension of judgment the necessity



9 4

for Petitioners-Appellants to be granted sufficient time to 
enable them to file a Petition for Writ of Certiorari or 
Appeal with the Supreme Court of the United States of 
America. Petitioners-Appellants do further aver that sub­
stantial questions with reference to the violation of their 
rights under the Fourteenth and First Amendments to the 
Constitution of the United States of America are involved 
herein.

And, Petitioners-Appellants do further pray that in the 
event such Petition for Writ of Certiorari or Appeal is so 
filed that the period of time of the said stay of execution 
and suspension of judgment be extended until such time 
as this cause be fully disposed of by the Supreme Court of 
the United States of America.

Respectfully submitted,
Charles Morgan, Jr. and Melvin L. Wulf, By: 

Charles Morgan, Jr., Of Counsel for Petitioners- 
Appellants.

[fol. 107] Certificate of Service (omitted in printing).

[fob 108]
In Supreme Court oe the State of A labama 

Special Session 1962 
6th Div. 801, 802, 809

Dr. E dward R. F ields and R obert Lyons, 
Appellants-Petitioners

vs.
T he City of F airfield, a Municipal Corp., 

Appellee-Respondent

Order Granting Stay of J udgment— July 26, 1962
Appellants-Petitioners, Dr. Edward R. Fields and Robert 

Lyons, having filed in this Court a petition for a stay of



95

the execution of the judgment rendered by this Court on 
June 14, 1962, in order that they may seek a review of the 
judgment of this Court in the Supreme Court of the United 
States by a Petition for Writ of Certiorari or appeal, and 
the same haying been duly examined and understood by 
this Court,

It Is Hereby Ordered and Adjudged that the judgment 
in these causes be and the same is hereby stayed until 
October 11, 1962, and if proceedings have been instituted 
in the United States Supreme Court on or before said date, 
then said stay shall remain in full force and effect until such 
[fol. 108a] time as this cause be fully disposed of by the 
Supreme Court of the United States, or until further orders 
of this Court.

[fol. 109]
In Supreme Court of the State of A labama 

October Term, 1961-62 
6 Div. 801:802:809

E dward R. F ields and National States R ights P arty, 
and R obert Lyons, Appellants,

vs.
City oe F airfield, a Municipal Corporation, Appellee.

Notice of A ppeal to the Supreme Court of the 
United States—Filed September 10,1962

I. Notice is hereby given that Edward R. Fields, the 
National States Rights Party, and Robert Lyons, the ap­
pellants above named, hereby appeal to the Supreme Court 
of the United States from the final order of the Supreme 
Court of Alabama affirming a judgment of conviction for 
contempt, entered herein on June 14, 1962.

This appeal is taken pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1257 (2).
Appellants were adjudged in contempt for violating an 

injunction issued ex parte under the purported authority 
of Sections 3-4, 3-5 and 14-53 of the General City Code of



96

the City of Fairfield, Alabama. Appellants Fields and 
Lyons were sentenced to serve 5 days in jail and pay a $50 
fine. Appellants are presently enlarged on $500 bond, 
execution of their sentences having been stayed by the 
Supreme Court of Alabama on July 26, 1962, pending dis­
position of this appeal by the Supreme Court of the United 
States.

II. The Clerk will please prepare a transcript of the 
record in this cause for transmission to the Clerk of the 
Supreme Court of the United States, and include in said 
transcript the following:

1. Bill of Complaint (with attached exhibit) of the City 
of Fairfield dated October 11, 1962, (sic) filed in the 
Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama, Bes­
semer Division.

2. Fiat Ordering Issuance of Temporary Injunction 
[fol. 110] signed by the Honorable Edward L. Ball, 
Judge of the Circuit Court, Jefferson County, on 
October 11, 1961.

3. Writ of Injunction issued on October 11, 1961 in 
compliance with the Fiat issued by the Honorable 
Edward L. Ball.

4. Report of Proceedings held on October 12, 1961 in 
the Circuit Court of the Tenth Judicial Circuit, State 
of Alabama, Jefferson County, Bessemer Division 
in the matter of City of Fairfield vs. Dr. Edward R. 
Fields, and National States Rights Party, and Mr. 
Robert Lyons, No. 19249 in Equity.

