Williams v. Iowa Petition for Writ of Certiorari
Public Court Documents
October 6, 1969
Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Williams v. Wallace Transcript of Record (Pages 1-355), 1965. 51b0421d-c99a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/a39284fb-90b7-4379-b512-0153c2728130/williams-v-wallace-transcript-of-record-pages-1-355. Accessed July 16, 2025.
Copied!
U ) A 1\£Ua a S \J ^ t l U o ^
SELMA
D ocu m en t T itle P age
Civil Docket US District Court 1-4
Complaint 5-11
Motion for Preliminary Injunction 12
Motion for Temporary Restraining Order 14-15
Order Denying Motion for Temporary Restraining Order 16-17
Duplicate Copy of Above (onion-skin, hard to read) 18-19
Return on Serving of Writ (Temporary Restraining Order)
• Fred Gray 20
• John Lewis 21
Order 22-23
Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order 24-25
Order 26
Plaintiff’s Memo of Points and Authorities 27-35
Order of US Intervenes (poor quality) 36-37
Complaint in Intervention 38-46
Cert of AG of US 47
Return on Service of Writ Order, Complaint in Intervention, Cert on
AG
• A1 Lingo 48
• James C. Clark 50
Petition to Show Cause Why Martin Luther King, Jr et al Should Not 52-55
be Punished for Contempt
Order Denying Motion For Temporary Restraining Order (poor 56-58
quality) marked Exhibit A
Exhibit B- Police Affiants March 9 58-59
Motion to make Injunction Permanent 60-63
George Wallace and Al Lingo 64-67
Return on Service of Writ Order Denying Motion for Temporary
Restraining Order
• Charles H. Jones, Jr 68
• Fred Gray 69
• Amelia Boynton 72
• Hosea Williams 73
• Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr 74
Order Denying Clark’s Motion to Make Injunction Permanent 75-76
Summon 78-79
Return of Service of Writ, Summons & Complaint, Motion for
Preliminary Injunction
• George Wallace 79
• James G. Clark 81
• Al Lingo 82
Duplicate of Above-Signed by Clark & Lingo as Unacceptable 83-85
Document Above Withdrawn from an Exhibit 89
Memo Transcript 499-507
Motion for Stay Preliminary Injunction Pending 508
Index-Witnesses Exhibits 509-514
Transcript
• Vol. 1 515-764
• Vol. 2 765-1027
• Vol. 3 1028-1275
Reply to: Attn, of Auja 1277-1278
Order for Return of Cash Appeal Bond 1279
Transcript, James Michael Barko 1280-1318
Order Denying Defendant Injunction 1319
Exhibit 1320-1325
Subpoena
• John Cloud 1326
• Annie Louree Fuller 1327
• Michael Benjamin Mosely 1328
• Richard Valeriani 1329
• John Cross 1330
• James Martin, Tom Lankford 1331
Subpoena Return on Service
• A1 Lingo 1332-133
• Leon Daniel 1334
• Returned Unexecuted 1335-1337
• George Stover 1338
• Mr. William (Bill) Jones 1339
Return on Service of Writ
• Al Ling 1340
• Hon. George C. Wallace 1341
Return on Service
• Al Lingo 1342
• Mrs. Addie Lily 1343
• C'eola Miller 1344
• Hon. Wilson Baker 1345
• Sister Michael Ann 1346
Attachment 1347
Return on Service, M.J. Anderson 1348-1349
Return on Service
• James G. Clark 1350
• Col. Al Lingo 1351-1352
• Jack Johnson 1353
• Arthur Worthy 1354
• Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. 1355
• Mr. Leon Daniel (not executed) 1356
• Mr. Curtis Reese (not executed) 1 j j /
1358
CIVIL DOCKET
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Jury demand date
D. C. Form N o. 106A R er.
TXTKJB O F CABS ATTORNEYS
Civil Action No. 2181-N
. HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS and
‘AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly
situated,
Plaintiffs,
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
vs .
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
G©V<£rii6R of the State of Alabama;
AL LINGO, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
STATISTICA L RECORD COSTS
For plaintiff:
Peter A. Hall V.
1630 4th Avenue N
Birmingham, Alabama
Gray & Seay
34 N. Perry St.
Montgomery, Alabama
Jack Greenberg
Norman Amaker
Charles H. Jones, Jr.
10 Columbus Circle
New York 19, New York
For defendant:
Goodwyn & Smith
Bell Bldg., Montgomery, Ala.
(for Governor Wallace)
John P. Kohn, Bell Bldg.,
Montgomery, Ala. (for Lingo)
Pitts & Pitts
Wilkinson, Wilkinson & Russell
T. G. Gayle, all of Selma, Ala.,
(for Sheriff Clark)
1 OR
RBCK IPT NO. B K DISB.
J.S. 5 mailed
J.S. 6 mailed
7/5/68
Basis of Action: Civi 1rights - Preliminary an
permanent injunctions
asked to restrain defen L
with non"violent effort in voter
registration in Ala. an>
in exercise of constitu
right to walk along hig] '
Clerk
Marshal
Docket fee
Witness feesants from
Depositions
lional
ways
3/8 Fred Gray
3-11 3/D-T-I4.6
3-18 Goodwyn &
Smith
3-214.465 C/D-T-I4I
15
5
00
00
15 00
00
1
Civil Action No. 2181-N
D A TS
3/8/65
3/9/65
I
I
I
I
^ 3/9/65 »»
I
, 3/10/65
■"3/10/65
i3/11/65
I
I
I
13/11/65
"3/12/65
3/13/65
3/15/65
I
*
I
I
I
i
Ii
ir
3/15/65
PROCEEDINGS D «te O rder or
Judgm ent N oted
.3/11/65
| 3/11/65
Complaint filed and summons issued.
Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary irijtm’efrion. -*"* <
" " temporary restraining order.
ORDER denying motion for temporary restraining order, temporary
restraining order, and setting cause for hearing on motion for
preliminary injunction.on Thursday, Marbh 11, 1965, at 9 a.m.
(Plaintiffs temporarily restrained from exercising "what they
claim to be a constitutional right to march, until the matter
can be judicially determined at an early hearing.”)
ORDER appointing U.S. as party to cause.
Plaintiffs' motion to dissolve temporary restraining order.
ORDER setting motion to dissolve temporary restraining order for
hearing on Thursday, March 11, 1965, at 9 a.m.
Complaint in intervention of U.S.
ORDER directing that complaint in intervention be filed, served
upon each of the defendants and upon attorneys for the plaintiffs and set for hearing at 9 a.m. on Thursday, March 11, 1965.
Defendant James G. Clark's petition for order for Rev. Martin
Luther King, et al., to show cause why they should not be held in contempt.
Defendant Clark's motion to make injunction permanent.
Defendant George C. Wallace's motion for order permanently
enjoining plaintiffs from conducting any march or mass
demonstration along U.S. Highway 80 between Selma and Montgomery,
Alabama, or along or upon any other public highway in State.
Marshal's returns on order of 3/10/65 and complaint in intervention
(^lih certificate of U.S. Atty. Gen. attached). Personal service
on w f 5 / ~ ay and charles «• Jones, Jr., attorneys for plaintiffs, on 3/10/65. ’
Marshal s returns on order of 3/9/65 denying motion for temporary
restraining order, temporary restraining order, and setting cause
for hearing. Personal service on Amelia Boynton, Hosea Williams
and Rev. Martin Luther King on 3/9/65 at Selma, Ala. Personal ’ service .on Î red Gray at Montgomery and John Lewis at Selma on 3/9.1^ORDER denying motion of James G. Clark, filed on 3/J.1/65, 'asking ' *
Court to enlarge into a permanent injunction the temporary restraining order of 3/9/65.
Marshal's returns on summons and complaint, motions for preliminary
i/o/cction ?nd for.temporary restraining order, and order of 3/9/65 denying motion for temporary restraining order, temporary restraining order, and setting cause for hearing. Personal
service on Honorable George C. Wallace as Governor of the State
of Alabama, James G. Clark as Sheriff of Dallas County, Alabama
and A1 Lingo, Director of Public Safety for State of Alabama, on 3/9/65. ’
Marshal's returns on order allowing U.S. to file complaint in
intervention and complaint in intervention. Personal service on Al Lingo and James G. Clark on 3/10/65.
r
D. C. 11QA Rev. Civil Docket Continuation
No. 2181-N 2
F f l ATLANTA----- 12 16 I S -----2 * 0 0
DATE
3/16/65
3/17/65
3/17/65
3/17/653/18/65
3/19/65
M ■
f t
PROCEEDINGS
^^1^-ntiffs' proposed plan for march from Selma, Alabama, to n^Montgomery, Alabama.
Objections of defendants Lingo and Clark to proposed plan.
Objections of defendant Wallace to proposed plan.
Marshal }s additional return on order denying motion for temporary
restraining order, etc., of 3/9/65. Personal service on
Peter Hall on 3/10/65.
Marshal's additional return on order of 3/9/65 denying motion for
temporary restraining order, etc. Personal service on Fred
Gray on 3/9/65.
Memorandum opinion.
Preliminary injunction. Defendants enjoined from arresting, etc.,
or interfering with march of plaintiffs and members of their
classin their march along U.S. Highway 80 from Selma, Alabama,
to Montgomery, Alabama, said march, as presently approved by
the Court to commence not earlier than Friday, March 19, 1965,
and not later than Monday, March 22, 1965, and from otherwise
obstructing, etc., plaintiffs' efforts to assemble and march
along U.S. Highway 80 from Selma, Alabama, to Montgomery,
Alabama, as proposed in plaintiffs' plan as approved by
the Court; defendants further restrained and enjoined from
failing to provide police protection for the march. Motion
of defendant Wallace for preliminary injunction denied;
motion of plaintiff-intervenor, U.S., for relief in addition to
that specifically granted in this order denied, and motion of
plaintiffs for relief in addition to that specifically granted
denied. Jurisdiction of all matters involved specifically
Urtfe 'oFeihjunction issued. iNotice of defendant Wallace of appeal from preliminary injunction.
Copies mailed by Clerk to Attorneys Fred D. Gray, Jack Greenberg,
John P. Kohn, Pitts & Pitts, Wilkinson, Wilkinson & Russell,
T. G. Gayle, and to John Doar, Acting Assistant Attorney General,
Civil Rights Division of Department of Justice.
Deposit of $250 by defendant Wallace as security for costs on appeal. . . . . . >
Motion of defendant Wallace for stay of preliminary injunction pending appeal.
ORDER setting motion for stay for hearing at 11 a.m. on 3/19/65.
Plaintiffs' opposition to motion for stay pending appeal.
ORDER denying defendants' motion for stay pending appeal.
File and exhibits delivered to John Doar, Acting Assistant
Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, Dept, of Justice,
for transmittal to Court of Appeals.
Court reporter's transcript of the testimony of A1 Lingo on
March 13, 1965, during the hearing of this case on March 11-16, 1965.
Court reporter's excerpt transcript of testimony of A1 Lingo on
March 12, 1965, during said hearing.
Date Order <
Judgment No
/22/65
/22/65
No. 2181-N
DATE
/29/65
/30/65
4/L-/65
4/2/65
4/17/65
/ 3 / 65
'23/6 7
/17/68
PROCEEDINGS
ORDER of Court of Appeals (entered by three-judge panel of that
court)on 3/19/65) denying stay during pendency of appeal.
Marshal s returns on writ of injunction, memorandum opinion, and
preliminary injunction. Personal service on McLean Pitts,
Attorney for Dallas County, Alabama, on 3/18/65. Personal
service on Sheriff James G. Clark, Plaintiffs' attorney Fred
D. Gray, John Doar, Attorney for Government, A1 Lingo, John
P. Kohn Jr., Hugh Maddox, and Governor George C. Wallace
on 3/17/65. Maury D. Smith, attorney, served on 3/17/65 by handing copy to John S. Bowman, attorney.
Court reporter's excerpt transcript containing the testimony of
John Cloud, witness in rebuttal for the U.S. in hearing
in this case March 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, said testimony having been adduced on March 16, 1965.
Court reporter's excerpt transcript containing testimony of
Asbury Middlebrooks, witness for defendant James G. Clark in
hearing in this case March 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, said testimony having been adduced on March 15, 1965.
Court reporter's excerpt transcript containing testimony of
James A. Hare, witness for James G. Clark in hearing
March 11, 12, 13, 15, 16; this testimony having been adduced on March 15, 1965.
Motion of defendant James G. Clark to dismiss complaint andcomplaint in intervention.
Court reporter’s excerpt transcript containing testimony of
Leatha Mae Stover, witness for the United States, in hearing
in this case March 11,12, 13, 15, 16, said testimony having been adduced on March 13, 1965*
Court'- reporter's excerpt transcript containing testimony of
Sallie Bett Rodgers, witness for the United States, in hearing
in this case March 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, said testimony having been adduced on March 13, 1965-
Court reporter’s exceprt trmscript containing testimony of
Frederick Douglas Reese, witness for the United States, in
hearing in this case March 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, said testimony
having been adduced on March 13, 1965.
Defendants' notice of withdrawal of notice of appeal.
0° r , „ rT rt<,r’S proceedings beiPre Judge Jotason
S h m S S ) °n M8r0h U ' 12> 13' 1S> 1965.
Court reporter's excerpt transcript of testimony of James Michael Barko.
Date Order or
Judgment Noted
)
ORDER closing this case for record purposes,
dissolved; jurisdiction not relinquished. Injunction not
(
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA.
NORTHERN DIVISION
— ---------------------------------------------------------- *
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS and
AMELIA BOYNTON, on b e h a lf o f
th em selves and o th e rs s im ila r ly
s it u a t e d , *
P l a i n t i f f s ,
V.
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as *
Governor o f the S ta te o f Alabama;
AL LINGO, as D ire c to r o f P u b lic
S a fe ty fo r the S ta te o f Alabama;
and JAMES G. CLARK, . , as *
S h e r i f f o f D a lla s County, Alabama,
D efen d a n ts.
*
CIVIL ACTION
NO.
COMPLAINT
This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1343(3)
and (4). The action is authorized by 42 U.S.C. §1971(a) and
(b) as amended and 42 U.S.C. §§1981 and 1983. This action
seeks relief from the denial of equal protection of the laws
under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution on account
of race or color and to redress deprivation of rights, privileges
and immunities guaranteed by the First, Fourteenth and Fifteenth
Amendments to the Constitution of the United States as implemented
by the aforesaid Congressional Statutes.
I I
The named plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of them
selves and all other persons similarly situated pursuant to
represented by plaintiffs are so numerous as to make it imprac
ticable to bring individually before this court all the persons
whose rights, privileges and immunities have been violated by
defendants' actions as hereafter set forth. However, there are
common questions of law and fact affecting the rights, privileges
and immunities of the named plaintiffs and the members of the
classes. The named plaintiffs adequately represent the interest
of the classes.
Ill
Plaintiff Hosea Williams is over the age of 21 years, and
is a resident of the State of Georgia and of the United States.
Plaintiff John Lewis is over the age of 21 years, and is a
native of the State of Alabama, presently residing in Atlanta,
Georgia, and of the United States. Plaintiff Amelia Boynton is
over the age of 21 years, and is a resident of the State of Ala
bama, and of the United States. Each of said named plaintiffs
belongs to that class or race of persons commonly designated
and referred to as Negroes.
Defendant Honorable George C. Wallace is the duly elected
Governor of the State of Alabama. As such, defendant Honorable
George C. Wallace is the chief executive officer of the State
of Alabama, with offices in the State Capitol, Montgomery,
Alabama. Defendant A1 Lingo is the Director of Public Safety
for the State of Alabama, having been appointed pursuant to
state statute, by the Governor of the State of Alabama. As
such director of Public Safety, defendant A1 Lingo is empowered,
inter alia, to enforce all laws pertaining to roads and highways
Plaintiffs and members of the class they represent,
have been working in Dallas County, Alabama and other adjacent
counties since 1963, in an effort to encourage and assist
Negroes to register and become voters and to persuade local
Boards of Registrars to register such people and allow them
to vote. Pursuant to this objective, they have participated
in mass meetings and peaceful demonstrations. Demonstrations
have been forcibly broken up and demonstrators arrested. In
addition, plaintiffs and members of the class represented by
them, have been harassed and beaten by State and local police
officers. For the last seven weeks, their efforts have been
intensified inspite of intimidation and brutality on the part
of State and local police. Because of such intimidation and
brutality, plaintiffs announced their intention to make a
peaceful, non-violent march on, to-wit; March 7, 1965, from
Selma, Alabama to Montgomery, Alabama, for the purpose of
soliciting the assistance of the defendant Honorable George C.
Wallace, Governor of the State of Alabama, in removing impedi
ments to voter registration of Negroes in Alabama.
That on or about to-wit, March 6, 1965, the defendant
Honorable George C» Wallace announced to the press and on T. V.
that, "such march cannot and will not be tolerated. . . and
that "there will be no march between Selma, Alabama and Mont
gomery, Alabama, and I have so instructed the Department of
Public Safety." A copy of said announcement is hereto attached,
marked Exhibit 1, and made a part hereof just as if fully set
out herein.
Pursuant to their announced plans, on Sunday, March 7,
v_.uuj.cu iucuLeu uu oyivau oueei jlu Dexma, uanas county, Ala
bama. They proceeded to walk through the City of Selma to
Braod Street where they turned left on Highway 80-East.
At this point they lined up in columns of two's and walking
three feet apart. They crossed the Pettus Bridge on their
way to Montgomery, Alabama, walking along the shoulders of the
highway. Said marchers were led by plaintiffs John Lewis and
Hosea Williams. Apparently, pursuant to the orders of Governor
George C. Wallace that there would be no such march, State
Troopers, standing shoulder to shoulder across the highway,
stopped the march after they had gotten across the bridge. As
the marchers approached within 50 feet of the troopers, they
were told over a public address system that that was as far
as they could go. They were informed that the march created
a traffic hazard and was forbidden by the Governor of Alabama.
Plaintiff Hosea Williams requested permission to speak to the
officer apparantly in charge, but was told that there would be
no talking and they had two minutes to disperse and go back to
the Churcho The marchers stood silently and after a very short
time, the State Troopers advanced on them and began beating
and jabbing the marchers with their billy clubs. The State
Troopers, joined at a point by Dallas County Sheriff James
Clark’s possemen mounted on horses, who began beating, jabbing
and riding the marchers down. Many of the marchers were bloody
and some were unconscious. State Troopers then put on gas
masks and fired tear gas bombs in the midst of the marchers.
The marchers tried to retreat back across the bridge to Selma.
The mounted possemen pursued the screaming and running marchers,
I l ( W »-♦ *-»*% V»l •!»•% u i » l_ u u n ■ L .1 1 r » u u i u n r w r u o i
T r o o p e r s a n d p o s s e m e n a l l t h e w a y b a c k t o t h e C h u r c h . Ma n y o f t h e Ma r c h e r s ,
I N C L U D I N G TWO OF THE P L A I N T I F F S JOHN L E W I S AND A M E L I A BOYNTON WERE I N J U R E D BY
BLOWS AND TEAR GAS AND R E Q U I R E D H O S P I T A L I Z A T I O N AND M E D I C A L A T T E N T I O N . A n
ACCOUNT OF THE MARCH WAS C A R R I E D IN THE MARCH 8, 1 9 ^ 5 E D I T I O N OF THE B I R M IN G H A M
N e w s , a c o p y o f w h i c h i s a t t a c h e d , Ma r k e d E x h i b i t ? , a n d m a d e a p a r t h e r e o f
J U S T A S I F FU LLY S E T OUT H E R E I N .
V
T h e a c t s o f D e f e n d a n t s a s a f o r e s a i d w e r e a c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e i r e f f o r t s
TO FR U S T R A T E THE A C T I V I T I E S OF P L A I N T I F F S AND OTHER MEM BERS OF THE C L A S S THEY
R E P R E S E N T TO GET N EGRO ES IN D A L L A S COUNTY AND N E IG H B O R IN G C O U N T I E S R E G I S T E R E D .
L e s s t h a n t h r e e ( 3# ) p e r c e n t o f t h e p o t e n t i a l N e g r o v o t e r s i n D a l l a s
C o u n t y a r e r e g i s t e r e d . A s i m i l a r l y n e g l i g i b l e n u m b e r o f N e g r o e s i s r e g i s t e r e d
J>N N E IG H B O R IN G POBW COUNTY. IN THE N E I G H B O R I N G C O U N T I E S OF LOWDNES AND W l L C O X ,
n o N e g r o e s a r e r e g i s t e r e d a s v o t e r s .
P l a i n t i f f s a l l e g e a n d a v e r , t h a t t h e a c t s o f t h e D e f e n d a n t s c o m p l a i n e d o f
H E R E I N , I S A D E N I A L TO P L A I N T I F F S , AND M EM BERS OF THE C L A S S THEY R E P R E S E N T , OF
EQUAL P R O T E C T IO N OF THE LAW GUARANTEED UNDER THE FO URTEENTH AMENDMENT TO THE
C o n s t i t u t i o n o n a c c o u n t o f r a c e o r c o l o r ; o f t h e r i g h t t o v o t e a n d t h e r i g h t
TO F R E E S P E E C H AND FREEDOM TO P E A C E F U L L Y A S S E M B L E TO P E T I T I O N FOR R E D R E S S OF
G R I E V A N C E S .
VI
P l a i n t i f f s d e s i r e t o c o n t i n u e t h e i r p e a c e f u l n o n - v i o l e n t e f f o r t i n b e h a l f
o f N e g r o v o t e r r e g i s t r a t i o n i n A l a b a m a , i n c l u d i n g t h e r i g h t t o r e d r e s s t h e i r
G R I E V A N C E S BY W A LK IN G P E A C E F U L L Y ALONG THE P U B L I C H IGHWAY OF THE S T A T E OF
A l a b a m a , b e t w e e n S e l m a a n d Mo n t g o m e r y a n d o t h e r p l a c e s w i t h i n s a i d S t a t e , a n d
TO E X E R C I S E OTHER C O N S T I T U T I O N A L R I G H T S A S H E R E I N A B O V E A L L E D G E D .
I r r e p a r a b l e i n j u r y t o P l a i n t i f f s a n d t h o s e s i m i l a r l y s i t u a t e d h a s o c c u r r e d
AND THE THREAT OF C O N T IN U IN G AND FUTURE I R R E P A R A B L E I N J U R Y AND HARM I S I M M IN E N T
U N L E S S D E F E N D A N T S ARE E N J O I N E D AND R E S T R A I N E D BY T H I S COURT FROM D E P R I V I N G
P l a i n t i f f s a n d t h o s e s i m i l a r l y s i t u a t e d o f t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t s s e c u r e d
t h e : F o u r t e e n t h A m e n d m e n t t o t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e Un i t e d S t a t e s .
HAVE NO OTHER ADEQUATE OR COMPLETE REMEDY OTHER THAN T H I S S U I T FOR
P l a i n t i F F S
I N J U N C T I V E
R E L I E F
R E S T R A I N I N G AND E N J O I N I N G D E F E N D A N T S T H E I R S E R V A N T S , A G E N T S , S U C C E S S O R S
AND A L L P E R S O N S IN A C T I V E CONCERT AND P A R T I C I P A T I O N W ITH THEM FROM
A R R E S T I N G , H A R R A S S I N G , T H R E A T E N IN G OR I N ANYWAY I N T E R F E R I N G WITH
OF P E A C E F U L N O R - V I O L E N T EFFORT IN B E H A L F OF NEGRO VOTER R E G I S T R A T I O N IN A L A . AND
P L A I N T I F F S C O N S T I T U T I O N A L L Y PRO TE CTE D R I G H t/ t O WALK A L O N G R ID E THE
P U B L I C H IGHWAYS OF THE S T A T E OF A L A B A M A .
2. T h a t t h i s C o u r t e n t e r a p r e l i m i n a r y a n d p e r m a n e n t i n j u n c t i o n ,
R E S T R A I N I N G AND E N J O I N I N G D E F E N D A N T S T H E I R S E R V A N T , A G E N T S , S U C C E S S O R S
AND A L L P E R S O N S IN A C T I V E CONCERT AND P A R T I C I P A T I O N W ITH THEM FROM
F A I L I N G AND R E F U S I N G TO P R O V I D E P R O T E C T I O N FOR P L A I N T I F F S AND OTHER
M EM BE R S OF THE C L A S S THEY R E P R E S E N T , IN E X E R C I S E OF T H E I R C O N S T I T U T I O N A L L Y
PRO TECTED R I G H T TO WALK A L O N G S I D E THE P U B L I C H IGHWAY OF THE S T A T E OF
A l a b a m a .
3. T h a t t h i s C o u r t g r a n t t o p l a i n t i f f s s u c h o t h e r f u r t h e r a n d
G E N E R A L R E L I E F TO WHICH P L A I N T I F F S MAY BE E N T I T L E D , I N C L U D I N G T H E I R
C O ST S AND R E A S O N A B L E A T T O R N E Y S F E E S .
B i r m i n g h a m , A l a b a m a
GRAY & SEAY
3 4 N o r t h P e r r y S t r e e t
Mo n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a
JACK GREENBERG
NORMAN AMAKER
CHARLES H. JONES, JR
! 0 C o l u m b u s C i r c l e
N e w Y o r k 19, N. Y.
A T T O R N E Y S FOR P L A I N T I F F S
• i n - m v u u u u i o i m u i wi m r\i
NORTHERN D IV IS IO N
HOSEA W ILLIAM S, JOHN LEWIS a n d
AMELIA BOYNTON, o n b e h a l f o f
T H E M S E L V E S AND O THERS S I M I L A R L Y
S I T U A T E D ,
*
P l a i n t i f f s , * C I V I L ACTION
VS
HONORABLE GEORGE X . WALLACE, a s
G o v e r n o r o f t h e S t a t e o f A l a b a m a ;
A l L i n g o , a s D i r e c t o r o f P u b l i c
S a f e t y f o r t h e S t a t e o f A l a b a m a ;
a n d JAMES G . CLARK, a s S h e r i f f o f
D a l l a s C o u n t y , A l a b a m a ,
D e f e n d a n t s .
P l a i n t i f f s , u p o n t h e i r v e r i f i e d c o m p l a i n t f i l e d h e r e i n m o v e t h e C o u r t
t o g r a n t a p r e l i m i n a r y i n j u n c t i o n h e r e i n a g a i n s t d e f e n d a n t s a n d a l l o t h e r p e r s o n s
UNDER T H E I R D I R E C T I O N AND A U T H O R I T Y , I N C L U D I N G A G E N T S , S U B O R D I N A T E S , E M P L O Y E E S ,
A T T O R N E Y S , S U C C E S S O R S AND A L L P E R S O N S A C T I N G IN CONCERT WITH THEM P E N D I N G THE
F I N A L D E T E R M I N A T I O N OF T H I S A C T I O N AND U N T I L THE F I N A L ORDER OF T H I S COURT,
E N J O I N I N G THEM FROM T A K I N G ANY A C T I O N TO I N T E R F E R E WITH THE P L A I N T I F F S '
OF P E A C E F U L N O N - V I O L E N T EFFOR T IN B E H A L F OF N E Q R O - V O T E R R E G I S T R A T I O N IN ALA B A M A AND
C O N S T I T U T I O N A L L Y PRO TE CTE D R I G H T / T O P E A C E F U L L Y WALK ALONG THE P U B L I C H IGHWAYS OF
t h e S t a t e o f A l a b a m a a n d t o t a k e a p p r o p r i a t e m e a s u r e s t o p r o t e c t a n d g u a r a n t e e
P l a i n t i f f s ' a f o r e s a i d c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t s o n t h e g r o u n d t h a t u n l e s s r e s t r a i n e d
b y t h i s C o u r t , d e f e n d a n t s w i l l c o n t i n u e t o d e p r i v e p l a i n t i f f s o f t h e i r c o n s t i t u
t i o n a l r i g h t s w i t h r e s u l t a n t i m m e d i a t e i r r e p a r a b l e i n j u r y , l o s s a n d d a m a g e t o
P L A I N T I F F S AND M EM BERS OF THE C L A S S THEY R E P R E S E N T DU R IN G THE PENDENCY OF T H I S
A C T I O N A S MORE F U L L Y A P P E A R S FROM THE C O M P L A IN T H E R E I N .
MOTION FOR PRELIM INARY INJUNCTION
STATE OF ALABAMA
: S S
COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY )
B e f o r e m e , t h e u n d e r s i g n e d a u t h o r i t y i n a n d f o r t h e C o u n t y
o f Mo n t g o m e r y , S t a t e o f A l a b a m a , p e r s o n s l l y a p p e a r e d H o s S a W i l l i a m s ,
w h o a f t e r b e i n g f i r s t d u l y s w o r n , d e p o s e s a n d s a y s t h a t h e r h a s
READ THE F O RE GO IN G C O M P L A IN T AND THAT THE CONTEN TS TH ERE O F AR E TRUE
AND CORRECT TO THE B E S T OF H I S KNOWLEDGE AND B E L I E F , .
T m r v m j m
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED
B E F O R E ME T H I S 8 t H DAY OF
Ma r c h , 1 9 ^ 5 •
NORTHERN D IV IS IO N
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS,
and AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf
of themselves and all others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
V.
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE,
as Governor of the State of
Alabama; AL LINGO, as Director
of PUBLIC SAFETY of the State
of Alabama; and JAMES G. CLARK,
JR., as Sheriff of Dallas County,
Alabama,
Defendants.
MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Plaintiffs, and members of the class they represent, based
on the allegations contained in their verified complaint attached
hereto, respectfully move this court for a temporary restraining
order, without notice, enjoining defendants, their agents, employees
successors, and those in active concert and participation with
them, from enforcing and giving effect to defendants' stated in
tentions of preventing plaintiffs from exercising their constitu
tionally protected right to peacefully walk along the public
highways of the State of Alabama, by harassing, beating,
terrorizing, or otherwise interfering with plaintiffs in the
exercise of their aforesaid constitutionally protected right.
Plaintiffs and other members of the class which they
represent, are planning to attempt another march on Tuesday,
March 9, 1965, from Selma, Alabama, to Montgomery, Alabama
for the purpose of soliciting the aid and assistance of the
*
*,v ^*
*
CIVIL ACTION
* NO. frl $1 -tJ
*
*
*
the S ta te o f Alabam a, in th e ir e f f o r t s to g e t q u a l i f ie d
Negroes in Alabama r e g is t e r e d to v o te .
P l a i n t i f f s , on b e h a lf o f th em selves and oth er members
o f the c la s s they r e p r e s e n t , fu r th e r show unto the Court
th a t u n le ss im m ediately r e s tr a in e d by t h is C ou rt, defendants
w i l l con tin u e the a c ts and p r a c t ic e s com plained o f in the
v e r i f i e d com plain t a tta ch e d h e r e to , and ir r e p a r a b le in ju r y
w i l l r e s u lt b e fo r e n o t ic e can be served and a h earin g can be
had.
WHEREFORE, p l a i n t i f f s , on t h e ir b e h a lf and on b e h a lf
o f o th e rs s im ila r ly s i t u a t e d , r e s p e c t f u l ly pray th a t the
co u rt is s u e a tem porary r e s tr a in in g order w ith ou t n o tic e
r e s tr a in in g d e fe n d a n ts , t h e ir a g e n ts , s e r v a n ts , em ployees,
su c c e sso rs and th ose in a c t iv e co n c ert and p a r t ic ip a t io n w ith
o f p e a c e fu l n o n -v io le n t e f f o r t in b e h a lf o f Negro r e g is t r a t io n and
them from in t e r fe r in g in any way w ith p l a i n t i f f s ' r i g h t /t p
p e a c e fu lly w alk a lon g the highways o f the S ta te o f Alabama,
and from f a i l i n g and r e fu s in g to p rov id e p r o te c t io n fo r
p l a i n t i f f s and members o f the c la s s they r e p r e s e n t , in the
e x e r c is e o f t h e ir c o n s t i t u t io n a l ly p r o te c te d r ig h t to walk
a lo n g s id e the p u b lic highways o f the S ta te o f Alabama.
R e s p e c t fu lly Subm itted,
I >
FI LED
HOS&A WILLIAMS JOHN LEWIS
and AMELIA BOYNTON, on D e h a I o £
chenueLyes aid o:;h»r*r<* s im i la r ly
s i t u a t e d ,
1 j a in t i f r ^ .
HONORABLE ’ iORGE C *1 *Ai ^
J
Governor o f die State o f Alabama
Ai- LINGO, as D ire ct or o f Public
Safety f o r the St at v o f A^abaoiaj
acn JAMES G. CLARE, as S h er i . : : o f
D allas County blab ai.*a,
By
ivii- a c t :
MAR 0 - ':RG5
it. G. .1
Clerk
Deputy Clerk
2 ! H1 ■ M
he fopdanLz
ORDER rJ£LY 1L<; MOTION
ORDER . AND SKTfirci_CAUSE FOR ffiSAKIi
. TEMTOEAKY
On MOTION Ft
•. '2 II-'JRAKY RES’ll
e a r .This caast
tut exhibit;* th e re to , f i l e d with the Clerk o f d i j s Cot r
eo«pIainr. and e x h ib it s th ere to are advanced in support:
a ; eujf r rary res ■ Lvz order :a y res
to t i e defend .n
>0. NA.il ITNCTIOE
> np .1. a ' n i , r.ogct'-e. r. w > vU
Ha t ci: 1. ’ o 5 . o
: - ■,.. >; ion
o . t o hearing and w: chout formal. s. ;
‘ irreparable, in jury w il l r e s u lt b
l i a r.
no t iC ’ : i.u- k-ei."
he had . 11
An c-ramina t ion c f the
a t the p ia i . i t > i t s and Cha reiuhe . :
Laiiit. together with the
ir*C C ! 3 .S 5 Cftv* / •"** j . f* : \i
■jC I S
'i:. dii;or!
•* >.i courage and assn ; t Negroes to ragj sr.t.r and becone voters and tc; vers V'-’idc i rv.al
boar le o f reg ia t/:-ars m Che Stai f o f Alabama to regi>iter- Negroes and a L O * t:h« ni
to VOti, attempted k march a long the p«’h l i c tlighway <.'!> March 7, 1915, L'O’il S e i aa
Munĉ ooicry« Alflbvir̂î 1 £c mmrch vr•> p p:. * . • .
the a s s is ta n c e o f the Honorable George C. Wallace Gov**rno he Sta » o f Alabama
:n removing Impediment's to v o te r r e g i s t r a t i o n o f Nfcg.i.ct i.i »•>.« Sr.a e f ••xXabaaw
m at sa id planned march was ha lted under the i n s n icc ion s o f tne .vert uc through
L;se o f e x c e s s i ve fo rce by the Alabama State Trrx'pars a.to the Da Courier
s h e r i f f togeth er with i t s deputies ant) pcsaeioen. h la ln t i f tK sav that they Cor.j
to reaune th e ir r ig h t cc redress th e ir grievances by walking a ion , ’ the w h i t e
highway o f the S tate o f Alabama between Selma AlxHina ft f f* Ft < »1
t io n f o r is su in g a temporary r e s t r a in in g order w ithout n o t ice to the defendants
and w ithout a hearing* Ihere w i l l be no ir re p a ra b le harm i f the p l a i n t i f f s w i l l
await a j u d i c i a l determ ination o f the -flatters in v o lv e d .
I n order to a f f o r d the p a rt ie s to th is l i t i g a t i o n an opportu n ity to
p resen t t h e ir ev iden ce upon the motion f o r a pre lim inary in ju n c t io n that was f i l e d
with the C lerk o f th is Court at 4 :30 o.ra. on March 8, 1963, ta is Court is o f the
op in ion that there should be an ea r ly hearing upon said m otion.
c o n s id e r a t io n o f the fo r e g o in g and f o r good cause, i t is the ORDER,
JUDGMENT and DECREE o f th is Court that the motion o f the p l a i n t i f f s f i l e d h ere in
f c r a cemcccsry r e s t r a in in g order be and the sar.e is hereby den ied .
In order to p r o t e c t the i n t e g r i t y o f th is Court and to prevent the
j u d i c i a l p rocesses from being fr u s tra te d by the p l a i n t i f f s and other members or
th e ir c la s s con t in u in g to attempt to e n fo r ce the r ig h ts they seek to have
j u d i c i a l l y determined in th is Court, i t appears that i t w i l l he to tne best
in t e r e s t o f a l l concerned and w i l l work r.o i r re p a ra b le in ju ry or narm to p l a i n t i f f s ,
or members o f th e ir c l u i , i f they are ordered to r e f r a in from attem pting to
e x e r c is e what they c la im to be & c o n s t i t u t i o n a l t i g h t to march, u n t i l the matter
can be j u d i c i a l l y determined a t an e a r ly h earin g .
I t Is the fu r th e r ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE o f th is Court that the
p l a i n t i f f s and other members o f tn e ir c l a s s , and those a c t in g in co n ce r t with
them, be and each is hereby en jo in ed and re s tr a in e d from attem pting to march
f j o u Selma, Alabama, to Montgomery, Alabama, u n t i l th is Court can have a reasonable
op p ortu n ity to make a ju d i c i a l determ ination as to the r e s p e c t iv e r ig h ts o f the
p a r t i ta to th is ca s e .
I t is the. fu r th e r ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE o f th is Court that the
motion o f the p l a i n t i f f s f o r * prelim inary in ju n c t io n be and the same i s hereby
r e t f o r a hearing to commence a t 9 a .w . , Thursday, March 11,
Done, th is the 9th day o f March, 1965.
b m s u *DISTRICT
wost* aiixmts. jui utvp
t i i i n l x i aj«f wtoer* i t a U t f l ;
a itu o te d »
»laU*t#«e
i m i w r o f tta i U U « f A Ij^ n i ,
ax. i.iWBC, m vtraatev o f f t » l k
t le t / fur c m W te # f lawaa*.
•Ml JMM 9 . (U K , ae W rtff o f
)
)
)
)
)
>
)
)
>
f i l e d
* . C Dof*’o \ .V i , k i\
IWmr i
civil. «if<» iv». nti<«
TMa eMM> u M V »iSwal t t*J « I the w n rlfta l c<4*il*i'.*t, rojpethar v i i l
t t# M b lM U ( h M M , f lie d % U * H h C lK t o f th is ( M r t ctt i , IH 5 , M l« fc
. M U D M Mat « iX M l* DM U to i f * mOmmmat* tm a f M tk n tm
a nrrpTTninr im ccK bI ^ «vi»r. tt» reagKirery w » triM n | » ttir U ra p orted with*
out • h a trD ii an* K t l M t ( m m i1 notice to D m drfeoftaact <« tW tSm&ry that
irreoaeotto te la ry M i l l r e ee l t M e n notice ee» fce s e m t cat « M er i t c«*»
A* inetlnn «| t k eoatLeiat. together **efc the reflects
c m He pleJM tifte aari tie* * a N « o f Dm etaea A ** r*W M W t. in K e ffo r t te
mi ii— | i art u « u t Megruea to an* teoaae '.Atm art to eersuade lo c a l
iK o e H o f M f U t n m la D m s ta r t o f AlaM a to n p la t t r Htgraea a rt a llo o U r n
to eeta, c t to M C M a a e c t) a l o g tea jwfcUc tU r ta y «a Merc* 1, I M , tt<m S * la i,
n t in n o , to |> n ft — r.1 , A la ta a a : th at *n M mare* aaa fa r tim purge** a f a o llc it t o *
to i i niliiji ia m ila iiM * to ra te r re - le t re t io« a f Kagrcaa to the :to M o f A lateen*
i t i i aato pieaaee aorr i «a# ta lto a order toe U > »trm xio m at too t wa n w r , ttcoe gt
cto .«a of rcceoelve ferae by to* M ahan* Stote ftto tp M * a r t toe Aoltoe Cooaty
• t a r if f , togpettar vltfe t ie i apia ioa aod .meaem . . ^ i^ c i i f e eoy tone tto> doelco
to roaoee to a ir r l« t t to rrtteee toe it y to *aaea» % f a l H s s * !« ** too p to lU
a — a a
Am # At* an*# !«•*.
F o r m N o . U 8 M 282
Edition 4-22-55
RETURN ON SERVICE OF WRIT
flimteb States* of America,
MrpnLE_____District op __
Hossa w illiam s et a l
vs C-2181-N
Hon. George C. Wallace e t a l
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
(Writ)
on the therein-named_____ A tty . Fred D. Gray_____ ___________ ____ __________________
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof w ith__him, Fred D. Gray,
(Individual or agent of company, corporation, etc.)
personally at -JDftaa.J?xugsjtflrft._____ Qii .Mo.nrce.„_at_.LaHr_ence..5bBfifi.ta............... ...... .......
(Address— Street number, apartment number,
rural route, etc.)
at______ Montgomery,....................... ................. Alabama______
(City) (State)
at i ? j l £ _ _ . _ J 6 K —p. m., on the.. ..... 2th_____ day of ..March
in the said District
196iL.
Marshal’s fees_______ fe 3 .0 0
Mileage_________________ ____
W illiam M. Parker Jr
United States Marshal.
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 18----1 7 7 7 7 - 2
Deputy.
F o r m N o . U 8 M 282
Edition 4-22-55
RETURN ON SERVICE OF WRIT
®mtefc &tatea of America,
Middle____ District of
ss:
Hosea Williams e t a l ,
vs CA-2181-M
Honorable George C. W allace e t a l
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed PLes^rari:LnE Order
(Writ)
on the therein-named__________________ ..„<?ohn_Lgj£lJL________________ ____
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof with him, John Lewis
(Individual or agent of company, corporation, etc.)
personally at Brown Chapel Church ____ ___________ _________ ________________________
(Address— Street number, apartment number,
rural route, etc.)
a t........... .............Ss.lma*---------- ----- -------------------Alabama................... ....... jn the said District
(City) (State)
at .-klkCL.. s&W—p. m., on the........... 5 t h _ day o f ____ March___________, 19 .65..
William M. Parker Jr.
Marshal’s fees____________ Il„3-*Q0 _ United. States Marshal.
1 i *
Mileage______________ _____. 1 2 * 6 0 By 6-/. , -t- & ________
i Deputy.
U- S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1C----1 7 7 7 7 -2
r l L C u
HOi'EA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS
and AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly
s i t u a t e d .
Plaintiffs,
vs.
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
AL LINGO, aa Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
end JAMES G. CLARK, aa Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
1 MAR 9 - 1365
) K, 0. DOBSON
Clerk
) J10!3 .............
Depir Clerk
)
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-S
)
)
)
)
)
O R D E R
It appears to the Court that this case has been filed as of
March 8, 1965, with the Clark of this Court, by the plaintiffs acting through
their attorneys; and it further appears that the said plaintiffs ask this Court
for temporary and permanent injunctive relief against the Governor of the State
of Alabama, the Director of Public Safety for the State of Alabame, and others;
and it further appears that these plaintiffs and members of the class they
represent seek to have this Court declare their constitutional right to march
along certain public highways of the State of Alabama for the purpose of demonstrat
ing against certain impediments to voter registration of Negroes in the State of
Alabama. These plaintiffs ask this Court to mske and enter the necessary orders
assuring their constituttone1 right and the constitutional right of other members
of their class to protest said alleged discrimination by the named officials of
the State of Alabama by marching along the public highways of this State.
Upon consideration of the foregoing, this Court is of the opinion
that the public interest in the administration of justice, of lsw and order, and
of protecting the authority and integrity of the lawfully constituted courts of
the United States should be represented in these proceedings. To tills end, this
Court is of the opinion that it is now appropriate and necessary that the United
States be designated to appear and participate In all proceedings in this action
before this Court, to accord this Court the benefit of its views and raccanenda*
tfnns. with the rlszht to submit nleedinss. evidence, arguments and briefs, and
and preserve the due administration of justice and the integrity of the judicial
authority of the United States of America• Faobufi v. United States. 8th Cir.f
1958, 254 F. 2d 797; cert, denied 358 U.S. 829; Btfjjh, ££. jj. v. ffirllMMI f«rt»il
School Board, at al.. 188 F. Supp. 916, aff’d 365 U.S. 569; Buahx at_aj. v.
Orleans Pariah School Board, et aj_., 190 F. Supp. 86i, aff'd 366 O.S. 212;
United State* v. Barnett. 5th Cir. 1962 (unreported but discussed in 330 F. 2d 3691) .
In accordance vlth the foregoing and for good cause, it is the
ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE of this Court that the United States of America be
end it ie hereby designated to appear and participate In all proceedings in this
action before this Court as a party thereto. It is the further ORDER, JlfM2£MT
and DECREE of this Court that the Attorney General of the United states, and
such attorneys in the Department of Justice as lie may designate, he and he la
hereby appointed to appear and participate in behalf of the United States in
this action before this Court.
Done, this the 9th day of March, 1965.
JL1N J.riE. UlNliLLI D I A lt a U l i) 1JS. XL. I LUUKi £ UK i t it
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS
and AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
*
Plaintiffs
vs * CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE,
as Governor of the State of *
Alabama; AL LINGO, as Director
of Public Safety for the State *
of Alabama; and JAMES G. CLARK,
as Sheriff of Dallas County, *
Alabama,
MOTION TO DISSOLVE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Now come the plaintiffs in the above entitled cause by
and through their Attorneys of Record, and move the court to
dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order heretofore filed in
this cause whereby the plaintiffs and other members of their
class were enjoined and restrained from attempting to march
from Selma, Alabama to Montgomery, Alabama; and as grounds
for said motion assign the following:
1. That this court lacked jurisdiction to enter said
2. That said order violates plaintiffs right to freedom
of speech, freedom of assembly to petition the government for
redress of grievances, and other rights secured by the First
*
Defendants.
*
order.
Constitution of the United States of America with respect to
the plaintiffs efforts to march, in that there is no case or
controversy and no such relief had been requested by the
defendants.
4. That said Temporary Restraining Order violates the
rights of the plaintiffs and the class which they represent
to due process of law as provided by the Fifth Amendment to
the United States Constitution.
WHEREFORE p l a i n t i f f s pray th a t sa id Temporary R e stra in in g
Order be d is s o lv e d .
Respectfully submitted
GRAY & SEAY, A 1 ia
34 North Perry Street
Montgomery, Alabama
PETER A. HALL
1630 Fourth Avenue North
Birmingham, Alabama
JACK GREENBERG
NORMAN AMAKER
CHARLES H. JONES, JR.
10 Columbus Circle
New York 19, New York
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
2
FILED
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS )
and AMELIA BCKNTON, on behalf of
theaoelvea and others similarly )
situated,
)
Plaintiffs,
)
va.
)
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of Alabama; )
AL LINGO, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama; )
and JAMES G. CLARE, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama, )
Defendants. )
It is ORDERED that the motion to dissolve the temporary restrain
ing order of this Court, said motion having been filed with this Court at 2:30
p.a. on this date, be and the same Is hereby set for submission at 9 a.a.,
8?
MAS 0 - '355
it C. DOBSON
Clerk!
Depart '» k
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
Thursday, March 11, 1963.
Done, this the 9th dey of March, 1963.
/• dN • % / - .
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DISTRICT
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS, AMELIA BOYNTON,
on behalf of themselves and others similarly
situated,
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL ACTION NO, 2181-N
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as Governor
of the State of Alabama, AL LINGO, as Director of Public Safety for the State of Alabama and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff of Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
PLAINTIFFS* MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND MOTION TO DISSOLVE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST PLAINTIFFS
I.
The Court Is Without Power Or Jurisdiction To Grant Or Continue The Temporary Restraining Order Issued Against
Plaintiffs.
A. The Court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief against
plaintiffs because there is no claim for relief against them pre
senting a justiciable case or controversy within the meaning of
Article III of the Constitution of the United States.
1. No party to the action has asserted a claim for an
injunction against plaintiffs, thus an essential element of a case
or controversy is absent.
a. Havburn* s Case. 2 Dali. 409, 1 L.ed. 436 (1792).
b. Fong Yue Ting v . United States. 149 U.S. 698,
729 (1893).(The elements of a civil case include, at least, "a complainant, a defendant, and a iudoe--actor. reus, et judex.11)
l i lt . _ — J_
statutes upon which this suit is based to grant relief against
private persons who are not subject to the Fourteenth Amendment.
a. Congress Of 54 (5th Cir. 1963 v v. Cl
Held Federal Court had no'Li, 323 F.2d
jurisdiction over suit by city officials against civil rights demonstrators.)
b. KgJLLy y. Page, 335 F.2d 114, 117 (5th Cir. 1964).
Judge Tuttle dissolved Temporary Restraining Urder obtained by city against civil rights demonstrators for lack of jurisdiction, on motion for stay. Full panel of Court did not reach the question of jurisdiction because trial judge entered no further injunction against civil rights group.)
c* R,aC*al £qû l l t y v - Douolas.318 F . 2 d9 5 (5th Cir. 1963). (Held that injunction against Freedom Riders was denial of First Amendment rights.)
3. There is no power to issue a Temporary Restraining
Order against plaintiffs on the theory that it involves a matter
ancillary to their claim or to protect the Court's jurisdiction
over the subject matter. There was no claim that plaintiffs were
threatening to do any act which would oust the Court of jurisdiction
over plaintiffs’ pending claim.
3. Sh w M.ttip.n, Co,,
(General equity powers can only be asserted in cases within the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts as defined by the Congress.)
b - ?ee» £a.ntain v. Ravenel. 17 How. (US) 369,15 L.ed. 80 (1855).
C * to % a^ ° / C Qt v t Koehn.fi, 188 U.S. 681,690, 47 L.ed. 651, 656, 23 S.Ct. 452 (1903).
^ ' There has been no pleading or motion by any party
asserting a claim against plaintiffs, or requesting that the relief
be granted as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
T T h P ^ i S l ^ K ^ Ryle 65(6).I The Rule forbids Temporary Restraining Orderswithout notice and hearing unless specific factsare shown by "affidavit or verified complaint"demonstrating immediate and irreparable injury,loss, or damage to "the applicant" before noticecan be served and a hearing had thereon.)
Peaceful March From Selma To Montgomery,Alabama.
A . A peaceful march to protest deprivation of constitutional
rights, and to urge the State Government to correct such depriva
tion is protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution,
as an exercise of freedom of speech, assembly and petition for
redress of grievances. Edwards v. South Caroling. 372 U.S. 229;
£2*..V« ____ U.S. ____ , 33 L.W. 4099 (January 18, 1965).
Plaintiffs here have at all times wished to conduct a
peaceful, non-violent march to the Capitol of the State of
Alabama in order to protest the deprivation of Negro citizens of
their right to vote. They began such a march on Sunday March 7,
1965; the marchers were entirely peaceful, and the only violence
that ocurred was at the hands of State law enforcement officials.
It is clear that such a demonstration is protected under the First
Amendment to the Constitution. The recent case of Cox v.
iojyjLsia&a, ^.UEpa, involved a march on the Louisiana State Capitol
Building by approximately 2,000 persons protesting segregation and
discrimination against Negroes. The Supreme Court held that the
arrest of demonstrators was a violation of the First Amendment of
the Constitution as incorporated in the Fourteenth Amendment.
Similarly a federal court should not enjoin the conducting of
such a peaceful demonstration Kelly v. Page. 335 F.2d 114 (1964).
B. The right of citizens of the United States to move
freely within the country is an attribute of liberty protected by
the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. See, Kent
357 U.S. 116, 125-127; Edwards v. California. 314 U.S.
160, 181 (Douglas, J. concurring); Slaughter House Cases. 83 U.S.
36, 78-80. As a protected right, it should not be interfered with
except under extraordinary circumstances. Kent v. D u I I p s . supra.
v i i C J V Wi l t s O I
violence or other public disturbance against persons seeking to
exercise peacefully a constitutionally protected right is not a
ground for interfering with them* £ ok .¥, Louisiana, surra, 33
L.W. 4102-4103. If violence is threatened, the proper remedy is
to restrain or move against those threatening the violence.
£o.QPer y, Aaron, 358 U.S. 1; Aaron v. Cooner. 257 F.2d 33 (8th
Cir. 1958).
III.
This Court Should Exercise Its Power To Grant Plaintiffs And Members Of Their Class The Injunctive Relief Prayed For.
A. This Court Has Jurisdiction To -Eo-ioin The Defendants Herein
Jurisdiction of this Court is based upon 28 U.S.C.
§1343, which provides:
§1343. Civil rights and elective franchise.
The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action authorized by law to be commenced by any person:
* * * * *
(3) To redress the deprivation, under color of any State law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage, of any right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution of the United States or by any Act of Congress providing for equal rights of citizens or of all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States.
(4) To recover damages or to secure equitable or other relief under any Act of Congress providing for the protection of civil rights, including the right to vote.
This suit in equity is "authorized" by 42 U.S.C. §1983,
which provides:
§1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights.
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or
pruceeomg ior xeaxess.
B. There Exists Ample Precedent For Eederal^ Injunctive Relief Against Denials °f Fedexal Constitutional jllfolS fiy St.atQ Eavy.Enf oygerngnj
2£jUsflti.
In Kelly v. Page. 335 F.2d 114 (5th Cir. 1964), the
United States Couxt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was
confronted with a somewhat similar fact situation: a dispute
had broken out between Negroes protesting denials of their
federal constitutional rights and the city administration of
the city of Albany, Georgia; demonstrations had been held to
protest these denials of constitutional rights; the demonstrators
sued in federal court for an injunction against interferences
with their demonstrations by the city officials; the city
officials cross-claimed to enjoin the demonstrators from continuing
their protests; the district court denied all injunctive relief;
the Court of Appeals, however, held that the district court should
determine the rights of the parties, saying:
First, as to the rights of plaintiffs, those espousing civil rights through the Movement, it has long been settled, indeed from the beginning, that a citizen or group of citizens may assemble and petition for redress of their grievances*First Amendment, U.S. Const. . . . Edwards v. South Carolina. 1963, 372 U.S. 229. . . A march to the City Hall in an orderly fashion, and a prayer session within the confines of what plaintiffs seek would appear, without more, to be implicit in this right.
. . . And these rights to picket and to march and to assemble are not to be abridged by arrest or other interference so long as asserted within the limits of not unreasonably interfering with the right of others to use the sidewalks and streets, to have access to store entrances, and where conducted in such manner as not to deprive the public of police and fire protection.
. . . In short, those engaged in the Albany Movement have definite well defined constitutional rights. They must be accorded where claimed, but in a manner that will accommodate rights of other citizens to the end that the rights of all may be preserved.
trom, inter alia:
[Djenying to Negro citizens the right to peacefully protest against state enforced racial segregation in the
City of Albany, Georgia by peacefully walking two abreast upon the public sidewalks of the City of Albany, observing all traffic signals, walking close to the building line or close to the curb so as not to interfere with or obstruct other pedestrian traffic on the sidewalk and peacefully assembling in frontof the City^Hall and peacefully speaking out against said segregation for a reasonable period of time when traffic to and from^places of business or employment is not at its peak, and in such circumstances as will not unduly disrupt the public peace and conducted in such manner as not to deprive the public of adequate police and fire protection.
[Prohibiting or preventing the activities described
[above] . . .by arrests, threats of arrest, harassment or
intimidation.
Xn Boynton v. Clark. United States District Court, S.D.
Ala., No. 3559-65, United States District Judge Thomas, guaranteed
the right of plaintiffs herein to protest against denials of
voting rights, saying, in an order entered January 23, 1965
Those interested in encouraging others to register
to vote have the right peaceably to assemble outside the court house, but shall not do so in such a way as to interfere with lawful business expected to be transacted in the court house. Such persons also have a right to peaceably assemble without molestation, and will be permitted to do so; but violence, either by those so assembled or officers entitled to surveillance over such assemblages, or on the part of outsiders, wil be tolerated at such assemblage.
Not only are such assemblages entitled to occur, but those so assembled are entitled to have lawful
protection in such assemblage.
This order in nowise is intended to interfere with the legal enforcement of the laws of the State of Alabama, Dallas County, or the City of Selma. But under the guise of enforcement there shall be no intimidation, harassment or the like, of the citizens of Dallas County legitimately attempting to register to vote, nor of those legally attempting to aid others in registering to
vote or encouraging them to register to vote.
In Zellner v. Lingo. 218 F. Supp. 513 (M.D. Ala. 1963)
aff’d. 334 F.2d 620 (5th Cir. 1964), this Court had before it
facts which bear a striking superficial similarity to the
facts of the instant case. There, the plaintiffs had planned a
"freedom march" through the State of Alabama as a memorial to
one William Moore, who was shot and killed on a similar walk.
this Court against Director ot fUDiic gaiety Dingo, seeding an
injunction against interference with the exercise of their
First and Fourteenth Amendment rights to walk peacefully through
the State. Subsequent to the time the suit was filed, but prior
to decision by this Court, plaintiffs were arrested for breach
of the peace by defendant Lingo and those acting under his
direction and control.
Preliminarily, this Court found that it had jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. §1343 (218 F.Supp at 515). However, this Court
refused to grant injunctive relief against the arrest and
prosecution of the plaintiffs, because it found that the
plaintiffs, under the doctrine of Douglas v. Jeannette. 319 U.S.
157 (1943), could protect their rights in the state court
system. However, this Court noted (218 F.Supp. at 518):
The action now being taken by this Court in refusing to enjoin the criminal prosecution of these plaintiffs by officers acting under color of law for the State of Alabama must not be construed as an approval of the action taken by these officers in arresting and prosecuting these plaintiffs under the guise of maintaining and preserving the peace and tranquility of the State of Alabama. (emphasxs
supplied;.
There is a crucial difference between the facts of this
case and those in Zellner: Here, there is no possibility of
plaintiffs’ protecting their rights in the state court system,
the purpose of defendants, as evidenced by their actions of2/March 7th and by their published statements, is not to punish
plaintiffs consistent with due process of law, but to punish them
summarily with the club and the whip.
V7 See, to the same effect. State of A l a b a m a _ v S h i n e ,
233 F. Supp. 371 (M.D. Ala. 1964).
2/ Defendant Lingo was quoted by correspondent John Herbersin the New York Times of March 9, 1965, p. 23, as saying, «We don’t believe in making arrests . . . It is better to
break them up."
a aeniai oi due process ot law and, considering tne nature ot
the protest, a denial of equal protection of the laws, but also
constitutes infliction of cruel and unusual punishment, in
violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Robinson v .
California. 370 U.S. 660 (1962).
C. Plaintiffs’ right to demonstrate peacefully cannot be
abridged by a proclamation that is overbroadly drawn. This
case does not involve the validity of narrowly drawn statutory
traffic regulations that impose reasonable limitations on the
holding of marches. Edwards v. South Carolina. 372 U.S. 229,
236. Rather, here there is a proclamation by the Governor that
bans completely all marches without regard to manner, time, or
number of marchers. It is clear that the right to march and
petition for a redress of grievances is protected by the First
and Fourteenth Amendments, Cox v. Louisiana. ___ U.S.____ , 33
U.S. L.W. 4099 (January 18, 1965).
Cox also reaffirmed that demonstrations may not be banned
by the exercise of a discretion unbridled by standards or
procedures, for "the lodging of such broad discretion in a public
official allows him to determine which expressions of view will
be permitted and which will not. This thus sanctions a device
for the suppression of the communication of ideas and permits
the official to act as a censor." 33 U.S.L.W. at 4105. See also,
Garner v. Louisiana. 368 U.S. 157, 202 (Harlan, J. concurring).
D. Plaintiffs’ Peaceful March Cannot Be Outlawed Because of the Hostile B£a,£.UQn, if woyj,(j ..Engender
It is well settled that persons acting in the exercise of
the constitutionally protected rights of free speech, assembly,
and petition cannot be punished or interfered with because of the
acts of hostile onlookers. The United States Supreme Court said
in Wrioht v. Georgia. 373 U.S. 284 (1963):
Li jne possiDinxy oi aisoraer oy otners cannot justify exclusion of persons from a place if they otherwise have a constitutional right (founded upon the Equal Protection Clause) to be present. Taylor v. Louisiana, 370 US 154, 8 L ed 2d 395,82 S Ct 1188; Garner v Louisiana, 368 US 157,174, 7 L ed 2d 207, 219, 82 S Ct 248; see also Buchanan v Warley, 245 US 60, 80, 81, 62 L ed 149, 163, 38 S Ct 16, LRA 1918C210, 3_/
Respectfully submitted,
FR^D GRAY34 North Perry Street f Montgomery, Alabama
t
PETER HALL1630 Fourth Avenue North Birmingham, Alabama
JACK GREENBERG JAMES M. NABRIT, III NORMAN C. AMAKER CHARLES H. JONES, JR. MELVYN ZARRCHARLES STEPHEN RALSTON
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
3 / See also, Barr v. City of Columbia. 378 U.S. 146, 150 (1964); Cox v. Louisiana. 33 U.S. L.W, 4099, 4102-^103
(January 18, 1965).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DISTRICT
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS, AMELIA BOYNTON,
on behalf of themselves and others similarly
situated,
Plaintiffs,
v. : CIVIL ACTION
NO. 2181-N
11 ONCRABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as Governor
of the State of Alabama, AL LINGO, as :
Director of Public Safety for the State
of Alabama and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff
of Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
PLAINTIFFS1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AMD AUTHORITIES IN
SUPPORT OE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND MOTION
TO DISSOLVE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST PLAINTIFFS
I,
The Court Is Without Power Or Jurisdiction To Grant Or
Continue The Temporary Restraining Order Issued Against Plaintiffs.
A. The Court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief against
plaintiffs because there is no claim for relief against them pre
sent Lug a justiciable case or controversy within the meaning of
Article til of the Constitution of the United States,
i, No party to the action has asserted a claim for an
injunction against plaintiffs, thus an essential element of a case
or controversy is absent.
a, H ayburn * s C a s e 2 Da.li. 409, 1 L.ed. 436 (1792),
b , Eon cl Yue Tina v. United States, 149 U.S. 690,
729 (189377 " ‘
(The elements of a civil case include, at
least, "a complainant, a defendant, and
a judgeQ-actpr. reus , at. . judex. " )
c, Osborn v. Banlg_..Qx.,ta_e_ United States, 9 Wheat. 738,
819 (1824 J7
(Requirement of adverse parties asserting rights
is pre-requisite to the exercise of judicial
power.)
2. The Court has no jurisdiction under the Civil Rights
statutes upon which this suit is based to grant relief against
private persons who are not subject to the Fourteenth Amendment.
a. Congress Of Racial Equality v. Clemmons. 323 F.2d
54 (5th Cir") 1963). (Held Federal Court had no
jurisdiction over suit by city officials against
civil rights demonstrators. )
b. Kelly v. Page. 335 F.2d 114, 117 (5th Cir. 1964).
"(Chief Judge Tuttle dissolved Temporary Restraining
Order obtained by city against civil rights
demonstrators for lack of jurisdiction, on motion
for stay. Full panel of Court did not reach the
question of jurisdiction because trial judge
entered no further injunction against civil
rights group. )
c. Cf. Congress Of Racial Equality v. Douglas.
318 F .2d 95*(5th Cir. 1963T (Held that
injuncxion against Freedom Riders was denial
of First Amendment rights.)
3. There is no power to issue a Temporary Restraining
Order against plaintiffs on the theory that it involves a matter
ancillary to their claim or to protect the Court's jurisdiction
over the subject matter. There was no claim that plaintiffs were
threatening to do any act which would oust the Court of jurisdiction
ever plaintiffs' pending claim.
a. Briaos v. United States Shoe Machinery Co..
239 U.'S. 48, 50 0.915).
(General equity powers can only be asserted
in cases within the jurisdiction of the
Federal Courts as defined by the Congress.)
b. See, Fop.tain v. Ra'venel. 17 How. (US) 369,
15 L.ed." 80 (l855).
c. See also, Indiana Mfq. Co. v, Koehne. 188 U.S. 681,
690, 47 L.ed. 651, 656, 23 S.Ct. 452 (1903).
4. There has been no pleading or motion by any party
asserting a claim against plaintiffs, or requesting that the relief
be granted as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 65(b).
(The Rule forbids Temporary Restraining Orders
without notice and hearing unless specific facts
are shown by "affidavit or verified complaint"
demonstrating immediate and irreparable injury,
loss, or damage to "the applicant" before notice
can be served and a hearing had thereon. )
- 2
II.
This Court Should Not Continue Its Order
Restraining Plaintiffs From Conducting A
Peaceful March From Selma To Montgomery,
Alabama.
A. A peaceful march to protest deprivation of constitutional
rights, and to urge the State Government to correct such depriva
tion is protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution,
as an exercise of freedom of speech, assembly and petition for
redress of grievances. Edwards v> South Carolina. 372 U.S. 229;
Cox v, Louisiana. _____U.S. . 33 L.W. 4099 (January 18, 1905).
Plaintiffs here have at all times wished to conduct a
peaceful, non-violent march to the Capitol of the State of
Alabama in order to protest the deprivation of Negro citizens of
their right to vote. They began such a march on Sunday March 7,
1965; the marchers were entirely peaceful, and the only violence
that ocurred was at the hands of State law enforcement officials.
It is clear that such s demonstration is protected under the First
Amendment to the Constitution, The recent case of Cox v.
Louisiana, supra, involved a march on the Louisiana State Capitol
3uilding by approximately 2,000 persons protesting segregation and
discrimination against Negroes. The Supreme Court held that the
arrest of demonstrators was a violation of the First Amendment of
the Constitution as incorporated in the Fourteenth Amendment.
Similarly a federal court should not enjoin the conducting of
such a peaceful demonstration Kelly v. Page. 335 F.2d 114 (1964).
B. The right of citizens of the United States to move
freely within the country is an attribute of liberty protected by
the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, See, Kent
v« Dulles. 357 U.S, 116, 125-127; Edwards v. California. 314 U.S.
160, 181 (Douglas, J. concurring); Slaughter House Cases. 83 U.S.
36, 78-80, As a protected right, it should not be interfered with
except under extraordinary circumstances, Kent v. Dulles, supra.
3
C, There is no showing here that the enjoining of
plaintiffs was necessary. It is clear that the threat of
violence or other public disturbance against persons seeking to
exercise peacefully a constitutionally protected right is not a
ground for interfering with them, Cox v. Louisiana, sucre. 33
L.W. 4102-4103, If violence is threatened, the proper remedy is
to restrain or move 3gainst those threatening the violence.
Coco a.r v. .Aaron, 358 U.S, 1: Aaron v. Cooper, 257 F, 2d 33 (8th
Cir, 1953),
III.
This Court Should Exercise Its Power
To Grant Plaintiffs And Members Of
Their Class The Injunctive Relief
Prayed For.
This Court Has Jurisdiction To
E_n iojn The Defendants Herein
Jurisdiction of this Court is based upon 28 U.S.C.
§1343, which provides:
§134 3, Civil rights and elective franchise.
The district courts shall have original
juri sd iction of any civil act ion authorized
by law to be commenced by any parson:
* * * * *
;3) To redress the deprivation, under color of
any State law, statute, ordinance, regulation,
custom or usage, of any right, privilege or
immunity secured by the Constitution of the
United States or by any Act of Congress provid
ing for equal rights of citizens or of all
persons within t'ns jurisdiction of the United
Stages»
(4 ) To recover damages or to secure equitable or
other relief under any Act of Congress providing
for the protection of civil rights, including the
right to vote.
This suit in equity is "authorized" by 42 U.S.C. §1983,
which provides:
§1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights.
Every person who, under color of any statute,
ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any
State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be
subjected, any citizen of the United States or
ether person within the jurisdiction thereof to
the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or
immunities_secured by the Constitution
shall be liable to the party injured in
action at law, suit in equity, or other
proceeding for redress.
and laws
an
proper
3- Ihere— Salats Ample Precedent. Fnr
Federal.^ Injunctive Relief Against
Denials Of Federal .Constitutional
Bights Bv -State Law Enforcement
Officers.
In i^Uy-V^Paoe, 335 F.2d 114 (5th Cir. 1964), the
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was
confronted with a somewhat similar fact situation: a dispute
had broken out between Negroes protesting denials of their
feoer^j. constitutional rights and the city administration of
the ciry of Albany, Georgia; demonstrations had been held to
protest these denials of constitutional rights; the demonstrators
sued in federal court for an injunction against interferences
with their demonstrations by the city officials; the city
officials cross-claimed to enjoin the demonstrators from continuing
their protests; the district court denied all injunctive relief;
tne Court of Appeals, however, held that the district court should
determine the rights of the parties, saying:
First,^as to the rights of plaintiffs, those
espousing civil rights through the Movement, it
has long been settled, indeed from the beginning,
t.nat a citizen or group of citizens may assemble
and petition fox redress of their grievances,
r^rst Amendment, U.S. Const. . . , Edwards v. South
Cgroxina, 1963, 372 U.S. 229. . . A march to the
City Hall in_an orderly fashion, and a prayer
session within the confines of what plaintiffs seek
would appear, without more, to be implicit in this right.
. . . And these rights to picket and to march
and to assemble are not to be abridged by arrest or
other interference so long as asserted within the
limits of not unreasonably interfering with the
right of others to use the sidewalks and streets, to
have access to store entrances, and where conducted
in such manner as not to deprive the public of police
and fire protection.
. . . In short, those engaged in the Albany
Movement have definite well defined constitutional
rights. They must be accorded where claimed, but
in a manner that will accommodate rights of other
citizens to the end that the rights of all may be
preserved.
5
On remand, the District Judge enjoined the city officials
from, inter alia:
[Djenying to Negro citizens the right to peacefully
protest against state enforced racial segregation in the
City of Albany, Georgia by peacefully walking two
abreast upon the public sidewalks of the City of Albany
observing all traffic signals, walking close to the
building line or close to the curb so as not to interfere
with or obstruct other pedestrian traffic on the sidewalk
and peacefully assembling in front of the City Hall and
pesceiUlly speaking out against said segregation for a
reasonable period of time when traffic to and from places
ct business or employment is not at its peak, and in such
circumstances as will not unduly disrupt the public
peace and conducted in such manner as not to deprive the
public of adequate police and fire protection.
r , [Prohibiting or preventing the activities described
i_a ove _ • , « oy Sixests, threats of arrest, harassment or
intimidation.
In Boynton v. Clark. United States District Court, S.D.
Aj.a., No, 35o9-65, United States District Judge Thomas, guaranteed
the right of plaintiffs herein to protest against denials of
voting rights, saying, in an order entered January 23, 1965:
Those interested in encouraging others to register
to vote have the right peaceably to assemble outside
the court house, but shall not do so in such a way as to
interfere with lawful business expected to be transacted
in "the court house. Such persons also have a right to
peaceably assemble without molestation, and will be
permitted to do so; but violence, either by those so
assembled or officers entitled to surveillance over
such assemblages, or on the part of outsiders, will not
be tolerated at such assemblage.
Not only are such assemblages entitled to occur,
but those so assembled are entitled to have lawful
protection in such assemblage.
This order in nowise is intended to interfere with
the legal enforcement of the laws of the State of
Alabama, Dallas County, or the City of Selma. But under
the guise of enforcement there shall be no intimidation,
harassment or the like, of the citizens of Dallas County
legitimately attempting to register to vote, nor of
those legally attempting to aid others in registering to
vote or encouraging them to register to vote.
In Zeliner v,.Lingo, 213 F. Supp. 513 (M.D. Ala. 1963)
aff’a. 334 F.2o 520 (5th Cir. 1964), this Court had before it
facts which bear a striking superficial similarity to the
facts of the instant case. There, the plaintiffs had planned a
"freedom march" through the State of Alabama as a memorial to
one William Moore, who was shot and killed on a similar walk.
- 6 -
Prior to their entry into the state, plaintiffs filed suit in
this Court against Director of Public Safety Lingo, seeking an
injunction against interference with the exercise of their
First and Fourteenth Amendment rights to walk peacefully through
the State. Subsequent to the time the suit was filed, but prior
to decision by this Court, plaintiffs were arrested for breach
of the peace by defendant Lingo and those acting under his
direction and control,
Preliminarily, this Court found that it had jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C, §1343 (218 F.Supp at 515). However, this Court
refused to grant injunctive relief against the arrest and
prosecution of the plaintiffs, because it found that the
plaintiffs, under the doctrine of Douglas v, Jeannette. 319 U.S.
157 (1943), could protect their rights in the state court
system. However, this Court noted (218 F.Supp, at 518):
The action now being taken by this Court in
refusing to enjoin the criminal prosecution of
these plaintiffs by officers acting under color of
law for the State of Alabama must not be construed
as an approval of the action taken by these officers
in arresting and prosecuting these plaintiffs under
the guise of maintaining and preserving the peace
and .tranquility of the State of Alabama. (emphasis
supplied),
There is e crucial difference between the facts of this
case and those in Zellner: Here, there is no possibility of
plaintiffs’ protecting their rights in the state court system;
the purpose of defendants, as evidenced by their actions of
2/March 7th and by their published statements, is not to punish
plaintiffs consistent with due process of law, but to punish them
summarily with the club and the whip.
T7 See, to the same effect, State of Alabama v. Shine.
233 F. Supp, 371 (M.D. Ala. 1964]“
2/ Defendant Lingo was quoted by correspondent John Herbers
in the New York Times of March 9, 1965, p. 23, as saying,
"V.'e don't believe in making arrests . . . It is better to
break them up."
7
The infliction of summary punishment not only constitutes
s denial of due process of law and, considering the nature of
the protest, a denial of equal protection of the laws, but also
constitutes infliction of cruel and unusual punishment, in
violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Robinson v.
Californie, 370 U.S. 660 (1962).
C. Plaintiffs' right to demonstrate peacefully cannot be
abridged by a proclamation that is overbroadly drawn. This
case does not involve the validity of narrowly drawn statutory
traffic regulations that impose reasonable limitations on the
holding of marches. Edwards v. South Carolina. 372 U.S. 229,
236. Rather, here there is e proclamation by the Governor that
bans completely all marches without regard to manner, time, or
number of marchers. It is clear that the right to march and
petition for a redress of grievances is protected by the First
and Fourteenth Amendments, Cox v. Louisiana. ____U.S._„__, 33
U.S. L.W. 4099 (January 18, 1965).
Cox also reaffirmed that demonstrations may not be banned
by the exercise of a discretion unbridled by standards or
procedures, for "the lodging of such broad discretion in a public
official allows him to determine which expressions of view will
be permitted and which will not. This thus sanctions a device
fox the suppression of the communication of ideas and permits
the official to act as a censor." 33 U.S.L.W. at 4105. See also,
Garner v., Louisiana. 368 U.S. 157, 202 (Harlan, J. concurring),
D. Plaintiffs' Peaceful March Cannot
Be Outlawed Because of the Hostile
Reaction It Would F.naender
It is well settled that persons acting in the exercise of
the constitutionally protected rights of free speech, assembly,
and petition cannot be punished or interfered with because of the
acts of hostile onlookers. The United States Supreme Court said
in .'.'right v. Georgia. 373 U.S. 284 (1963):
8
[T]he possibility of disorder by others cannot
justify exclusion of persons from a place if they
otherwise have a constitutional right {founded
upon the Equal Protection Clause) to be present,
Taylor v. Louisiana, 370 US 154, 8 L ed 2d 395,
82 S Ct 1188; Garner v Louisiana, 368 US 157,
174, 7 L ed 2d 207, 219, 82 S Ct 248; see also
Buchanan v Warley, 245 US 60, 80, 81, 62 L ed 149,
163, 38 S Ct 16, LRA 1918C210, 3_/
Respectfully submitted,
FRED GRAY
34 North Perry Street
Montgomery, Alabama
PETER HALL
1630 Fourth Avenue North
Birmingham, Alabama
JACK. GREENBERG
JAMES M. NABRIT, III
NORMAN C. AMAKER
CHARLES H. JONES, JR,
MELVYN ZARR
CHARLES STEPHEN RALSTON
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
3 / See also, Barr v. City of Columbia. 378 U.S, 146, 150
(1964); Cox v. Louisiana, 33 U.S, L„W„ 4099, 4102t4103
(January 18, 1965),
j • v ', • .. /,l ; :: At': A
*.S*A WILLIAMS, JOHN LKWZ£ )
r i L f c
and AMELIA EcfHIUS, on behalf
of threeelves and others )
stellarly situated, R C. i'H !i*C)N, tBy,,w
Plaintiffs,
) ©•’'UV Cler!
)WIT*® -TATtr OP AMERICA,
)
alaIntIff-Intervener,
)
CIVIL ACTIO* HO. mi-ti
)
mmmMdx c u m c . m m jlack , **
Cov*roar o f the S U U o f M ihaea; )
AA UMPd. M HrvtetoT of ublic
Safety for the "ta t* of Alaoaea, )
•ad 0 . CLAIUC, aa Sheriff of
Lei loo County, Alabons, )
!>•« andante. >
u u «
Xho •otton of the United Statoe. presented to this Court o n ehla
date, teaming to Intervene as a p la in t if f , la im m subm itted. Upon consider a t lem
o f the com plaint in in tervention aa f ile d by the United sta te * la th is cauae.
i t appear* O u t the issu e s presently fo r data rati net loo between the p la in t i f fa
end the defendants are not enlarged or subs taut t a lly changed by tHo ccsqualnt
la interviotIon of the United States, and there does not appear to be any roeeon
why the ccsaplalnt in intervontlon should not ba filed and a hearing heard thereon
at the sane t i m aa the hearing originally scheduled la this caee coweenclng at
9 a .e . , March U . IM S .
In consideration of the foregoing and for good cause, it t* the OHM*,
J i i x a & M and PKCRKt of this Court that the notion of the United States seeking
leave to intervene L* this cause ba aud th« tu a m is hereby granted. It is the
further uMHBl, JlKSCKl and DKJUCf of this Court that the hearing upon the Issue*
involved in the conplaint in intervention be set commclft* at 9 March U .
IM S .
It ia further OR&tfcEL that the United Scat** Marshal for this district
serve open ths defendants copies of the conplelnt in intervention as filed herein,
together with e copy of this order.
it la further QHMItffl that p m ( M «# rk*> I d € r tf' f r* foal a.d ^
1
IL
i
1
i
iij
i
i
i
i
i
I
■
ii
i
i
i
l
l
i
I
l
• (this 10th day of March, 1969.
***** M. JOHNSON, j r .
W l!» S M S S D ISTtSCT JWCT
wist. * — 19Certtfi®4 to
?■■ C- I,:’M f , 3 i 3 t r l r t C M * .
.'■...via fl ».-v“ u
— ----— " Deputy -levV:V1
IN THE UNITED STATES D IS T R IC T COURT FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
HOSEA WILLIAMS, ET AL., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
Plaintiff-Intervenor, )
)
v. )
)
GEORGE C. WALLACE, ET AL.,) COMPLAINT IN
) INTERVENTION
Defendants. )
_______________________________ )
The United States of America, intervenor herein,
alleges as a claim against the defendants:
1. This is a complaint in intervention filed
by the Attorney General pursuant to the order of this
Court designating the United States as a party and
pursuant to the provisions of Section 902 of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964.
2. On March 8, 1965, the plaintiffs filed
their complaint in this case under 28 U.S.C. 1343(3)
and (4), for relief against alleged conduct of the
defendants George C. Wallace, Albert J. Lingo, and
James G. Clark, Jr., in violation of 42 U.S.C. 1971(a)
and (b), 42 U.S.C. 1981, and 42 U.S.C. 1983.
3. The Attorney General has certified that
this case is of general public importance and his
certificate is attached to this complaint in inter
vention.
4. George C. Wallace is the Governor and
Chief Executive Officer of the State of Alabama; in
such capacity he is charged with the faithful execu
tion of the laws of the State of Alabama; in such
capacity he controls and supervises the defendant
Albert J. Lingo, Director of the Department of Public
Safety; and in such capacity he controls and directs
the activities of the Alabama Highway Patrol. He
resides in Montgomery, Alabama.
5. Albert J. Lingo is the Director of the
Department of Public Safety of the State of Alabama.
As such, he is the head of the Alabama Highway Patrol.
He resides in Montgomery, Alabama, and has been
Director of the Department of Public Safety at all
times referred to in this complaint.
6. James G. Clark, Jr., is the Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama, and, as such, is authorized
2
to enforce the laws of Alabama within Dallas county.
He resides in Dallas County. He has been Sheriff
of Dallas County since November 1955. The law
enforcement officers (hereinafter referred to as
officers) under Clark's command are his deputies
and the Dallas County Sheriff's Posse. The deputies
are full-time, trained law enforcement officers and
the posse members are part-time volunteers.
7. Under Alabama law, registration is a pre
requisite to voting in any election.
8. In several counties in central Alabama,
including Dallas and Perry Counties, fewer than
10% of the Negroes of voting age are registered to
vote. For the purpose of obtaining better political
representation for Negroes in these counties the
Negro communities, through local and national organ
izations, have conducted voter registration drives
in recent years. The voter registration drives in
Dallas, Perry, and other central Alabama counties
have been intensified during 1965.
9. Public demonstrations have been held in
connection with the voter registration drives referred
to in the preceding paragraph. The purpose of the
demonstrations has been to encourage Negroes to
attempt to register to vote and to protest discrimin
atory voter registration practices in Alabama. The
demonstrations have been peaceful.
3
10. On February 10, 1955, at about 2:30 p.m.,
approximately 160 Negro youths lined up in a quiet
and orderly fashion on two sides of the Dallas County
Courthouse in Selma, Alabama. They had assembled to
protest against the discriminatory treatment of Negroe
attempting to register to vote, and to urge qualified
Negro adults to attempt to register. They carried
signs to express their purpose.
11. At about 2:45 p.m. on February 10, 1965,
the defendant Clark, knowing of the purpose of the
demonstration described in the preceding paragraph,
forced the demonstrators to march through the City of
Selma and out into the countryside. Deputies and
members of the Sheriff’s posse, accompanying the line
of march on foot and in Sheriff's Department automo
biles moving behind, alongside, and in front of the
group, forced the youths to move at a rapid and fre
quently running pace. The officers used electric
shocking devices and night sticks to prod the demon
strators. After the demonstrators had been forced to
march over two miles, the children broke away and ran
towards farmhouses and into the fields off to the sidr
of the road. Some of the Sheriff's men pursued the
children and attempted to force them to resume the
march. After a short time all the Sheriff's men
V t V .J V *-< \— x m v A
leaving the children scattered in the fields and
around the farmhouses.
12. On February 18, 19S5, approximately 300
Negroes met at the Zion Methodist Church in Marion,
Alabama. At about 9:30 p.m., the Negroes began
leaving the church in an orderly and peaceful manner
and proceeded toward the Perry County Jail and the
Perry County Courthouse for the purpose of publicly
protesting racially discriminatory voter registration
practices in Perry County and the recent arrest of a
Negro participant in the voter registration drive.
When the Negroes had gone about half a block they were
ordered to stop by local law enforcement officials.
The Negroes stopped. They were then ordered to disperse.
13. Knowing of the purpose of the demonstration
referred to in the preceding paragraph, State Troopers
under the command of defendant Lingo, without lawful
justification, pushed, prodded, struck, beat and
knocked down members of the group of Negroes described
in the preceding paragraph when the group failed to
disperse immediately. The action of the State Troopers
resulted in the injury of approximately twenty Negroes.
14. During the events described in the preced
ing paragraph, newsmen were observing and recording
the activities of the State Troopers. Certain white
5
individuals assaulted and beat the newsmen and
destroyed some of their equipment. State Troopers
under the command of defendant Lingo were in a pos
ition to protect the newsmen and to arrest their
assailants, but they wilfully failed to do so.
15. On March 7, 1965, approximately 500
Negroes left a church in Selma, Alabama, for the
purpose of walking to Montgomery, Alabama, to present
to defendant Wallace grievances concerning the voter
registration process and restrictions on public demon
strations. The Negroes proceeded in an orderly and
peaceful fashion to a bridge near the south edge of
the City of Selma on the highway that leads to
Montgomery. They proceeded on a sidewalk across the
bridge, then continued walking on a grassy strip
alongside the highway to Montgomery until confronted
by a detachment of State Troopers at a point approx
imately 200 yards from the bridge. The Negroes had
observed all traffic laws and other pertinent regula
tions and had not interfered with traffic in any manner.
They were orderly and quiet.
16. Upon the failure of the Negroes to disperse,
as described in the preceding paragraph. State Troopers
and members of the Dallas County posse moved against
the Negroes. The State Troopers and posse members at
6
this time were acting under the direction and con
trol of the defendants, who then knev; of the plans
and purpose of the Negroes in seeking to walk to
Montgomery. Troopers equipped with tear gas and gas
masks, as well as night sticks, advanced on the
Negroes. Posse members mounted on horseback sup
ported the Troopers. Approximately twenty cannisters
of tear gas were fired at the Negroes by the Troopers.
Troopers and posse members then prodded, struck, beat
and knocked down members of the group of Negroes.
Approximately sixty of the Negroes were injured.
17. The acts and conduct of the defendants,
as herein described, have not been directed toward
enforcing any valid law of the State of Alabama, or
to furthering any legitimate policy of the State or
of its political subdivisions, but have been for the
purpose, and have had the effect, of preventing and
discouraging Negroes from exercising their full rights
of citizenship.
I S . By their acts and conduct herein described,
the defendants have intimidated, threatened, coerced,
and have attempted to intimidate, threaten and coerce,
Negro citizens of Alabama for the purpose of inter
fering with the right of such citizens to vote for
candidates in any election held in Alabama.
7
X 3 . 1 U C Q t L B C111U W I 1 U U U L U J . U l t t U f c J X t J U U c t l l t S
and of their officers and agents, as herein des
cribed, deny Negro citizens of Alabama the equal
protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment
to the Constitution on account of their race and
color, and violate sections 1971(a) and 1971(b) of
Title 42 of the United States Code.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff-intervenor prays that
this Court enter an order enjoining George C. Wallace,
Albert Lingo, and James Clark, together with their
agents, employees, successors in office, and all those
in active concert or participation with them from:
(a) Intimidating, threatening, or coercing
or attempting to intimidate, threaten, or
coerce any other person for the purpose of
interfering with his right to register to
vote;
(b) Interfering with lawful, peaceable
demonstrations on behalf of the rights
of Negroes by attempting forceably to
disperse the demonstrators or seeking
to impose unreasonable conditions on
the demonstrators;
(c) Using unreasonable force or threatening
without just cause to use any force, in
8
W J_ i U « U U X . U A .
functions, against persons known to
the defendants to be exercising, seeking
to exercise or to have exercised the right
to vote or to be demonstrating or seeking
to demonstrate on behalf of the rights
of Negroes;
(d) Summarily punishing, by striking, beating,
tear gassing or other means, any person
for his participation in a demonstration
on behalf of the rights of Negroes.
(e) Failing to provide ordinary police pro
tection to persons attempting to exercise
the right to vote or to demonstrate law
fully on behalf of the rights of Negroes.
Plaintiff further prays for its cost of suit
and for such other relief as the interest of justice
may require.
NICHOLAS DeB. KATZENB^CH
Attorney General
0>>—
JOHN DOAR
Acting Assistant Attorney General
t-K,__ - yi' \ p- /
BEN HARDEMAN
United States Attorney
9
CERTIFICATE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF THE UNITED STATES
NICHOLAS DeB. KATZENBACH, Attorney General of
the United States, certifies that, in his judgment,
the case of Hosea Williams, et al. v. George C. Wallace,
et al., Civil Action Number 2181-N, which has been
commenced in the United States District Court for the
Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division, seeking
relief from alleged denials of equal protection of the
laws under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution
on account of race and color, is of general public
importance.