5. Judgment of Contempt filed October 12, 1961.
6. Notice of Appeal to Supreme Court of Alabama filed 

October 12, 1961.
7. Assignments of Error in Cases 5801 (sic) and 802 in 

the Supreme Court of Alabama.
8. Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed by appellants 

herein with the Supreme Court of Alabama.
9. Opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of 

Alabama, dated June 14, 1962.



97

10. Application for rehearing filed by appellants herein 
and order of the Supreme Court of Alabama, dated 
July 12, 1962, denying a rehearing.

11. Application by appellants herein for stay of exe­
cution of sentence.

12. Order of the Supreme Court of Alabama, dated 
July 26, 1962, staying execution of sentence.

III. The following questions are presented by this ap­
peal:

1. Whether Sections 3-4 and 3-5 of the General City Code 
of Fairfield, Alabama, upon which appellants’ contempt 
convictions rest, on their face or as construed and applied 
in this case, abridge appellants’ rights of free speech, press 
and assembly in violation of the due process clause of the 
Fourteenth Amendment and the First Amendment to the 
United States Constitution.

2. Whether Section 14-53 of the General City Code of 
[fol. 111] Fairfield, Alabama, upon which appellants’ con­
tempt convictions rest, on its face or as construed and 
applied in this case, abridges appellants’ rights of free 
speech, press and assembly in violation of the due process 
clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the First Amend­
ment to the United States Constitution.

3. Whether appellants’ convictions for contempt, being 
unsupported by any evidence of guilt, constitute wholly 
arbitrary official action and thereby violate the due process 
clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States 
Constitution.

Melvin L. Wulf, c /o  American Civil Liberties Union, 
156 Fifth Avenue, New York 10, New York;

Charles Morgan, Jr., 1512 Comer Building, Birming­
ham 3, Alabama,

Attorneys for Edward R. Fields, National States 
Rights Party, and Robert Lyons, appellants.

Proof of Service (omitted in printing).



98

[fol. 112]
In Supreme Court of the State of A labama 

October Term, 1961-62 
6 Div. 801:802:809

E dward E. F ields and National States E ights P arty, 
and E obert L yons, Appellants,

v.
City of F airfield, a Municipal Corporation, Appellee.

A mendment to Notice of A ppeal to the Supreme Court 
of the U nited States—Filed September 18, 1962

Notice is hereby given that Edward E. Fields, The Na­
tional States Eights Party, and Eobert Lyons, the Appel­
lants above named, hereby amend the Notice of Appeal 
to the Supreme Court of the United States previously filed 
in this case by adding to the questions presented therein, 
the additional question presented set forth below:

4. Whether consideration by the Supreme Court of the 
United States of a challenge on federal grounds to the va­
lidity of a municipal ordinance on its face, or as construed 
and applied, may be precluded where Appellants are found 
in contempt of an ex parte temporary injunction which 
purports to enforce compliance with the ordinance, and 
the state court refuses to entertain the merits of the chal­
lenge on the procedural ground that Appellants “ chose to 
disregard the temporary injunction rather than contesting 
it by orderly and proper procedure,” where the consequence 
of the state procedural rule is to nullify Appellants’ rights 
[fol. 113] of free speech, press and assembly in violation of



99

the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and 
the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Melvin L. Wulf, c /o  American Civil Liberties Union, 
156 Fifth Avenue, New York 10, New York;

Charles Morgan, Jr., 1512 Comer Building, Birming­
ham 3, Alabama,

Attorneys for Edward R. Fields, National States 
Eights Party and Robert Lyons, Appellants.

[fol. 114] Proof of Service (omitted in printing).
[fol. 115] Clerk’s Certificate to foregoing transcript 
(omitted in printing).

[fol. 116]
Supreme Court oe the U nited States 

No. 566, October Term, 1962

E dward R. F ields, et al., Appellants, 
vs.

City of F airfield.

Order Noting Probable Jurisdiction— March 18, 1963
Appeal from the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama.
The statement of jurisdiction in this case having been 

submitted and considered by the Court, probable jurisdic­
tion is noted. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief 
expressing the views of the United States.