This certification is made pursuant to the pro
visions of Section 902 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Signed this 9th day of March, 1965.
NICHOLAS DeB. KATZENBACH^
Attorney General
C 4130
F orm N o . TJSM 288
Edition 4-22-55
®m'teb &tate$ of America,
Middle . District of
RETURN ON SERVICE OF WRIT
Hosea W illiam s, John Lewis and Amelia
Boynton, on beha lf c f themselves and ethers
. s im ila r ly s itu a ted , P la in t i f f s ,vs.Alabama ss:
Hon. Geo. C. ’W allace, as governo:
et a l
Ala,
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed 9^L ^n - eX venti ° rVw e r B t x c r r r e y ' uSth of u .b .
on the therein-named___ Al--jel.P^?_u„AS..Lirec.tcr .of-_Pubiic Safety f o r the State o f Alabama
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof with Al Liingo
(Individual or agent o f company, corporation, etc.)
personally a t ___ Highway Department Building___ ____ __________
(Address—Street number, apartment number,
rural route, etc.)
a t---------------------- I fo n t g o m ^ Alabama.____________ ________________ in the said District
(City) (State)
at 2; 30 —p. m., on the ......IQth____day 0f _______ March_________f is 65
Marshal’s fees____
Mileage_________________
WILLIAR K. PARKER, JR,
By
United. States Marshal.
i2ZZf.lL__
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1 M 3 - O G 7 3 7 I 6
Deputy.
—' V' >o>O ' VJ':•J ! r 'r •” • :;j
O
c/>>-r *•—
~—. >-» _>r“ UJ
prjC~>m
mo
CA 2181-N
F orm N o . U 8M 282
Edition 4-22-66
®mteb &tateg of America,
RETURN ON SERVICE OF WRIT
Hosea W illiam s, John Lewis and Amelia
Boynton, on beh a lf o f themselves and others
K iddle District of . Alabama
ss:
s im ila r ly s itu a ted , P la in t i f f s ,
vs
Mon. Geo. C. W allace, as governor o f Ala.
et a l
ORDER, Complaint in In terven tion ,
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed C e r t if ica te o f Attorney Gen, o f U. <
(Writ)
on the therein-named___ James C. Clark_____ ________________________
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof w ith___Janies C. C lark
(Individual or agent of company, corporation, etc.)
personally at County Courthouse
(Address— Street number, apartment number.
rural route, etc.)
at Selma, Alabama
(City) (State)
----------in the said District
at —.?.4-5..____ acxHK—p. m., on the.... IC th_____ day of March__________ , 19.65.*.
George M. Stuart
Marshal’s fees___
Mileage. j ? .o u By
United. States Marshal.
Sou Dist of Ala
/ ) / «. £ c. ^ Y >----^---------— l-- r-A-
/T ota l $1)4.60 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1 9 6 3 - 0 - 6 7 3 7 1 6
rm
orn
rn
i ' ~o . n
’o
T H E M ID D L E D I S T R I C T O F A L A B A M A ,
N O R T H E R N D I V I S I O N .
H O S E A W I L L I A M S , J O H N
L E W I S and A M E L I A B O Y N T O N ,
on behalf o f th em selv es and o th e rs
similarly s itu a te d ,
P la in t i f f s ,
U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A ,
P la in t i f f -I n t e r v e n o r ,
vs.
H O N O R A B L E G E O R G E C . W A L L A C E ,
as G overn or o f th e S t a t e o f A lab am a;
A L L I N G O , as D ire c to r o f Public
S a f e t y f o r the S t a t e o f A lab am a;
and J A M E S G . C L A R K , as S h e r i f f o f
Dallas C o u n ty , A labam a,
D e fe n d a n ts .
I
f
I
i
l
I
i
I
i
i
i
9,'i
C I V I L A C T I O N
N O . 2 1 8 1 -N .
P E T I T I O N T O S H O W C A U S E W H Y M A R T I N L U T H E R
K I N G , J R . , e t al , S H O U L D N O T B E P U N I S H E D
F O R C O N T E M P T
Now com es J a m e s G , C la rk , as S h e r i f f o f D allas C o u n ty ,
A lab am a, one o f th e D efe n d a n ts in th e above sty led ca u se , and
re sp e c tfu lly r e p r e se n ts and show s unto th e C o u r t , as fo llo w s :
1 . P e titio n e r is one o f th e D efe n d a n ts in the above
en titled c a u se .
2 . A preliminary injunction w as issued in th e above en titled
cause on, t o -w i t : M arch 9 , I 965 , and your P e titio n e r does not
know th e date th a t said order w as served upon any o f th e p a rties
herein s e t f o r t h , but your p etition er is in form ed , believes and
th e r e fo r e s t a t e s , th a t said order w as personally served upon H osea
W illiam s, John L e w is , A m elia B o y n to n , on , t o - w i t : M arch 9 , I 965 ,
and your P e titio n e r av ers th a t if he is m istaken in his allegation
o f service on th e above named p e r so n s , he does aver th a t th e said
..uiiauio, u uiui uewiB ana A m elia irioynton hart personal
knowledge o f th e issuance o f said injunction o r d e r ; fu r t h e r , your
P e titio n e r av ers th a t on, t o - w i t : M arch 9 , 1 9 6 5 , a t approxim ately
2 :3 0 P . M . said order w as read by D epu ty U . S . M arshal S ta n ley
Fountain a t th e n orth end o f th e Edmund P e t t u s Bridge a c ro ss
the A labam a R iver w here th e same in te r s e c ts W a te r A venue and
j* ju s t on th e edge o f th e co rp o ra te lim its o f th e C ity o f S e lm a , to
| th e d e m o n stra to rs who w ere m arching, or a ttem p tin g to m arch ,
fro m S e lm a , A lab am a, to M on tgom ery , A lab am a, under th e guidance,
leadership and direction o f M artin L u th e r K ing, J r . and Ralph
A b e r n a th e y , who w ere then personally p re se n t and heard said
I injunction order read and th e re w as also personally p re se n t a t the
tim e o f the reading o f said order H osea W illiam s, Cohn L e w is ,
C . T . Vivian, A n d rew Young, Carnes B ev el, Cohn L o v e , C am es
O ra n g e , L . L . A n d e rso n , A . D . K in g , Am elia B o y n to n , Frank
S o r a c c o ; th a t in th e event any o f said above named person s w ere
n ot p re se n t in th e fr o n t o f said dem on stration line a t th e tim e
}| th ey w ere stopped by th e U . S . D ep u ty M arshal and said order w as
rea d , th a t said person s had personal knowledge o f th e f a c t th a t
said tem p orary injunction order had been issued by th is Honorable
C o u r t ; th a t in disobedience o f said preliminary injunction order
a f t e r th e U . S . D eputy M arshal had read said o rd e r , said persons
led said d e m o n stra to rs onto U nited S t a t e s Highway N o . 80 a c ro ss
th e A labam a R iver Bridge and f o r approxim ately o n e -q u a rte r o f a
mile sou th o f said river bridge, th ereb y blocking said highway fo r th e
use o f o th er person s who w ere law fully traveling said highway and
causing a serious t r a f f i c jam on both sides o f th e Alabam a R iver
Bridge leading into S e lm a ; P e titio n e r fu r th e r a v e rs th a t th is is th e
bridge and is th e rou te o f an in te r s ta te highway, t o - w i t : U nited
S t a t e s Highway N o . 8 0 ; fu r t h e r , th a t said highway is used by
em ployees o f C ra ig A ir F o r c e B a se and b u sin esses situ a ted south
o f th e Alabam a R iver and th a t said d em on stration seriously in te r -
jj fe r e d w ith th e norm al flow o f t r a f f i c on said highway; th a t a tta ch ed
1 h e r e to , marked E xhibit 1,A " and made a p a rt h e r e o f , is a copy o f
said order th a t w as read by said U . S . D ep u ty M arshal to said
p erson s a t th e tim e and place above s t a t e d , and a tta ch e d h e r e to ,
I marked E xhibit " B " and made a p a rt h e r e o f , is an a ffid a v it or
a ffid a v its se ttin g fo r t h said f a c t s .
W H E R E F O R E , R e titio n e r prays th a t th is C o u rt issue
a rule upon M artin L u th er K ing, U r . , H osea W illiam s, Uohn L e w is ,
IAm elia B oyn ton , C . T . V ivian, A n drew Young, U am es B e v e l, Uohn
L o v e , U am es O ra n g e , L . L . A n d e rso n , A . D . K ing, and Frank
S o r a c c o , sep arately and severally , ordering or directing each o f
'I said named p e r so n s , sep arately and severally , to appear b e fo re this
C o u rt on a day to be s e t by th is C o u r t , sep a ra tely and severally
! to show ca u se , i f any th ey have, why th ey should n ot be punished
n /
A ? yvtj
j Z . ‘
c V c
U am es G . C lark
I S T A T E O F A L A B A M A I
C O U N T Y O F D A L L A S I
B e fo r e m e, th e undersigned a u th o rity , in and fo r said S t a t e
and C o u n ty , personally appeared U am es G . C la rk , w ho, being by
|j me f i r s t duly sw o rn , on o a th , deposes and s a y s :
The a f f ia n t is one o f th e D e fe n d a n ts in th e above styled
cause and the f a c t s s e t fo r t h in th e foregoin g petition are tru e
O X i< ^ U O U l_ W -L. 1X J .U X1J .X V /̂U.
d Z z . x / t
J a m e s G . C lark
S W O R N T O A N D S U B S C R I B E D b e fo re me on th is / /
day o f M arch , A . D . , 1965* A
/ " h / t / y / ^
/ / / v y.
N o ta r y P ublic, D allas CC o u n ty , A lab am a.
My Com m ission E x p ir e s : -J *
W . Me D E A N P I T T S
P H I L I P H E N R Y P I T T S
P I T T S & P I T T S
A tto r n e y s a t D aw
S e lm a , Alabam a
U . E . W I D K I N S O N , U R .
W X D K X N S O N , W I D K I N S O N & R U S S E D D
A tto r n e y s a t Daw
S e lm a , Alabam a
T . G . G A Y D E
A tto r n e y a t D aw
S e lm a , A labam a
A T T O R N E Y S F O R D E F E N D A N T
J A M E S G . C D A R K
\> i a v i u . a m , j«m l* • i.
'.'i. lit- Ji-'CM a , * * .-«**?. t of
Ci*MK<'l'*» #'Hi r.Utetta itetUrl;
Uioclffc
V * .
KAIWU l . ,AU.AL' , •*
« f Cm* fC M n r f A1
-» - I H U ; , k t t i r * < C a t ■ ,1 r»j*»i4*
« f * t y fa t t w 3 t » « a * f *il*t «• '*Wr» lie otH A CiVxiHfv, (.IiL m
)
)
civil m :ti <?•'
)
i
)
)
>
kl̂ EB j AS** -I - m s m - . ■ •Aiuae^' i
THli> c « (w « L» d w «ubN ftta«i 1*1 t»« v* H i* .
tint wafcU»it c l i t m u , H U « o t » * t:*» i< h *f o u .•»• u t » »*.. .
;,«$>> uLnt j*stC A*Jj Ik- it< thc<»«t«. . e i-& a . « 1<. j%TV * l * ' *< ;
A t « » t t«t t*J u* . 1%* v-aapotM > D M i cd tjiln | A
->ot <i bM-r UkA 4>mI «ri t * * (■■"*+ * ( U t »o tho <3« ( m Amum *r rfe*. f
It v l t i M ta i s 5 tt.i »** »/*• t v».« t .*■
>« tr>C .
ill fSMH l M U w \ti KMtt t '•r With ttfc. C * i
< V' r<«* jJtii.Tt' lf* twrf- aw mmAm « ot tw* ' .**? t *• - i*. .-«<•.
<iKcur*|)t MtA to r«*t*tov a w .a t* i * ,tv. <
••<■>*■£■6* W r t f U m r t (A t*m ••«*«•? o f j «*„,*« t«t **»,*> ■ *» . . .
ta Vi^tn. *t r s«w<< ■»** * «ft>.ca t ■.■« bl^sa. rW c .t n
»«CvHtw, t<j , t lu m w .. t K*c i«J wirrU •** tat t* - n a? • -
Oui « t » U U » « o f ta* ‘KmetMbk* <teu*£* t . . t3ov«rswwr .if to t u»t»
lt» i 'Afcrvin^ to w t * r fTOijlutrai lira o f Ir t w tat*
that im*m$ iilamaM ware it m m belfc«C u^aoir . ;«t t» * tr .atxfmtt - * « '.*•■>
tW tsaa o£ « « # * • » vo fe r e * t>y ctw t a t # fr«o*>*r» *uor- tl*t & n ! l . , i
t t u U l f , iv g a tb * . miV Jits oMrputlo* •**•*• t w n . U l n t U t c *y tb » f t j •• tr-t. *_
ta r t# aw U*at r ta r * e r v « « trite*i: grUt'*»me*r* fe/ s >*
ht£b*-*y <rt fiw ' t o t * at "Hwfv^or ^ u * . l . .m a . . *
tK*» ( W Uewia* • t w m r -arary rwcrCisinlortor vftlkmX M t U c to »h* awfaoexr l >
jsw. without a »*re will *» «o IrrafMtrafcle t o m if tar »lafsitlffa vt!l
m » 4K « judicial totow l aalt— <k| tkc M t W f IwwUipi .
*« ©tow; U» attar* th> aarttaa ta t«tU IfljfEagina «ui >^p«rt .nit; to
fttaaaot ttoi* »'»;****• a t-V «Mtioa far a f n t M M r y > tito w*t ftlto
■• ©€ thi* it 4 ..1C j>.k. <*• ktrc-i <9, |9€<3, thin ttuil l* n f t n
ap talar tket ttorw afctv-4* ** < m m t !/ kit l*** «r>un M i a «rtt«o.
I* W k M u i ' M i i k ul ttr (ntfaUj) ««d i m r fcs*«i c«u m , it u tin
JWQmm- sad WBfJtWi «# U U Cwrt Ctot cto M llci af t « plaintiff. file* tor*ir.
<»r 4 t M N iw ry n vtra*a«k i jrtot to aoC (to **** 1# harafc7 4** ito
l* «4*t ia W » l«l*»nty a t At* Court *>03 is **f,i ?■;**
iro*««©aa f r « totne froatrata* by tiwt fUtntiPr tax ottoi . v m «
**«• i,f ' *•»» u c« *«»/w<c» ttM ri*kt« tkrr «...
itototolijr U Wiia towrt, it *a«ars t!»M U kill «*e tc t vr *.®iu
tutam&t <>f# «x i « w .« if '.* c *©* wi l l voi k a* t tn y tr u tx * lajury ar ”s* tts Ct/ ,
sr mmsan at Atlf »U*t, li Uny *rm erdmrmil to mftilt) fr<« . y
M i n l M wtoai tkrr cU I m U N * t « n i t t u u « M l rij£>t t« m ar--.', w t t l tto n c i u r
k*«u to jutUUlly tawm-aw; at ar Mriy toario*.
It ia fcfee IwUkV okftisv. «to M M £ I *f thin S w t rtor tto
plaintiffs a n d .Aar — liair at thair lU m , aa* fcto*a toting u e-wart wit>
’uaa, to ««f aaak fta feMMkf M j a t M * and raatralMi fr-ui attoapt a**, to wreii
r,tJ* *“*i*a, Alafcam, ta ttoatjtaaar*v, i ] uooaw* t unt il !■!»* .nor* 0*4. *v»ve i -— 1 - -riafr 1 a
#
’̂ o rumity auk* a ^uiicia. 4et*r»i'**t, >r a. r to avayiactlvo fi**-./* o f 1 a
partlua to U U sane.
It ia t k m t m t t m m i m * f . t JtiMNWT > w * , &l-CRric wftitu Co«rt ttuM U>n
K H r a* to* .-.laUattffa far a |rr* 1 lakbtar> injvoctiar, to an* tto » & m r i* *, *-y
»*t fe.- a haartnt t© m m m at *>-.*., ffc— adny, MareU a, .
t'oaa, A U tto Ita t o ' - totii . it 3.
S T A T E O F A L A B A M A J
•>
C O U N T Y O F D A L L A S I
B e fo r e m e, th e undersigned a u th o rity , in and f o r said
S t a t e and C o u n ty , personally appeared N . B . C h a m b ers, T . L .
P y ro n , U . B . C ro w d e r , RbbXCtXMSi'&DX, Charlie J o n e s and C . E .
O oodw in, each o f whom being by me f i r s t duly sw o rn , on o a th ,
depose and sa y :
E ach o f th e a f f ia n ts are police o f f ic e r s o f the C ity o f
S e lm a , A lab am a; each o f said a f f ia n ts w ere p re se n t a t th e in te r -
section o f W a te r A venue and B road S t r e e t near th e n orth end o f
| th e Edmund P e t t u s Bridge a c r o ss th e Alabam a R iver on M arch 9 ,
1 9 6 5 , a t about 2 :3 0 P „ M„ ; each o f th e a ff ia n ts w ere engaged in
th eir o ffic ia l duties as police o f f ic e r s o f th e C ity o f S elm a and
w ere p re se n t when a line o f m arch ers led by M artin L u th e r K ing,
U r . , Ralph A b e rn a th e y , e t a l, arrived a t said in tersectio n and
|| each o f said a f f ia n t s saw S ta n le y F ou n tain , D ep u ty U . S . M arsh al,
read an order to said leaders o f said m arch a t said tim e and p lace .
||
T h a t a f t e r said order w as read to said person s th ey proceeded
onto th e Edmund P e t t u s B ridge and proceeded in th e direction o f
l! M ontgom ery on U nited S t a t e s Highway N o . 8 0 ; th a t said m archers
in th e s t r e e t s o f th e C ity o f S elm a seriously in te r fe re d w ith the
normal flow o f t r a f f i c causing t r a f f i c congestion and fo r a period
o f tim e no autom obiles could proceed to w a rd s M ontgom ery a c ro ss
II said bridge and no t r a f f i c could proceed in th e direction o f Selm a
a c r o ss said bridge.
t
I
THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA,
NORTHERN DIVISION.
H O S E A W I L L I A M S , J O H N
L E W I S , and A M E L I A B O Y N T O N ,
on behalf o f th em selves and o th e rs
similarly s itu a te d ,
B la in tiff s ,
U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A ,
P la in t i f f -I n t e r v e n o r ,
v s .
H O N O R A B L E G E O R G E C . W A L L A C E ,
as G overn or o f th e S t a t e o f A lab am a;
A L L I N G O , as D ir e c to r o f Bublic
S a f e t y f o r th e S t a t e o f A lab am a; and
G A M E S G . C L A R K , as S h e r i f f o f
D allas C o u n ty , A lab am a,
D e fe n d a n ts .
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
9:
C I V I L A C T I O N
N O . 2 1 8 1 -N .
M O T IO N T O M A K E I N J U N C T I O N P E R M A N E N T
N ow com es G am es G . C la rk , one o f th e D efen d a n ts in th e
above sty led ca u se , and re sp e c tfu lly r e p r e se n ts and show s unto
the C o u r t as fo llo w s :
1 . M ovant is one o f th e D efe n d a n ts in th e above en titled
c a u se .
2 . A prelim inary injunction or restrain in g order w as issued
by th is Honorable C o u r t in th e above en titled cause on, t o - w i t :
M arch 9 , 1 9 6 5 , enjoining or restrain in g th e p la in tiffs herein and
o th er m em bers o f th eir c la s s , and th o se acting in co n cert w ith th e m ,
fro m a ttem p tin g to m arch fro m S e lm a , A labam a, to M on tgom ery ,
A labam a, until th is Honorable C o u rt could have a reasonable
opportunity to make a judicial determ ination as to th e p rosp ective
rig h ts o f th e p a rties in th is ca u se .
3 . T h a t said p la in tiffs and m em bers o f th eir c lass and
' J r . , H osea W illiam s, .John L e w is , A m elia B o y n to n , C . T „ Vivian,
A n drew Young, J a m e s B e v e l, Bohn L o v e , JJames O ra n g e , L . L .
A n d e rso n , A . D . King and F rank S o r a c c o , violated said tem p orary
restrain in g order or tem p o ra ry injunction on, t o - w i t : M arch 9 ,
1 9 6 5 , by marching on U . S „ Highway 80 fro m th e co rp o ra te lim its
|i o f th e C ity o f S e lm a , A labam a, to w here said U . S . Highway 80
is in te r se c te d by Old M ontgom ery Road in D allas C o u n ty , A lab am a,
and said person s by th eir action s displayed a t said tim e and by their
action s since said d a te , will a tte m p t to march fro m S e lm a , A labam a,
to M on tgom ery , A lab am a, along said U . S . H ighw ay, which is a
| heavily traveled highway and is fo u r laned fro m S elm a to th e Low ndes
C ounty line and through L ow n d es C ou n ty said highway is single
lane and is a narrow highway w ith many hills and c u rv e s ; th a t th e
marching o f a large number o f p erson s on fo o t on said highway
would seriously in terru p t and in te r fe r e w ith tr a v e le r s along said
highw ay, including in te r s ta te tr a v e le r s , and would seriously in te r fe re
I
w ith th e rig h ts o f o th er citizen s to peaceably drive along said
highway fo r pleasure or business r e a so n s ; th a t a large number o f
person s on said highway as proposed by said p la in tiffs would also
jl endanger th e lives o f said person s on fo o t on said highway and would
probably re su lt in som e o f said person s being run over or stru ck
by m otor vehicles traveling along said highway; th a t said highway
a t no point has any sidewalks along th e sam e and under Alabam a L aw
said person s traveling along said highway would be required to walk
I along th e shoulder o f said highway which are n ot o f su ffic ie n t
width to accom odate large num bers o f person s and which said
!l shoulders do n ot c r o s s s tr e a m s w here th e re are brid ges; th a t it is
within th e police pow er o f th e S t a t e o f Alabam a and its law fully
.
C O n R ' h i f . l l ' h p d P i r h h r r p i t ' i p . Q -hrv r>r*<=»iro-n+- a m r ^ o m A n n f v . ^ 4 - ; « w ~ 1 ------— _ - : J
W H E R E F O R E , D e fe n d a n t , D am es G . C la r k , moves th a t the
tem p orary restrain in g order or injunction issued by th is C o u rt under
date o f M arch 9 , 19&5 > a-t 9? 00 A . M . be made perm an en t.
l
J a m e s G . C lark
S T A T E O F A L A B A M A I
:
C O U N T Y O F D A L L A S I
B e fo r e m e, the undersigned a u th o rity , in and f o r said S t a t e
and C o u n ty , personally appeared J a m e s G . C la rk , w ho, being by
I me f i r s t duly sw o rn , on o a th , deposes and s a y s :
T h e a f f ia n t is one o f th e D efe n d a n ts in th e above sty led
cause and th e f a c t s s e t f o r t h in th e foregoin g petition are tru e
to th e b e s t o f his in form a tion , knowledge and b e lie f .
Vv-Aj i ( x ^ i t . , — . — ,
J a m e s Go C lark
S W O R N T O A N D S U B S C R I B E D b e fo r e me on th is j ’/
day o f M arch , A . D . , 19&5'
N oXa.xfe P ublic, D allas C o u n ty , Alabam a*
My C om m ission E x p ire s
W . M c L E A N P I T T S
P H I L I P H E N R Y P I T T S
P i t t s & P i t t s
A tto r n e y s a t L aw
S e lm a , Alabam a
J . E . W I L K I N S O N , J R .
W ilkinson, Wilkinson & R ussell
A tto r n e y s a t L a w
S e lm a , Alabam a
T . G . G A Y L E
A tto r n e y a t L a w
S e lm a , Alabam a
a m m o n M m ’ i r C * T T ' n O T- ^ T T ' L P U P T \ T T ^ \ A M T 1
vvnxL/Jxji/r o jx rv , u eien aarrc , u a m e s hi. hharh, m oves th a t the
mder
B e fo r e m e, the undersigned a u th o rity , in and f o r said S t a t e
and C o u n ty , personally appeared J a m e s G . C la rk , w ho, being by
me f i r s t duly sw o rn , on o a th , deposes and s a y s :
T h e a ff ia n t is one o f th e D efe n d a n ts in th e above styled
cause and the f a c t s s e t f o r t h in th e foregoin g petition are tru e
to th e b e s t o f his in form a tion , knowledge and b e lie f.
S W O R N T O A N D S U B S C R I B E D b e fo r e me on th is
W . M c L E A N P I T T S
P H I L I P H E N R Y P I T T S
P it t s & P i t t s
A tto r n e y s a t L a w
S e lm a , Alabam a
U . E . W I L K I N S O N , U R .
W ilkinson, Wilkinson & R ussell
A tto r n e y s a t L a w
S e lm a , Alabam a
H T . G . G A Y L E
A tto r n e y a t Law
S e lm a , Alabam a
A T T O P K l t V C ! trip T T R E F l M h A M T
C lark
S T A T E O F A L A B A M A I
C O U N T Y O F D A L L A S I
U am es G , C lark
day o f M arch , A . D . , 1965* /)
FOR THE MIDDLE D IST R IC T OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN D IV IS IO N
HOSEA WILLIAMS, ET AL,
Plaintiffs,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
v.
GEORGE C. WALLACE, ET AL,
Defendants
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
>
)
)
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
Now comes George C. Wallace, as Governor of the
State of Alabama, and A1 Lingo, as Director of the Depart
ment of Public Safety for the State of Alabama, parties
defendant in the above styled cause, and show to the Court
as follows:
1. Over the past several weeks preceding the fil
ing of the Complaint in this cause, Plaintiffs acting in
concert with numerous other persons under the guise and
pretense of attempting to obtain for themselves and others
similarly situated voting rights guaranteed under the laws
and Constitution of the United States of America, have con
ducted a series of mass demonstrations, marches and rallies
participated in by large numbers of persons in and around
the cities of Selma and Montgomery, Alabama. These activities
which purport to be peaceful and non violent, have in each
instance resulted in breaches of the peace, traffic conges
tion and have generally disrupted the maintenance of peace
and order in the cities affected.
2. There is presently pending in the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Alabama a civil
action which seeks to obtain in behalf of Negro citizens
voting rights in Montgomery County, Alabama, wherein the Citv
M V X V , V / W i . v x v , u o vJ j j . o x u u x v ) i W X ^ H X J V ^ O V ^ I O ^ O i l U X O O U C U
an injunction against the Montgomery County Board of
Registrars, enjoining them, their successors in office,
and all persons acting in concert therewith from discrimin
ating in any manner against Negro citizens seeking to register
and become qualified voters.
3. There is presently pending in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, Northern
Division, a civil action which seeks to obtain in behalf of
Negro citizens voting rights in Dallas County, Alabama,
wherein the City of Selma is situated, and that Court has
heretofore assumed jurisdiction of said cause and issued an
injunction against the Dallas County Board of Registrars,
enjoining them, their successors in office, and all persons
acting in concert therewith, from discriminating in any
manner against Negro citizens seeking to register and become
qualified voters.
4. There is also presently pending in the United
States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama,
Northern Division, Civil Action No. 2159-N, wherein the
United States Justice Department seeks to enjoin the Secretary
of State of Alabama and other officials of the State of Ala
bama from using certain questicnaires in the voter registration
procedures throughout the State of Alabama on the alleged ground
that such tests violate the voting rights and privileges of
Negro citizens.
5. The Plaintiffs in this cause and other persons
acting in concert with them, on March 7, 1965, announced
their intention to organize and conduct a mass demonstration
along U. S. Highway 80 E from a point in Selma, Alabama, to
the State Capitol in Montgomery, Alabama, for the alleged
purpose of soliciting the assistance of the Governor of Alabama
\J 0 luciccji Ltx, uii ma-Lun o , i v o j , n a m u n s i n e a
this action seeking to have this Court declare their Consti
tutional right to march along the public highways of the
State of Alabama for the purpose of demonstrating against
certain alleged impediments to voter registration of Negroes
in the State of Alabama. On March 9, 1965, this Honorable
Court decreed that the United States of America be designated
to appear and participate in all proceedings in this action
and directed that the Attorney General of the United States,
and such attorneys in the Department of Justice as he may
designate, be appointed to appear and participate in behalf
of the United States in this action.
7. On March 9, 1965, this Honorable Court made and
entered an order in this cause denying Plaintiffs' motion for
a temporary restraining order, set the cause for hearing on
motion for preliminary injunction, and ordered that the
Plaintiffs and other members of their class, and all persons
acting in concert with them, be enjoined and restrained from
attempting to march from Selma, Alabama, to Montgomery, Ala
bama, until this Court can have a reasonable opportunity to
make a judicial determination as to the respective rights of
the parties to this case.
8. On March 9, 1965, after a copy of this Court's
injunction order had been personally served upon each of the
Plaintiffs to this action, and upon others acting in concert
with them, including Martin Luther King, the said Plaintiffs
in this action and numerous ethers acting in concert therewith,
commenced a march demonstration along U. S. Highway 80 in
Selma, Alabama, in violation of the previous order of this Court.
9. The said U. S. Highway 80, between Selma, Alabama,
and Montgomery, Alabama, is a heavily travelled public thorough
fare which contains numerous narrow bridges and embankments.
Immediately adjacent to this highway, there are several
swamps and heavily wooded areas, and a mass of people attempt
ing to walk along this public highway would constitute a
serious threat to the safety of the motoring public and the
proposed marchers themselves.
to herein which seek to secure for these Plaintiffs arti the
class which they represent voting rights under the Laws and
Constitution of the United States, the Defendants allege
that there can be no legitimate or proper motive for continued
mass meetings, demonstrations, and rallies upon the public
highways of this State. This Court, rather than the streets,
is the proper forum for the redress of such alleged grievances.
Court enter an order permanently enjoining and restraining the
plaintiffs herein and all other members of their class, as
well as those persons acting in concert with them, from
conducting any march or mass demonstration along or upon
U. S. Highway 80 between Selma, Alabama and Montgomery, Alabama,
or along or upon any other public highway within the State of
Alabama, and Defendants pray for such other relief as may be
just and proper in the premises and its reasonable costs,
including attorneys fees.
10. In view of the numerous pending actions referred
WHEREFORE, the Defendants herein pray that this
Goodwyn & Smith 325 Bell Building Montgomery, Alabama
21C1-N
TOTm N o . U 8M 282
Edition 4-22-55
RETURN ON SERVICE OF W RIT
®mteb &tate£ of America,
Laddie D istrict of Alabama
s s :
Ho sea W illiam s, John Lewis and Amelia
Boynton, on beh a lf o f themselves and
others s im ila rly s itu a ted , p la in t i f f s .
vs
Honorable Cecrge Wallace, as Gov.cfAla
ORDER, Complaint in In terven tion ,
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed ..C e r t if ica te o f Attorney Gener al ofUS
(W rit)
Charles H. Jones, Jr.on the therein-named
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof w ith__________
(Individual or agent o f company, corporation, etc.)
personally a t _______ __ _________ 34 North Perry S t.________ ________________________
(Address— Street number, apartment number.
rural route, etc.)
a t__________ Montgomery, Alabama
(City)
at JLLl£5— a. m.—pCih., on the jut:
(State)
day o f ____ L
in the said District
— , 19— 6.1
Marshal’s fees jfjL*—?.
Mileage_________________
WILLI A.
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1963— 0 -4 7 3 7 1 8
K. PARKER,
f.
United States Marshal.
)
Deputy.
F orm N o . U S M 382
Edition 4-22-65
C-4130
GA-21B1-N
s s :
Hossa W illiam s, John Lewis and Amelia
Boynton, on beh a lf o f Lhemselves vxi
others s im ila r ly s itu ated , p la in t i f f s .
VS
Honorable Ceorge C. W allace, as Gov. ofA la
et al^
T. . order, Complaint in In tervention
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed .-C e r t i f ic a t e o f Hi-, tornev General* o'US
(Writ)
Fred Gray
RETURN ON SERVICE OF W RIT
Wniteb States! of America,
Middle District op Alabama
on the therein-named
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof w ith_____ HIM
(Individual or agent o f company, corporation, etc.)
personally at ..... . 11. bn. -y
(Address—Street number, apartment number.
rural route, etc.)
a t_____________ Montgomery. Alabsm a______
<City) (State)
at i i i l i — a. m.—pMHC, on the ....... AOlh____day o f _______ March
in the said District
— , 19..CC,.
Marshal’s fees
Mileage______
$3.00 WILLIAM H. PARKER, JR.
By
rloyd Lf Marshal
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1 9 6 3 - 0 - 6 7 3 7 1 6
_ United States Marshal.
C j/jTZc
Deputy.
—o-r — Vl0\vjio i r
i .“3»
— > C" X'
r<r->GO o oL"n
> > *ŵ rno
S>~ VO
V/ ̂ o
W illiam s vs Wallaxe CA-2181-N
®mteb States! of America, 1
s s :
Middle District of Alabama j
Order Denying Motion fo r Temporary
R estrain ing Order, Temporary R est.
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed ^r( ê r S etting cause fo r hearing
(Writ)
on the therein-named__Amelia Boynton____________________ _______ ____________________
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
F o rm N o . U SM 282
Edition 4-22-55
RETURN ON SERVICE OF W RIT
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof with Amelia Boynton
(Individual or agent o f company, corporation, etc.)
personally at Baptist Church_____ __________________________________________________
(Address—Street number, apartment number.
rural route, etc.)
a t_____________Selma , Alabama
(City)
at - l i l i ___U .U i.— p. m., on the____ day of
(State)
March
----- in the said District
____ , 19._6£
Marshal's fees____Jib-.Q-Q.
Mileage
*.JR,________
States Marshal.
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1963— 0 6 7 3 7 1 6
Deputy.
F orm N o . U 8M 282
Edition 4-22-65
RETURN ON SERVICE OF WRIT
W illiam s vs. W allace CA-2181-N
®mteb i&tateg of America,
Middle_____ District o f____Alabama Order Denying Motion fo r Temnorary
R estrain ing Order, Temporary Rest.
Order and S etting Ca\)3e fo r
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed Hearing_______
(Writ)
on the therein-named Hosea W illiam s _____ _______ __________ ___
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof with Hosea W illiam s
(Individual or agent o f company, corporation, etc.)
personally a t __l l i l6 Lapsley St. __ ___ ____________________________
(Address— Street number, apartment number.
rural route, etc.)
at Selma^ Alabama
(City)
at — a. m.—p/h i., on the __
(State)
9th day o f . March
in the said District
6919-
Marshal’s fees
Mileage______
$3 .00
, -WILLIAM M. PARKER. JR.
( 7 s
By
United States Marshal.
Deputy.
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OPFICE: 1963— 0 -6 7 3 7 1 6
RETURN ON SERVICE OF WRIT
W illiam s vs. W allace CA-2181-N
&tateg of America,
SS *
_____ District op Bahama________
F orm N o . U 8M 282
Edition 4-22-M
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed .
Order denying Motion fo r Temporary
R estrain ing Order, Temnprary R est,
birder fc~Se$£$jpg Csnse—fo ir lrea r i ng
on the therein-named______________________________________________
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof with Rev . Mart in Luther King
(Individual or agent o f company, corporation, etc.)
personally a t ___l l j l6 Lapsle y S t . ___ ____________________ _____ ___
(Address— Street number, apartment number.
rural route, etc.)
Selma, Alabama
(City)
at a. m.—^ fi{/., on the__ 9th
(State)
day o f ____
March
in the said District
65
— , 19------
Marshal’s fees____ $3.00
Mileage_________________
.WILLIAM M. PARKER^ JR._______
— \ United States Marshal.
) /
B y___ J jitr ./ '
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1963— C
Deputy.
!IOS£A WILLIAMS. JOHN LEWIS
and AMELIA BOTWOH, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
UNITED STATES OP AMERICA,
PlaintIff-Intervenor,
vs.
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of aJabaam;
AL LINGO, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and JAMES G. CLARK, aa Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Defendants. )
frJLED
NAa 13 196$
**“ U i-'OiiAuh
By., Clerk
Deputy Ilprk '
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2131-N
O R D E R
The defendant James C. Clark, by and through his attorneys of
record, filed with this Court on March 11, 1965, a motion to make permanent
the temporary restraining order of this Court, said order having been entered on
March 9, 1965. The temporary restraining order as issued by this Court on March
9, 1965, was for a specifier! and limited purpose, that la, to protect the
integrity of this Court, to preserve this Court's jurisdiction, and to prevent
the judicial proceases from being frustrated by the plaintiffs and other members
of their class continuing to attempt to enforce the rights they seek to have
judicially determined in this case; thus, by the terms of the restraining order
itsolf, when these rights have been judicially detanained, the order will have
served its purpose. Therefore, a motion by one of the defendants to enlarge this
restraining order and to make it into a permanent injunction against the plain
tiffs and other members of their class, is not proper.
In this connection, this Court notes that the defendants George
C. Wallace as Governor of the State of Alabosm end A1 Lingo as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama, by and through their attorneys on March 11, 1965,
in submitting to the jurisdiction of this Court in thla case, pray for an injunction
against the plaintiffs and other members of their class from continuing any march
or demonstrations along or upon U. S. Highway 80 between Selma, Alabama, and
ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE of this Court that the notion o f Jane* 6 . Clark filed
herein on March 11, 1965, asking this Court to anlarge into a pemanent injunction
the temporary restraining order unde and entered in this case on March 9, 1965,
be and the sans is hereby denied.
Done, this the 13th day of Merch, 1965.
FOR THE 9 ibi
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
C i v i l Action File No. 2181r.N
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS and AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff >- SUMMONS
v.
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as Governor of the State of Alabama; AL LINGO, as Director of Public Safety for the State of Alabama; and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff of Dallas County, Alabama,
To the above named Defendants :
You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon P e t e r A . H a l l ,
plaintiff’s attorney , whose address i s 1630 k th A venue N , B irm in gh am , A la bam a ,
an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you, within tw e n ty days after service
of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgement by default
will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
Defendants J
R o C . Dobs on
Date: March 8 } 1965 [Seal of Court]
FOR THE .K i Mi y 1 y
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
C i v il A c t i o n F ile N o ..... 2181-N
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS and
AMELIA BOYNTON, on b e h a lf o f
th em selves and o th ers s im i la r ly
s i t u a t e d ,
Plaintiff SUMMONS
v.
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor o f the S ta te o f Alabam a;
AL LINGO, as D ir e c to r o f P u b lic
S a fe ty fo r the S ta te o f Alabam a;
and JAMES G. CLARK, as S h e r i f f o f
D a lla s C ounty, Alabam a,
To the above named Defendants :
You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon P eter A . H a l l ,
plaintiff’s attorney , whose address i s 1630 4 th Avenue N, Birmingham, Alabama,
an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you, within twenty days after service
of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgement by default
will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
Defendants
Ro C. Dobson
Date: March 8 , 1965 [Seal of Court]
V-T.
r t
L̂>
72
<T>
o ’o
0>
3
s(tyo
CflCl
o5Z5ai
c
Vw
♦-»•
cV
%_ e*■71 f t
2 « 71 a
i'tej
P I »
3.
' (5. - § g
-
p
•XiitcJ»(7 stq io |i?i|SJ«|̂ x,^nj$ P'Vjiuf) u urn,, j a t p o u o s j .n l r. Xq apvui si oaiAJas ji X|UO p a ju i h a j jfAwpqfV—
< t c
S l l f l
[avas]
61 ‘ } ° -tep
b ‘aui ojojaq 0} u j o a \s puB paqixosqng
•‘ivi{iixuj\[ sapis paimfl HputeQ
•pya.ivjft 89fD)S V3PU[1
---- aoiAxas
.... $ [8ABJJ,
saaj; s.avHsavjM
F o rm N o . U 8M 282
Edition 4-23-66
RETURN ON SERVICE OF WRIT
®intteb &tate* of America,
Middle „ _ Alabama___________District op______________
Hosea Williams, et al
vs. Civ.2181-N
ss• Hon. George C. Wallace, et al
Summons & Complaint, Motion for . ' Preliminary Ini. & Motion for Temp.
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed -ltes.training Order & Order__
(Writ)
on the therein-named____ Honorable George C. Wallace, as Governor of the State
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
of Alabama
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof with ^onora^ le George C. Wallace
(Individual or agent o f company, corporation, etc.)
personally at _h i s offiGe> State Capitol Building,
(Address—Street number, apartment number.
rural route, etc.)
a t ________________________________ Montgomery, AJ.aba™................ ..............................., n said DlsWct
(City) (State)
at — a. m.— pxm., on the .?.th____ day of_______________ , 19̂ 5
Marshal’s fees
Mileage______
$12.00
.21*
$12.2U
WILLIAM M. PARKER, JR.
_____ United. States Marshal.
By ----------Chief Deputy.
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING 0F F IC E /19 fa -O -673716
F o rm N o. T J S M 288
Edition 4-22-65
RETURN ON SERVICE OF WRIT
W illiam s vs. W allace CA-2181-N
SHmteb &tate$ of America,
Middle____ District op___Alabama
Prelim inary I n j . It Motion f o r Temp.
R estrain ing Order It Order
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed___________________________ __ ___
s s :
Summons It Complaint, Motion fo r
(W rit)
on the t h e r e i n - n a m e d C l a r k , as S h e r iff o f_D allas County, Alabama
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof with James G. Clark
(Individual or agent of company, corporation, etc.)
personally a t ___D allas County Courthouse___ __________________________________
(Address—Street number, apartment number.
rural route, etc.)
at _ Selma, Alabama
(City) (State)
at 12.LJ.Q__m., on the........... 9th___ day of____March
in the said District
__ 19-65...
Marshal’s fees__
Mileage_______________
WILLIAM M. PARKER, JR.
Lfnited States Marshal.
By - 5
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFttCE: 1 9 6 3 -0 -6 7 3 7 1 6OPFlCE: t
Deputy.
H arm N o. U 8M 282
Edition 4-22-M
RETURN ON SERVICE OF WRIT
W illiam s vs. W allace CA-2181-N
®totteb ££>tate3 of America,
s s :
Middle _ District of Aiaoama
Summons i' Complaint, Motion fo r
Prelim inary I n j . lr. Motion fo r Temp.
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed Re s tr a ining Order t- Order ___
(W rit)
on the therein-named___A1 Lingo, D irect o r , o f P u blic Safety fo r the State o f A la pama
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof with A1 Lingo
(Individual or agent o f company, corporation, etc.)
personally a t _________ _________________ ________ _________ _____ ________________________
(Address— Street number, apartment number,
rural route, etc.)
D allas County Courthouse , Selma, A la .
(City)
at 1
(State)
p. m., on the....... -------------day of _ March
------in the said District
____ , 19.6?...
Marshal’s fees______________
Mileage_____________________
WILLIAM M. PARKE? , JR. .......
United States Marshal.
B y ____: /
\/ / Deputy.
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1963— 0 -6 7 3 7 1 6
NORTHERN D IV IS IO N
HOSEA W ILLIAM S, ET AL. *
Plaintiffs, *
CIVIL ACTION
vs. * NO, 2 l8 l -N
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of Alabama, * FILED
ET AL. *
Defendants. * M AR 1 6 1965
--------------- --------- ---------------------------------------- B R. ĉ Jd^ bs^ i, clerk
PLAINTIFFS’ PROPOSED PLAN FOR MARCH FROM
SELMA, ALABAMA TO MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA
1. T h e m a r c h w i l l c o m m e n c e o n F r i d a y , Ma r c h I 9 > 19&5 AT 1 0 : 3 ° A * H * 0R ANV
DAY T H E R E A F T E R P R O V I D E D T H A T P L A I N T I F F S W I L L P R O V I D E AT L E A S T 4 8 H O U R S A D V A N C E
N O T I C E O F TH E M A R C H TO D E F E N D A N T S , TH E U N I T E D S T A T E S , AN D TH E C O U R T .
2 . T h e n u m b e r o f p e r s o n s m a r c h i n g w i l l b e a s f o l l o w s ;
a . T h e r e w i l l b e n o l i m i t a t i o n o n t h e n u m b e r o f m a r c h e r s w i t h i n t h e
C i t i e s o f S e l m a a n d M o n t g o m e r y a n d along t h e 4 - l a n e p o r t i o n s o f
R o u t e 8 0 - E a s t b e t w e e n S e l m a a n d M o n t g o m e r y .
b . T h e n u m b e r o f m a r c h e r s w i l l n o t e x c e e d 3 0 0 p e r s o n s o n t h e 2 - l a n e
p o r t i o n o f R o u t e 80.
3 . T h e f o l l o w i n g a r e t h e a p p r o x i m a t e d i s t a n c e s t o be c o v e r e d e a c h d a y ;
a . F i r s t d a y - m a r c h a p p r o x i m a t e l y I ! m i l e s s t o p p i n g a t a d e s i g n a t e d
P R I V A T E F I E L D W I T H P E R M I S S I O N O F OV/NER W H IC H H A S A L R E A D Y B E E N
g r a n t e d ;
b . S e c o n d d a y - m a r c h a p p r o x i m a t e l y I I m i l e s s t o p p i n g a t a d e s i g n a t e d
F I E L D W I T H P E R M I S S I O N O F THE OWNER W H I C H A L R E A D Y H AS B E E N G R A N T E D ;
c. T h i r d d a y - m a r c h a p p r o x i m a t e l y 17 m i l e s s t o p p i n g a t a d e s i g n a t e d
B U I L D I N G AN D A J O I N I N G F I E L D W I T H P E R M I S S I O N O F OW NERS W H IC H H A S
A L R E A D Y B E E N G R A N T E D ;
d . F o u r t h d a y - m a r c h 8 m i l e s t o t h e w e s t e r n p a r t o f M o n t g o m e r y
S T O P P I N G AT AN A R E A T E N T A T I V E L Y S E L E C T E D AN D TO BE D E S I G N A T E D .
e . F i f t h d a y - m a r c h f r o m w e s t e r n p a r t o f M o n t g o m e r y t o t h e C a p i t o l .
f . L a r g e t e n t s w i l l b e e r e c t e d a t t h e c a m p s i t e s b y p r o f e s s i o n a l s .
M e e t i n g s a n d s o n g f e s t i v a l s m a y b e h e l d a t c a m p s i t e s .
4 . R o u t e o f m a r c h i n t h e C i t y o f S e l m a ; S t a r t i n g a t B r o w n ’ s C h a p f l A , M . F
C h u r c h o n S y l v a n Street p r o c e e d i n g S o u t h on S y l v a n t o A l a b a m a , t h e n West o n
A l a b a m a t o B r o a d ( h i g h w a y 8 0 - E a s t ) , t h e n S o u t h o n B g a r d S t r e e t a c r o s s E d m u n d
f o l l o w i n g R o u t e 8 o u n t i l i t b e c o m e s F a i r v i e w A v e n u e a n d c o n t i n u e o n
F a i r v i e w t o Oa k S t r e e t t u r n i n g N o r t h o n Oa k S t r e e t t o J e f f D a v i s A v e n u e ;
t h e n E a s t o n J e f f D a v i s t o H o l t S t r e e t ; t h e n N o r t h o n H o l t t o Mo b i l e S t r e e t ;
t h e n o n Mo b i l e t o M o n t g o m e r y ; t h e n n o r t h e a s t o n M o n t g o m e r y t o C o u r t
S q u a r e t h e n u p D e x t e r A v e n u e t o C a p i t o l . T h e Ma r c h i n t h e c i t y w i l l b e
I N THE S T R E E T S .
6 . O n THE H IGHWA Y, THE MARC HERS W I L L PRO C EED ON SH O U L C E R S OF THE
ROAD W A LK IN G 8N THE L E F T S I D E F A C I N G A U T O M O B IL E T R A F F I C . THEY W I L L MARCH
ALONG ROAD SH O U LDE RS TWO A B R E A S T AND EMPLOY S I N G L E F I L E S AT P L A C E S WHERE
THE SHOULDER I S NARROW AND ON B R I D G E S WITHOUT S I D E W A L K S . THE MARC HERS
W I L L BE O R G A N IZ E D IN S E P A R A T E GROUPS OF A P P R O X I M A T E L Y 5 ° P E R S O N S (OR L E S S )
AND EACH GROUP W I L L BE UNDER THE S U P E R V I S I O N OF A D E S I G N A T E D GROUP L E A D E R .
7* The FOLLOWING S U P P O R T I N G S E R V I C E S W I L L BE P R O V I D E D :
A. F o o d ;
b . T r u c k - b o r n e w a s h i n g a n d t o i l e t f a c i l i t i e s ;
c. L i t t e r a n d g a r b a g e p i c k u p b y t r u c k a l o n g r o u t e a n d a t c a m p s i t e s *
d . A m b u l a n c e a n d f i r s t a i d s e r v i c e ;
e . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n f o r r e t u r n t o S e l m a o f t h o s e m a r c h e r s i n
e x c e s s o f t h e 300 ( o r f e w e r ) p e r s o n s w h o w i l l c o n t i n u e
o n t h e m a r c h a f t e r t h e f i r s t d a y . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i l l
A L S O B E A V A I L A B L E FOR SOME P E R S O N S WHO W I L L J O I N THE GROUP
ON THE L A S T DAY TO COMPLETE MARCH BY ENTRY INTO MONTGOMERY.
f . L i n e s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n a m o n g t h e m a r c h e r s a n d l e a d e r s a n d
C E R T A I N S U P P O R T I N G S E R V I C E S W I L L BE E S T A B L I S H E D BY W A L K I E -
T A L K I E R A D I O S AND OTHER M EA N S .
8 . L l A S O N W I L L BE E S T A B L I S H E D BETWEEN D E S I G N A T E D L E A D E R S OF THE
MARCH AND SUCH S T A T E AND LO CAL O F F I C A L S AS THE A G E N C I E S CONCERNED S H A L L
D E S I G N A T E .
9 . A M ASS M E E T IN G W I L L BE H E L D I N FRONT OF THE ALA BA M A ST A T E C A P I T O L
ON THE DAY THE MARC HERS ENTER MONTGOMERY. T H E R E W I L L BE A S P E A K E R S 1 STAND
WITH L O U D S P E A K E R S IN THE S T R E E T IN FRONT OF THE C A P I T O L . THE A U D I E N C E
W I L L B E ON THE S I O E W A L K S AND IN THE S T R E E T I N FRONT OF THE C A P I T O L A S WELL
a . N o r m o r e t h a n 2 0 p e r s o n s w i l l e n t e r t h e C a p i t o l B u i l d i n g
P R O C E E D TO T H E G O V E R N O R ' S O F F I C E , S E E K AN A U D I E N C E W I T H
t h e G o v e r n o r a n d p r e s e n t a p e t i t i o n .
b . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n a w a y f r o m t h e C a p i t o l g r o u n d s w i l l b e
p r o v i d e d b y l e a d e r s o f t h e m a r c h t o v a r i o u s d e s t i n a t i o n s
I N C L U D I N G T R A N S P O R T A T I O N T E R M I N A L S . .
I I . T h e m a r c h w i l l b e o r d e r l y a n d p e a c e f u l a n d o t h e r w i s e o b s e r v e
T H E H I G H E S T S T A N D A R D S OF D I G N I T Y AN D DECORUM.
R e s p e c t f u l l y s u b m i t t e d ,
1 0 C o l u m b u s C i r c l e
N e w Y o r k 19 , N . Y .
ATTORNEYS FOR PLA IN T IFF
NORTHERN D IV IS IO N
HOSEA W ILLIAM S, ET AL.
P l a i n t i f f s , *
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of Alabama,
ET AL.
Defendants.
C I V I L ACTION
NO. 2 l 8 l -N
FILED
M AR 1 6 1965
By R.
1 T O CLERK
Denut v C lerk
PLAINTIFFS* PROPOSED PLAN FOR MARCH FROM
SELMA, ALABAMA TO MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA
I. The march will commence on Friday, March I9j 19^5 AT 1^:30 a .m . or any
DAY T H E R E A F T E R P R O V I D E D THAT P L A I N T I F F S W I L L P R O V I D E AT L E A S T H8 HOURS ADVANCE
N O T I C E OF THE MARCH TO D E F E N D A N T S , THE U N I T E D S T A T E S , AND THE COURT.
2 . T h e n u m b e r of p e r s o n s m a r c h i n g w i l l b e a s f o l l o w s ;
a . T h e r e w i l l be n o l i m i t a t i o n o n t h e n u m b e r o f m a r c h e r s w i t h i n t h e
C i t i e s o f S e l m a a n d M o n t g o m e r y a n d a l o n g t h e U - l a n e p o r t i o n s o f
R o u t e 8 0 - E a s t b e t w e e n S e l m a a n d M o n t g o m e r y .
b . T h e n u m b e r o f m a r c h e r s w i l l n o t e x c e e d 3 0 0 p e r s o n s o n t h e 2 - l a n e
p o r t i o n o f R o u t e 8 o .
3 . T h e f o l l o w i n g a r e t h e a p p r o x i m a t e d i s t a n c e s t o b e c o v e r e d e a c h d a y :
a . F i r s t d a y - m a r c h a p p r o x i m a t e l y I I m i l e s s t o p p i n g a t a d e s i g n a t e d
p r i v a t e f i e l d w i t h p e r m i s s i o n o f o w n e r w h i c h h a s a l r e a d y b e e n
g r a n t e d ;
b . S e c o n d d a y - m a r c h a p p r o x i m a t e l y I I m i l e s s t o p p i n g a t a d e s i g n a t e d
F I E L D WITH P E R M I S S I O N OF THE OWNER WHICH A L R E A D Y HAS BEEN GRANTED ;
c . T h i r d d a y - m a r c h a p p r o x i m a t e l y 17 m i l e s s t o p p i n g a t a d e s i g n a t e d
B U I L D I N G AND A J O I N I N G F I E L D WITH P E R M I S S I O N OF OWNERS WHICH HAS
a l r e a d y b e e n g r a n t e d ;
d . F o u r t h d a y - m a r c h 8 m i l e s t o t h e w e s t e r n p a r t o f M o n t g o m e r y
S T O P P I N G AT AN AR EA T E N T A T I V E L Y S E L E C T E D AND TO BE D E S I G N A T E D .
e. F i f t h d a y - m a r c h f r o m w e s t e r n p a r t o f M o n t g o m e r y to the C a p i t o l
f. Large tents w i l l be erected at the c a m p s i t e s b y p r o f e s s i o n a l s .
Meetings a n d song festivals m a y be h e l d a t c a m p s i t e s .
H. Route o f m a r c h i n the City of S e l m a : S t a r t i n g a t B r o w n ’ s C h a p e l A , M , F
C h u r c h o n S y l v a n S t r e e t p r o c e e d i n g S o u t h on Sylvan t o A l a b a m a , t h e n We s t o n
A l a b a m a t o B r o a d ( h i g h w a y 8 0 - E a s t ) , t h e n South on Board S t r e e t across Edmund
F a i r v i e w t o O a k S t r e e t t u r n i n g N o r t h o n O a k S t r e e t t o J e f f D a v i s A v e n u e ;
t h e n E a s t o n J e f f D a v i s t o H o l t S t r e e t ; t h e n N o r t h o n H o l t t o M o b i l e S t r e e t ;
t h e n o n M o b i l e t o M o n t g o m e r y ; t h e n n o r t h e a s t o n M o n t g o m e r y t o C o u r t
S q u a r e t h e n u p D e x t e r A v e n u e t o C a p i t o l . T h e M a r c h i n t h e c i t y w i l l b e
I N TH E S T R E E T S .
6 f ON THE H I G H W A Y , TH E M A R C H E R S W I L L P R O C E E D ON S H O U L D E R S OF THE
ROAD W A L K I N G SN TH E L E F T S I D E F A C I N G A U T O M O B I L E T R A F F I C . T H E Y W I L L MA RCH
A L O N G ROAD S H O U L D E R S TWO A B R E A S T AN D E M P L O Y S I N G L E F I L E S AT P L A C E S W HER E
TH E S H O U L D E R I S NARROW AN D ON B R I D G E S W I T H O U T S I D E W A L K S . T H E M A R C H E R S
W I L L B E O R G A N I Z E D I N S E P A R A T E G R O U P S O F A P P R O X I M A T E L Y 5 0 P E R S O N S (O R L E S S )
AND EACH GR OU P W I L L B E UN D ER THE S U P E R V I S I O N O F A D E S I G N A T E D GROUP L E A D E R .
7 . T h e f o l l o w i n g s u p p o r t i n g s e r v i c e s w i l l b e p r o v i d e d :
a . F o o d ;
b . T r u c k - b o r n e w a s h i n g a n d t o i l e t f a c i l i t i e s ;
c . L i t t e r a n d g a r b a g e p i c k u p b y t r u c k a l o n g r o u t e a n d a t c a m p s i t e s .
d . A m b u l a n c e a n d f i r s t a i d s e r v i c e ;
e . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n f o r r e t u r n t o S e l m a o f t h o s e m a r c h e r s i n
E X C E S S O F TH E 3 ^ 0 ( ° R F E W E R ) P E R S O N S WHO W I L L C O N T I N U E
ON T H E MA RC H A F T E R THE F I R S T D A Y . T R A N S P O R T A T I O N W I L L
A L S O B E A V A I L A B L E FOR S O M E P E R S O N S WHO W I L L J O I N TH E GROUP
ON TH E L A S T DAY TO C O M P L E T E M ARC H BY E N T R Y I N T O M O N T G O M E R Y .
f . L i n e s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n a m o n g t h e m a r c h e r s a n d l e a d e r s a n d
C E R T A I N S U P P O R T I N G S E R V I C E S W I L L B E E S T A B L I S H E D BY W A L K I E -
T A L K I E R A D I O S AN D O T H E R M E A N S .
8 . L l A S O N W I L L B E E S T A B L I S H E D B E T W E E N D E S I G N A T E D L E A D E R S O F THE
M ARC H A N D S U C H S T A T E A N D L O C A L O F F I C A L S A S THE A G E N C I E S C O N C E R N E D S H A L L
D E S I G N A T E .
9 . A M A S S M E E T I N G W I L L B E H E L O I N F R O N T OF TH E A L A B A M A S T A T E C A P I T O L
ON T H E DAY THE M A R C H E R S E N T E R M O N T G O M E R Y . T H E R E W I L L B E A S P E A K E R S 1 S T A N D
W I T H L O U D S P E A K E R S I N T H E S T R E E T I N F R O N T O F TH E C A P I T O L . T H E A U D I E N C E
W I L L B E ON T H E S I D E W A L K S A N D I N TH E S T R E E T I N F R O N T O F TH E C A P I T O L A S W E L L
a s on th e Ca p i t o l s t e p s . The a u d i e n c e w i l l b e d i r e c t e d not to walk on the
a . N o t m o r e t h a n 2 0 p e r s o n s w i l l e n t e r t h e C a p i t o l B u i l d i n g
PRO C EED TO THE G O V E R N O R ' S O F F I C E , S E E K AN A U D I E N C E WITH
t h e G o v e r n o r a n o p r e s e n t a p e t i t i o n .
b . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n a w a y f r o m t h e C a p i t o l g r o u n d s w i l l b e
p r o v i d e d b y l e a d e r s o f t h e m a r c h t o v a r i o u s d e s t i n a t i o n s
i n c l u d i n g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n t e r m i n a l s . .
I I . T h e m a r c h w i l l b e o r o e r l y a n d p e a c e f u l a n d o t h e r w i s e o b s e r v e
t h e h i g h e s t s t a n d a r d s o f d i g n i t y a n d d e c o r u m .
R e s p e c t f u l l y s u b m i t t e d ,
_______________________ PETCR A. HALL
1 6 3 0 4 t h A v e n u e N .
B i r m i n g h a m , A l a b a m a
P l a i n t i f f s GRAY &. SEAY
3 4 N o r t h P e r r y S t r e e t
M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a
JACK GREENBERG
NORMAN AMAKER
CHARLES H. JONES, JR.
JAMES M. NABRIT, I ! I
1 0 C o l u m b u s C i r c l e
N e w Y o r k 1 9 , N. Y.
ATTORNEYS FOR PLA IN T IFF
dfe ^ K l o i
RG: 3
ENTRY: CO
BOX'.
TAB #:
______ / ______ / ______COPIES/ PPS. /CLASS.
ACCESS RESTRICTED
The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:
Q ( i - /JFile Designation iz_ L;
Date
From
To
l (USH f t h (1/J7X cd / k C
___________ £ ae.________n
___ % £ (- /
\ — -------—-----
jc/7 [ U ( L ^ ----
J 0 '0 % H 1 f / V J O i)
it is restricted. Restrictions on records in the National
Archives are stated in general and specific record group
restriction statements which are available for examination. The
item identified above has been withdrawn because it contains:
□ Security-Classified Information
Otherwise Restricted Information
vx)t44t J11 XmT - j n r [LSl I ./"
5 /L~\ iCi/v Ll<̂ . c. Vc o i
Authority “ 0isk/e*
Date
Withdrawn by flift—-
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION NA FORM 14000 (5-92)
WITHDRAWAL
NOTICE
NORTHERN D I V I S I ON
HOSEA W ILLIAM S, ET AL.
Plaintiffs, #
C I V I L ACTION
NO. 2 l 8 l - N
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, a s #
G o v e r n o r o f t h e S t a t e o f A l a b a m a ,
ET AL.
D e f e n d a n t s . # * I. 2 3
FI .ED
M AR 1 6 1965
n N- clerk
t f ' t y Clerk
PLAINT IFFS' PROPOSED PLAN FOR MARCH FRCM
SELMA, ALABAMA TO MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA
I . T h e m a r c h w i l l c o m m e n c e o n F r i d a y , Ma r c h 19, 1965 a t 10:30 a . * o r a n y
DAY T H E R E A F T E R P R O V I D E D THAT P L A I N T I F F S W I L L P R O V I D E AT L E A S T ^ 8 HOURS / JV A NCE
N O T I C E OF THE MARCH TO D E F E N D A N T S , THE U N I T E D S T A T E S , AND THE COURT.
2 . T h e n u m b e r o f p e r s o n s m a r c h i n g w i l l b e a s f o l l o w s ;
a . T h e r e w i l l b e n o l i m i t a t i o n o n t h e n u m b e r o f m a r c h e r s w i t h . n t h e
C i t i e s o f S e l m a a n d M o n t g o m e r y a n d a l o n g t h e 4 ~ l a n e p o r t i o s o f
R o u t e 8 0 - E a s t b e t w e e n S e l m a a n d M o n t g o m e r y .
b. The n u m b e r o f m a r c h e r s w i l l n o t e x c e e d 300 p e r s o n s o n t h e * - l a n e
p o r t i o n o f R o u t e 80.
3. T h e f o l l o w i n g a r e t h e a p p r o x i m a t e d i s t a n c e s t o b e c o v e r e d e a c h a y :
a . F i r s t d a y - m a r c h a p p r o x i m a t e l y I I m i l e s s t o p p i n g a t a d e s i c a t e d
P R I V A T E F I E L D WITH P E R M I S S I O N OF OWNER WHICH HAS A LR EA D Y b EN
g r a n t e d ;
b . S e c o n d o a y - m a r c h a p p r o x i m a t e l y I I m i l e s s t o p p i n g a t a d e s i n a t e d
f i e l d w i t h p e r m i s s i o n o f t h e o w n e r w h i c h a l r e a d y h a s B EEN V r a n t e d ;
c . T h i r d d a y - m a r c h a p p r o x i m a t e l y 17 m i l e s s t o p p i n g a t a d e s i g a t e d
b u i l d i n g a n d a j o i n i n g f i e l d w i t h p e r m i s s i o n o f o w n e r s w h i c h a s
a l r e a d y b e e n g r a n t e d ;
d . F o u r t h d a y - m a r c h 8 m i l e s t o t h e w e s t e r n p a r t o f Mo n t g o m e r y
S T O P P I N G AT a n AR EA T E N T A T I V E L Y S E L E C T E D AND TO BE DES IG N/ ED.
E . F i f t h d a y - m a r c h f r o m w e s t e r n p a r t o f Mo n t g o m e r y t o t h e Caf- t o l ,
f . L a r g e t e n t s w i l l b e e r e c t e d a t t h e c a m p s i t e s b y p r o f e s s i o k . l s .
M e e t i n g s a n d s o n g f e s t i v a l s m a y b e h e l d a t c a m p s i t e s .
R o u t e o f m a r c h i n t h e C i t y o f S e l m a : S t a r t i n g a t B r o w n ' s C h a l l A . M . F
C h u r c h o n S y l v a n S t r e e t p r o c e e d i n g S o u t h o n S y l v a n t o A l a b a m a , t h e n We s . o n
A l a b a m a t o B r o a d ( h i g h w a y 8o - E a s t ) , t h e n S o u t h o n B o a r d S t r e e t a c r o s s El u n d
D O 0 /-V r—
F a i r v i e w t o Oa k S t r e e t t u r n i n g N o r t h o n O a k S t r e e t t o J e f f D a v i s A v e n l ;
t h e n E a s t o n J e f f D a v i s t o H o l t S t r e e t ; t h e n No r t h o n H o l t t o Mo b i l e S r e e t ;
t h e n o n Mo b i l e t o M o n t g o m e r y ; t h e n n o r t h e a s t o n Mo n t g o m e r y t o C o u r t
S q u a r e t h e n u p D e x t e r A v e n u e t o C a p i t o l . T h e Ma r c h i n t h e c i t y w i l l b
i n t h e s t r e e t s .
6 . On THE H IGHWA Y, THE MARCHERS W I L L P RO C E ED ON SH O U L D E R S OF Th
ROAD W A L K IN G ON THE L E F T S I D E F A C I N G A U T O M O B IL E T R A F F I C * THEY W I L L MA CH
A l o n g r o a d s h o u l d e r s t w o a b r e a s t a n d e m p l o y s i n g l e f i l e s a t p l a c e s w h e e
THE SH O U LbE R I S NARROW AND ON B R I D G E S WITHOUT S I D E W A L K S . THE MARCHERS
W I L L BE O R G A N IZ E D IN S E P A R A T E GROUPS OF AP PROX I M A T E L Y 5® P E R S O N S (OR L j s )
AND EACH GROUP W I L L BE UNDER THE S U P E R V I S I O N OF A D E S I G N A T E D GROUP LEA :R.
7 * THE FOLLOWING S U P P O R T IN G S E R V I C E S W I L L BE P R O V I D E D ;
a . F o o d ;
b . T r u c k - b o r n e w a s h i n g a n d t o i l e t f a c i l i t i e s ;
c . L i t t e r a n d g a r b a g e p i c k u p b y t r u c k a l o n g r o u t e a n d a t c a m s i t e s .
d . A m b u l a n c e a n d f i r s t a i d s e r v i c e ;
e . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n f o r r e t u r n t o S e l m a o f t h o s e m a r c h e r s i n
E X C E S S o f THE 30D { o r f e w e r ) P E R SO N S WHO W I L L C O NT IN U E
o n t h e m a r c h a f t e r t h e f i r s t d a y . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i l l
A L S O B E A V A I L A B L E FOR SOME P E R S O N S WHO W I L L J O I N THE GROU
ON THE L A S T DAY TO COMPLETE MARCH BY ENTRY IN T O MONTGOMER .
f . L i n e s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n a m o n g t h e m a r c h e r s a n d l e a d e r s a n d
C E R T A I N S U P P O R T I N G S E R V I C E S W I L L BE E S T A B L I S H E D BY WALK t E
T A L K I E R A D I O S AND OTHER M EA NS .
8 . L l A S O N W I L L BE E S T A B L I S H E D BETWEEN D E S I G N A T E D L E A D E R S OF THE
MARCH ANO SUCH S T A T E AND LOCAL O F F I C A L S A S THE A G E N C I E S CONCERNED SR A L
D E S I G N A T E ,
9 . A M A SS M E E T I N G W I L L BE H E L D IN FRONT OF THE ALA BA M A ST A T E CAP fOL
ON THE DAY THE M ARC HE RS ENTER MONTGOMERY. T H ER E W I L L BE A S P E A K E R S 1 S , AND
WITH L O U D S P E A K E R S I N THE S T R E E T IN FRONT OF THE C A P I T O L . THE A U D I E N C E
W I L L BE ON THE S I O E W A L K S AND IN THE S T R E E T IN FRONT OF THE C A P I T O L AS W . L
as on the Capitol steps. The audience will be directed not to walk on the
a . N o t m o r e t h a n 2 0 p e r s o n s w i l l e n t e r t h e C a p i t o l B u i l o i . g
PRO C EED TO THE G O V E R N O R ' S O F F I C E , S E E K AN A U D I E N C E Wl TiJ
t h e G o v e r n o r and p r e s e n t a p e t i t i o n .
b . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n a w a y f r o m t h e C a p i t o l g r o u n d s w i l l b e
P R O V I D E D BY L E A D E R S OF THE MARCH TO V A R I O U S D E S T 1 NAT I l-,iS
I N C L U D I N G T R A N SP O R T A T IO N T E R M I N A L S . .
II. The MARCH W I L L BE O RDERLY ANO P E A C E F U L AND O T H E R W IS E O B S E R V E
THE H IG H E S T S T A N D A R D S OF D I G N I T Y AND DECORUM.
R e s p e c t f u l l y s u b m i t t e d ,
I N T I F F S
PETER A. HALL
1630 4 t h A v e n u e N.
B i r m i n g h a m , A l a b a m a
GRAY Sc SEAY
3 4 N o r t h P e r r y S t r e e t
M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a
JACK GREENBERG
NORMAN AMAKER
CHARLES H. JONES, JR .
JAMES M. NABRIT, I I I
10 C o l u m b u s C i r c l e
N e w Y o r k 19, N. Y.
ATTORNEYS FOR PLA IN T IFF
/ // / b # * 4
^U sjgu jcL ct ( s'
"z V sU J s j j
fa jt& j /4W/Om V /tW kXA .
j m A - M
j d v j t
Hosea Williams, John Lewis and Amelia Boynton, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
United States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
vs
Honorable George C. Wallace, as Governor of the State of Alabama; A1 Lingo, as Director of Public Safety for the State of Alabama; and James G. Clark, as Sheriff of Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
)))
))))
Civil Action
No. 21S1-N.
(MEMORANDUM TRANSCRIPT: This memorandum transcript containsinterrogation by the Court of the witness, Martin Luther King, Jr., at conclusion of cross-examination of said witness by Mr. Maury D. Smith on behalf of his clients during hearing held'in above case before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomery, Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965.)
THE COURT: Does that conclude your examination, Mr.
Smith?
MR. SMITH: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: All right. Dr. King, before we continue
with counsel examining you, along this last part of Mr. Smith’s
examination let me ask you a few questions, please.
WITNESS: (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
THE COURT: On Tuesday when — when you did march,
prior to the time you marched did you have any — any conversation with
Governor Collins concerning the extent of your march, how far you
intended to march, and where you intended to march?
WITNESS: Yes, I said to him that we felt compelled,
as I said earlier, on the basis of conscience, to march, and I said to
him at that point that we were aware of the fact at that time that the
State Troopers were standing at a certain point across the bridge, and
that they were there in large numbers, and that they would form a human
wall, and I went on to say that we would not ever attempt, on the basis
of the non-violent spirit and the non-violent movement, to break through
a human wall that had been set up by a policeman. And when I said — said
that, I went on to say that I felt that at least we had to walk to the
point where the brutality occurred Sunday, and not only walk to that
point, but to be able to make some kind of witness, some kind of
testimony, to have some prayers, because of the numerous religious
leaders who had come in from all over the country.
THE COURT: Is it correct to say that when you
started to march, and you went across the bridge, you knew that the
State Troopers were approximately five hundred feet beyond it?
WITNESS: That’s right; we did.
THE COURT: And you did not intend at that time to
march past the Troopers; is that right?
WITNESS: That is correct; we —
THE COURT: Had you made any advance preparations for
a march from Selma to Montgomery —
WITNESS: I think —
THE COURT: — in the way of food for that day, in
the way of food and trucks and things like that?
WITNESS: No, we didn’t. The — the predominant
opinion was that we would not be able to get to Montgomery, so we didn’t
even prepare for it.
THE COURT: Now, it has been reported to me -- and
let me ask you if this is correct — that after you reached the State
Troopers, and while you were there and confronted by the Troopers, that
they were pulled away and that their automobiles were removed while you
all were still there; is that correct?
WITNESS: That is correct.
— J —
THE COURT: And then did you go forward, or did you
turn and go back to Montgomery — I mean to Selma?
WITNESS: We turned around and went back to Selma.
THE COURT: After the State Troopers had been pulled
back?
WITNESS: That’s right.
THE COURT: And at that point there were no Troopers
in front of you —
WITNESS: That is correct.
THE COURT: — between — on the highway between you
all and Montgomery?
WITNESS: That is correct.
THE COURT: But you turned and went back to Selma;
is that report to me that I have received from the Justice Department
correct?
WITNESS: Yes, sir; that is correct.
THE COURT: You know why the State Troopers were
pulled back at that point to leave the highway open for you?
WITNESS: No, we — we don’t know; we have been
asking questions in my mind, in our minds, but we really don’t know. It
may be that after confronting them, and we felt that we had to have this
moral confrontation with the State Troopers, and they said we couldn’t
move forward, I made the statement, "Do you mind, sir, if we have some
prayers and sing one or two freedom songs?" and then I said — I mean he
said, "You can have the prayers and songs and go back to the church."
This was a kind of tacit agreement —
THE COURT: Now, a tacit agreement between who,
between what parties?
WITNESS: Right there with who — I don’t remember
the name.
THE COURT: Was G o v e rn o r C o l l i n s t h e r e ?
or not. I am not sure, but I mean with the State Trooper who spoke over
the —
THE COURT: All right.
WITNESS: — system.
THE COURT: Along that same point, let me ask you
if there was an agreement between you and — and Governor Collins, who,
as I understand it, was acting as a liaison between you and the State
Troopers; is that correct; was he on that day carrying messages back and
forth?
WITNESS: Well, when he came in, I think the sequence
would be this: He came and said that for many reasons he wished that we
wouldn’t march, and he urged us not to, and I went through a long
discussion, relatively long discussion, about the reasons why I felt that
we had to march, and then at that point Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth, who
was in the meeting, said to Governor Collins that, "The thing you should
do, Governor, if you want to be helpful in this situation, is to go to
the Troopers and urge them not to interfere with our activities today
or not to be brutal in any manner."
THE COURT: Subsequent to that time, were you brought
a route of march by Governor Collins?
WITNESS: Yes, he brought me a piece of paper with a
WITNESS: N o, I am n o t s u r e i f he w as on th e s c e n e
route.
THE COURT: Before you marched?
WITNESS: Yes. As we —
THE COURT: And who did it purport to come from?
According to Governor Collins, the route of march that you and this group
were to take last Tuesday?
WITNESS: I am sorry, I really don’t know, and I
gave it immediately to Reverend Young.
THE COURT: Well, did you march according to the
route that Governor Collins brought you?
WITNESS: Yes, it was the same route that they used
Sunday, according to Reverend Young; he looked at it immediately, and he
said, ,rThis is the same route, I am familiar with this."
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Now, we — that is all right.
THE COURT: What were you informed with reference to
that route, that it was permissible for you to march along that route or
not?
WITNESS: Governor Collins said to me when he gave me
the paper, he came and said very briefly, "Let me give you this, or this
is the route that they would like for you to follow."
THE COURT: They who; did he say?
WITNESS: He didn’t say who.
THE COURT: All right.
WITNESS: And he said, "I think things will work out
all right," and that was all he said.
THE COURT: Did it have a point on there where the
State Troopers were supposed to be?
WITNESS: I really don’t think it did. As I recall,
I looked at it very quickly and gave it to Reverend Young, but I don’t
recall —
THE COURT: All right.
WITNESS: -- it having where the State Troopers were
to be, but it just gave around — I don’t remember the name of streets,
but it led right on around to the bridge.
THE COURT: Then as I understand it, on one point did
_ did you agree, and did you subsequently carry it out with Governor
Collins, that you would stop on your march where the Troopers were?
WITNESS: Oh, yes; we made it very clear to Governor
Collins in our talk with him that we —
THE COURT: A l l r i g h t
would have to stop at that point.
MR. GREENBERG: Please the court, we have — one of
the witnesses, I think, has that so called map. It is just a few
scribbled lines; we are trying to get it so the court can see the whole
thing. Here it is.
THE COURT: Let it be marked for identification.
THE CLERK: Plaintiff’s Exhibit number 15 for
identification.
THE COURT: I hand you Plaintiff’s Exhibit 15 and
ask you if that is the diagram that Governor Collins gave you on that
morning before the march indicating where you could march?
WITNESS: Uh, huh; yes, sir; this is it.
THE COURT: Do you know whether he had been in touch
with Sheriff Clark or Lingo or any of their representatives prior to tha
time?
WITNESS: I — I don’t know, but I assumed that he
had been. When he came to me,at the end of our meeting, after we
suggested that he — after we suggested that something be done about
curbing the brutality, he did say that they would immediately try to do
something about it, and we didn’t —
THE COURT: Were you informed by Governor Collins
prior to the time you marched that if you stopped where the Troopers
were there would be no brutality?
WITNESS: Well, when he came to me, he said simply
that, ”1 think everything will be all right." That was his statement,
as I recollect, and I assumed by that that he meant that we would be
able to march at least to the point where the brutality occurred Sunday
and would face the human wall, and that we would be permitted to have a
brief period there and go back to the church.
WITNESS: — w o u ld n o t b r e a k th r o u g h t h e t r o o p s , we
THE COURT: We w i l l t a k e a t e n m in u te r e c e s s .
(END OF MATTERS COVERED BY THIS MEMORANDUM TRANSCRIPT)
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct transcript of notes taken by me in above matter, or that portion thereof indicated in caption on pagfi 1 thereof.
Glynyi He nde rs on, Official Court Reporter
3 ■
F o rm N o , U 8 M 989
Edition 4-22-515
RETURN ON SERVICE OF WRIT
Hosea W illiam s, e t a l
QJmtefc States of America,
--MiddIe District of Alabaia5_____
v s . 2lU8-N
s s ; Hon. George G. Wallace e t a l
Order Denying Motion f o r Temporary
R est. Order, Temp. R est. Order &
T U u _+•+? , , ,, , T , ,, , S etting Cause fo r Hearing on MotionI hereby certify and return that I served the annexed j rn- p. ” -. ;,..;,,.,.,,, • _ _rxrr rrexTnn^gjjy- xr.j.
on the therein-named Z^er,,H^l^AAtoniey__for Plaintiffs
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof with .... Peter H all
(Individual or agent o f company, corporation, etc.)
personally a t _______ Di-S tnxcCour t* Room
(Address—Street number, apartment number.
rural route, etc.)
at__________ Montgome ry , Alabama
(City)
at 9:00
(State)
a. m.—jEtm , on the :11 th ____day of March
Marshal’s fees
Mileage______
3.00
WILLIAM M. PARKER, JR.
in the said District
1 9 -6 1 .
„ Q r - A ' ^ ' r r
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1 9 6 3 -0 -6 7 3 7 1 6
United States Marshal.
Deputy.
RETURNED AND FiLED
ivl£\R 17 19B5
R. C. DOBSON
clfpk
r
Form No. U S M 282
JCditloa 4-22-66
RETURN ON SERVICE OF W RIT
SHmteb States! of America,
Hosea Williamg, et al
| vs. Civ. 2l8l-N
ss: Hon. George Wallace, et al
— ' Summons & Complaint
Motion for Preliminary Injunction,
Motion for Temporary Rest. Order,
I hereby certify and return that I served the annexed
Middle District of Alabama
(Writ)
on the therein-named Fred Gray, Attorney for Plaintiffs
(Individual, company, corporation, etc.)
by handing to and leaving a true and correct copy thereof with him, Fred Gray,
(Individual or agent o f company, corporation, etc.)
personally at__Dean Drug Store on Monroe at Lawrence Streets___________
(Address—Street number, apartment number.
rural route, etc.)
at______ Montgomery*._________Alabama______________in the said District
(City) (State)
at JULiilS._m-> on the_________5th____day of__March._________, 19 68
Marshal's fees____
Mileage_________
_M2.J20 ___________
United States Marshal.x > y
By (T t 'Itfcr
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1963— 0 - 8 7 3 7 1 6
' / Deputy.
RETURNED AND FILED
MAR 1 ? 1965
R C. DOBSON
CLERK
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS
and AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
)))))))))
Plaintiffs,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA*
Plaintiff-Intervenor, )
and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
AL LINGO, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
vs.
Defendants.
)))))))))))
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The plaintiffs as Negro citizens and the members of the class they
represent filed with this Court on March 8, 1965, their complaint, motion for
temporary restraining order and motion for a preliminary injunction. Juris
diction is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3) and (4). This action,
authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 1971(a) and (b) as amended and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981
and 1983, seeks relief from the denial of the equal protection of the laws
under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and
seeks redress of the deprivation of rights, privileges and immunities guaran
teed by the First, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of
the United States, as implemented by the above-identified Congressional
enactments. On March 10, 1965, the United States of America, by leave of this
Court, filed Its complaint in intervention. This intervention complaint was
filed pursuant to an order of this Court designating the United States as a
party and pursuant to the provisions of § 902 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(Public Law 88-352, July 2, 1964). The Attorney General of the United States
certifies that this case is of general importance, and his certificate is
attached to the intervention complaint.
The defendant George C. Wallace is the Governor and chief executive
executive officer of the State of Alabama is charged with the faithful
execution of the laws of the State of Alabama and of the United States of
America; in such capacity, the Governor controls and supervises the defendant
Albert J. Lingo, and through the defendant Lingo the Governor controls and
directs the activities of the Alabama Highway Patrol, also known as the Alabama
State Troopers. The defendant Lingo as director is in the active control of
the Alabama Highway Patrol.
The plaintiffs seek to have this Court guarantee their right to
assemble and demonstrate peaceably for the purpose of redressing their
grievances concerning the right to register to vote in the State of Alabama
without unlawful interference. Included in the rights plaintiffs seek and
ask this Court to adjudicate is that of walking peaceably along the public
highway in the State of Alabama between Selma and Montgomery. Plaintiffs
also ask this Court to enjoin and restrain the defendants and all persons act
ing in concert with them from arresting, harassing, threatening, or in any
way interfering with their peaceful, nonviolent march from Selma, Alabama,
to Montgomery, Alabama, for the purpose of protesting injustices and petition
ing their State government, particularly the chief executive officer— the
Governor— for redress of grievances.
By order made and entered in this case on March 9, 1965, this Court
denied the plaintiffs' application for a restraining order, which was sought
without any notice to the defendants and without a hearing. At the same time,
upon being informed that the plaintiffs intended to continue to attempt their
mass marching along the public highway of the State of Alabama between Selma
and Montgomery before this Court had had an opportunity to adjudicate the
respective rights of the parties, this Court entered an order temporarily
restraining any further attempts on the part of the plaintiffs to enforce the
rights they ask this Court to judicially determine until the matter could be
heard commencing Thursday, March 11, 1965. Plaintiffs were restrained by this
Court pursuant to the authority of Title 28, § 1651, United States Code, with
the purpose of the temporary restraining order being necessary and appropriate
1/in aid of this Court's jurisdiction. Issue was joined by the defendants upon
wanace, in aaaicion to joining issue, asking tnis Court to enjoin and restrain
the plaintiffs and other members of their class from continuing any march or
mass demonstration along or upon U. S. Highway 30 between Selma, Alabama, and
Montgomery, Alabama, or along or upon any other public highway within the
State of Alabama.
This submission is upon the pleadings, the testimony of numerous
witnesses taken over a period of four and one-half days, and the several
exhibits offered and admitted in connection with that testimony. Upon this
submission, this Court now proceeds in this memorandum opinion to make appro
priate findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by Rule 52, Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure.
Under Alabama law, registration is prerequisite to voting in any
election. In several counties in central Alabama, including Dallas County
wherein Selma, Alabama, is located, fewer than 10% of the Negroes of voting
21age are registered to vote. For the purpose of obtaining better political
representation for Negro citizens in these counties, the Negro communities,
through local and national organizations, have conducted voter registration
drives in recent years. These voter registration drives in Dallas and other
central Alabama counties have been intensified since SeptcOvber, 1964. Public
demonstrations have been held in these several counties, particularly in Dallas
County, for the purpose of encouraging Negroes to attempt to register to vote
and also for the purpose of protesting discriminatory voter registration
practices in Alabama. The demonstrations have been peaceful. At the same
time, cases have been filed in the United States District Courts in this
U 4/district and also in the Southern District of Alabama; these cases are
1/ This temporary restraining order, being designed only to protect this
Court's jurisdiction, pending a hearing and adjudication of the rights of the
parties, ha3 served Its purpose with the filing of this order, and, therefore,
expires.
2j See Appendix "A" for registration statistics compiled for Dallas, Perry,
Wilcox, Hale, Choctaw and Marengo Counties. As to Lowndes County, the evidence
reflects that no Negroes ere registered to vote although the Negro population
in Lowndes County is considerably in excess of 50% of the total population of that county.
3/ United States v. Penton (for Montgomery Countv). 212 F. Sudd. 1S3 (1962);
several central Aiaoama counties
As reflected by Appendix "A" to this opinion, the efforts of these
Negro citizens to secure this right to register to vote in some of these
counties, have accomplished very little. For instance, in Dallas County,
as of November, 1964, where Negro citizens of voting age outnumber white
citizens of voting age, only 2.2% of the Negroes were registered to vote.
In Perry County as of August, 1964, where the Negro citizens of voting age
outnumber white citizens, only 7% of the Negroes were registered to vote.
In Wilcox County as of December, 1963, where the Negro citizens of voting age
outnumber white citizens over two to one, 0% of the Negro citizens were
registered to vote as contrasted with the registration of 100% of the white
citizens of voting age in this county. In Hale County, where Negro citizens
of voting age outnumber white citizens, only 3.6% of these Negro citizens
have been registered to vote. The evidence In this case reflects that,
particularly as to Selma, Dallas County, Alabama, an almost continuous pattern
of conduct has existed on the part of defendant Sheriff Clark, his deputies,
and his auxiliary deputies known as "possemen" of harassment, intimidation,
coercion, threatening conduct, and, sometimes, brutal mistreatment toward
these plaintiffs and other members of their class who were engaged in their
demonstrations for the purpose of encouraging Negroes to attempt to register
to vote and to protest discriminatory voter registration practices in Alabama.
This harassment, intimidation and brutal treatment has ranged from mass arrests
without just cause to forced marches for several miles into the countryside,
with the sheriff's deputies and members of his posse herding the Negro
demonstrators at a rapid pace through the use of electrical shocking devices
(designed for use on cattle) and night sticks to prod them along. The Alabama
State Troopers, under the command of the defendant Lingo, have, upon several
3/ (Contd.) United States v. State of Alabama (for Macon County), 171 F. Supp.
720 (1959), 267 F, 2d 808, vacated and remanded 362 U.S. 602; United States v.
State of Alabama (for Bullock County), Civil Action No. 1677-N, Sept. 3, 1961; United States v. Cartwright (for Elmore County),230 F. Supp. 873 (1964).
4/ United States v. Atkins (concerning Dallas County), 210 F. Supp. 441,
reversed, 5th Cir., 323 F, 2d 733, and United States v. Mayton (relating to
Perry County), 335 F. 2d 153.
state troopers, along with sneritt mark as an "invited guest," nave
extended the harassment and Intimidating activities into Perry County, where,
on February 18, 1965, when approximately 300 Negroes were engaged in a
peaceful demonstration by marching from a Negro church to the Perry County
Courthouse for the purpose of publicly protesting racially discriminatory
voter registration practices in Perry County, Alabama, the Negro demonstrators
were stopped by the State troopers under the command of the defendant Lingo,
and the Negro demonstrators were at that time pushed, prodded, struck, beaten
and knocked down. This action resulted in the injury of several Negroes, one
of whom was shot by an Alabama State Trooper and subsequently died.
In Dallas County, Alabama, the harassment and brutal treatment on the
part of defendants Lingo and Clark, together with their troopers, deputies
and "possemen," and while acting under instructions from Governor Wallace,
reached a climax on Sunday, March 7, 1965, Upon this occasion approximately
650 Negroes left the church in Selma, Alabama, for the purpose of walking to
Montgomery, Alabama, to present to the defendant Governor Wallace their
grievances concerning the voter registration processes in these central
Alabama counties and concerning the restrictions and the manner in which these
restrictions had been imposed upon their public demonstrations. These
Negroes proceeded in an orderly and peaceful manner to a bridge near the
south edge of the City of Selma on U, S, Highway 80 that leads to Montgomery,
Alabama, which is located approximately 45 miles east of Selma. They proceeded
on a sidewalk across the bridge and then continued walking on the grassy
portion of the highway toward Montgomery until confronted by a detachment
of between 60 to 70 State troopers headed by the defendant Colonel Lingo,
by a detachment of several Dallas County deputy sheriffs, and numerous Dallas
County "possemen" on horses, who were headed by Sheriff Clark. Up to this
point the Negroes had observed all traffic laws and regulations, had not
interfered with traffic in any manner, and had proceeded in an orderly and
peaceful manner to the point of confrontation. They were ordered to disperse
and were given two minutes to do so by Major Cloud, who was in active command
of the troopers and who was acting upon specific instructions from his
troopers and the members of the Dallas County sheriff's office and "possemen"
moved against the Negroes. The general plan as followed by the State
troopers in this instance had been discussed with and was known to Governor
Wallace. The tactics employed by the State troopers, the deputies and "posse-
men" against these Negro demonstrators were similar to those recommended for
use by the United States Army to quell armed rioters in occupied countries.
The troopers, equipped with tear gas, nausea gas and canisters of smoke,
as well as billy clubs, advanced on the Negroes. Approximately 20 canisters
of tear gas, nausea gas, and canisters of smoke were rolled into the Negroes
by these State officers. The Negroes were then prodded,struck, beaten and
knocked down by members of the Alabama State Troopers. The mounted "posse-
men," supposedly acting as an auxiliary law enforcement unit of the Dallas
County sheriff'8 office, then, on their horses, moved in and chased and beat
the fleeing Negroes. Approximately 75 to 80 of the Negroes were injured, with
a large number being hospitalized.
The acts and conduct of these defendants, together with the
members of their respective enforcement agencies, as outlined above, have
not been directed toward enforcing any valid law of the State of Alabama or
furthering any legitimate policy of the State of Alabama, but have been for
the purpose and have had the effect of preventing and discouraging Negro
citizens from exercising their rights of citizenship, particularly the right
to register to vote and the right to demonstrate peaceably for the purpose of
protesting discriminatory practices in this area. By these actions and by
this conduct, the defendants, together with other members of their enforcement
agencies, have intimidated, threatened and coerced Negro citizens in this
section of Alabama for the purpose of interfering with these citizens and
preventing them from exercising certain of their basic constitutional rights--
i.e., the right to register to vote, peaceably assemble, remonstrate with
governmental authorities and petition for redress of grievances. The attempted
march alongside U.S. Highway 80 from Selma, Alabama, to Montgomery, Alabama,
on March 7, 1965, involved nothing more than a peaceful effort on the part
of Negro citizens to exercise a classic constitutional right; that is, the
453; Edwards v, South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229 (1963); Fields v. South Carolina.
375 U.S. 44 (1963) (reversing State v. Fields. 240 S.C; 366, 127 S.E. 2d 6
on the basis of Edwards v. South Carolina); Kelly v. Page, 335 F. 2d 114
(C.A. 5, 1964); Young v. Davis. 9 RRLR 590 (M.D. Fla. 1964), including the
right to come to the capitol of the government against which the grievances
exist, "to assert any claim . . . [one] may have upon that government," and
"to seek its protection" (Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35, 44 (1867)), and
the right -- part of the "liberty" of which the citizen cannot be deprived
without due process of law -- to travel freely within the country, Kent v.
Dulles. 357 U.S. 116, 125-126 (1958); Edwards v. California. 314 U.S. 160,
177-181 (1941) (concurring opinion of Mr. Justice Douglas); Williams v. Fears.
179 U.S. 270, 274 (1900); Crandall v. Nevada. 6 Wall. 35, 44 (1867); Passenger
Cases, 7 How. 232, 492 (1849).
The law is clear that the right to petition one’s government for
the redress of grievances may be exercised In large groups. Indeed, where,
as here, minorities have been harassed, coerced and intimidated, group
association may be the only realistic way of exercising such rights. For
instance, in Edwards v. South Carolina, supra, the Supreme Court of the United
States invalidated as an infringement of the rights of free speech, free
assembly and freedom to petition, the convictions of 187 students who had
peaceably assembled at the site of the state government for the purpose of
petitioning their government for redress of grievances. In Fields v. South
Carolina, supra, breach-of-peace convictions were struck down where students had
protested by marching along the streets in three groups totaling approximately
1,000; this march was for the purpose of petitioning for the redress of
grievances. And in the more recent case of Cox v.Louisiana, supra, the
Supreme Court invalidated the breach-of-peace conviction against the leader
of a march of some 1,500 to 2,000 students on the Louisiana State Capitol
Building, the purpose of the march being to protest segregation and discrimi
nation against Negro citizens.
This Court recognizes, of course, that government authorities have
the duty and responsibility of keeping their streets and highways open and
people m cue use or puojLrc auiects au« ------ ----
are reasonable and designed to accomplish that end. As to any conflict that
may arise in such areas, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has stated in
Kelly v. Page. 335 F. 2d 114 (July 1964), ’’there is room in our system of
government for both, once the proper balance between them is drawn." As
has been demonstrated above, the law in this country constitutionally
guarantees that a citizen or group of citizens may assemble and petition
their government, or their governmental authorities, for redress of their
grievances even by mass demonstrations as long as the exercise of these
rights is peaceful. These rights may also be exercised by marching, even
along public highways, as long as it is done in an orderly and peaceful
manner; and these rights to assemble, demonstrate and march are not to be
abridged by arrest or other interference so long as the rights are asserted
within the limits of not unreasonably interfering with the exercise of the
rights by other citizens to use the sidewalks, streets and highways, and
where the protesters and demonstrators are conducting their activities in such
a manner as not to deprive the other citizenry of their police protection.
As was stated in Kelly v. Page, supra, there must be in cases like the one
now presented, a "constitutional boundary line" drawn between the competing
interests of society. This Court has the duty and responsibility in this case
of drawing the "constitutional boundary line." In doing so, it seems basic
to our constitutional principles that the extent of the right to assemble,
demonstrate and march peaceably along the highways and streets in an orderly
manner should be commensurate with the enormity of the wrongs that are being
protested and petitioned against. In this case, the wrongs are enormous.
The extent of the right to demonstrate against these wrongs should be
determined accordingly. This is true even though it is recognized that the
right to exercise constitutional rights by marching alongside a public
highway must be narrowed in the sense that such a right is subject to greater
regulation and in the sense that greater abridgement of the right may,
depending upon the circumstances, be warranted. This Court is, of course,
concerned in this case only with the right to demonstrate and protest by
highway; it is a four-laned highway for approximately two-thirds of the
distance between Selma and Montgomery, Alabama; it is a two-laned highway
for the remaining distance. There is an average "shoulder" six feet wide
on each side of the highway that is four-laned; there is an average three-
foot "shoulder" along that portion of the highway that is two-laned. Cross
overs are regularly constructed or located along the portion that is four-
laned. This highway, according to the law of the State of Alabama, is open
5/for pedestrian traffic. Thus, a reasonable use of the highways for the
purpose of pedestrian marching is guaranteed not only by the Constitution
of the United States according to the principles above set out, but is
specifically authorised by the law of the State of Alabama. The proclamation
as issued by the Governor of the State of Alabama on March 6, 1965, absolutely
banning any march by any manner--regardless of how conducted--and stating
that such a march will not be tolerated, constituted an unreasonable inter
ference with the right of Negro citizens engaged in the march to use U. S.
Highway 80 in the manner they were seeking to use it on Sunday, March 7,
1965. Such a proclamation by the Governor of the State of Alabama, as
enforced by the Alabama State Troopers and deputies and "possemen" of Dallas
County, Alabama, stepped across the "constitutional boundary line" that lies
between the interests of the public to use the highway in general and the
right of American citizens to use it for the purpose of marching to the
seat of their State government— Montgomery, Alabama--for the purpose of
protesting their grievances. This interference by the defendants and those
acting under their control and in concert with them with the attempted march
from Selma, Alabama, to Montgomery, Alabama, along U. S. Highway 80 on March
7, 1965, constituted an unconstitutional deprivation of these Negro citizens'
right of assembly and free movement within the State of Alabama along a public
highway located therein and their right to petition their State government,
and particularly their Governor, for redress of their grievances. * 1
5/ Code of Alabama, Title 36, § 58(19) (b) ; 'mere sidewalks are not provided
any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall when practicable walk1 An »-V.a c-Mo rtf fho rr.jA,iau nr -it-c nil mil tier far.iiv? traffic which mav
constitutional right to inarch along U. S, Highway 80 for their intended
purposes is not an unrestricted right, but, to the contrary, must be
exercised, if exercised at all, within this "constitutional boundary,"
have filed with this Court as a part of the evidence in this case a proposed
plan for a inarch from Selma, Alabama, to Montgomery, Alabama, along U* S.
Highway 80. These plaintiffs propose that the march will commence on Friday,
March 19, 1965, at 10:30 a.m., or any day thereafter provided that plaintiffs
give at least 48 hours' advance notice of the intended march to the defend
ants, to the United States, and to this Court. The plaintiffs propose
that there be no limitation on the number of marchers along that portion of
U. S. Highway 80 that is four-laned; the plaintiffs further propose that,
along that portion of the highway that is only two-laned, the number of
marchers will not at any time exceed 300 persons. The plaintiffs further
propose that the marchers will proceed on the shoulders of the highway on
the left side facing traffic; they will proceed two abreast, but will employ
a single file at places along the highway where the shoulder is narrow and
at bridges without sidewalks. The marchers will, according to the proposed
plan, be organized in separate groups of approximately 50 persons; each of
these groups will be under the supervision of a designated leader. Support
ing services will be provided, such as food, washing and toilet facilities,
litter and garbage pickup by trucks along the route and at campsites, and
ambulance and first aid service. The proposed march, according to plaintiffs'
plan, will proceed approximately 11 miles on the first day, stopping at a
designated private field with permission of the owner, which has already
been granted; approximately 11 miles on the second day, stopping at a designa
ted field with permission of the owner, which has already been granted;
approximately 17 miles the third day, stopping at a designated building and
adjacent field with permission of the owners, which has already been granted,
and, on the fourth day, approximately 8 miles to the western part of
Montgomery, Alabama. The fifth day's march, as proposed by the plaintiffs,
will be from the western part of Montgomery, Alabama, to the State Capitol.
According to the plaintiffs' plan, large tents will be erected at the camp-
tiffs' plan, in much greater detail, is attached hereto as Appendix "B".
This Court finds the plaintiffs' proposed plan to the extent that it
relates to a march along U.S. Highway 80 from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama,
to be a reasonable one to be used and followed in the exercise of a consti
tutional right of assembly and free movement within the State of Alabama
for the purpose of petitioning their State government for redress of their
grievances. It is recognized that the plan as proposed and as allowed
reaches, under the particular circumstances of this case, to the outer limits
of what is constitutionally allowed. However, the wrongs and injustices
inflicted upon these plaintiffs and the members of their class (part of
which have been herein documented) have clearly exceeded— and continue to
exceed--the outer limits of what is constitutionally permissible. As stated
earlier in this opinion, the extent of a group's constitutional right to
protest peaceably and petition one's government for redress of grievances
must be, if our American Constitution is to be a flexible and "living"
document, found and held to be commensurate with the enormity of the wrongs
being protested and petitioned against. This is particularly true when the
usual, basic and constitutionally-provided means of protesting in our
6/
American way--voting— have been deprived. It must never be forgotten that
our Constitution is "intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently,
7/
to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs." With an application
of these principles to the facts of this case, plaintiffs' proposed plan of
march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, for its intended purposes, is clear
ly a reasonable exercise of a right guaranteed by the Constitution of the
United States provided the march commences not earlier than March 19, 1965,
and not later than March 22, 1965.
It is appropriate to note here that the defendants, having been
6/ Examples as to the systematic and very effective deprivations of voting
rights to Negro citizens in this area are demonstrated by Appendix "A" to
this opinion. Aa to the met la ode ueed to accooplloh this, see this Court's
findings in United States v. State of Alabama. 171 F. Supp. 720, and United
States v. Fenton, 212 F. Supp. 193. The Courts have recognized that In the
field of racial discrimination statistics such as those set out in Appendix
"A" tell the basic story. United States v. State of Mississippi. 229 F.
Supp. 925; State of Alabama v. United States (5uh Cir. 1962), 304 F. 2d
some hostility to this march will not justify its denial. Watson v
City of Memphis (1963), 373 U.S. 526; Cox v. Louisiana, supra. Nor will
the threat of violence constitute an excuse for its denial. Cooper v.
Aaron (1958), 358 U.S. 1.
It is also appropriate to note that neither the defendant Governor
Wallace nor the defendant Sheriff Clark testified in this case.
These plaintiffs and the members of the class they represent are
entitled to police protection in the exercise of this constitutional right
to march along U. S. Highway 80 from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama. Hague
v. Ccl.O. (1939), 307 U0S. 496; Kelly v. Page (5th Cir. 1964), 335 F. 2d
114; Downie v. Powers (10th Cir. 1951), 193 F. 2d 760; United States v.
Klans (M.D. Ala., 1961), 194 F. Supp. 897. They are entitled to be pro
tected by the law enforcement agencies of the State of Alabama against
traffic and other hazards. This Court recognizes that, to afford the
necessary protection for these marchers, there will be a considerable
burden imposed upon the law enforcement agencies of the State of Alabama.
Recognizing this, and recognizing the absolute necessity for providing
this protection, this Court, after inquiry, has been informed by the
attorneys representing the United States in this case that the United States
Government stands ready, if requested by the Governor of the State of
Alabama, to assist in providing police protection for this proposed march.
This response to this Court's inquiry has been made with full recognition
that the law imposes this duty upon the State of Alabama to provide this
protection. This offer on the part of the United States to assist if
requested is not— whether the offer is accepted or refused--to be construed
as lessening the duty on the part of the State of Alabama law enforcement
agencies to afford this protection.
What has been said in this opinion is not intended to declare
or adjudicate the rights of citizens to assemble, petition, or protest
within the City of Selma, Alabama, the City of Montgomery, Alabama, or any
other municipal area since the exercise of such rights in each instance
In accordance with the foregoing, an injunction will be issued
by this Court enjoining the Governor of the State of Alabama, George C.
Wallace; the Director of Public Safety for the State of Alabama, Albert
Je Lingo; and the Sheriff of Dallas County, Alabama, James G. Clark, Jr.,
together with their agents, employees, successors in office, and all those
in active concert or participation with them, from intimidating, threaten
ing, coercing or interfering with the proposed march by these plaintiffs
and other members of their class along V. S. Highway 80 from Selma, Alabama,
to Montgomery, Alabama. Said defendants will also be enjoined from fail
ing to provide adequate police protection to these plaintiffs in their
exercise of this constitutional right. The motion of the defendant Governor
for an injunction restraining the march will be denied. All relief sought
by the plaintiffs in their motions and the United States in its motions
except as herein specifically referred to, will be denied.
Done, this the 17th day of March, 1965.
/s/ Frank M. Johnson, Jr.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
appendix "a ,:
Dallas County, Alabama
iSfiKi stratioii Statistic»
(November 1964)
Whit e
Negro
Person# o f
Vo t in g Age
U.400
15,115
Pereone
iUsgigterad
9,542
335
Percent
Registered
66.3
1.2
1951
Juu« W
N
July W
N
Auguat W
N
3 «p t« '*iN
O ct. WN
Nov. WN
D«*c ̂ 'n
N
1962
Jan. W
N
Fab. W
N
March WN
A p r il W
N
May W
N
Jun« W
N
w N w * M r. l»
1?. 13
YL
10
2 11
16
34
13
4
12
4
1
0
7.7
/
0
9
12
8
7
1A
5
n
41
.10
19
9
11
1
3
10
42
30
19
28
14
7
5
/
27
45
29
43
18
a.
11
4
38
15
4
13 ri
1
13
25
158
5
144
4
14
1
9
20
128
3
115 13
1
10
33
33
3
3C
2
3
1
9
33
15
4
13
3
2
1
13
25
6
1
6
"1
i.
0 0
50
3
2
3
TA
0
1
0
50
U i . J
N 50. j10
August W
N
11
8«pt. w
«
n.i
Get. w
N
16 16
ik>v. w
N
14 13 7.1
D*e. W
N
40
1963
J .in a W
N
73 59 14 19.2
F»b, W
H
21 14
12 42.8
March W
N 17 17
22.2
nf>rll y
N 17 17
bO.O
Hay WK 29 16 13
3C
44.3
Jun* W
N
45
41
31 14
35
31.1
July W
H
65
33
52 17
31
24.6
100.0
0
0
33.3
1 0 0 .0
66.7
50.0
100 .0
100.0
96.8
85.4
31.6
0 t
a 9.0.57
■>#pt. V
Oct. W
&
Nov. W
N
Doc. VN
1 *64
Jan. V> K
K#d . W
N
April
May
Jur\«
July
V
N
W
N
*
n
w
:'
August tf
H
42
296
j u 5
46
246
22
Hatch V 31
13
10
22
2 5
215
V.O
54
2 /
12
23
12
14
96
34
219
78
197
16
2o
11
15
16
77
27
4 9
20 f
l7
2 6
1J
2.)
92
19.0
26.0
32.2
19.9
27.3
161.
15.4
20.0
31.8
3.3
35.7
94.9
92.7
85.0
72.2
96.3
83.3
8 6 .9
66.7
85.7
93 .9
12 i 75.0
19C* *»
Sept. V 13 12
N 1G
Get. w 23 20
N *
Nov. VT 7 7
9 7
Dec. W 0
N 14
1965
Jan. V 52 2a
N 112
Feb. W 33 32
H 95 _
1,82b 1 ,158 1,465
2
1
3
7.7
30.0
3 13. J
* s
1
c
6
0
83.7
0 0
0 14 100
12
28
100
53.3
89.3
3.0
36 59 62.1
2 I t 363 939
v Figure* not obtained; the Board accepted ap p lica tion s on one day in October 1964
Perrv County, Alabama
fotklat ratio,. SutUstiy*
(August 17, 1964)
Parsons o f Persons Percent
Voting Age R ek is fer«d R eg istered
White 3441 3260 94.7
N«gru 5 2 0 2 363 7.0
A p p lies t io n * For R e g is tra t io n
1962
T ota l Applied /accepted Rfa j act ad Percent Rei ected
V K W N w V V N
liov , W ]. 1 0 0
N 1 U 80
1>S*C . W G 0 0 C
S 6 1 3 83.3
1963
Jan. w 3 3 0 0
N 8 0 6 100
P«b. W 14 13 1 7.1
K 7. 0 - 100
Maxcb W 7 6 14.2
N 1 0 . 100
April W 0 0 0 0
h 0 0 0 0
Hav w 5 3 0 0
A A 0 1 100
JUQ* V 4 4 0
H 139 42 147 77.3
July V 4 1 J. 25
K 37 0 37 LOO
August W 9 3 1 1 1 . 1
N 6 0 6 100
S^pt« W 6 0 0
N 0 c 0 0
Oct ¥ 21 15 6 2 8 . *
N 73 15 58 79.5
Nov. W 51 *+5 6 11.7
N 65 4 61 93.8
Uec, ¥ 23 24 4 14.2
H 20 6 14 70
1964
Jan, V 43 34 14 29.2
K 62 8 54 88.9
Feb. W 10 6 4 40
N 15 r>4. 13 86,6
Marcn W 1 6 12 ■i 25
N 17 3 14 32.3
April ¥ no report
N no report
M*y V 16 13 3 18,7
N 25 10 15 60
June W 3 A 1 33,3
1 16 3 13 81.2
co July
20 w 6 6 0 0
N 24 8 16 b6 . 6
to August
17 W 8 2 6 75
N 21 16 76.1
Wilcox County, Alabama
R eg is tra t ion 1t a t i s t l c s
becamber 1963
White
'♦•gro
Persons o f
Aft?
2647
6185
Persons
tears reran
3959
■ >
Pareant
Registered
100*
0
A p p lica t io n s f „ r ReKlatratl.cn
rear
1959 V
T. ta l
Wt
Applied
M
Accept
W
47
ed
N
Re i ec l
W
rkj
tec
N
1’ercenr
V
0
Rei ected
N
N 0 0 0 -
1960 V.
K
118
0
l i b
0 -
0
1 .6
1961 W 62 62 0 cN 0 0 0 -
1962 W
N
97
/,v*
89
0
8
3
8.2
O Oct , W 62 61 1 1 A
7, 1963
T ota ls
N
W 336
29 0 29 100
29
315
0
1 1 *
29
a. * ^
100
N
A t o t a l o f 11 r e je c t e d a p p lica t io n # f i l e d with thu Beard are b)
be w hite , 9 o f then were r e j e c t e d because the app lican t did not
requirements to r e g i s t e r to v o te or they were act o f proper age
cant was r e j e c t e d fo r i n a b i l i t y to com plete the a p p l ic a t io n and
-• q u a l i f i e d due to i n a b i l i t y to complete a p p l i c a t i o n , 1' but th<
r * li i*6e e i to / o t « on the l a r i * o f th ie a p p l i c a t i o n .
persona b e l ie v e d to
possess the res iden cy
t c r e g i s t e r . One app li~
one form wa* marked
a p p lica n t was
Hale Councy, A1 abama
i teg istra£ icn St*l U ^ lcs.
,'I>ec«*rbar 1964)
White
Negro
Paraona o f
Voting, Age
3594
5999
PersonaBlistered
3395
218
Percent
Reg is t e r e d
94.4
3.6
^Ucati£us.-£2£ R a /.la tr a t io n
Month and
Y eai ______ T ota l Appli*si
W N
S c e n t e d
W N
R eiected l^crceut
W
1962 7 Between 1954 and
J an V 0 August 1963, 1-34
N
6°
undated a p p l ic a t io n s
were r e j e c t e d by the
Fab. W *\ Board o f R eg is tra rs ,
N
20
o f these 120 were f i l e d
by Negroes and 14 war*
March W o t i l e d by white a p p l i c a n t s .
H
19
A pril W 1
N
2
May V 0
N
W 2
June 5 .
N
V
*
July 1
N
2August V 3
N
V
10
Sept. 1
1'
6
O ct. V 0
s
w 3
Nov. 1
N
Dec. W o4.
Month and
fear Total Applied Accepted
1963 W H W
Jan. W 1
N 1
Feb. V 7
N 4
March W 8
N 3
April W 2
N 3
May U 1
N ?.
June W 5
N 3
July U 3
N 1
August W rO
N 14
dept . W 2 ;
N 2 )
yOct. W 44 >N 3 )
)Nov. W L2 )N 8 >
)Dec. W J >
N 4 )
>1964 >
Jan. W 13 )N 3 >
Feb. W 60
N 11
Reiacted Percent Reject*
V N W N
Between September 1963 and
February 1 1 , 1964, 143 a p p l i c a
t io n s f o r which the race o f the
a p p lica n t ha* not been determined
have been f i l e d with the Board o f Registrar*.
13
j j
1 / Rejected figures are for application* f i l e d a f t e r February 11, 19o4
flDDCK «U3Q
X s « ___ Total 4b e U i £ Accepted Rejected Percent Reiecte1964 ¥ N ¥ N ¥ N W N
M arch V 16 14 2 12.5
K 18 2 16 88.8
April ¥ 44 43 1 2.3
X 3 4 4 50.0
May ¥ 11 . 11 C 0
N 7 2 5 71.4
June ¥ *» 2 0 0
d 3 0 3 100
July ¥ 11 11 0 0
V 29 8 21 72.4
August ¥ 6 6 c 0
K 14 8 6 43 .$
Sept. U 6 5 1 16.7
S 1C 3 7 70.0
Occ. ¥ 10 9 1 1C
N 12 3 9 75.0
lo w . V 0 0 0 „
K 2 0 2 100
free. ¥ 0 0 0 V <«*
N 1 2 66.7Totals W 106 101 *mf 4.7
( Mar- X 106 31 75 70.7&*c.64)
1/ la addition t w torn* filod by white persona ant! rejected by the Board
ar* undated; and ot*e fora filed In February 1964 and one io March 1964 do
not Indicate race.
Choc : dV County, Aluboaa
Raftlt-crallun_8t& tratlua
February 1 , 1965
Peraor.s o f Taraon* Farceur
V otin g te» KaKtafared Raxlatarad
Hi l i t a
Nagro
5192
3S82
4886
284
94.1
7.1
AudI t c At ions t cr R aaiit ra t io n
XftftE.
T ota l Applied Acc« t>tad Re i ee 11 si Percent Rai acred
NW N w N W N a’
Nov» 9 ,
1959-l**o.
31,1959 W
N
11
'>
11
1
0
2
0
66,6
1960 V
N
23?.
20
232
1 19
0
95.0
1961 W
N
196
115
195
17
1
98
.5
85 .2
1962 tf
N
212
118
212
23
0
95
0
80.5
1963 W 32 32 0
0
0
To Fab« 5 N 0 0
1959-1963
data* Un
known
W
N
l
46
0
0
1
46
100
100
Tab. 5, 19b3
-A p r i l 6, 1964 V
u
393
98
385
35
8
83
2.0
64.2
A p r i l 20,1964
3- y * 6 - 1 ,1965 w 111 108
71
i . .
_2 I*oN 100
T otal* V 1188 1175 13 1 .2
28,8N 500 106 194
K-. rengo County, Alabama
luu £,'«•< tare a To Vol*
Y a an ; ~mir.lt s Negro.
Fab, , 1954 )
1955 ) 39 2 98
1950 328 9
1957 118 C
1958 252 c
1959 214 .1
1960 457 5
1961 57 1 0
Jan. and 1 0 3 1
Fab. 19o2 -
Totals 1,921 nr
A p p lica t ion s fo r R egistt at Ion
Month and Total *
Y » a x App^iad Accepted 8c 1 a cted Percent: ite 1 1
V N fa H fa N V N
March, 1962 V 145 345 0 0
-Dae. 1962 N 66 14 52 78.8
J in . 1963 V 20 20 0
N 70 32 38 54.3
Fab. 1953 W 43 43 0 0
•April 1963 N 27 13 14 51.8
May 1963 V 3 3 0 0
N 13 12 nX ? 7 . 7
June 1963 fa 5 0 0
N 32 24 8 25 .0
Jaly 1963 W 23 23 0
l1 99 19 70 70.1
August 1963 fa 4 4 0 0
l 48 43 5 10.4
Sept. 1963 W 21 21 0 0
N 16 13 3 18.7
V >1 •
O ct. lyo3 A
N 31 1 J 13
Nov. Iy63 V 0 4 63 1 .
A 20 14
Joe. 1963 W 10 4.0 ■J 0
N '4 0
Jan. 1964 W 9 6 :>5 1
20 2. ^ 1
F * b . 19 64 w u
N 7
March i9 c4 W 22 1 4.:
N 0
A pril 1964 W
8 2
M*.y 19 64 w i
N 0 C 0
June 1964 W ]/> i ' j
S 1 /
Jt '.v 1964 V 12 ■ r
J 111 65 6
Aiigo.it 1964 w 14 r\w }
N 28 19 9
Sept. 1964 W 36 29 19,
N 10 C .. ̂
O ct. 19:>4 r 1w 4? 15 23.
N 5 0 5
Nov. 1964 W n
-4 0 u
i>er.. 19 64 W 2
N 1 *vX 0
Jan. 1965 V 0
N 4 0 4
Fab. 1965 W 11 5 0 1 .
h j f j
TntaLa w 8 30' 799 31 7
JO. i
? o . ;
5.0
77.7
59.1
is.*;
"Jo 1
100
100
100
iOu
A 622 304 318 51.1
DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS and
AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly
situated,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
FILED
Plaintiffs, jcu G. JJUxKSUN
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA By
Deputy Clerk
Plaintiff-
Intervenor
vs CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as )
Governor of the State cf Alabama;)
AL LINGO, as Director of Public )
Safety for the State of Alabama; )
and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff )
of Dallas County, Alabama, )
This cause coming on to be heard upon the motions of
the plaintiffs and the plaintiff-intervenor, United States of
America, for a preliminary injunction and also upon the motion of
the defendant Governor Wallace for a preliminary injunction, and
due notice having been given to all parties, and the Court having
considered the testimony offered in support of and in opposition
to said motions and being fully advised in the premises, and for
the reasons set forth in the memorandum opinion of this Court
entered on this date and pursuant thereto, it is
order of this Court, George C. Wallace, as Governor of the State
of Alabama, Albert J. Lingo, as Director of Public Safety for
the State of Alabama, and James G. Clark, Jr., as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama, their successors in office, agents,
representatives, employees, and other persons in active concert
and participation with them be and each is hereby restrained
and enjoined from?
Defendants. )
)
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that, pending further
who may join with them, along UoS„ Highway 80
from Selma, Alabama, to Montgomery, Alabama,
said march, as presently approved by this Court,
to commence in Selma, Alabama, not earlier than
Friday, March 19, 1965, and not later than
Monday, March 22, 1965, and to terminate in
Montgomery, Alabama; and
(2) Otherwise obstructing, impeding, or inter
fering with the peaceful, nonviolent efforts by
said plaintiffs, members of their class, and
others who may join with them, in protesting and
demonstrating by assembling and by marching
along UCS» Highway 80 from Selma, Alabama, to
Montgomery, Alabama, as said march is proposed
in plaintiffs1 plan filed with this Court and
served on the defendants on March 16, 1965,
and to the extent that said plan is presently
approved by this Court.
It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that,
pending further order of this Court, the defendants George C„
Wallace, as Governor of the State of Alabama, Albert J. Lingo,
as Director of Public Safety for the State of Alabama, and James
G. Clark, Jr., as Sheriff of Dallas County, Alabama, their suc
cessors in office, agents, representatives, employees, and all
others acting in concert with them, be and each is hereby re
strained and enjoined from failing to provide police protection
for the plaintiffs, members of their class, and others who may
join with them, in their march, as presently scheduled and presently
approved by this Court, to commence not earlier than Friday,
March 19, 1965, and not later than Monday, March 22, 1965, along
U.S. Highway 80 from Selma, Alabama, to Montgomery, Alabama,,
It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the
motion for preliminary injunction filed by the defendant Governor
Wallace, the motion by the plaintiff^intervenor, United States of
America, for relief in addition to that herein specifically
granted, and the motion of the plaintiffs for relief in addition
to that herein specifically granted be and each is hereby denied.
It is further ORDERED that jurisdiction of all matters
herein involved be and the same is hereby specifically retained.
Done, this the 17th day of March, 1965.
J .1 1 A l l U U J .1 X 1 u t / i / i u 1 U 1 V J X U V U U 1 JL' WAN. X U l j n i w i j u 17
DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
HOSEA WILLIAMS , JOHN LEWIS and
AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf of
them:?elves and others similarly
situated,
Plaintiffs,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-
Intervenor,
vs .
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of Alabama
AL LINGO, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff
of Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
))
)
)
)
)
)) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
)
OJ
A 3 AM A
WRIT OF INJUNCTION
To the above-named defendants and each of them:
TAKE NOTICE that you and each of you, your successors
in office, agents, representatives, employees, and all other
persons who are or may hereafter be in active concert and partici
pation with you and who shall receive notice of this order, be
and you are hereby enjoined as more particularly set out in the
Memorandum Opinion and the Preliminary Injunction of this Court
made and entered herein on this date, a copy of each of which
is attached hereto.
This writ of injunction is issued pursuant to the
Memorandum Opinion and the Preliminary Injunction of this
Honorable Court made and filed with the Clerk of this Court on
this the 17th day of March, 1965.
Done, this the 17th day of March, 1965..
&
,---- — ; i, —̂ — lerk ot the United States
District Court for the
i n o u i x x x j x x i c u m u uxoxivxox o v u m ruts. xnc. r i ± u u u ^
DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
HOSEA WILLIAMS , JOHN LEWIS and
AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf of
thi'nuielves and others similarly
s icuated,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff- Intervenor
Plaintiffs,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)vs ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
)HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as )
Governor of the State of Alabama;)
AL LINGO, as Director of Public )
Safety for the State of Alabama; )
and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff )
of Dallas County, Alabama, )
)
WRIT OF INJUNCTION
To the above-named defendants and each of them:
TAKE NOTICE that you and each of you, your successors
in office, agents, representatives, employees, and all other
persons who are or may hereafter be in active concert and partici
pation with you and who shall receive notice of this order, be
and you are hereby enjoined as more particularly set out in the
Memorandum Opinion and the Preliminary Injunction of this Court
made and entered herein on this date, a copy of each of which
is attached hereto.
This writ of injunction is issued pursuant to the
Memorandum Opinion and the Preliminary Injunction of this
Honorable Court made and filed with the Clerk of this Court on
this the 17th day of March, 1965.
Defendants )
Done, this the 17th day of March, 1965
Clerk of the Ignited States
District Court for the
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE
DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS and
AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly
situated,
UNITED STATES
Plaintiffs,
OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-
Intervenor,
vs.
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as Governor of the State of Alabama;
AL LINGO, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff
of Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
I
l
i
l
I
l
5
l
l
l
l
l
I
I
I
l
I
i
I
i
l
l
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Notice is hereby given that George C. Wallace as Governor
of the State of Alabama, one of the defendants above-named, hereby
appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
from the preliminary injunction issued by the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division, on
March 17, 1965.
__ __■■ ■ ifo:
a /tp u . t r i
R SAID DEFENDANT
GOODWYN & SMITH
325 Bell Building
Montgomery, Alabama
Telephone Number 263-1033
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE
DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS and
AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly
situated,
Plaintiffs,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-
Intervenor,
vs.
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
AL LINGO, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff
of Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
i
l
l
l
l
l
l
i
l
i
I
IJ CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
I1
l
i
I
I
I
I
I
the 18th day of March, 1965,This is to certify that on
the Honorable George C. Wallace as Governor of the State of Alabama
deposited with me the sum of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00) as
security for costs on appeal, in lieu of bond for costs on appeal,
in his appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit, from the judgment rendered in the above-entitled cause on
the 17th day of March, 1965.
f)
■ J • ^ • /V * t. V-rT^_________ ____Clerk of the United States District
for the Middle District of Alabama,
Northern Division
V / X
NORTHERN DIVISION
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS )
and AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf j
of themselves and others )
similarly situated, )
)Plaintiffs, )
)UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)Plaintiff-Intervenor, )
;
f i l e d
i IB iyb-j
Vs. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
)HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as )
Governor of the State of Alabama; )
AL LINGO, as Director of Public )
Safety for the State of Alabama; ) and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff )
of Dallas County, Alabama, )
Defendants. )
NOW COMES George C. Wallace as Governor of the
State of Alabama, one of the Defendants in the above entitled
cause, and moves the Court to stay enforcement of the preliminary
injunction heretofore entered in this cause on March 17, 1965,
pending the disposition of the Defendants' appeal to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, filed this day,
and as grounds therefor, states as follows:
Since Tuesday, March 16, 1965, the day upon which
the taking of testimony in this cause was competed, there have
occurred in and about the City of Montgomery, Alabama, several
acts of violence on the part of allegedly peaceful demonstrators,
and such incidents have resulted in property damage and personal
injury to innocent by-standers, law enforcement officers and the
demonstrators themselves. There have been gatherings and demon
strations on the part of white citizens in opposition to the
proposed march from Seirna to Montgomery. Maximum efforts are
being made by lav/ enforcement authorities of the State of Alabama
to maintain order, but tension in the city is rising and there
preliminary injunction heretofore entered pending the
disposition of the Defendants' appeal filed this day.
Respectfully submitted,
Goodwyn & Smit#
Attorneys for Defendant Wallace
Goodwyn & Smith 325 Bell Building
Montgomery, Alabama
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS
and AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf
of themselves and others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
vs,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)HONORABLE GEORGE C, WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of Alabama; )
AL LINGO, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama; )
and JAMES G, CLARK, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama, )
Defendants. )
FI LED
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
ORDER SETTING MOTION FOR STAY
The defendant George C. Wallace as Governor of the State of
Alabama, by and through his attorneys, filed with the Clerk of this Court as
of 4:42 p.m., on March 18, 1965, and presented to the undersigned Judge of
this Court for consideration as of 8:40 a.m., on March 19, 1965, a motion to
stay the order of this Court made and entered in this case on March 17, 1965.
Upon the representation of the attorneys for the defendant
Governor that they are extremely anxious to have the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit review this matter, at least upon a motion to
stay the judgment of this Court, it is felt that the motion to stay as now
presented should be heard at the earliest possible time. Counsel for the
defendant Governor have been orally directed to inform all attorneys in this
case that their motion to stay will be set for a hearing in open court on
this date to commence at 11 a.m.
It is, therefore, the order of this Court that the motion of
the defendant George C, Wallace as Governor of the State of Alabama, filed
herein at 4:42 p.m., on March 18, 1965, wherein a stay is sought as to the
execution of this Court's order of March 17, 1965, be and the same is hereby
set for a hearing to commence this date at 11 a.m.
Done, this the 19th day of March, 1965.
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS and *
AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly
situated, *
Plaintiffs,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, *
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N*
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;*
AL LINGO, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff
of Dallas County, Alabama, *
Defendants. *
Plaintiff-
Intervenor,
vs .
FILED
M A R 1 0 1965
R. <3LSHECfetMitv Clerk
n , clerk:
OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL
Now come the plaintiffs in the above-entitled cause and
in opposition to the motion of the defendant George C. Wallace,
as Governor of the State of Alabama, to stay enforcement of
the preliminary injunction pending appeal, and as grounds
for said opposition assign the following:
1. That the motion of said defendant is not verified.
2. That no facts are alleged that would justify this
Court granting the relief prayed for therein.
3. The Court considered the defendant's contention that
there is some hostility to this march but that said hostility
will not justify the denial of plaintiffs' constitutional
right to march.
settled and there is very little likelihood that the Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit will reverse this Court.
5. To grant the stay in this case would work further
delay and injury to the plaintiffs and the class they represent,
while immediate enforcement of the judgment can do no appreciable
harm to said defendant.
6. That the conditions as alleged in the defendants'
motion are the results of unlawful conduct of the defendants
and those working in concert with them and, therefore, the
stay should be denied.
7. The Court in balancing the equities between the parties
should deny said motion.
Respectfully submitted,
Gray & Seay
34 North Perry Street
Montgomery, Alabama:
Peter A. Hall
1630 Fourth Avenue North
Birmingham, Alabama
Jack Greenberg
Norman Amaker
Charles H. Jones, Jr.
James M. Nabrit, III
10 Columbus Circle
New York 19, N. Y.
__ ■
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS
and AMELIA BOYNTON, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
vs.
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
AL LINGO, as Director of Public
Safety for the Statu of Alabama;
and JAMES G. CLARK, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
O R D E R
Pursuant to the order of this Court made and entered herein
earlier on this date, the application of the defendant George C. Wallace as
Governor of the State of Alabama, by and through his attorneys, filed with
the Clerk of this Court as of 4:42 p.m., on March 18, 1965, and presented to
the undersigned Judge of this court for consideration as of 8:40 a,m., on this
date, was heard by this Court on this date commencing at 11 a,m3
Upon consideration of said application and the arguments of
counsel In support of and in opposition thereto, this Courc finds that there
is nothing new presented and shown that will justify a stay of this Court's
order made and entered in this case on March IT, 1955,
It is not alleged by the defendant Governor in the petition for
stay as now presented that this Court's order of March 17, 1965, is contrary
to the law; it is not alleged by the petition that the findings of fact are
not supported by the evidence; no claim is made that these findings or con
clusions are clearly erroneous. The only basis for the petition to stay is
that if the order is not stayed there is danger of violence on the part of
white citizens in opposition to the proposed march„ Such a contention will
not justify the stay of an otherwise uncontested court order. Coop_er v
A n QQQ\ IT f *!• T.W rrh + f ionvola n ^7“* n_S_ ?8A; T a v lo r v .
During the hearing held in this cause that lasted for a period
of four and one-half days, the defendant Governor and the other defendants
had a full opportunity to offer any evidence they desired for the purpose of
showing any undue burden that might be placed upon the State enforcement
agencies of Alabama, or the costs that would be imposed upon the State of
Alabama if this Court allowed the relief the plaintiffs sought. The defend
ants failed to offer any such evidence. Hi is is true even after the defend
ants had a detailed copy of the plan as proposed by the plaintiffs.
This matter as now presented is not a question of the State of
Alabama not having the resources and manpower to keep down disorder and
violence since the United States stands ready and willing, if requested by
the Governor of the State of Alabama, to assist in this regard. The only
question that is now presented is whether the State of Alabama authorities
are willing to employ their available resources and utilize the additional
available resources of the United States Government to preserve peace and
order in their compliance with this Court's order.
This Court, being desirous that the parties, particularly the
Governor of the State of Alabama, have an adequate opportunity to have this
denial of their petition to stay reviewed by a higher court, has determined
that a panel of Judges, members of the United States Court, of Appeals for
the Fifth Circuit, stands ready and willing, upon proper application, to
review immediately this Court's denial of the petition to stay. The defend
ants are hereby informed that said appellate panel stands ready either this
afternoon or tomorrow, upon proper application to said Court and upon notice
to opposing counsel, to hear their motion to stay.
If the defendant Governor of the State of Alabama desires to take
advantage of the opportunity to present this matter immediately to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans, Louisiana, the
Clerk of this Court is authorized and directed to make the court file and
all exhibits available to the Honorable John Doar, attorney for the United
States, who appears as amicus and as a party in this cause, so that said file
and records mav be transmit-ted d-'rer'Mir t-n t-hc. TV»-*«-ad cj-.f/M.
the State of Alabama, presented to this Court on this date, seeking to stay
the order of this Court made and entered herein on March 17, 1965, be and
the same is hereby denied.
Done, this the 19th day of March, 1965.
/s/ Frank M. Johnson, Jr.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
±i'i This UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN D IV IS IO N
Hosea Williams, John Lewis
and Amelia Boynton, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
United States of America,
Plaintiff-lntervenor,
vs
Honorable George C. Wallace, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public Safety for the State of Alabama;
and James G. Clark, as Sheriff of Dallas County, Alabarna,
Defendants.
Civil Action
No. Z161-N.
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomery,
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, 1 9 6 5.
■ i1 ii
■% -
7 / 4 S ' 3
f * ( t s
(NOTE; This transcript is an excerpt transcript
containing the testimony of AL LINGO, a
Deiendant, when called as witness by the
United States, in hearing in above case March
l1 “1 2“-3-15-l6, 1 9 6 5, this testimony havinc
been adduced on March 1 2 , 1 9 6 5.)
Glynn Henderson,
Official Court Reporter.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN D IV IS IO N
; Hosea Williams, John Lewis
and Amelia Boynton, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
siUnited States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
vs
'j Honorable George C. Wallace, as
I Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama:
and James G. Clark, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomery,
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965.
A p p e a r a n c e s :
For the Plaintiffs:
For the United States:
Gray & Seay
(Fred D. Gray and
Solomon S. Seay, Jr.),
Peter A. Hall,
Jack Greenberg,
Norman Amaker,
Charles H. Jones, Jr.,
Oscar W. Adams,
Demetrius C. Newton,
James M. Nabrit, III,
Charles S. Ralston.
Ben Hardeman,
John Doar,
David Reuben.
Civil Action
No. 2181-N.
Correct, sir.
Well, then, let me just interrogate you further for a minute.
Okay, sir.
First, you were asked to bring all State Troopers7 radio logs
for February 10, February 10, March 6 through 9, 1965; are the}
there, Colonel Lingo?
Assume so, I gave that order to -- that they be here.
You were asked to bring all State Trooper daily assignment
rosters for February 18 to March 7 and 9, 1965; are they there'
I gave that order to send all that that was on the suopoena to
this court; I haven’t had a chance to look it over, I assume
that they are there.
You were asked to bring all reports, memoranda, statements,
correspondence, photographs, and other documents relaoing to
the Negro demonstrations in Marion on February 18 and Selma
on February 10 and March 7 and March 9; that, is ±our days,
your reports, memoranda, statements, and correspondence, and
photographs; did 3rou give that order?
I did.
To your deputy to assemble that information?
That is correct, sir.
You were asked to bring all arrest reports for those same four
days; did you bring those?
I gave that order, also.
Then y o u w e r e a s k e d t o b r i n g a l l i n v e s t i g a t i v e r e p o r t s j .o r t h o
r;
four days?
A Yes, sirj I gave that order.
MR. DOAR: Now, do you have an objection to those
particular items?
MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. Your honor, we object under
item three to producing all reports, memoranda, statements, and
correspondence, and under item five to producing all investigative
reports. We have no objection to the other matters called for in
the subpoena.
THE COURT: All right. You wish to be heard in
support of your objection?
MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. Your honor, it is our feeling
that to require the Department of Public Safety, through Mr. Lingo,
its Director, to produce all of its investigative reports would be
to require them to produce certain information which would be
privileged information. A department such as this Department receive
information from informers, it receives information from persons
who confidential -- a confidential basis. We feel that to be
compelled under this subpoena to produce, as called for in the
subpoena, all the investigative reports relating to this incident
would seriously jeopardize the position of this Depar'tment in all
future law enforcement matters which would properly come within its
province to investigate. And I readdress myself to the point that
THE COURT: All right, what you said up to this
point, you claim privilege?
6
MR. SMITH: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: All right, what else you claim?
MR. SMITH: Nothing else.
THE COURT; All right, you want to be heard?
MR. DOAR: Just simply, your honor, that I know of
no privilege in the law that would permit the defendants to claim
that they are not required to produce investigative reports
covering a particular incident. There may be a specific document
that the defendants would want to call to the court’s attention
to look at in camera, and on the grounds that that particular
document shouldn’t be produced, but they haven’t done that to you,
j j to the court, done that for the court, and we don’t believe that
there is any basis for the claim of privilege.
irlh uOURf: Well, I have — I have been faced with
that same problem many times in the last ten years, and nearly
every instance, in nearly every instance it is presented by the
claim presented to the court by the United States asking that
F.B.I. reports be privileged. And in each instance I have sustained
your objection, and I never have required you to do it on the ground
that it is a — it is a work paper and a good cause showing under
Hickman against Taylor is not sufficient, and that is the ruling
of the court in this case as to items three and items five to the
| extent that they relate to investigative reports. Now, as far as
the other portions of items three and five, and I have specific
reference to photographs, they should be produced.
7
MR. SMITH: We are happy to produce them.
THE COURT: Anything in item three and .item ihve,
, other than i n v e s t i g a t i v e reports, are to b e produced.
MR. SMITH: (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
THE COURT: And items one, two, and four are oo be
produced.
MR. DOAR: Could I inquire of the court if there
are i n v e s t i g a t i v e reports by law enforcement officers who are -
wh0 are at the scene at that time, does the claim of privilege =ovS
that?
THE COURT: Any investigative reports made by agenc.
for the purpose of - of submitting to their higher authority for
the purpose of submitting to the prosecuting authorities to enable
them to determine what action, if any, to take, X have consistent!
held, and I understand that the law is to that effect, that they
are lot - they are not to be produced where there is an objection
to them.
MR. SMITH: Your honor.
MR. DOAR: I respectfully feel, your honor, that -
MR. SMITH: Excuse me.
MR. DOAR: — I don’t understand that to be the la:
at all; I concede that --
THE COURT: We didn’t open this for the purpose
arguing the law.
MR. DOAR: No, sir.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE KIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN D IV IS IO N
Hosea Williams, John Lev/is
and Amelia Boynton, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
United States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
vs
Honorable George C. Wallace, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and James G. Clark, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
Civil Action
No. 21I1-N.
-b\V,h>
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomery,
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965.
(NOTE: This transcript is an excerpt transcript
containing the testimony of AI< LINGO, a
Defendant, when called as witness in his
own behalf, in hearing in above case March
11-12-13-15-16, 1965, this testimony having
been adduced on March 13, 1965.)
Glynn Henderson,
Official Court
Reporter.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN D IV IS IO N
Hosea Williams, John Lewis
and Amelia Boynton, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
United States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
Honorable George C. Wallace, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and James G. Clark, as Sheriff of
!Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomery,
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965.
Civil Action
No. 21B1-N.
A p p e a r a n c e s :
For the Plaintiffs:
For the United States:
Gray & Seay
(Fred D. Gray and
Solomon S. Seay, Jr.),
Peter A. Hall,
Jack Greenberg,
Norman Amaker,
Charles H. Jones, Jr.,
Oscar W. Adams,
Demetrius C. Newton,
James M. Nabrit, III,
Charles S. Ralston.
Ben Hardeman,
John Doar,
David Reuben.
2
For George C. Wallace:
(and for A1 Lingo
3 / 1 1 - 1 2 )
For A1 Lingo:
(from 3/13)
For James G. Clark:
Goodwyn & Smith
(Maury D. Smith,
Charles M. Crook, and
John S. Bowman).
John P. Kohn, Jr.
McLean Pitts,
P. H. Pitts,
J. E. Wilkinson, Jr..
T. G. Gayle.
(NOTE: This transcript is an excerpt transcript
containing the testimony of AL LINGO, a
Defendant, when called as witness in his
own behalf, in hearing in above case March
11-12-13-15-16, 1965, this testimony having
been adduced on March 13, 1965.)
Would you please state what instructions, if any, you gave to
your subordinates, and name him or them, relative to their conduc
on this occasion?
I gave Major Cloud orders to disperse the crowd if possible.
THE COURT: This is for the 7th?
MR. KOHN: Yes, your honor.
THE COURT: March 7?
MR. KOHN: March 7, 1965.
THE COURT: Sunday, March 7; all right.
To disperse the crowd if possible without too much force; if
there was any resistance met to back off and to give them ample
time and use tear gas.
Colonel Lingo, did you observe any member of the Department of
Safety — Public Safety or any State Trooper actually beating
any human being on this occasion?
I did not. Now, I didn't see it, I wasn’t in a position, I was
about approximately fifty yards away, and my vision was impaired
by the Troopers and other people in front of me. Now, the
reason there was no — I was not up, because I was — I had
almost had pneumonia, that was my opinion,
Did you hear Major Cloud’s direction to the
on this highway —
I almost had it.
assembled crowd theh
I did.
— immediately before the tear gas occurred?
Yes, sir; I did.
|l
; Q Do you think you are in a position to have an opinion concerning
the time that elapsed after Major Cloud gave his last order to
that assembly or to that crowd before the tear gas occurred,
whether it rolled out on the highway or was thrown?
A Yes, sir; I think they had ample time to disperse should they —
Q The question should have been and meant to be, and I will
rephrase it, approximately how many minutes would you say?
A Well, now, that would be a guess, I would just have to estimate.
; Q What is your opinion?
|A Approximately two minutes; that is the best of my knowledge; I
didn’t --
Q Could it have been three minutes?
A I didn’t — it could have been; I didn’t time it.
Q Now, Colonel Lingo, from where you were sitting or where you wer
during this time when this crowd was -- became dispersed, could
you observe the crowd on both sides of the bridge or just one
side of the bridge, the east side of the bridge or west side
of the bridge, or where exactly?
A The position I was sitting in, so many people were in front of
me I couldn’t observe the ones on the right too well; I could
on the left.
Q Now, when you say, "The left," would that be the Montgomery side;
A That would be on the left going east to Selma.
Q Well, how many people would you say were there at this time and
occasion?
5
6
A You mean white people or —
Q Just people?
A Just people; I would say approximately fifteen hundred people.
Q Fifteen hundred people?
A Yes, sir: now, that is Sunday, I am speaking of Sunday now.
Q Am I correct in construing what you said to mean — when you
say, "The left side,5' do you mean the Montgomery side of the
bridge?
A Yes, sir; I mean the Montgomery side.
Q On the Montgomery side of the bridge?
A Right, sir.
Q You were --- were you in a position to know or observe the crowd
on the Selma side of the bridge?
A No, sir; I did not go across on the Selma side.
Q Nov;, these people that you just testified, I believe you said
fifteen hundred people —
A Approximately fifteen.
Q — did that include lav; enforcement officers or just people in
general?
A No, sir; that is just people in general.
Q People in general. Would you say or I will phrase it so it
won’t be objected to — among that fifteen hundred people, what
race did the majority of them belong to, in your opinion, on
that side of the bridge?
A Now, you mean in the marchers?
Q
A
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
BY
Q
A
The people were there, not the marchers; I believe you testifiec.
there were fifteen hundred people on the Montgomery side of the
bridge?
Right, sir.
Now, the question specifically is if you know were the majority
of those people of what race?
I would say it was about half and half.
Now, did you have anything to — directly to do with any tear
gas?
No, sir.
Did you strike anybody?
No, sir.
Did you hit anybody?
No, sir.
Did you shove anybody?
No, sir.
Did you curse anybody?
No, sir.
MR. KOHN: Take the witness.
THE COURT: For the plaintiffs.
CROSS EXAMINATION:
MR. GRAY:
Mr. Lingo, how long have you held the position that you present..y
hold?
Since January 14, that was at midnight, 1963. I was a former
8
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Trooper for five years before I --
How many years have you had in lav/ enforcement?
About -- over seven years.
Are you familiar, sir, with a statement issued by Governor
Wallace on February 20, 1965, concerning the banning of night
marches; I show you a copy of Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 13?
I am familiar with that order: yes.
MR. KOHI'J: Objection.
THE COURT: Objection overruled.
You are familiar with it?
Yes, I am.
Were you given any instructions by the Governor or anyone else
on his staff pursuant to that press release that was made?
No.
Were you given any orders with respect to prohibiting any marche
in Marion on or about February 18?
Now — no, not at that time; no.
Were you at any time given any such order?
I was given orders not to let them march from Selma to Montgomer
Now, were you given any -- any orders at all by the Governor wit
respect to prohibiting any night time marches?
Only his order here.
You mean —
I am familiar with his order here; he didn’t give it to me
direct, but I am familiar with his order.
s
y
h
9 i
Q And you did receive word from him to that effect?
A Right.
Q Now, pursuant to those orders, did you or did you send some of
your Troopers or some of your subordinate officers to Marion,
Alabama?
A That is correct; on request from the local officials there.
Q In your best judgment, approximately when were these persons sent
to Marion?
A Well, I don’t have the specific date written down. I can’t give
you the specific date.
Q Did you receive any orders from the Governor or from his staff
dealing with demonstrations since February 1 , 1 9 6 5 ?
Yes, only about this night time marching and the march from
Selma to Montgomery.
Q I believe you were served with a subpoena requiring you to bring
with you copies of all such orders?
A I have no written orders.
Q You — during this period of time you received no written orders
from the Governor?
A Right; it was all verbal.
Q And who gave you the verbal orders?
A The Governor.
Q The Governor, himself?
A Yes.
Q Now, do you — in your best judgment, when did he give you the
10
verbal order pursuant to his press release of February 20 dealing
with the night marches and with the Marion situation?
I believe it was immediately after he came out with this release.
As best you recall what did the Governor tell you?
That we would have no night marching, we would not allow any
night marches, and to assist the local officials in maintaining
law and order.
All right, so actually, I believe that night march was on or
about February 20 — I mean February 18, wasn’t it, about that
time?
I don’t have those dates, I didn’t fix them in my mind, so I
can’t specifically say what date it was.
Nov/, did the Governor in that order to you indicate to stop a
certain number of marchers, or was it his instructions to stop
any march at night, regardless of the number?
Any march; any demonstrations.
Any demonstrations?
Right.
Did he define to you what he meant by demonstrations?
No, he did not.
Did you understand what — what did you understand the Governor
to have meant when he said there would be no night demonstrati or.s
MR. SMITH: Object to this, if the court please —
THE COURT: Overrule.
MR. SMITH: — as to what he understood the Governor1s
11
! statements.
THE COURT: As to what he interpreted the order to|j mean, it is admissible, sure; not what the Governor thought, how
j he interpreted it is what the question is calling for.
MR. SMITH: (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
THE COURT: Go ahead.
| A Any mass number of people out on the streets and highways
demonstrating; that was my interpretations of his order.
Q All right, he — did he in his order explain it didn’t make any
difference what the purpose of the demonstration was, but any
demonstration —
A No, he didn’t.
IQ — at night?
| a He didn’t go into that; no, sir; he didn’t.
Q Now, did you — pursuant to those oral orders from the Governor
did you go to Marion?
A I did.
Q On — on or about when did you go to Marion?
A I did -- as I will repeat again, I do not have that date fixed
in my mind.
Q Was that before the attempted march?
A That was the night that they did attempt to march at night, and
the Sheriff -- I got there, the Sheriff had them stopped,
j Q Approximately what time did you arrive?
A Approximately nine thirty.
!
12
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Now, had you, prior to your arrival, issued any orders with
reference to the Marion situation?
I — yes, I instructed my men to work with the local officials
and to carry out their wishes.
Now, who specifically did you give those orders to?
Major Cloud.
Major Cloud?
Yes.
When did you give Major Cloud that order?
That -- again, I don’t have that date fixed in my mind.
Was it the same day that you went to Marion?
No, it was before that.
In your best judgment, approximately how many days before?
I would say two or three days before.
Did you give him any written order to that effect?
No, I did not.
Did you give anyone other than Major Cloud any orders?
No, I was — no, that was direct to Major Cloud.
Now, will you tell us, sir, how many of your Troopers were
dispatched to Marion on this occasion?
Approximately forty, I believe.
Do you know approximately how many automobiles were dispatched?
No, I do not.
Were you present -- were there any arrests made on that occasion
There was by the Sheriff and the City Police.
13
Q Were your men -- did your men assist the Sheriff and the City
Police in making the arrest?
A They did. I say they did; I assume they did.
Q In your best judgment, how many persons were arrested on that
occasion?
A I believe it was about five or six; it was a very small number.
Q When you arrived at the scene, I believe you testified that the
Sheriff had already stopped them?
A That is correct.
Q What did you do upon your arrival?
A I went to the Sheriff, stood by his side, and he said — he was
telling them that a march would not be allowed and it was
unlawful assembly, and he asked them to disperse or go back to
the church, which they did.not do.
Q Now, at that particular time, where did — did you see Sheriff
Clark on that night?
A Yes, I did see Sheriff Clark there.
Q Where was Sheriff Clark?
A He was out in the street when I saw him.
Q Was he along with the Sheriff of Perry County?
A I donTt remember whether he was by his side or not, but I
observed Sheriff Clark quite a bit that night; I know he was in
civilian clothes, but I can’t tell you what kind of hat he had
on.
Q But he was assisting the other law enforcement officers?
14
A You say, "Assisting"; now, I don’t quite follow you on that.
was not making any effort to participate in the dispersement of
the crowd, if that is what you mean.
Q But he was present at the time?
A Oh, yes; he was present.
Q I think you testified that you saw him on several occasions
during the evening?
A Right.
Q Now, where else did you see Sheriff Clark?
A That is the only place I saw him — let’s see, I believe I did
see him over at the City Hall.
Q What was he doing there?
A Drinking coffee, I believe.
Q Are you familiar with the .Dallas County Sheriff’s Posse?
A Oh, yes.
Q What is it?
A Well, it’s an auxiliary of the Sheriff’s Department.
Q Is it under the supervision of Sheriff Clark?
A Yes.
Q Were any of the Dallas County Sheriff’s Posse there on that
night?
A I don’t remember seeing any of the Posse there; I think I
remember seeing a couple of the deputies there, the full time
deputies, but I don’t remember seeing any Posse members there.
Q Will you give us the names of the full time deputies of Dallas
15
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
County that were in Perry County on that evening?
I cannot give you those names.
Can you give us the name of one of his deputies?
No. I cannot, because I don’t know their names; it is just too
many men involved, I don’t have the ability to remember all the|s
names.
Now, did you receive any further orders from Governor Y/allace
after the Marion incident and prior to the March on Sunday?
Yes, the order to not let them march from Montgomery — from
Selma to Montgomery on highway SO.
I show you Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 14, which is a news release from
the Governor’s order -- office.
Uh, huh; says such a march cannot and will not be tolerated, and
I was carrying out those orders.
All right, now, everything that happened, as far as your
Troopers are concerned, on Sunday were done pursuant to the
orders of the Governor in stopping the proposed march; is that
right?
The Governor specifically said there would be no march from
Selma to Montgomery —
Yes, sir.
-- that is correct.
And did — you were aware of that order —
Yes, sir: yes.
-- prior to Sunday?
A Yes.
Q And what did you — when did you receive notice of the Governor’
words?
! A That again, I don’t remember the specific time nor date.
.
|| Q Did you get it directly from him?
A I talked to him about it, and he said that there would be no
march.
Q And what did he instruct you to do?
A He did not instruct me; he just said that there would be no
march.
| Q And what did you interpret the Governor’s statement to mean for
you to do?
A To restrain them from marching from Selma to Montgomery.
Q Now, I believe in that press release there is --
THE COURT: Regardless — just a minute; regardless
of what it took to do it?
WITNESS: Well, I don’t mean kill any of them, but
use the means of least force as possible to restrain them from —
THE COURT: But whatever it took to do it?
WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Regardless of what that was?
WITNESS: No, sir; not regardless of what that was.
THE COURT: Where were you going to stop, Colonel?
WITNESS: Well, I the reason I did not want to■
use tear gas, I wanted to use a little resistance there to try to
1 6
17
break up the crowd, because I was in Oxford, Mississippi, and I
! observed Mr. McShane, the use of tear gas and what it caused, and
j that is the reason I did not want to use tear gas unless I
; absolutely had to.
THE COURT: Go ahead.
Q I believe, sir, there is a reference in Plaintiffs1 Exhibit 14
to the effect that the Governor had met the night before with
certain legislators; were you present with the meeting the
Governor had that is referred to in that press release?
A I don’t believe so; I don’t remember any representatives being
there at the time I was there.
Q Were you present at any time that there v;as a meeting between
Governor Wallace and yourself and any other person with
reference to stopping the proposed Sunday march?
A Oh, yes: it was several there, we discussed it quite a bit.
Q Will you tell me, when did this meeting take place?
A That again, I can’t give you the specific time nor date.
Q What do you — was it the Saturday before the march?
A Well, I — again, I can’t tell you exactly the date.
Q Was it two or three days before the march?
A Possibly so.
Q Now, who else was present at that meeting, other than you and
the Governor?
I believe Cecil Jackson was there, and I believe Bill Jones,
his Press Secretary, and I believe Seymour Trammell was there,
A
16
and possibly some more.
Q Do you know whether or not the Governor's Legal Adviser was
present?
A I believe he was; yes, I believe he was; yes.
Q Now, was there at that meeting any detailed discussion as to
how far the State Highway Patrol would go in stopping the
proposed march?
A There was not.
Q How long did this meeting last?
A We were there until approximately, I would say, twelve o’clock.
Q What time did it begin?
A Oh, around eight o’clock, I believe: I am not positive on those
— that time.
Q Who conducted the meeting?
A No individual, it was a discussion among the whole group.
Q Who started the discussion?
A Well, I believe the Governor possibly said the first few words.
Q And you were there for four hours?
A I believe that is correct.
Q Will you tell the court in your best judgment exactly what took
place beginning when the meeting was opened?
A Well, it was two or three — two or three things discussed, how
best to handle it; should we let them march, or should they be
stopped; and then as we — as it kept on, we finally decided it
would be better to stop for the safety of the marchers and the
19
traveling public. On account of the — somebody may be struck
by an automobile, it just wouldn’t be safe for the marchers nor
the traveling public.
Q Was any -- was any consideration given to the possibility of
arrest?
A Yeah, I told the Governor that I did not believe in mass arrest
that I believed in arresting the leaders, and that would break
up the — the march.
Q So then it was your opinion at the meeting that the leadership
be arrested, and that would break up the march?
A Right; that is correct.
Q Now, what else was — what other alternative possibilities were
discussed at this meeting?
A As I repeat again, the possibility of letting them march, but
we decided that that would not be safe for the marchers nor the
traveling public.
Q What else was discussed at the meeting, sir?
A Well, I believe that will just about cover all of it.
Q ’Were there any discussion at the meeting as to limiting a
certain number of marchers?
A No.
Q I believe you testified earlier that you believed in — in
making arrests? Instead of mass arrests?
A That -- that is what we did in Marion, trying to break it up,
which it didn’t work. We have tried every method in the world
20
to keep from causing the least amount of trouble as possible,
and that is what was done in Marion by the Sheriff, and we see
it didn’t work; so when it came to the march from Selma to
Montgomery, the best method was to disperse the crowd.
Q All right, now, immediately after you left the Governor’s --
where did this meeting take place?
A In the Governor’s office.
Q In the Governor’s office, and it was about midnight?
A When the — approximately midnight.
Q Was that that Friday before the --
A Possibly so.
Q Now, did you do anything else that night in furtherance of the
Governor’s orders?
A I could have possibly gotten in touch with Major Cloud; I don’t
remember, I been working night and day, so I am a little bit
confused on the dates.
Q All right, were you — were you — will you tell the court in
chronological order as best you can exactly what you did after
you left the Governor’s office in furtherance of the Governor’s
orders after you left the meeting with the Governor?
A I got in touch with Major Cloud and told him to restrain the
marchers, do not let them march, and to use as little a force
as necessary to try to disperse the crowd, because I did not
want to use tear gas unless it was absolutely necessary, becaus
I saw what happened in Oxford, Mississippi, and I didn’t want
21
that repeated in Selma.
Q Let me go back for just a moment: did the question of tear gas
arise in the discussion with the Governor and his advisers ?
A There is —
Q Did that question —
A — a possibility it could have.
Q And was it the consensus of those who were present that if
necessary tear gas would be used?
A As a possibility that could have been — I have had so many
meetings and discussions, to pin me down to one meeting, it’s
pretty hard.
Q Well, tell me what other meeting you had subsequent to the
meeting with — did you have more than one meeting with the
Governor?
A Oh, I met with him quite a bit.
Q I mean with respect to stopping the march in Selma?
THE COURT: On the 7th?
MR. GRAY: On the 7th; yes, sir.
A Did I have another meeting?
Q Yes, sir?
A Other than the one, there is a possibility that I did discuss
some things with him.
Q When was that meeting?
A Possibly the day before or day after the meeting; I don’t
remember.
22
Q And where did it take place?
A Probably — possibly in the Governor’s office.
Q And who were present at that time?
A That I do not remember.
Q Was anyone present other than you and the Governor?
A There is a possibility there was, people are coming in and out
constantly.
Q Was his Legal Adviser present at that meeting?
A I don’t remember.
Q Was his Press Secretary present at that meeting?
A That I don’t remember; it is a possibility that they could have
been there.
Q Was the Finance Director present at that meeting?
A That I don’t remember.
Q You are familiar with the close advisers of the Governor, aren’
you?
A Yes, I am familiar with them; yes.
Q And is it your testimony, sir, that out of — you only recall
no one present at this second meeting but you and the Governor?
A I said there is a possibility it was several in there, because
people are constantly coming in and out.
Q In your best judgment, who else was present there?
A Well, it could have been the Legal Adviser there, and it could
have been Cecil Jackson, his Press Secretary — I mean his
Executive Secretary.
23
Q
A
Q
A
Q
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
All right, and what was discussed in that meeting?
The stopping of the marchers from Selma to Montgomery.
Any new developments discussed xtfhich may have developed since
the meeting the night before?
I don’t believe so; I don’t think — I don’t remember any new
developments.
Did you make a report to him in terms of what you had done in
furtherance of his orders of the night before?
No, he knows I carry out his orders, that I passed them on to
my men in command.
Did you pass on to your men in command any written orders?
Mo, they were verbal to Major Cloud.
Now, after this second meeting with you and the Governor and
probably some others, did you have any other meeting with the
Governor prior to the Sunday’s march with respect to the Sunday
march?
I don’t believe so; I don’t recall any.
Did you have any meeting with Major Cloud and any other of your
subordinate officers with respect to plans to stop the march on
Sunday?
Well, I am constantly meeting with my men and discussing
different problems and how they should carry their duties out.
Could you tell us, sir, the first meeting that you had with youf
men after your first conference with the Governor with respect
to stopping the march in Selma?
I c
24
Well, it was — I possibly called Major Cloud that night after
I talked to the Governor, but I am sure it was the next day
after that.
Q Now, where did that meeting take place?
A Possibly — I believe it was in my office.
Q And who were present at that time?
A I believe my assistant, Colonel Russell, and possibly — I am
not sure he was there, but I think he was, and I believe Major
Bill Jones, who is head of the Investigative Division, and
possibly -- I believe that’s all.
Q All right, now, did you give any specific orders to either of
these men who were present?
A Yes.
Q What specific orders did you give to Colonel — I think you
said Rush?
A Russell.
Q Russell -- what was he to do?
A I told him — I told him what our plans were.
Q And tell the court what was your plan again; what was the plan?
A To stop these people and tell them it was an unlawful assembly
and to disperse, and I told Major Cloud to give them a reasonab
length of time to disperse, then should they not disperse to us^
a minimum amount of force, to go in and try to disperse them,
rather than to use tear gas, and I repeat again, I did not want
to use tear gas, because I saw what it caused in Oxford,
25
Mississippi.
Q Now, did you tell any of your subordinate officers how they were
to — supposed to stop the marchers?
A Yes.
Q How?
A By using their sticks in the horizontal manner and to go in and
to — to push; I don’t mean run over them, but to push and try
to break up the crowd. Now, I do not, nor any of my men, give
any orders to strike anybody; that is never given.
Q Now ---
A Now, they have orders to defend themselves.
Q Did — did you —
MR. McLEAN PITTS: We object; let him —
THE COURT: Just a minute; go ahead, complete your
answer.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Wait until Colonel Lingo completes
his answer.
Q Go on, Colonel?
A They have orders — we never give an order to strike anybody,
we don’t want to strike anybody if we can keep from it, but they
do have orders to defend themselves, and in — and then this
march on Sunday you are talking about, here are the list of men
that did meet resistance, one of them had to go to the hospital
Q Now, my — my question right now, sir, is directed toward the
instructions that you gave your subordinate officers in your
26
office prior to the march, that is all I want to know about rig it
now; did you give them any other instructions other than to use
their clubs to try to push them back?
A That’s right, and it was brought out that we want to use as
minimum amount of force as possible and not to hurt anybody.
Q Now, did did you discuss in that meeting with them at what
point if at all tear gas was to be used?
A When other means would not disperse the crowd.
Q Now, was there any discussion in this -- in this meeting about
xwhat type of equipment the Troopers should have?
A Only his sidearm and his helmet and tear gas grenades.
Q Plow long did ---
A And his night stick.
Q How long did the meeting last?
A Well, I have so many meetings, you are trying to pin me down to
— to one specific meeting, and I would — i would guess thirty
minutes.
Q Now, did you have any discussion about or were these officers
instructed to do any particular thing as far as carrying out
the general plan; were any of these officers assigned to certain
details?
A Now, Major Cloud assigned them; I only gave my orders to Major
Cloud, and Pie passed it on down; it is too big a department for
me to Piandle each individual —
Q Do 3̂ 011 know -- do you know whether or not Major Cloud did make
27
certain assignments to certain other subordinate officers?
A I am sure he did; yes.
Q Do you know how many State Troopers were dispatched to Selma to
be present on Sunday?
A On Sunday, approximately seventy.
Q Were all of these State Troopers in uniform?
A They were, but we also had investigators in plain clothes in
Selma.
Q Approximately how many such investigators did you have in Selma?
A I say -- I would say about eight to ten.
Q And do ŷ ou know where these eight to ten investigators were?
A They were scattered throughout the — the city and county.
Q Now, did you or any of your subordinate officers make any contac
with Sheriff Clark about the plan for Sunday?
A I believe I did discuss it with Sheriff Clark.
Q When did you discuss it with Sheriff Clark?
A I believe it was over the telephone, possibly Saturday night.
Q And what instruction or what information did you give him with
reference to the plans of the State Highway Troopers?
A I gave him the same thing I have repeated several times, our
method of dispersing the crowd, that there would be no march
allowed.
Q Did he inform you that he would use his Posses and that they
would be on hand?
A No, he did not.
28
Q Did you know they would be on hand?
A No, I did not,
Q Did you know his deputies would be on hand?
A Well, I felt sure that they would be.
Q You were familiar, I believe, with the fact that Sheriff Clark
has a Posse?
A Oh, yes.
Q Did you inform him not to use his Posse?
A Nov: —
Q In this march, or the breakup?
A — I asked Sheriff Clark about a month or two ago, and I think
he will back me up in this, I asked him to screen his Posse,
and that some should be removed, and which — which he did remov.
those men that should not be in the Posse; I did ask him to
screen them, and he complied with my request. That was not an
order; I cannot give a Sheriff an order, that was a —
Q I am sorry; you asked Sheriff Clark to do what?
A I am talking as loud as I can.
Q I am sorry; I just didn’t quite understand?
A I asked — a month or two ago I asked Sheriff Clark to screen h:.;
Posse; he had some members in there that I felt should not be
in there, that they may cause trouble, and he complied with my
request in screening these bad men out.
Q All right. Do you recall approximately how many, using your
words, bad men that Sheriff Clark had in his Posse?
29
A I feel like there were some in there that would — possibly wouLc
shoot somebody.
Q Approximately how many such men, in your best judgment, was in
his Posse who were bad men at that time?
A Well, that figure I cannot give you; I was just observing them
from their appearance and their manner of speech and so forth.
But Sheriff Clark agreed with me on the screening of this Posse,
which he did.
Q And had you observed Sheriff Clark’s deputies — I mean Possemen
working at other demonstrations?
A Only one — no, I have not; no; no, I have not.
Q Do you know when Sheriff Clark organized his Posse?
A No, I do not.
Q Now, what time did 37-ou arrive in Selma on Sunday, Sunday of the
march?
A Approximately one o’clock; like I stated, again, I had such a
bad cold I felt like I almost had pneumonia, and I stayed in bei
just as long as I could.
Q And where did you go immediately upon arriving in Selma?
A This — on this side of the bridge.
Q And where on the Montgomery side of the bridge were you?
A I parked on the left side, that is going into Selma, approximate]
fifty yards from where the — the confrontation took place.
Q Fifty yards to the rear?
A Yes.
30
Q Back toxvard Montgomery?
A Yes.
Q Now, upon your arrival in Selma — excuse me — and prior to th|e
march, did you talk with any of your men?
A Prior to the arrival in Selma -- no, I did not talk to any of
them.
Q After your arrival in Selma and before the marchers crossed the
bridge, did you talk with any of your men?
A Well, some of them would come by the car, and I would speak to
them; as far as giving any orders, and so forth, I — I did not
give any orders at that time.
Q Were you in touch with Major Cloud on that day, on Sunday?
A I talked
Q Prior to the march?
A I talked to him once or twice on radio, but he did not stay in
his car, so I did not have full time radio contact with him.
Q Was there any discussion at that time with him about the amount
of force which should be necessary or any change of plans?
A No. No.
Q What were those conferences about?
A We were just merely talking about how large the crowd was, and
we hoped it didn’t get out of hand, and that is just about it.
Q Now, did you see Colonel Cloud — Major Cloud before the march
and after you had arrived in Selma?
A Yes, I believe I did.
31
Q Where did you see him?
A That is what I just explained to you, that I did talk to him
before the march.
Q Oh, I am sorry, I thought you were telling me about a radio
conversation?
A No, I told you I did see him.
Q Where did you see him?
A It was near the point of the confrontation.
Q Was it in — on the street or in an automobile or where?
A I radioed to him to come to — to walk over to my car, because
I wasn’t feeling well, 1 was mighty weak from this cold, and he
walked over to my car.
Q Was there any discussion at that time about what plans or the
execution of the plans?
A No, that had already been discussed; there was -- I don’t belie'
there was any further discussion on that.
Q Did you receive any report, or what was the purpose for calling
him to your car?
A Merely to ask him was everything working to our plans, number
of men, and so forth.
Q And about how long was that before the marchers came over the
bridge ?
A Oh, I imagine possibly an hour before.
Q What else did you do after you arrived in Selma and before the
marchers came over the bridge?
32
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
I stayed in my car.
During this whole hour?
Oh, yes; I stayed in my car, I had a driver with me.
Now, could you see the marchers as they approached?
I could see them coming across the bridge, but after they
approached down where they were confronted, my vision was
blocked by the men.
Did you see or did you hear the conversation between Major Clou
and the leader of the march?
Mo, I did not; I heard his statement to them over the P.A. syst
but I did not hear any exchanges of those conversations.
Could you actually see the confrontation when it occurred?
No, I could not.
You could not?
No, I could not see it.
Did you see or could you see any State Troopers when they had
their masks on?
Yes.
Their gas masks?
I did see some with their gas masks on; yes.
Let me show you PlaintiffsT Exhibit 11.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Has that been offered in evidence
MR. GRAY: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: 11 been offered?
MR. GRAY: It has been identified.
i
3n
?
33
offered.
THE COURT: It has been identified; it has not been
MR. McLEAN PITTS: We object until It is offered,
MR. GRAY: It has not been offered; it has been
identified.
A Let me tell you something else; I did get out of my car after
they tried to disperse the crowd by moving into them with a
stick; now, I did move, go down there, and Major Cloud asked me
should we use gas at this time, and I told him no, to give them
more time, and which he did give them more time.
Q Let me ask you a couple of questions about Plaintiffsf Exhibit
11 for identification; you know what — what is that?
A These are State Troopers with tear gas masks on.
Q Does that adequately represent State Troopers as they appeared
at the march --
A I would —
Q --on Sunday?
A — say so; yes.
Q
A
MR. GRAY: We offer it.
THE COURT: Any objection to number
MR. KOHN: No objection.
THE COURT: It will be admitted.
Now, you said, I believe, sir, that you got —
you get out of your automobile?
After they had tried to disperse the crowd, I
11, gentlemen?
at what point did
saw some objects
34
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
in the road that I thought may be human beings, and I put on a
gas mask, myself, and walked down there and saw it: it was
packs of blankets and so forth laying out in the road. I wanteld
those people removed if it should — it had been people. Now,
I saw some that were lying limp laying there with their eyes
open and looking around, but we didn’t bother those, in a few
minutes they got up and left.
I show you Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10 for identification purposes --
We thought --
— will you tell us what that portrays?
These are blankets and — for camping along the side of the
road, that is what I assume they are.
Now —
Now, that is what I thought were -- may possibly could have
been human beings, and I walked down there to see if it was,
and I wanted to do something about it.
Does that fair and adequately depict the scene after the
marchers had gone back across the bridge?
Yes, sir; that is what tear gas will do for you; that is the
reason I hes-- was hesitant in using it.
MR. GRAY: We offer —
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Let us see it.
MR. GRAY: It is right here.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: You want to see it, John?
MR. KOHN: No objection to that.
35
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
Q
A
Q
A
MR. McLEAN PITTS: No objection to it.
THE COURT: It will be admitted.
Now, I believe you testified, sir, that after they started to
push the marchers back, I think you mentioned you got out of
the car at some point after they were pushing the marchers back?
Oh, it was after this.
Did you see your deputies — l mean your Troopers as they pushed
the marchers back on that occasion?
Well, I tell you, my vision was pretty well blocked: I couldn’t
see what was going on; I did see a scuffle, but I couldn’t
determine exactly —
You could not identify these as being your Troopers?
No, I couldn’t.
All right. Look again, sir, at Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 12 for
identification purposes; can you identify those as your Troopers
I would say they are State Troopers: yes.
And tell us whether or not that appears to fair and adequately
describe the front of that march as the Troopers were advancing?
Well, I tell you, as I repeat time and time again, my vision was
was blocked by the people, and I could not get a clear view
of the situation.
All right. Now, how much time, in your best judgment, sir,
elapsed between the time Major Cloud gave the order to disperse
and the time he gave the order to advance?
Well, now, this is merely a guess; as I said before, I would say
36
approximately two minutes; it could have been one minute or
three minutes; it is merely a guess, because I did not time it.
And at what point did you get out of your car?
After these --- I saw these objects in the road, and I was
concerned that they were human beings, and I wanted to see about
them, to get them taken care of should they be human beings.
Did you get out of your car before the tear gas was dispensed?
Oh, yes; I did.
How long before the tear gas was dispensed?
Oh, I imagine two or three minutes, or maybe more than that; it
might have been ten minutes; Major Cloud asked me should we use
tear gas at that time, and I told him no, should give them more
time to disperse, and which he did.
Is it your testimony, then, that ten or fifteen minutes elapsed
between the time that he gave the —
I wouldn’t specifically say how much time elapsed, because in
the excitement of all this, I am a human being, the same as
everybody else, and you are going to be excited a little bit, I
don’t care who you are or how tough you might think you are, you.
are going to be excited a little bit, and as far as pinning it
down to the exact amount of time, I cannot pin it down.
How, after — after you gave him the orders not to use tear gas,
what did you do?
I believe I walked up the road a little bit and then came on bad-
to the car.
Q In what direction of the road, toward Selma or toward Montgomery
A Toward Selma, yes, and he was going up and down the line telling
these people to please disperse, if they didn’t we would have to
use tear gas; he was begging them to disperse, "Please go home
or to your church, if not we will have to use tear gas."
Q Did you see the film that was shown in this court room yesterday
afternoon?
A Yes, I did.
Q Did you see at that time several State Troopers hitting people?
A That was discussed today with a gentleman in the court room here
and I did not see that; maybe my vision is not too good, but I
did not see that, anybody striking, although I say that here is
a list of men that met resistance.
THE COURT: Just answer his questions, Colonel.
WITNESS: Okay, sir.
Q Did you observe the actual tear gassing of these people?
A Part of it; not all of it.
Q Where were you at that time?
A I went back towards my car -- now, you say, "Tear gas"; now,
there was smoke used, tear gas, and nausea gas. Now, nausea
gas, all of them are saying some of them were seriously injured;
nausea gas is a temporary nausea. Now, mostly smoke was used,
very little bit of nausea and very little bit of tear gas, but
smoke — what we were trying to do is cover it and make them
go on back.
37
All right, now, you are saying, then, there were three different
types of gasses —
That is correct.
-- that were used?
No, I say there were two types of gasses.
Two types of gasses and then —
Smoke.
-- smoke you say; just tell us about the smoke, Colonel, how does
it happen?
All it does is just come up, it is just a bluff, you might say,
for the use of tear gas, it is try to bluff them, make them go
on, thinking it is tear gas.
Now, how much smoke was used; how many cans?
I believe —
Containers?
— Major Cloud told me it was about twelve canisters of that
issued.
All right, now, what about tear gas?
I believe he said it was approximately — it can’t be definite
around that, around twenty to thirty canisters of tear gas.
And what was the third type — the second type of gas?
That was nausea, nausea gas.
And nausea gas, do you know the - the name, anything better tha
just nausea gas?
No, I do not; they have a chemical formula for it, but I don’t
38
39
know it.
And how many canisters of that was used?
I believe he said there were eight, there were eight canisters
issued; now, how much was used I do not know.
Tell us the color of these various gasses and smoke?
Well, the — your smoke is white, your tear gas is white, your
nausea is a kind of a greenish yellow color.
Did you see the various colors of smoke arise from your positiojf
Yes, I could see it coming on up.
And did you see some of the demonstrators or marchers down on
their knees at the time that this gas was used?
Yes, I walked up there, as I told you before, I put my gas mask
on, and I was afraid they might use it before I got there, and
told them to hold off, to give them a little bit more time.
I show you PlaintiffsT Exhibit 6 for identification, and ask
you whether or not that fair and adequately depicts the scene
after the gas or smoke had been used?
Well, that — now, that was too far away, I could have no visioji
of that whatsoever.
You didn’t see that?
Well, that was too — I was too far away from this; I was a
quarter to a half a mile away from this scene; that is right
at the edge of the bridge.
All right, I show you Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 7 for identification
purposes, and see whether or not you recollect that scene?
40
A It could have been one of the scenes; I don’t deny it nor
confirm it. I would more or less think that it was one of the
jl scenes.
fj Q You think it fair and adequately depicts one of the scenes at
that time?
IA Yes, I believe so; I think most of this is smoke in here,
because tear gas does not make that much smoke; it is very littlje
bit of smoke in tear gas.
MR. GRAY: We offer it in evidence, this Plaintiffs’
.
| Exhibit 7. You have any objection to this other Exhibit going in.
MR. KOHN: No objection.
THE CLERK: 7.
|
THE COURT: It will be admitted; 7 is admitted.
MR. GRAY: Exhibit 6 is also offered.
THE COURT: 6 admitted.
Q Would you tell us, Colonel, in connection with the smoke, is it
a pretty dense smoke?
A Yes, it is real heavy white smoke.
Q Would it be difficult to make a picture or to get a — a film
of something if that smoke is used?
A Oh, it definitely would be, yes; but that was not the purpose o.
using it.
Q Did you see any persons after tear gas had been used who were
lying around and who needed some type of medical attention?
A No, I didn’t go back up there: I wasn’t in the physical condition
41
to be walking around up there, as I told you before, I — I
was feeling pretty rough,
Q Can you tell us whether or not the State Trooper automobiles arje
equipped with first aid equipment?
A No, they are not.
Q They have no first aid —
A No.
Q — material in them at all?
A No. We have some first aid equipment at some of our posts, but
not all of them.
Q Now, where did you go after — did you — at what point did you
leave the scene?
A When all the marchers returned across the bridge, or maybe not
all of them had returned, I went on back to Montgomery and went
home and lay down for awhile, and that night I did — I x\ras
concerned about some people might cause some trouble over there
at night, and I was concerned, and I got up and rode back to
Selma to check on the situation.
Q And what time was it that you returned?
A I imagine I got — you mean back to Selma?
Q Yes?
A I imagine it was around, oh, eight or nine oTclock, something
like that.
Q What type of firearms were issued to your Troopers that day?
A No special equipment, just their regular issue.
i
42
Q And the regular issue includes what?
A Their sidearms, which is a thirty-eight revolver, and the car
is equipped with a sawed off shotgun, and some of them, also,
the cars do have carbine rifles in them.
Q Some of them did have carbine rifles?
A Oh, yes; yes, I think you will find other states have the same
issue.
Q I show you, sir, Plaintiff-Intervenor’s Exhibit 3, picture number
B-218, and ask you whether or not you can identify any of the
lav; enforcement officers?
A Now, I have looked at this picture today, and I cannot tell
whether that is a State Trooper or not. It looks like he — it
looks like he is not, but this patch here is not similar to our
patch; I donTt know whether it is a defect in the picture or whft
it is.
Q He does have on a gas mask, doesn’t he?
A He does have on a gas mask here.
Q And isn’t that gas mask similar to the gas masks of other State
Troopers?
A Yes, it is similar.
Q Similar to --
A Yes.
Q I show you Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 11 —
A If you will notice, this picture is distorted; it is not a true
picture.
Q I see, but the gas mask is similar to those gas masks?
A That is correct, it is; well, the canister is similar, and the
outline of the face here is similar —
j Q Uh, huh.
A -- but the uniform, I couldn’t tell whether it is a State Trooper
or not. -1
Q I show you the person who is depicted in the far left; is that a
State Trooper?
A Now, that is a State Trooper, I would say that is a State
Trooper; now, the man, I cannot identify him, the picture is too
distorted there.
Q And the next picture, is that a Sheriff’s deputy?
A That I couldn’t say; I see the man with the — with the badge
on, I couldn’t tell whether he was a Sheriff or City or what not.
THE COURT: Was any City officers there, Colonel?
WITNESS: I don’t believe so, sir; I think they were
working the traffic on the west side of the bridge.
THE COURT: All right.
WITNESS: Now, I asked them to be there to assist us ,
and they said that they were tied up on the traffic.
Q Now, will you tell us, sir, why was the march broke up?
A Why was it broken up?
Q Yes, sir?
A Because -- due to the safety of the marchers, themselves, and
the motoring public, we felt like that it shouldn’t continue.
43
44
I think there would have been several people killed, and we are
having too many people killed on our highways today, and we want
to avoid any more fatalities than we possibly can.
Q Colonel, you were quoted in the New York Times on March 9, 1965,
page twenty-three, as saying, "We don’t believe in making
arrests, it is better to break them up"; did you make that
statement, that is an adequate quote?
A I don’t recall making any such statement; now, I have been
misquoted so many times in the newspaper until that doesn’t
concern me.
Q Mow, you have had considerable amount of experience, have you
not, in breaking up demonstrations?
A Quite a bit; yes.
Q Does a number involved have anything to do with whether you
break them up or let them go on?
A The larger the crowd, the — naturally the more concerned I am
with it.
Q Now, the — the — the plan as used in Selma was a change in
other plans that you and your State Troopers have used in other
demonstrations; is that right?
A Well, this is the first time we have used tear gas, if that is
what you are implying.
Q You recall the Freedom Walker incident, don’t you, sir?
A Oh, yes; I recall it.
Q I think you made — in that instance you arrested the walkers?
45
Q
! A
Q
A
the
Yes, that is true, and we have the pictures where the traffic
was backed up for several miles by — caused by those -- those
walkers over in Georgia, and that is the reason we wouldn’t let
them into Alabama.
So in-- this time instead of arresting the persons, you disperse
them with gas and other -- and used other force?
That is correct; exactly.
Were these marchers ever told that they were under arrest?
No, they — they were told that that was an unlawful assembly
and to disperse.
THE COURT: All right, anything further on cross frorji
plaintiffs?
MR. GRAY: That’s that’s all.
THE COURT: All right, before we get — do you have
cross examination, Mr. Doar?
MR. DOAR: I do, your honor.
THE COURT: We will take a ten minute recess prior to
that.
(At which time, 2;52 p.m., a recess was had until
3:00 p.m., at which time the hearing continued)
THE COURT: Mr. Doar.
BY MR. DOAR:
Q Colonel Lingo, I assume that in this four hour conference with
the Governor that you and the Governor and the other lav;
enforcement officials considered the question of whether or not
4 6
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
to arrest the marchers, some of the marchers, that da}r?
That was -- that is entirely left up to me who is to be arrested;
that is law enforcement natter.
But you knew that you had the power to make arrests out there
that day?
Yes, sir; I did.
But you didnTt believe in mass arrests?
Ho, sir; I do not believe in mass arrests, because I think a
lot of those people that are demonstrating, they don’t realize
what they are doing, and I just don’t like to arrest them and
them in jail when they are ignorant of the situation.
put
But you do believe in using force to — to break up a demonstra
tion?
Just the minimum amount of force to break it up.
Now —
I don’t believe in striking any of them; our men are instructed
not to raise their club above their head, they are to use it in
a horizontal manner or either in a pushing manner to disperse
a crowd.
Now, using the minimum amount of force necessary to break up
a crowd, what would that be?
Well, I told Major Cloud to attempt to use a minimum amount of
force to disperse the crowd, should there be any resistance to
withdraw and give them time enough to disperse, if they wouldn’t
disperse then to use tear gas.
47
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
Now, as a law enforcement officer, would 3rou say that the actioh
of Major Cloud in sending those twent};- or thirty Troopers againp'
the front of that line was a minimum amount of force?
Definitely; yes, sir.
A minimum?
I don’t believe it was about —
A minimum?
A minimum amount of force.
Is that your definition of a minimum amount of force?
Yes, sir; it is; it is.
All right.
To push them and try to disperse them.
Are you drawing any distinction between using two Highway
Patrolmen or four Highway Patrolmen or twenty Highway Patrolmen)?
It Is according to number in the crowd how many you would use;
I don’t believe he used over fifteen or twenty at the most in
that.
But he did use fifteen or twenty?
I believe that’s right.
You were —
As I said before, ray vision was obstructed by the people.
Well, as I understand it, after this initial encounter between
the Troopers and the marchers, they drew back, and you then put
on your gas mask and went down along the route of the march, tt
line of the march?
e
46
A Yes, sir; I would like to make it clear why I went down there; I
saw objects in the road, and I thought they were human beings,
and I did not want human beings being left out in the road, I
wanted them to have the proper attention.
Q I see. Well, now, I’ll just hold that for now. What instruction
were given to the crowd then or the marchers then about
dispersing?
A After Major Cloud — he gave them instructions over the P.A.
system to — this was an unlawful assembly, and they were
forbidden to march for their own safety and the motoring public,
and he requested that they disperse and go back to the church or
their home, which they did not do. They put their nose in the
ground, because I heard at a later time that they said —
Q Well, just --
A Yes, sir.
Q — not what you heard.
A Yes, sir.
Q They didn’t disperse, and you walked down along the line; is that
right?
A Right, sir.
Q And did I understand you correctly to say that then you were a
quarter to a half a mile away when the tear gas went off?
A No, sir; I was not; I was walking.
Q Did you --
A Walking back toward Major Cloud where they were confronted when
49
the tear gas went off, and maybe not quite to him at that time.
Q Now —
A When I first went out there, he said, "Is it time to use gas?"
and I said, "No, give them additional time to disperse."
Q I was under the assumption that you had a conference with Mr.
Baker, chief lav; enforcement officer of the City —
A No, sir; that —
Q -- prior to -- prior to the march?
A That is not true.
Q That is not true, huh?
A I did not even go into Selma proper.
Q You know whether or not any of your officers had a conference
with Mr. Baker?
A No, sir; I do not; now, I told him — I told — I donTt remember
who it was, but I requested some of the City Police to be over
there to assist us, and they came back and said that they were --
all the men were tied up on traffic, and they would not be able
to come across the bridge.
Q Now, did you take into consideration in using force to break up
that crowd to send a Trooper or several Troopers up and arrest
the leaders?
A Yes, sir; I tried that before, and it didnTt work, so I —
Q Based upon — based upon what you tried before, you concluded
not to do that?
A Yes, sir.
50
Q Mow, that time you tried that before was when?
A At Marion.
Q Now, at any other time?
A Now, I didn’t try it, but the Sheriff and the Chief of Police
tried it.
Q It isn’t fair to say as — you as head of the State Patrol your
officers tried it?
A I was observer there with the Sheriff and the Chief of Police,
were assisting the local authorities.
Q Uh, huh: now, then, there was no attempt then to arrest the
leaders of the march?
A No, sir; there was not.
Q And there was no attempt to arrest any other persons in the
march?
A No, sir.
Q And there were women and children in the march?
A That I don’t know, I didn’t see any; as I state — as I have
stated before, I was — did not have a good view of the situatijx
Q Well, I thought — I thought that you walked along the line of
the march and saw these people on the --
A I did, but they were all squatted down, had their nose in the
ground.
Q And you weren’t able to distinguish whether or not they were meji.
women, or children?
A Well, I was not trying to distinguish whether — they were all
in a huddle, they were just just a mass is what it was.
Q You weren’t making any attempt to distinguish then, Colonel, as
a law enforcement officer what kind of people they were there
that you xvere going to disperse?
A You said my — you said what kind of people: do you mean women
or children or what not?
Q I mean women or children or men or boys or persons with weapons
or no weapons?
A No, sir.
Q You made no attempt to make that determination?
A No, sir; Major Cloud went up and down that line telling them,
"Please disperse, please" — he went the full length of the line,
I believe, telling them, begging them, to disperse.
Q Could you and I agree that a law enforcement officer — it might
be reasonable to use a particular amount of force on a man ana
a different amount of force on a child?
A Absolutely, I would agree with you on that.
Q Could you and I agree that you might use a different amount of
force if there was a — in the day time or in the night time?
A Well, I don’t think day time and night time would enter into it.
Q You don’t think that would —
A The amount of force you would use.
Q I see, the amount of force that would be reasonable?
A Right; yes.
q You knew that all you could use was reasonable force?
51
52
Right, sir.
As a lav/ enforcement officer?
That is correct, sir.
And you knew you had the power of arrest?
Yes, sir.
Could v/e agree that it would make a difference in whether or not
the persons that you v/e re about to disperse had any v/eapons or
any kind of missiles, rocks, or bottles?
Yes, sir; that would enter into it.
And would it be true — would it be fair to say that a law
enforcement officer could use more force if the — if the people
in the demonstration were armed rather than if they were unarmed?
Absolutely.
And how were these people?
I don’t know.
You made any attempt to determine?
I had no -- I had no way of — they v/e re not put under arrest,
so they v/e re not searched.
But at any rate, you didn’t see any weapons?
As I state — as I have stated before, I did not have a good view
of the situation.
Uh, huh: and now, was any attempt made or any — strike that.
Was any consideration given to going down half way down the line
and attempting to break off the line of march and split it up
into smaller groups?
53
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
No, sir; I didn’t — don’t think that would have worked; Major
Cloud was going up and down the line begging them, absolutely
pleading with them, to — to disperse, asking them to go home
or go to the church, that the march would not be allowed.
Now, was it your — did you make a determination that those
people had to either go home or go to the church?
Well, they would have to get out of the road.
Well, this is a difference; all you were going to do was get
them out of the road?
Well, if they were dispersed, I wouldn’t care where they went -
Uh, huh.
— but that was merely a suggestion, go home or to the church.
I see. Well, after they dispersed, you didn’t care where they
went?
I didn’t care, except there were numerous number of people on t
streets, now, this is hearsay on my part because —
Then don’t testify to something that is hearsay on your part.
I did not go across the bridge.
Now, this Sheriff’s Posse, you saw them, the mounted Posse, you
say?
16
I did; yes, sir.
And did you see them chasing Negroes out in the fields?
I was not in a position to see that if it happened; no, sir.
And if it happened — have you looked at the pictures?
Some of them; yes, sir.
54
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
A
Q
But you didnTt see that?
I was not in a position to see that.
What kind of an agreement did you have with Sheriff Clark as to
when he would order the mounted Posse into action?
I had no agreement with him on such.
Who was in charge of that?
Of the Posse?
No, of the -- of the law enforcement officials?
Well, Major Cloud was in charge of the Troopers.
Well, what were you?
Well, I am the Director; I passed my orders on to Major Cloud,
but I was not -- as I told you, I was not in a physical conditio
to be out on the front lines, in ray opinion, I almost had
pneumonia --
What —
-- and that is the reason I was not out on the front line.
What kind of an arrangement did 3>-ou have with Sheriff Clark
as to the division of responsibility with respect to breaking u£>
the crowd?
I just merely told Sheriff Clark what our position was, that
we would not allow a march from Selma to Montgomery.
You then did not ask him to do anything out on the highway that
day?
I might have asked him to participate, I believe I did; yes, sir
You did then ask him to participate?
55
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
I believe I did: yes, sir.
And what did you ask him to do?
Well, I possibly said that, ’’Sheriff, we would like to — for
you to pis-- participate in the breaking up of this march from
Montgomery -- from Selma to Montgomery that the Governor has
banned."
And did 3>"ou give him any other specific instructions beside tha
No. sir; I told him what we v/ould do, we would use a minimum
amount of force to try to disperse the crowd, then if we could
not do it that way, we would have to use tear gas to disperse
them.
b
Were you aware afterwards that a number of — of the Negro
citizens that were in that march were hospitalised?
I heard that; that is just hearsay on my part; I don’t know.
Did you make any investigation of that?
Yes, sir; I sent some of my investigators to the hospital, and
they would give them no information whatsoever.
And other than that, have you made any attempt to investigate
to determine the extent of the injuries that were received by
the people in the march?
Yes, sir; I sent — as I stated before, I sent my investigators
to the hospital to try to determine how many and what the exter.
of their injuries were and how they received the injuries, and
they would not give us any information.
I want to know, now, again, what factors you take into
t
56
consideration in determining what is reasonable force to
disperse a group of people?
A Well, there are several methods in riot control how to disperse
a crowd, but I think in using the stick in a horizontal manner
and going in there — and 1 don’t mean hit them, but give them
a little shove and try to — to get them on started back in the
other direction, disperse them.
Q Now, that is — that is one?
A That is one method? yes, sir.
q One method, and that is the method you chose, and you have
testified that was not — that was a minimum amount of force to I
use?
A Right; yes, sir.
Q And then with respect to the vise of the tear gas, what
instructions did you have to the men after the tear gas was
used? How were they to use their sticks then?
A Well, they would have to use the tear gas I don’t think it would
be necessary to use the sticks at all, because the crowd j-S
going to disperse then.
Q I see; then it is your -- it is your testimony then that it
would be unreasonable to use the sticks afuer the tear gas?
A Well, nov/, if you have somebody, just a crowd that is just
determined to stay there, I think they should be — probably
place the stick on them and give them a little shove and tell
them they will have to move on.
57
Q But other than that, that is what you would want the men to do?
A That is what I would want the men to do: yes, sir.
Q I see. Mow, would 3̂ ou want a period of time to elapse after this
tear gas is exploded before a determination is made whether any
additional force should be used to disperse the crowd?
A I think you should allow a little bit of time, and I believe
there was a little bit of time did elapse in there.
Q How much time elapsed?
A I don’t know that; I can’t tell you, as again I state, I was no';
in a position to view the situation.
Q Now, do you think the — as a -- as a law enforcement officer,
do you think you had the right to, or one of your Troopers had
the right to, if a -- if a demonstrator laid on the — on the
ground and wouldn’t move, do you think your law enforcement
officer had the right to go up there and hit him over the head?
A No, sir; I do not. I don’t know that that happened.
Q I just want to know whether you would agree with me that he
would not have that right?
A No, sir; I would not agree --
MR. McLEAN PITTS: I object to that; that is not
that is not in evidence.
A -- I think a hypothetical question.
THE COURT: I see that the photographs reflect that,
and it is proper cross examination; your objection is overruled.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: All right, sir.
I
THE COURT: Mr. Alford, close this door; the noise
i coming from the witness room is a little excessive.
Q Did you see any of the marchers go off into the field on the
north or the east side of the road?
j A I saw some leave the road; now, as I state again, I was not in a
position to look down in the fields, but I did see some go out
to the side of the roads.
Q Now, did you go back to the church afterwards?
A No, sir; I did not go; as I stated before, after the — it
was broken up, the demonstration was broken up, I came on back
to Montgomery and went to bed for a little while, and I got to
worrying about, well, "What is going to happen tonight, I am
afraid somebody is going to get killed," and I rode back over
there and got in touch with the Sheriff and told him we had to
stay right on top of the situation, it may be some outsiders in
there that would want to cause us trouble, and he agreed with me.
Q Nov;, I want to go back again to the — until after your men
first used the sticks at the shoulder level to push into the —
into the marchers —
A Yes, sir.
Q — and after the marchers were on their knees on the ground; I
want to know whether or not you believed that —
MR. KOHN: We object to that; heTs gone over the same
ground before, your honor.
THE COURT: Go ahead and ask your question.
58
60
Yes, sir; I was there.
All right. Now, there were — in handling that march you did
three different things, or three different things occurred; I
want to see if you will agree with me on this; number one, the
mounted Posse was not there; is that true?
I didn’t see the mounted Posse.
Number two, you cleared the area of all the whites?
Whites, which I should have done on Sunday.
Okay.
I will agree with you on that.
You agree you should have done that on Sunday?
Right, that is the — an error I made.
All right; was having the Posse there an error?
Well, I don’t know what part the Posse played in it; as I
stated before, I saw them take no action, I wasn’t in the posit
to see.
But if — if the testimony that has been presented here today
about the Posse chasing innocent Negroes through the fields is
true, then would you agree it was an error to have the Posse
L(
there?
MR. McLEAN PITTS: We object to that.
THE COURT: Sustain it.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: We object to that.
TICE COURT: Sustain it.
The third -- the third thing you did different on --- on Tuesday
61
was that you didn’t use any force to disperse the crowd?
A That is correct; we would have —
Q You just stood your ground?
A We would have should they not dispersed.
Q And they were there for a matter of some thirty or thirty-five
minutes, and then they dispersed peacefully?
A That is correct, sir.
MR. DOAR: Thank you.
THE COURT: Mr. Smith.
BY MR. SMITH:
Q Were you present on Friday, March 5 —
A Talk a little louder.
Q Were you present on Friday, March 5, when Governor Wallace met
with approximately thirty of his legislative leaders?
A No, sir; I was not; I was not.
Q You were not?
A I was not; no, sir.
Q Were you present at any time when discussion was held in regard
to the possibility of blocking U.S. highway 80 between Selma arc
Montgomery and portions of it?
A That is correct, sir: I was.
Q Now, when was this discussed?
A That was at night; I don’t remember the date; that was one nigh’
Q Did you explain to the Governor the general condition of the
highway or not?
6 2
A Yes, sir; that was taken into consideration, the condition of the
highway, and the detouring of all of the traffic and —
Q Did you express to the Governor the condition of the alternate
route?
i
| A That was brought up; yes, sir; I donTt remember whether I
explained it to him or not, but that was taken into considerati<j>r
Q IsnTt it a fact that Governor Wallace stated emphatically that
he wanted this matter handled in such a manner so that nobody
would be hurt ?
A That is correct, sir; that is correct.
MR. SMITH: I have no further questions.
THE COURT: Mr. Pitts.
BY MR. McLEAN PITTS:
Q Colonel Lingo, I believe you have been head of the State Troopers
for how long, you say?
A Since January 14, T63.
Q And during that time there has been quite a few demonstrations
in various towns and marches and walks; is that correct?
A That is correct, sir.
Q And have your State Troopers been called out?
A Yes, sir; we have been called out on numerous occasions to assist
the local authorities.
Q And you have been there personally on those?
A Oh, yes, sir; I have.
Q So you have had experience in observing mass groups of people w|ic
63
are
A That
Q Have
0O)a,
A Yes,
Q Now,
did your Troopers first go to Selma after the first after -- in
January or December, December, *64, or first part of January, ’6
A That I can’t tell you exact date; no, sir; I believe it was in
’65 we sent them over.
Q But it was several weeks before all this?
A Oh, yes.
Q Sometime before all this occurred?
A Oh, yes, sir.
Q The Troopers had been in and out --
A Right.
Q -- of Selma; is that correct?
A Yes, sir; we have had so much going on until I can’t —
Q Mow, I will ask you, is it the policy of the State and the polity
of the State Department of Investigation — I mean State Depart
ment of Public Safetyr that you do not send Troopers into a town
of the size of Selma, the larger towns, unless it is at the
request of the Mayor or the Sheriff and the Sheriff?
A That is correct, sir.
Q And I will ask you if it is not true that Mayor Joe Smitherman
vn
and Sheriff Jim Clark jointly requested aid from the State
Troopers?
That is correct, sir.
And after that request was made, the State Troopers came into
Selma; is that correct?
That is correct, sir.
I will ask you is it not correct that your instructions to those
State Troopers were to only give aid and assistance to local law
enforcement officers?
That is correct, sir.
And during that time were you in and out of Selma?
I was, sir.
Did you have an opportunity of observing demonstrations in Selma
and observing the crowds in Selma?
Yes, sir; I did have; l --
Did you have State investigators there?
I did.
And do you know how many — what was the greatest number of Stat
investigators that you had in Selma at any one time, to your
knowledge?
I believe we had as many as fifteen at one time; I just --
And —
e
_ not positive about that figure, but I believe we have had as
many as fifteen.
Twelve to fifteen, anyway; is tnat correct?
65
Yes, sir.
And those State investigators are under the direction of Major
Jones; is that correct?
That is correct, sir.
And Major Jones, himself, was in Selma; is that correct?
That’s right; yes, sir.
Did he make regular reports to you on the conditions that
existed in Selma?
He did.
I will ask you whether or not the condition in Selma between
the races has deteriorated since Christmas?
It definitely has; yes, sir.
Has it been constantly getting worse?
Yes, sir.
Has that tenseness or that deterioration been caused by
demonstration after demonstration on the streets?
I think the demonstrations have caused it; yes, sir.
And have you been — have you seen these demonstrations on ohe
street?
I most certainly have, sir.
Have you been around the Dallas County oouru House when they
were having them?
I have, sir.
Will you describe what some of those demonstrations that you
around the Dallas County Court House?
saw
A Yes, sir; I have seen them block the sidewalks and just fill the
Court House full of people; of course, I have nothing to do with
the registration or nothing whatsoever, that doesn’t come under
my Department, but it was unnecessary, I have even seen children
all in the line going into the Court House standing there, and
I know they were not of age, of voting age, therefore they
couldn’t --
MR. GRAY: Your honor, we object to the --
THE COURT: Well, I sustain it to that part of the
response that -- or that part of his answer that is not responsive.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: All right, sir.
Q But you have seen —
THE COURT: Just answer his questions, please.
Q You have seen big crowds around that Court House, and have all
the entrances to that Court House been blocked on occasion?
A Yes, sir; it has.
Q And you have seen it?
A Yes, sir; I have seen it.
Q Now, and — now, you say that you came in — came to Selma on
Sunday afternoon, and you had previously discussed xvith the
Governor’s office about the --- that this particular march could
not proceed from Montgomery to Selma?
A That is correct.
Q Selma to Montgomery, I mean?
A That’s right.
66
67
Q And the reason for it was -- was because of the danger to these
marchers, themselves?
A And the motoring public.
Q And to the traveling public —
A Right.
Q — is that correct?
A Right, sir.
Q And so the Governor decided that he would not permit the march;
is that correct?
A That is correct, sir.
Q And it was your job as department — as head of the Troopers
to keep that march from proceeding; is that correct?
A That is correct; I am — to maintain law and order, that is the
only purpose, the only concern I have.
Q Now, when were you in Selma the last time you were in Selma
prior to that time?
A Now, prior to which time?
Q Prior to that Sunday?
A To that Sunday/?
Q Yeah?
A Possibly Friday; I am not sure.
Q What would you say — did you make an investigation then as to
conditions that were existing in Selma between the races?
A Yes, sir; the situation was constantly -- the tension was
constantly increasing.
68
Q Was it very tense?
A Yes, sir; it was very tense.
Q And had you had similar experience in observing pre-riot trouble
in Birmingham and other places?
A Birmingham, Gadsden; yes, sir; Tuscaloosa, and several different
places.
Q What was the condition in Selma on that Friday, compared to these
other towns?
A Well, you could see small groups of white people forming, and
some of them looked like they were pretty tough characters, and
I just didn’t like the looks of the situation, and --
Q And —
A -- and it was really getting tense.
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
It was getting tense?
Yes, sir.
You know the approximate size of the Sheriff’s force in Selma;
is that correct?
Yes, sir; about seven or eight deputies, I believe that is
correct.
In normal times; is that right?
Right; right, sir.
And you know the approximate size of the Selma Police Department
About forty men, I believe.
Uh, huh; and that is all the law enforcement that Selma and
Dallas County has got; is that right?
69
A That is correct, sir.
Q And the auxiliary, which is the Posse --
A Posse; yes, sir.
Q — is that correct?
A That is correct.
Q Now, have you had an opportunity to observe the Posse in action
in these demonstrations that have been taking place in Selma?
■
A Well, the -- no, sir; I haven’t observed the Posse except the
Sunday when they rode by me going on up the street; now, what
happened after that, I don’t know.
Q All right, sir.
A But they did ride by me.
Q Out on Sunday afternoon?
A On Sunday afternoon; yes, sir.
Q All right, sir; now, since we are on that point, Colonel, did
you — they rode right by you out there; is that correct?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Did you see the Posse as they rode in front of you?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you see any member of that Posse have any whip or bullwhip?
A Yes, sir; I saw some whips, some little whips about three or
four feet long, where they whipped the horses, and I saw one
with long reins where he could come around and hit the rump of
his horse on both sides; I am not a horseman, I don’t know.
Q Do y o u know w h a t a b u l l w h i p i s ?
A Well, I I am not sure I know what a bullwhip is.
Q You know a — a drover’s whip is a long whip?
A I have seen them in picture shows, and on television, where
these — they knock cigarettes out of people’s mouth and such
as that, I guess that is what a bullwhip is.
Q Well, did you see any kind ox instrument -- anĵ whip like that
on any of those horses?
A No, sir; I did not.
Q I’ll ask you further, is it true that as to what method should
be used -- well, I will withdraw that question. You say that
out in this area there where — on that Sunday afternoon, on the
Montgomery side of that bridge, there is businesses on both sides
of that road, isn’t it?
A Yes, sir; that is correct.
Q And there is a traffic light there for the old Montgomery highway
isn’t that right?
A That’s right.
Q It is about three quarters of a mile from that bridge down to
that light; is that correct?
A That is the approximate distance; yes, sir.
Q And that is in the area where this occurred; is that correct?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Now, when you arrived there, did you see white people all aroxmcl
there and in that area?
A Now, you refer to Sunday or Tuesday?
70
71
|Q Sunday?
A Sunday?
Q Sunday?
A Yes, sir.
Q And it was a good many of them there; is that correct?
A Yes, sir; there was.
Q Can you — you got any estimate as to the number of people that
was milling around there?
A Oh, I would say two or three hundred.
Q When you arrived there?
A Yes, sir; that is just an estimate.
Q Did that increase?
A Yes, sir.
i Q Did that increase during the afternoon?
'
A Possibly so; yes, sir.
Q Mow, I’ll ask you this, Major — I mean Colonel Lingo; it was
very difficult to keep people out of that area because of the
main artery of U.S. SO —
A Yes, sir.
q — and you wanted to keep that highway open as long as you could
is that correct?
A Yes, sir; that is correct.
Q And how long -- and did you close U.S. SO that afternoon?
A We had to.
Q And where did you close it at?
A Down the road behind the -- where we were, where they confronted
them.
Q That is a traffic light?
A Yes, sir; the traffic light just behind then.
q All right, sir: now, did that cause a traffic congestion on U.S.
80 ?
A Yes, sir; traffic was backed up for miles, how many I don’t know
this is hearsay, but they say it was backed up for several miles
Q And what --- back toward the City of Selma, was it cached up
that a’way, too?
A Well, yes, sir; it had to be, I couldn't see across the bridge.
MR. GRAY; We object to that, your honor.
THE COURT: Sustain it.
Q Well, it approaches from -- the bridge from the City of oelma
side, you come right down the main street of the City of Selma;
is that correct?
A That is correct; yes.
Q Now — but you didn’t go on that side of the bridge at that tim:
A No, sir.
Q At that date?
A No, sir.
Q In controlling a crowd or a mass group of people this a’way
that are determined to march or to do something on the streets,
in controlling them do you have to take into consideration tne
amount of tension that is existing there and the number of peoP:
?2
73
in the area?
A Definitely; yes, sir.
Q And did you take that into consideration?
A I did; yes, sir.
Q On Sunday afternoon?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, I believe you testified, also, that you didn’t believe in
mass arrests; is that correct?
A No, sir; I do not, not in a circumstance like that.
Q And mass arrests have proven futile in Selma, Alabama; isn’t
that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q And the City attempted to make mass arrests —
A That is correct.
Q -- for violation of their parade orders; is that correct?
A That is correct; yes, sir.
Q And it was futile, wasn’t it?
A Yes, sir.
Q And in making these mass arrests -- well, I withdraw that
question. It is also the problem that in making these arrests
where they claim that it is for voter registration that they are
immediately removed, those cases, out of the hands of the local
courts; isn’t that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q And that is what has happened in Selma; is that correct?
7k
A
Q
A
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
(Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
So you came to the conclusion that the problem of arresting all
these people out there would do no good: is that correct?
That is correct, sir.
And -- and did you further arrive at the opinion that mass
arresting the leaders would not disperse the rest of the group?
That was my opinion, that it would not help.
So you had the problem of breaking up some four or five hundred
people and sending them back to where they come from; is that
right?
I would say around six or seven hundred.
Six or seven hundred?
Yes, sir.
And you had a minimum amount of time to do it because of a
terrific traffic congestion on that highway; is that correct?
That is correct; yes, sir.
And you had to arrive at decisions quick; is that correct?
That is correct, sir.
And you had Major Cloud out there under your supervision, but y01
gave him orders from time to time?
I did.
As I understand you, Colonel, after the Troopers told them to
disperse, and that they moved into them with their clubs held
horizontal?
Yes, sir; that is the way they are trained.A
75
Q And pushed them back; is that right?
A That is the way they are trained; yes, sir.
Q And that was a long line of people, wasn’t it?
A Yes, sir; it was.
Q But the line didn’t turn around and go back when the Troopers --
saw them pushing the front ones back, did they?
A No, sir.
MR. GRAY: Your honor, we object to the form of these
questions.
THE COURT: Overrule.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Cross examination.
MR. NABRIT: May I be heard on that, your honor?
THE COURT: Well, I have permitted friendly witnesses
jj to be cross examined on both sides when the other party put them
on; I have overruled the objection; I will permit it. Is that the
|j basis for your wanting to be heard?
MR. NABRIT: What I wanted to say was there were
so many questions would suggest the answers.
THE COURT: Well, I understand that, you don’t have a
jury in the box in this case, I am familiar with trials and trial-
tactics; go ahead, objection is overruled; let’s get along, examine
your witness.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: All right, sir.
Q And after they were pushed back, some time elapsed between that
time and the time gas was released?
76
A Quite a bit of time; yes, sir; I don’t know exactly how much,
but it was quite a bit of time.
Q In fact, you had time to get out and walk up there and look
around?
A Oh, yes; yes, sir; Major Cloud had time enough to walk up and
down the line asking them to get up and leave.
Q And he asked you to let the use -- whether you wanted the gas
released at that time?
A Yes, sir.
Q And you told him no?
A That’s right, sir.
Q Mow, actually, where this occurred at out there on the highway
is outside the corporate limits of the City of Selma, but
within its police jurisdiction; is that correct? Is that
c orrect?
A That is correct; I believe the city limits is the middle of the
bridge, I believe.
Q The bridge?
A Yes, sir.
Q All right, sir; now — and so — and the City, no — you asked
the City to send troops — I mean some of their patrolmen there?
A Yes, sir.
Q But they had all they could handle back down the City; is that
correct?
A That was the information they sent to me, that they had too much
77
A
Q
A
y
A
Q
A
Q
traffic, they couldn’t control it.
Q Now, get back to this pushing, that gives — and out there aero
the river on that afternoon, you — some of these people fell
down on the pavement; is that correct?
Yes, sir.
And you -- did you look at them?
I think I saw one down --
And --
-- and I believe the — Major Cloud had that person removed.
And did you — did you see anything wrong with some of these
people; were some of them just lay down?
A Some of them were just limp; I walked by some of them, you coulji
see them looking around, their eyes open.
Q All right, sir; now, on that afternoon, did you have at that
time or sometime later, did you have some of your Troopers
injured?
Yes, sir; I did have.
And how many of those Troopers were injured?
A Well, I don’t know exactly; I been tied up in court here, I don
know exactly the number that were injured; but I have the
number well, I know definitely one had to go to the hospital
I have this — the names here of the ones that met resistance.
MR. NABRIT: Objection; that is not responsive.
THE COURT: I sustain it.
Q And will you tell — do you say you have the names of the ones
7£
that met resistance?
A Yes, sir.
Q Was that out there on that afternoon?
A Yes, sir.
Q Will you name those Troopers?
MR. GRAY: Your honor, we are going to object.
MR. NABRIT: Objection, unless personal knowledge.
THE COURT: All this is a report you have received
during the course of your administering the functions of the
Alabama Patrol; is that right?
WITNESS: Yes, sir; I received this information today.
Not the information, but the list of the names.
THE COURT: I might say this, in all fairness; in
all fairness, Mr. Pitts, I consider testimony that is this leading
and suggestive of very little value.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: All right, sir; I abide by the
courtfs decision.
THE COURT: I am not making a decision; in all
fairness —
MR. McLEAN PITTS: I withdraw the question.
THE COURT: — I have permitted both sides some
leeway in it, but 'when a lawyer testifies to the extent that you
are doing, I consider it of very little value.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: I will withdraw the question: I
ask
79
THE COURT: Now, that doesn’t apply just to this
question. I have overruled objection as to the admissibility of
this evidence regarding the Troopers.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: All right, sir: all right, sir.
MR. NABRIT: Could we have voir dire on the paper
he is referring to, your honor?
THE COURT: Yes, voir dire requested before the
evidence comes in on the paper.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION:
BY MR. GRAY:
Q When — how long have you had that list of names on that paper,
sir?
A I received it today.
Q Was it prepared for this litigation?
A Major Cloud — I told him to prepare it for me; yes.
Q So the -- the — it was not actual-- you did not actually re
ceive this information in the ordinary course of your business,
did you?
A I would have received it, but I have been here in court,
Q But it was prepared solely so you could read it off to the
court at this time?
A Well, this would come to me, whether I had been here or not; I
wouldn’t have gotten it until I got back to my office.
Q Now, can you tell from those names where the resistance took
place?
A There -- they say — I say, “They say"; Major Cloud says that
that resistance took place there at the — where they were
confronted on —
! Q Now, is that on the paper; is that on your piece of paper?
i A No, that is not on the paper.
Q So then any testimony as to where that took place would be
hearsay?
A We have Troopers that can testify to that, where it took place.
Q So all you know is you have a list of names of persons who were
injured sometime during the day in Selma?
A During the --
Q During Sunday?
A Right; during Sunday.
Q Did you say that those people on that list were injured?
A No, I said they met resistance.
Q They met resistance?
A I said some of them were injured; one of them definitely did
have to go to the hospital.
Q Was there any explanation as to what was meant by, 'Met
resistance"?
A Yes, some of them
Q As far as those are concerned?
A Before what?
Q Is there any information on that paper which indicates the type
of resistance which took place?
80
81
A No, there is no nothing on this paper; it is only just a list
of names that -- the ones that met resistance.
MR. GRAY: Your honor, we object.
THE COURT: It is not admissible.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: All right, that’s — we have
other witnesses we can prove it by; I withdraw the question.
THE COURT: All right; you can prove it by competent
testimony, but that is not competent.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: I can prove it by Major Cloud.
THE COURT: All right.
CROSS EXAMINATION (c ont * d):
BY MR. McLEAN PITTS:
Q Colonel, have you been in Selma — well, I withdraw that
question. Getting to Marion, you went to Marion at the call
of the Sheriff and the Chief of Police; is that correct?
A Yes, sir: that is correct.
Q Now, was that a hurried trip or not?
A Well, we moved in several days before the night marches were
banned, and t h e y were permitted to parade there a few days, and
i t just getting bigger and bigger and bigger; they were
beginning to get out of hand, so the Sheriff and all of them
and the Mayor decided no more marches, that’s it.
Q And did the situation deteriorate in Marion?
A Definitely; yes, sir.
Q Now, Colonel Lingo, when you got to Marion, did you see Sheriff
8 2
Jim Clark there then?
A I did, I did; yes, sir.
Q Did you see Sheriff Jim Clark arrest any person in Marion?
A No, sir.
Q Did you see him kick or strike any person in Marion?
A No, sir,
Q Did you see any of his deputies arrest any person in Marion or
hit or strike any person?
A The only time I saw his deputies, over there in front of City
flail.
Q All right, sir. Now, getting back to Selma, have you been ther^
on occasions when these demonstrations were going on?
A Yes, sir; I —
Q And the arrests were made and so forth?
A Yes, sir.
Q Have you seen Sheriff Jim Clark strike any person there?
A No, sir; 1 have not.
Q Have you seen any of his deputies or any of his Posse strike or
beat up anybody;- over there?
A No, sir.
Q Has anybody been shot by any — any of the Sheriff’s forces or
any of the Posse?
A Not to my knowledge.
Q And — do you know of an};- acts of brutality on the part of
Sheriff Clark or his Posse or his deputies?
OJ5
A I have not; I haven’t observed any.
Q You never observed any?
A No, sir.
Q Now, it is one more question I want to ask you about night
marches; are night marches more dangerous to the persons that
are involved in those marches than day marches?
A They definitely are; yes, sir.
MR. NABRIT: Objection.
THE COURT: Overrule.
Q Well, I will ask —
MR. McLEAN PITTS: You overruled it? All right.
THE COURT: (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
Q Is it also a possibility of more violence at night than there
is in the day time?
A Yes, sir; there is.
Q It is more difficult to identify people at night?
A Yes, sir.
Q And in sound police protection — I mean police -- policing,
is it your opinion that large marches where tension or --- could
be caused should not be allowed at night?
A They definitely should not be allowed.
Q Do you — I’ll ask you, in your experience have you heard —
in your experience as a law enforcement officer, is it true tha
horses are used a great deal by law enforcement agencies?
A I have some horses, myself; I haven’t used them in any riots
S4
so far.
MR. NABRIT: Objection; may it please the court,
there has been no testimony foundation for talking about riots.
THE COURT: Overrule.|
j Q Well, have -- is it — I ask you, was it -- is it your — do
I
you know of many law enforcement agencies, police, that do use
horses in their policing?
j A Quite a few north; yes, sir.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: I believe that is all.
THE COURT: Redirect, Mr. Kohn.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Yes, sir; I believe — just one
! minute, I wanted to ask him --
MR. KOHN: No redirect.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: That’s all.
WITNESS: Could I get a drink of water?
THE COURT: Go right ahead. I have excused him to
get water.
MR. GRAY: Oh, I am sorry.
THE COURT: Redirect, Mr. Kohn.
MR. £0®: No, your honor.
THE COURT: Recross for the plaintiffs.
MR. GRAY: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: All right. You need a recess, Colonel;
you need a recess?
WITNESS: No, sir; I am all right.
85
THE COURT: Cross examination.
BT MR. GRAY:
|Q I show you, sir, Intervenor’s Exhibit 3, picture 202; will you
look at that picture and tell us exactly where your car was
parked with relation to this picture?
A I believe -- let’s see, now, is this facing west?
Q It is looking toward Selma.
A That is looking toward Selma?
Q Yes, sir.
A I was back over in here, somewhere back over in here.
MR. KOHN: Let the court see; you want to see that
picture?
THE COURT: Oh, yes; you go right ahead.
A I — I don’t —
THE COURT: You want to see it?
MR. KOHN: I thought you wanted to see.
A It is — my car is not visible in this picture, because it
doesn’t go far enough back.
Q You were further toward Montgomery than the points indicated on
this picture?
A I believe so; I don’t know exactly what — where I was parked
along here, I don’t know exactly where.
Q Will you tell us, Colonel, you mentioned that at one point you
got out of your car and put on a mask?
A Yes, sir.
66
Q How were you dressed?
A I was in civilian clothes, as I am dressed now.
Q Did you have a hat on?
A Yes.
Q Did you have a coat on?
A I had a rain coat.
Q Rain coat; did you have a rain hat on?
A Oh, no.
Q No rain hat?
A Oh, no.
Q I show you, sir, picture 206, and ask you to examine that photo?
A Uh, huh.
Q Do you recognize the man on the extreme right?
A I believe that is one of our investigators.
Q One of your investigators?
A I believe that is correct.
Q All right.
A I am not positive, though, but his features are similar to one
of our investigators.
Q Who does it appear to be from — in your best judgment?
A It appears to be Sergeant Gatlin.
Q All right,sir. I think you mentioned earlier, sir, that a
large group of people in some other testimony in response to
one of the cross examiners, I ’would like to be sure I understar.d
now; the question to break up the march was already made before
87
the march occurred; is that right?
A That is correct.
Q So whether it was one or whether it was one hundred, if it were
a march to Montgomery, it was going to be broken up?
A That is correct.
Q Approximately how long vrere you in your automobile?
A I imagine I imagine about two hours.
Q Approximately how many white people did you see milling around
in that area?
A Oh, I would say two, three, or four hundred.
Q Did you give any orders to anyone to disperse the white persons'
A Now, that is on Sunday you are speaking of?
Q On Sunday; yes, sir?
A No, that is an error I made; I should have.
Q Did — did you —
A But I did on Tuesday.
Q Did you on Sunday direct any of your orders — your officers to
use tear gas on the white people?
A No.
Q Now, have the — did the State Troopers stop the traffic; the
State Troopers had stopped traffic, had they not?
A We had to stop it; it was paralyzed.
Q The marchers were actually marching on the side of the road off
of the paved portion; isn*t that right?
A Partially on the sidewalk and partially in the road.
Q You could see that from your point — your vantage point?
A I could see up the top of the bridge; now, it is up high, and
now, what I was afraid of, the reason I stopped all traffic, I !
was afraid somebody might ride by there and rock them or
possibly shoot them, and I did not want that to happen.
Q I think you -- you testified that you knew of no SheriffTs
deputy who had shot a n ^ r o n e ?
A No, I know of no one.
Q Do you know of an incident where a State Trooper shot a Negro
in Marion?
A I do.
Q Are familiar with that?
A Yes, sir; I caused an investigation to be made, immediately.
Q Did you know that that person subsequently died that was shot?
A I think that has got to be determined in court what he died
from; I think you will find it from mass infection that he died
with, that was the cause of death.
Q Now, did you have any of your employees or anyone connected wit:
the State Department of Public Safety making any picture--
taking any pictures?
A Where and when?
Q Sunday of the demonstration?
A Yes.
Q Who was the person making pictures?
A Roy Smith, I believe he was making some pictures, and I think
86
89
you will notice this investigator here you were asking about, I
think you will find him — that he has a camera and —
Q I show you again Intervenorts Exhibit 3, picture
I A I don’t know who this is.
Q — 214; is the person with the camera one of your employees
with the Department of Safety?
A I can’t tell; looks like State Trooper pants, but I can’t
determine, I would guess it was; I couldn’t positively say so
that it was, but I would think it is.
Q So from that picture it appears as if maybe some State Troopers
were making films?
A Oh, yes, sir; we make pictures, we always make pictures.
Q Of this occurrence — I see; all right.
A Just looking at this picture trying to determine here, what
kind of head is that?
MR. GRAY; That’s all; thank you.
THE COURT: Mr. Doar.
BY MR. DOAR:
Q Colonel Lingo, did I understand you to say that Governor Wallaeje
instructed you to disperse that crowd in a way that no one would
get hurt?
A He instructed me he didn’t — he says he never wants anybody
hurt.
Q Mr. Smith asked you, "Isn’t it a fact that Governor Wallace
said, ’Disperse that crowd so no one would get hurt,’" and you
90
A
Q
A
I Q
I A
Q
j! a
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
said that was right?
That is correct; he wants — never wants anybody hurt.
He didn’t want anyone hurt that afternoon?
That is correct, sir.
And you understood that?
Yes, sir: I always understand that.
You communicated that —
That is a standing — that is a standing oraer with him, to not
hurt anyone unless only in seif defense.
Well, did I understand you to say that 3rou didn’o make ax’rests
that afternoon because —
Now you are speaking of Sunday?
Sunday, because it was futile to make arrests in Selma?
Mass arrests would have done no good, and we have tried to
arrest the leaders.
No, wait a minute, excuse me; I understood Mr. Pitts to
the reason you didn’t make the arrests there is because
futile to make arrests in Selma?
Yes, sir; it would have done no good.
ask you
it was
Well, what do you mean by that?
Well, we couldn’t have broken the crowd up by just making
arrests.
No, but if you
If we made mass
believe in mass
had made mass arrests?
arrests, I just explained to you that I don’t
arrests, because there is a lot of individuals
91
Q
A
ny
in there that don't know what they are doing; they are just
there because they are told to be there, tell them they are goiji
to get their - a pension check cut off if they don't be there.'
Well, I — you — you said in answer to Lawyer Pitts question
that it was futile to make mass arresos ■■ ■
Well, not necessarily Selma; I think that would apply any place
I see. And Lawyer Pitts also said it was futile because the
defendants would remove the cases to Federal Court; was that
your testimony?
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Wait a minute, your honor: I
didn’t —
A No, sir; I don’t believe
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Wait just a minute; I didn’t ask
the question to that effect.
A No, sir; I don’t remember that question.
THE COURT: That was the substance of one oi the
questions, as I recall it; the objection is overruled; go ahead,
Mr. Doar.
q you don’t recall the question now?
A I don't remember anything about it being removed to Federal
Court; no, sir; I don't remember that portion of it.
MR. DOAR: All right.
THE COURT: Mr. Smith.
MR. SMITH: No questions.
THE COURT: Any other questions?
92
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Yes, sir; I want to ask him a few
more questions.
THE COURT: Mr. Pitts.
BY MR. McLEAN PITT'S:
Q Colonel Lingo, you just testified that you would not — that
you gave no instructions about gassing white people, but if
there were white people in that march, they were to be gassed;
is that right?
A If they had been all —
MR. ITABRIT: Objection; hypothetical, your honor.
THE COURT: Overrule.
A If they had been all white people in that march, they would have
been handled in the same manner as the marchers on Sunday were
handled.
Q And there were some white —
A The only thing I am concerned with is law and order; I am not
a politician.
Q You did — did you see some white people in that march?
A I did; yes, sir.
Q Now, Colonel Lingo, if the marchers had obeyed the orders or tha
requests of Major Cloud, would anybody have been injured that
afternoon?
A No, sir —
MR. GRAY: Objection.
A — if they had turned around —
93
MR. NABRIT: Objection.
THE COURT: I sustain it to that question.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Just one minute.
Q Do you know whether or not any of your Troopers moved any white
people around on —— out there in tnat area on chat ounday
afternoon?
A I am sure they did.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: That’s all.
A I didn’t see them move any, but they have the instructions not
, to let them get In there where they might —
MR. GRAY: Now, we are going to object unless he
knows of his own knowledge.
THE COURT: It is not responsive. He answered the
question: that part of it that is responsive is admitted.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: That is all right, your honor.
That’s all.
THE COURT: Any further examination of this witness
MR. GRAY: I have just one or two questions.
BY MR. GRAY:
Q Were you — are you familiar with the march that took place in
Selma the Saturday before where the white people throughout th
country and the State marched in Selma?
A On a Saturday?
Q On Saturday before this march took place l
A Where did they march?
94
Q In Selma, to the Court House?
I A I don’t believe so; I don’t believe I was there at that time.
|Q Has that matter come to your attention?
A Yes, I have heard about every march that we have had there.
Q All right; now, you had State Troopers in Selma on that
Saturday, didn’t you?
A Yes.
!Q Did they use tear gas on those white people?
A No.
MR. GRAY: That’s all.
THE COURT: Further examination, Mr. Doar.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: One question.
THE COURT: Mr. Pitts.
BY MR. McLEAN PITTS:
Q Those white marchers that were there on that day were not on
a State highway; is that correct?
A That is correct.
Q They didn’t go on the State highway?
A Well, any public street or alley is a public highway,
Q Well, they didn’t get out on the road, what I mean?
A No, sir; they didn’t get out on SO; no, sir; they —
Q They were at the Court House; is that correct?
A At what?
Q They went to the Court House?
A That -- I assume so; I don’t believe I was there on that day.
9$
Q And, Major — I mean Colonel, there has been a lot of
demonstrations on the Court House by Negroes, and no tear gas
was used, wasn’t it?
A I didn’t — didn’t understand you?
Q I say, a lot of demonstrations on the Court House --
A Oh; yes, sir.
Q — since January, and no tear gas was used, wasn’t it?
A That is correct.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: That’s all.
THE COURT: Any further questions by you gentlemen?
Any from you?
MR. KOHN: No further questions, your honor.
THE COURT: Let me ask you a few questions, please,
sir. Colonel, let’s direct your attention to Tuesday, March 9; wha
time did you go to Selma that day?
WITNESS: I got there, I guess, approximately one
t
o’clock.
that you had
the march?
THE COURT: And I believe that you told the lawyers
the same instructions that day from the Governor to sto]
WITNESS: That is correct, sir; yes, sir.
THE COURT: And you got there about when?
WITNESS: Approximately one o’clock, I believe.
THE COURT: And that is p.m.?
WITNESS: Yes, sir; p.m.
96
you talk with Governor Leroy Collins that day on the 9th?
WITNESS: Yes, sir. I did; yes, sir; I talked to
THE COURT: D i d y o u h a v e a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o a n d d i d
I Governor Collins.
THE COURT: And was he in Selma,
understanding, as the President’s representative
Community Service?
according to your
on the Committee for
WITNESS: I did have that understanding; yes, sir.
THE COURT: What was the nature of your conversation
generally, with Governor Collins concerning the proposed march for
Tuesday, the 9th?
WITNESS: Governor Collins came to me with Sheriff
Clark, and he says, "What these demonstrators want to do is march dow
and be confronted by the — the Troopers and sing and pray and returr
to the church. Will you permit that?" I said, "Yes, I will" —
said, "I will even protect them on their way there, I will see that
nobody harms them."
THE COURT: All right. All right, and was it your
understanding that he went back, that he relayed your message to Dr,
King?
WITNESS: I assume he did; yes, sir. I also told
Governor Collins that, "All that will be agreeable, but there would
be no march on the highways from Selma to Montgomery.".
THE COURT: All right, and I believe you had your —
your Troopers at approximately the same place on the 9th that they
97
j were on the 7th?h'
| WITNESS: That is correct, sir.
J!
THE COURT: And do you know who furnished Governor
|
ij Collins, if anyone, with this map?
WITNESS: No, sir; I have never seen that map before
l
"1 HE COURT: All right, as to the proposed route —
WITNESS: No, sir.
THE COURT: — they were to march?
WITNESS: I know nothing about the map.
THE COURT: All right. You don’t know, then, where
Reverend King obtained this map —
WITNESS: No, sir.
THE COURT: that he testified about?
WITNESS: No, sir: I have never seen the map before
THE COURT: All right, then is it fair to say that
your testimony on that point up to now is that you agreed with
Governor Collins, as the President’s representative, that if the
Negroes wanted to march down to where your Troopers were and -- and
pray and sing and turn around and return, that was satisfactory on
the 9th; is that correct?
WITNESS: Now, I didn’t agree that — that he was no
in violation of your court order; I didn’t agree to that.
THE COURT: Yeah, that is one of the reasons I am
asking the question?
WITNESS: Yes, sir: I did not agree to that, and I
Q?
made no deal whatsoever --
THE COURT: What I am interested in is you just
! answering my questions —
WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: — I will interpret the court order.
WITNESS: Yes. sir; I am sorry.
THE COURT: Was it your understanding with Governor
Collins that Dr. King and a group of Negroes were to march on the
9th down to where your Troopers were --
WITNESS: That is correct.
THE COURT: — turn around after they sang and prayed
and go back to Selma?
WITNESS: That is correct, sir.
THE COURT: All right, is that what they did?
WITNESS: Is that — that is what they did; yes, sir.
THE COURT: You heard the testimony that you moved
your Troopers before the Negroes turned and went back, and that you
moved your cars; is that cox-rect?
WITNESS: That is correct, sir.
THE COURT: And they were still there when you moved
yo\ir cars?
WITNESS: That is correct, sir.
THE COURT: And then they turned and went back witheu
your Troopers being there?
That is correct, sir.WITNESS:
qc
stopped them by agreement, did you not? Because you moved your
physical force --
WITNESS: That’s right; I moved —
THE COURT: — before they went back?
WITNESS: I moved the physical force; that is
correct.
THE COURT: Then if you stopped them that day, they
v/ere stopped by agreement that was conveyed to them from you to
Governor Collins; is that not right?
WITNESS: Well, the agreement I made with Governor
Collins; yes, sir.
THE COURT: All right.
WITNESS: Would you like for me —
THE COURT: And they turned around and went back on
their own after you moved your Troopers and moved your cars?
WITNESS: That’s right.
THE COURT: And they didn’t attempt to march on to
Montgomery?
WITNESS: No, sir.
THE COURT: And you were still two or three hundred
yards from the River Bridge there in the city limits of Selma?
WITNESS: Not the city limits; in the police
jurisdiction.
THE COURT: T h e n i f y o u s t o p p e d th e m t h a t d a y , y o u
THE COURT: How f a r f r o m t h e Edmund P e t t u s B r i d g e
1
1 100
1
were you?
1
■
WITNESS: I would say about a quarter of a mile,
approximately a quarter of a mile.
V
THE COURT: Now, did anything else about this
| agreement or understanding, whatever you want to call it, that you
1 had with Governor Collins — you started to say something a few
1
mm
minutes ago and I cut you off?
WITNESS: Yes, sir; I wanted to tell you why I
1
1
moved the — the Troopers out of the road.
THE COURT: (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
WITNESS: I think the traffic had been paralyzed lone
1
enough, and I wanted to move my Troopers and let them return to the
church and open that and let that traffic on through, it was just
1 snarled up —
THE COURT: Are you saying the traffic could go on
1
1
through while the Negro marchers were still there?
WITNESS: Mo, sir: they could not get through, they
were taking up the whole one lane of the road.
1
am
THE COURT: On the 9th?
WITNESS: Yes, sir.
1
1
THE COURT: And was there one lane open for them?
WITNESS: One — one lane of —
THE COURT: For traffic?
I WITNESS: There were four lanes, and one lane was
1
1
closed by them.
101
WITNESS: Right.
THE COURT: And then after you moved your Troopers,
j did the traffic move on in the other two lanes?
WITNESS: No, sir; we had to hold it until they were
THE COURT: Two l a n e s o p e n a n d t w o l a n e s c l o s e d ?
— went on back, because I was afraid we might have trouble until
they got --
THE COURT: All right, all right.
WITNESS: — cleared of the highways.
THE COURT: All right, now. getting on to — back to
the 7th, a few questions, please. Who selected the place for the
Troopers to stop the Negro marchers on the 7th?
WITNESS: I did, Major Cloud and myself.
THE COURT: All right. And what considerations
caused you to select this particular spot?
WITNESS: Well, it was a kind of wide place in the
road there where we could get the people back, they wouldn’t have t
be — the outsiders wouldn’t be there close up.
THE COURT: Were the outsiders that day present when
o
you selected the spot?
WITNESS: Sunday they were.
THE COURT: I am talking about Sunday now?
WITNESS: You are talking about Sunday?
THE COURT: Yes, sir?
WITNESS: They ;vere back — yes, sir; they were not
102
!! UP P° ~~ close to the edge of the road: they were back ud in the
j buildings and around the side of the buildings.
THE COURT: That the only consideration that caused
j you to select that particular spot as opposed to others?
WITNESS: I believe so; yes, sir.
THE COURT: Did you give any consideration to moving
the outsiders, the whites that were there that you were afraid of?
WITNESS: Well, it worried me after what happened —
i _
THE COURT: l am talking about when you — when you
I were troubled with them in selecting the spot?
| WITNESS: Sunday?I
THE COURT: Yes, sir?
WITNESS: Yes, sir; I did give it consideration; I
was watching it very close.
THE COURT: Now, is that bridge the only bridge for —
for automobile and pedestrian traffic coming out of Selma toward
Montgomery?
'WITNESS: Yes, sir; it is.
THE COURT: Did you give any consideration to putting
a barricade up at the Selma end of that bridge to stop that march?
WITNESS: No, sir.
THE COURT: And why not?
WITNESS: The Governor wanted to get out on the
highway. Didnft want to stop —
THE COURT: W h a t ?
103
WITNESS: Didn’t want to stop them in town. He didni’
want to stop them in town.
THE COURT: Then the Governor had something to do wi1
you selecting the spot on the 7th?
WITNESS: Well, not necessarily yes, sir; he didn
want to stop them in town, because the white people, see, around
those buildings, we were afraid we might have trouble: if we could
get them on out there on the highway and disperse them and get them
back in an orderly manner, we would have less trouble.
THE COURT: But they had to go across that bridge tc
O
get on the highway?
WITNESS: Well, they were on the highway when they
were on the bridge, when they were on the Broad Street they were or
highway 80.
THE COURT: Well, it would have been relatively
easy, would it not have, to have barricaded the bridge and stopped
the march before they went across the only bridge?
WITNESS: We could have done that, but we might have
had trouble with all those white people that were down town. I hac
one lieutenant in charge there who had to back --
THE COURT: Were you afraid of the whites committing
violence?
WITNESS: Yes, sir; I was; I really was. It was —
I got one lieutenant here who could testify he backed off around a
thousand to fifteen hundred white people, he started to throw gas
104
Ion them.
-L.i COURT: All right, sir; a few more questions.
'I believe the testimony has been up to this point that you and Sheri
|j Clark are on the same radio frequency — when I say, "You,” I mean||
!; the Alabama Highway Patrol?I|
IT WE So. Yes, sir; ohat is correct. And several of
[j the others — well, just about all the Sheriffs throughout the State
|| just a few
iiiiii COURT: That is what I wanted to ask you; are a
majority of the Sheriffs throughout the State on the Alabama Highwaj
Patrol frequency?
WITNESS: That is correct, sir; not all of them, but
the majority of them.
THE COURT:- Do you know what authority, if any,
Sheriff Clark had for being in Perry County the night that you say
he and his deputies x̂ ere over there?
WiTNESo: Mo, sir. 1 heard him tell somebody he was
there by invitation; I don’t know.
THE COURT: Do you know who invited him?
WITNESS: No, sir: I don’t. I haven’t talked to him
about that.
THE COURT: Who did you hear him tell he was there
by invitation?
WITNESS: I really don’t know. I don’t remember.
THE COURT: A l l r i g h t . T h e n t h e i n c i d e n t on T u e s d a y
March 9 — getting back to it — was more or less a play of what haql
been agreed upon beforehand, wasn’t it?
WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: That is all I want to ask him. You can
105
step down.
WITNESS: Yes, sir.
(END OF TESTIMONY CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSCRIPT)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
I, Glynn Henderson, Official Court Reporter of the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, do hereby
certify that the foregoing 105 pages contain a true and correct
transcript of proceedings had before the said Court held in
the City of Montgomery, Alabama, in the matter therein stated,
or that portion of said proceedings indicated in note on page 2
thereof.
In testimony whereof I hereunto set my hand on this the 19th day
of March, 1965.
U. s. DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DIST. OF ALA
MONTGOMERY. ALA.
DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS )
and AMELIA BOYNTON, on )
behalf of themselves and )
other similarly situated, )
)
Plaintiffs )
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff- )
Intervenor, )
)
-vs- )
)
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE,)
As Governor of the State of )
Alabama; AL LINGO, as )
Director of Public Safety )
for the State of Alabama; )
and JAMES G. CLARK, as )
Sheriff of Dallas County, )
Alabama, )
)
Defendants )
CIVIL ACTION NO- 2181-N
Now comes George C. Wallace, as Governor of the
State of Alabama, one of the Defendants in the above styled
cause and withdraws his Notice of Appeal heretofore filed.
O,
I LU_ \/7 1 c /
A tto rn e y s fo r s a id D efendant
GOODWYN & SMITH
325 Bell Building
Montgomery, Alabama
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE
CLERI\
U, ^ S f A Utr/ DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
MONTGOMERY, ALA.
HOSEA WILLIAMS, JOHN LEWIS )
and AMELIA BOYNTON, on )
behalf of themselves and )
other similarly situated, )
)
Plaintiffs )
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff- )
Intervenor, )
)
-vs- )
)
HONORABLE GEORGE C. WALLACE,)
As Governor of the State of )
Alabama; AL LINGO, as )
Director of Public Safety )
for the State of Alabama; )
and JAMES G. CLARK, as )
Sheriff of Dallas County, )
Alabama, )
)
Defendants )
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2181-N
Now comes George C. Wallace, as Governor of the
State of Alabama, one of the Defendants in the above styled
cause and withdraws his Notice of Appeal heretofore filed.
I ,uum -
/•
1/
Attorneys fgfr said Defendant
GOODWYN & SMITH
325 Bell Building
Montgomery, Alabama
>
RECEIVED
Lt K i885
CLERK
Otis J. GooDyno. rjiSTRiCT COURT
r ; ; ™ )lê V0F_____ MONTGOMERY, ALA.
Charles M. Crook
G o o d w y n & S m i t h
ATTO RN EYS AT L A W
SUITE 8X6 BELL BUILDING
M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 36 1 0 4
April 16, 1965
Mr. R. C. Dobson, Clerk
United States District Court
New Post Office Building
Montgomery, Alabama
Re: Hosea Williams, et al -vs-
George C. Wallace, et al
Dear Mr. Dobson:
Please file the enclosed withdrawal of notice
of appeal in the above referenced matter.
Sincerely,
GOODWYN & SMITH
Charles M. Crook
CMC:gw
Enclosure
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
- NORTHERN DIVISION
Hosea Williams, John Lewis
and Amelia Boynton, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
United States of America,
Civil Action
No. 2181-N.
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
vs
Honorable George C. Wallace, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and James C-. Clark, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomery,
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965.
A p p e a r a n c e s :
For the Plaintiffs: Gray & Seay
(Fred D. Gray and
Solomon S. Seay, Jr.),
Peter A. Hall,
Jack Greenberg,
Norman Amaker,
Charles H. Jones, Jr.,
Oscar W. Adams,
Demetrius C. Newton,
James M. Nabrit, III,
Charles S. Ralston.
For the United States: Ben Hardeman,
John Doar,
David Reuben.
o
For George C. Wallace:
(and for A1 Lingo
3/11-12)
C-oodwyn & Smith
(I-laury D. Smith,
Charles M. Crook, and
John S. Bowman).
For A1 Lingo;
(from 3/13)
John P. Kohn, Jr.
For James G. Clark: McLean Pitts,
P. H. Pitts,
J. E. Wilkinson, Jr.,
T. G. Gayle.
(NOTE: This transcript is an excerpt transcript
containing the testimony of FREDERICK DOUGLAS
REESE, witness for the United States, in hearing
in above case March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965, this
testimony having been adduced on March 13, 1965.)
3
FREDERICK DOUGLAS REESE, witness for the United States, having been
duly affirmed, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION:
BY HR. DOAR:
Q Will you tell the court your full name, please?
A Frederick Douglas Reese.
Q And where do you live?
A I live at 1566 Range Street, Selma, Alabama.
Q What is your occupation?
A I am a minister of the gospel, and also a teacher.
Q Referend Reese, are you connected with the Dallas County Voters
League ?
A I am.
Q Were you present at the march on Sunday, March 7, 1965?
A I was.
Q In the City of Selma?
A (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
Q Did you go on that march?
A Yes, I did.
Q Now, directing your attention to a particular part of that
march, after the State Troopers used tear gas, what did — when
did you go?
A I went to the east side of highway SO, behind a building, into
a field behind the building, as were others in a field back the:
Q And were there a number of other Negro citizens that were in th
Yes, there were.
And what happened down in that field; could you tell us?
Well, after the tear gas was thrown and we went in the field,
a lot of pandemonium broke out, and people were crying and —
and of course, hysterical, some were completely exhausted and
choking from the gas, and also, there was a Mounted Posse, in
other words, a man on a horse, that came down in the field durin|g
the time we was down there, and particular the time we were
come out of the field, this Mounted Posse on the horse was
urging, saying to the crowd, "You damn niggers, get out of here,
and at the same time jabbing the persons toward the end of the
line that was coming out of the field.
And as 3̂ou came out of the field, where did you go then?
Well, when we came out of the field there was lined up a parallel
line of State Troopers; we walked the parallel line of State
Troopers back to — on highway CO, and of course, on that highway,
when we came out was tear gas still in the air, and we went —
we proceeded towards the bridge.
I want to show you Exhibit number 1, Plaintiff-Intervenor’s
Exhibit number 1.
MR. KOHN: May we see it, Counsel? All right.
m a r c h i n t h a t f i e l d , a l s o ?
Picture 310; you recognise that picture?
Yes.
And w h a t i s t h a t p i c t u r e ?
A Yes, there were.
Q And what happened down in that field; could you tell us?
A Well, after the tear gas was thrown and we went in the field,
a lot of pandemonium broke out, and people were crying and —
and of course, hysterical, some were completely exhausted and
choking from the gas, and also, there was a Mounted Posse, in
other words, a man on a horse, that came down in the field durir
the time we was down there, and particular the time we were
come out of the field, this Mounted Posse on the horse was
urging, saying to the crowd, "You damn niggers, get out of here,
and at the same time jabbing the persons toward the end of the
line that was coming out of the field.
Q And as you came out of the field, where did you go then?
A Well, when we came out of the field there was lined up a paralle
line of State Troopers; we walked the parallel line of State
Troopers back to — on highway 80, and of course, on that highvm
when we came out was tear gas still in the air, and we went —
we proceeded towards the bridge.
Q I want to show you Exhibit number 1, Piaintiff-IntervenorTs
Exhibit number 1.
MR. KOHN: May we see it, Counsel? All right.
Q Picture 310; you recognise that picture?
A Yes.
m a r c h i n t h a t f i e l d , a l s o ?
Q And w h a t i s t h a t p i c t u r e ?
Here in this picture we see the persons who went in this field,
and of course, many persons that went in there with me.
Reverend Reese, what if any orders were given to you and the
other people in that field by the member or members of the Posse
down there about where you should go, what you should do?
How was that, now; I didnTt understand?
What if any orders were given by the members of the Posse down
there?
You asking were there any orders given?
Yes?
The only order that I mentioned was that when we were coning out
I seer that is the only thing -- order?
Only order 1 remember.
Now, then did you go back across the bridge?
Yes, I did.
MR. DOAR: Thank you.
THE COURT: For the plaintiffs.
MR. NABRIT: No questions, your honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Smith.
MR. SMITH: No questions.
THE COURT: Mr. Kohn.
MR. KOHN: I want to ask him a question.
CROSS EXAMINATION:
MR. KOHN:
R e v e r e n d R e e s e , w h a t i s t h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n y o u t e s t i f i e d , I
o
A
! Q
I A
Q
Q
A
Q
A
A
believe, that you belonged to,
else do you do over there?
besides being a minister; what
I am a teacher.
A teacher in what school?
The R. B. Hudson High School, Selma.
Do you belong to any of these
part in demonstrations or did
associations or
take part in the
organisations ;akin
demonstration on
Sunday, March 7, 1965?
I am President of the Dallas County Voters League.
Do you draw a salary?
Ho, I do not.
Do you draw any expense money?
No, I do not.
Are you on anybody’s pay roll paying you to agitate?
I am not on anybody’s pay roll —
MR. NA3RIT: I object.
— as such.
MR. KOIIN: I am cross examining him —
THE COURT: Well, you came in the case late.
MR. KOHN: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: It shouldn’t have been necessary, but it
has been necessary once during this trial for me to advise counsel
that when they examine they are to -- they are to demonstrate commor
courtesies to all of these witnesses, regardless of who they are
or what color they are, and that — that applies —
7
honor.
MR. KOHN: I am n o t c o n s c i o u s o f n o t d o i n g t h a t , yo u
THE COURT: -- and the objection is overruled to tha
particular question. And I — I am — I am cognisant of the fact
that counsel used the word, "Agitate,” but it has many connotations
and definitions: I will permit the question.
Q Will you proceed to answer the question?
THE COURT: Asked if you were a member of any of
the groups that have participated in any of the demonstrations; I
take it you are confining that for the last several months?
MR. KOHN: Last several months; I will, sir.
A I am President of the Dallas Voters — County Voters League.
Q I can’t hear you?
A I say I am President of the Dallas County Voters League.
Q Any other organisation?
A No.
Q What is the Dallas County Voters League; what is its objective,
its purpose?
A Its objective is to —
MR. HALL: May it please your honor, we object to
this question; this has been explained before.
THE COURT: Well, I will permit a limited amount of
this; Mr. Kohn came in this case late, with the court’s permission;
but I will not permit the fact that he came in late to have the
effect of unduly prolonging the trial.
MR. KOHN: That is not my intention, your honor.
THE COURT: We have been into that many, many times
in the last two or three days —
MR. KOHN: Yes, your honor.
THE COURT: — but go ahead; he asked you what the
purpose of the League ’was; overrule.
A The purpose of the League is to foster —
Q Will you talk a little louder so I can hear you back here?
A The purpose of the League is to foster voter registration
program, and also to foster citizenship classes.
Q Does that word, “Foster," include demonstrations in the public
streets of Selma and the highways of Alabama?
A Well, whatever means that we feel would actually encourage our
citizens to become registered, then certainly to foster —
Q Would you like to answer the question specifically that I asked
you?
THE COURT: I believe that is a fair answer; you can
delve into it further if you wish.
Q Then do you consider demonstrations a part of the objectives
of your organization?
A Well, not necessarily the objective, but certainly demonstratiot
could be a means of arriving at the objective.
Q Were you at the scene that you have testified about demonstrate
as one of the means to reach your objective of this association'
A Do you have reference to the march on Sunday?
Q Yes?
A I was there.
Q For that reason?
A For what reason?
Q One of the means to reach your objective was demonstrating at
this scene at this place and time on March 7, 1965?
A Well, I was there for the primary purpose to protest in a sense
the brutality that occurred, and also to -- to be a witness to
the fact that I was interested and am an interested citizen in
seeing that all persons have the right to vote.
Q How, you said you were there to protest the brutality that
occurred: do you mean trie brutality that occurred after you got
there on this occasion, or before this occasion?
A Well, before.
Q Before this occasion: was that your answer?
A Yes.
MR. KOHN: No further questions.
THE COURT: Any further examination? Mr. Pitts.
BY MR. McLEAN PITTS:
Q You are a teacher at the R. B. Hudson High School; isn’t that
right?
A That is correct.
Q How many days have you been absent from the R. B. Hudson High
School since the commencement of this present semester, January
A Oh, I should imagine — I am not exactly sure — possibly four
10
or five --- I am not sure of the number, I am not sure of the
number of da3?-s,
And one morning you called up there about eight thirty and tolc
them you wasn’t coming to school, didn’t you?
MR. GRAY: We object, your honor; give him a chance
THE COURT: Overruled.
You were going on a demonstration?
Are you asking a question?
Yes?
Will you please repeat your question, please?
I said on one occasion when there was a demonstration, between
eight and eight thirty, you called up Yelder, the Principal of
that school and told him you weren’t coming?
Which morning do you have reference to?
On one morning that there was a demonstration in front of the
Court House since January?
Yes, I have called; now, I — I couldn’t say exactly what morni
it was.
And how many days you say you have been absent?
Oh, I — I am not sure; I am not sure of the number of days.
The best of your judgment?
Well, it might have been five; some around there.
How, you have also been meeting at Brown’s Chapel and other
churches there in the city, haven’t you, at mass meetings, have
you?
Oh, yes.
And in those meetings you have advocated juveniles, children,
taking part in these demonstrations, haven’t 3̂ ou?
Have I; a question?
Yes?
No, I have not.
You have encouraged it, haven’t you?
What do you mean by encouraged?
You have spoke in encouragement of it?
No, I have never spoken encouraging juvenile delinquenc3̂.
And you have --- at no time have you ever encouraged these
juveniles from not going to school?
No time.
But you have assisted in organizing demonstrations of juveniles
on school days, haven’t you?
I have not assisted.
Now, how man3r times have you been to the Dallas County Court
House since Januar3r 1 with demonstrations?
To the County Court House?
Yes?
Oh, I don’t know; I don’t —
How nany times have you been down tnere witn demonstrations sir.
January 1, in your best judgment?
Oh, I should imagine about three or four times.
Three or four times is all you have been down there ?
12
A Yes, with —
Q All right.
A Not down to the Court House; you said with demonstrations.
Q I’m talking about the Dallas County Court House?
A Yes.
Q Now, on what other demonstrations have you been on?
A Other than those to the Dallas County Court House?
Q Yes?
A Well, the only one was across the river on Sunday.
Q All right. Mow, on occasions when large groups of Negroes have
gone down to the Dallas County Court House in an effort — what
they said to register to vote, it — it would be on a day that
the Board was closed, wasn't it?
A Well, I have known that at least one case.
Q And they would go there and demand to be registered to vote on
day the vote Board was closed: isn’t that right?
A Well, I cannot speak for all the times; I say I remember one tin
Q You just remember one case?
A Yes.
Q Do you remember the occasion at around four thirty in the
afternoon when you and a group of teachers went down there and
Hr. Pickard and Mr. Edgar Stewart advised all of you that the
Board was closed?
A 1 remember that day when we went down; yes, I was in that group
Q L e t me a s k y o u t h i s : h a v e y o u n o t h a d p l a c e d a g a i n s t y o u a s a
O
L
13
result of these demonstrations one or more charges of
contributing to the delinquency of a minor?
MR. NABRIT: Object.
MR. DOAR: Objection.
THE COURT: Overruled.
WITNESS: Should I answer the question?
Q Yes?
A I have been charged, according to what was reported to me, was
a contributing to the delinquency of a minor; yes.
Q You were arrested, weren’t you?
A Certainly.
IQ And that involved you hauling juveniles to the Dallas County
Court house, didn’t you?
MR. HALL: How, your honor please, we are going to
object to going into this unless it can be shown that this arrest
has culminated in a trial and what it involved has been brought out,
that sort of thing, if it was still pending.
THE COURT: One of your theories is harassment by
arrest. I don’t see that it hurts your case; it may inure to the
benefit of your theory. Your objection is overruled, if Mr. Fitts
wants to continue it; go ahead.
MR. MeLEAH PITTS: Your honor, that is all I want to
ask him about it, but for the court’s information, I think that that
case is in the bosom of the Southern District.
THE COURT: All right. Anything else?
14
MR. HcLEAN PITTS: Pending.
THE COURT: Any other questions from this witness?
MR. KOHIT: IIo, sir.
THE COURT: You will be excused; call your next
witness.
(END OF TESTIMONY CONTAINED HI THIS TRANSCRIPT)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
I, Glynn Henderson, Official Court Reporter of the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, do hereby
certify that the foregoing 14 pages contain a true and correct
transcript of proceedings had before the said Court held in the
City of Montgomery, Alabama, in the matter therein stated, or that
portion of said proceedings indicated in note on page 2 thereof.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
Hosea Williams, John Lewis
and Amelia Boynton, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
United States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
vs
Civil Action
No. 2181-N.
Honorable George C. Wallace, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and James G. Clark, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomery,
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965*
(NOTE: This transcript is an excerpt transcript
containing the testimony of FREDERICK DOUGLAS
REESE, witness for the United States, in hearing
in above case March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965, this
testimony having been adduced on March 13, 1965*)
Glynn Henderson,
Official Court
Reporter.
ilosea Williams, John Lewis
and Amelia Boynton, on --ehalf
Honorable Georye G. Wallace, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Linyo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and James G. Clark, as Sheriff of
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr.. Judye, at Montgomery
Alabama. March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965.
(NOTE: This trailer Apt is an excerpt transcript
containing the testimony of SALLIE BSTT RODGERS
witness for the United States, in hearing r..n
above case March 11-12-13-13-16, 1965. this
testimony having been adduced on March 13, 3.163
of tiles'selves and others
similarly situated.
Civil Action
No. 2181-N
Plaintiffs
United States of America
PI a i nt i f f -1 n t er ve nor
vs
Balias County, Alabama
Defendants
Glynn Henderson,
Official Court
Reporter
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR.THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
Hosea Williams, John Lewis
and Amelia Boynton, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
United States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
Civil Action
No. 2181-N.
vs
Honorable George C. Wallace, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and James C-. Clark, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomery,
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965.
A p p e a r a n c e s :
For the Plaintiffs: Gray & Seay
(Fred D. Gray and
Solomon S. Seay, Jr.),
Peter A. Hall,
Jack Greenberg,
Norman Amaker,
Charles H. Jones, Jr.,
Oscar W. Adams,
Demetrius C. Newton,
James M. Ilabrit, III,
Charles S. Ralston.
For the United States: Ben Hardeman,
John Doar,
David Reuben.
2
For George G. Wallace:
(and for A1 Lingo
3/11-12)
For A1 Lingo:
(from 3/13)
For James G. Clark:
Goodwyn & Smith
(Maury D. Smith.
Charles M. Crook, and
John S. Bowman).
John F. Kohn, Jr.
McLean Pitts,
P. H. Pitts,
J. E. Wilkinson, Jr.,
T. C-. Gayle.
(NOTE: This transcript is an excerpt transcript
containing the testimony of SALLIE BETT RODGERS,
witness for the United States, in hearing in
above case March 11-12-13-13-16, 1965, this
testimony having been adduced on March 13, 1965•)
3
SALLIE BBTT RODGERS, witness for the United States, having been
duly sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION:
| BY MR. DOAR:
j Q Will you tell the court your full name, please?
A Sallie Bett Rodgers.
Q Could you speak up in a loud voice so everyone in the court rooi
can hear you?
A Sallie Bett Rodgers.
Q Where do you live?
A 1522 Union.
Q In what city?
A Selma.
Q How old are you?
A Nineteen.
Q Where do you go to school?
A Selma University.
Q How long have you gone there?
A Two years.
Q Where is your home?
A Tyler, Alabama.
Q Where is Tyler?
A That is about fifteen miles going toward Montgomery, coming
toward Montgomery.
Q Have you ever participated in a demonstration in Selma, Alabama
t L
Yes, sir.
On what day did you participate?
I was -- the first time was on February 10.
February 10?
Yes, sir.
And what year was this?
’65.
And where did you go in connection with this demonstration?
We went to the Court House.
And about how many in the group were there?
There was approximately two hundred.
And were these young people or people of all ages?
They were teenagers mostly.
What were their race?
Negro.
What happened after you had -- let me ask you, had you ever bee
arrested before that day?
No, sir: I wasn’t arrested that day, either.
And what happened after you got to the Court House?
We stood there for about forty-five minutes, and then we were
told to — we — we heard the voice said, “Left face,1' and we
all turned left face, and then they said, "March,“ and we
started to marching, and we went out in the streets; we thought
we was going to the jail, but we wasn’t, and we was ran out of
i
t own.
Now, how -- how were you ordered to march?
We -- we was -••• we — they just said, ’March,n and as we were
marching, there were — when the space got between the line,
they kept saying, ''‘Close that gap up,” and that is how we
started to run.
And about how far did you go; do you know?
It seemed to be about approximately five or six miles, I guess;
I am not sure.
Could you describe how the -- how the group moved as they got
out into the country?
They ran, all the way.
And were there law enforcement officials there along with you?
In front of us, beside us, and behind us.
Was Sheriff Clark there?
I saw him at the Court House, but on the march I am not sure.
And did the law enforcement officers do anything to any of the
children on the march?
They beat some of them, cattle prod some of them, and they cursed
some of them, hit some of them.
Did you did you observe whether any of the children on the
march had to fall out because of —
Yes, sir.
— exhaustion?
Y e s , s i r .
MR. GAYLE: Objection to that: that is a conclusion,
6
may
Q
A
Q
A
may
do.
i f »
A
Q
A
Q
it please your honor.
THE COURT: Sustained.
Did you observe whether or not any of the children were not abl
to finish the march?
Yes, sir.
What did they do?
They — when they fell, they lay beside the —
MR. GAYLE: We object to that: that is her opinion,
it please your honor, that it wasn’t able to conclude it.
THE COURT: Well, he asked this time what did they
MR. GAYLE: I beg your pardon; I didn’t understand i
THE COURT: It is a proper question: you can answer
what did they do?
They laid beside the road.
Were you ever arrested that day?
Ho, sir.
Were you ever told that you were under arrest?
MR. DOAR: That’s all the questions I have.
THE COURT: For the plaintiffs.
BY MR. HALL:
Q What was your name, please?
A Sallie Rodgers.
MR. KOHN: Little louder, please.
7
MR. McLEAN PITTS: I can’t hear you.
MR. HALL: I asked for her name.
I didn’t quite get it?
Sallie Bett Rodgers.
Miss Rodgers, I believe you said that that march occurred on
February 10 —
February 10.
— 1 9 4 5 ?
Yes, sir.
I want you to tell us — direct your attention to the moment
when someone said, uLeft face,'*' and you turned left face and
began to march; where did you march, down which street, which
way, what did you do?
Well, we were standing on Alabama Avenue —
All right.
— and we marched down Alabama Avenue.
Were you going east or west on Alabama Avenue?
We was going toward Lauderdale.
That would be east?
Yes.
And how far did you march; did you march right on txhrough the
City of Selma?
We went through the City of Selma.
Did you go down a road or highway?
We went -- 1 think it was on the highway.
It was a paved road?
It was a paved road; yes, sir.
Did you go out of the City of Selina out into the country?
Yes, sir; we went into the country.
Mr. Doar asked you if law enforcement officers were present; I
believe you said, "Yes'1?
They were.
Were they walking with you; were they riding?
Well, they would — they would ride, and then they would walk;
you know, they — when they get tired of running, it seemed
they would change shifts, some ride awhile and some walk awhile,
some run awhile.
They -- were they riding in automobiles?
They were riding in automobiles.
And the automobiles went along beside you?
Sometimes behind us blowing, you know, trying to persuade us to
run faster or something, and I think there was one in front of us.
And how many automobiles were there?
I — I am not sure how many it was; there were one in front of
us and one behind us, but as we was going there were an automobile
at each road to stop the cars from coming into the highway that
we was running on.
Nov;, you told Mr. Doar that these law enforcement officers
carried you at least five or six miles; is that correct —
Y e s , s i r .
9
-- in your best judgment?
Yes, sir.
Did you identify the lav/ enforcement officers; were they
Sheriff’s deputies, possemen, or City policemen?
I am not sure, but they were dressed differently; some of them
had on gray, some had on mixed colors; they were dressed
differently, they wasn’t in one particular uniform.
I see; and some did have on gray?
Yes, sir; I remember one man particularly that had on gray.
You do not know whether they were Sheriff’s deputies?
I am not sure; no, sir.
Were there an}/ mounted men?
No, sir.
Any men mounted on horses?
It wasn’t mounted; no, sir.
And you are not positive whether they — or who they were?
No, sir.
How did you get back from where you stopped?
There were a friend that followed us, followed us out there, and
he brought me back.
And you never were arrested?
No, sir; never.
Did --- do you know who said, "Left face,t; whether or not it was
a law enforcement officer?
i t v / e r e , b u t I am n o t s u r e .i b e l i e v e
10
Q
A
Did you hear anyone say anything — any law enforcement officer
say anything at the Court House or see him say anything?
No, I am not — I don’t remember hearing one say anything.
jL: That’s all.
fRT: Mr. Smith.
:TH: No questions.
'RT: Mr. Kohn.
MR. DOAR: Your honor, I had an Exhibit I wanted to
: I reopen the cross examination — direc
•A
-* -1f—
t HALL:
THE COURT
MR. SMITH
THE COURT
MR. DOAR:
show to this witnesis; mi;
e xam ination and put that
THE COURT:
prior to that time.
MR. KOHN:
THE COURT
THE COURT: Unless Mr. Kohn wants to examine her
Go ahead.
THE CLERK: Plaintiff-Intervcnor’s Exhibit number 10
for identification.
BY MR. DOAR:
Q I want to show you an Exhibit which is marked for identification
as Plaintiff-Intervenor’s number 10, and ask you if you recognis
that picture?
A Yes, sir; I recognize it.
Q And what is that a picture of?
This is a picture of the march on February 10.
February 10?
A Y e s , s i r .
11
Q And that is tiiG — icii;en in the
rigat?
A Yes , sir.
HR. DOAR: I would li
E;:hibit 10.
MR. GAYLE: I would 1
just a :linute , sir •
1 lilii COURT: All right
MR. GAYLE: Before it
THE COURT: All right
Mp-'ll L • McLEAN PITTS: Vo
MR. WILKINSON: Voir dire.
HR. HeLEAN PITTS: Voir dire.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION:
BY MR. GAYLE:
Q Is that the picture there — could you tell me how you know that
that was on that date by this picture?
A Because I remember — I don’t know this girl, but I remember her,
and she was in the march on February 10.
Q Do you know she was in other marches?
A No, sir.
Q Then you do not know whether this picture was on that date, or
other than that one girl, she could have been in other marches,
could she not?
A Y e s , s i r ; s h e c o u l d h a v e
13
No, sir.
Now, I believe you testified a minute ago that all your testimor.
a minute ago referred to February 10, 1965; an I correct in
making that statement?
I beg your pardon?
What was the date that you testified about a minute ago?
February 10.
February 10?
Yes, sir.
1965?
Yes, sir.
Now, you were not present, ’were you, at this march on March 7,
that Sunday when there was tear gas used, were you not?
Vj
No, sir; I wasn't.
How did you happen to take place or participate in this march
on February 10? Who got you — who asked you to take place —
to take part in that march?
Who asked me to?
Yes, who directed you or who asked 3/ou to participate in that
march?
I don’t remember.
Well, did anybody ask you to participate in that march?
I don’t remember that, either.
Did you volunteer on your own to participate in that march?
I know I was guided by my own conscience, but I am not sure —
14
You are not sure whether anybody asked you to come down and mar
and take part in this demonstration?
No, sir.
oh
Was that on a school day?
Yes, sir.
Did you have to play hooky from school or excuse yourself from
school in order to participate in that march?
No, sir.
Was school out at that time?
That was on a Wednesday, and I don’t have any Wednesday classes.
You don’t have any Wednesday classes?
Afternoon, Wednesday afternoon.
Had you talked to any school principal about this march?
No, sir.
Had you talked to any member of any organization about
Before I went to the church?
this march
Yes?
No, sir.
Did you talk to anybody relative to whether you should march or
was going to march or not going to march?
I had talked to my parents previously; but on that date; no, sir.
Had you talked to any official of any organization, church
organisation, N.A.C.P., CORE, or anything like that?
No, sir.
T h e n i s y o u r t e s t i m o n y t h a t y o u j u s t o n y o u r own v o l u n t e e r e d t o
15
march?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you belong to any organisation that is participating in any
of these demonstrations or marches in Selma within the last two
months?
A No, sir.
MR. KOHN: That's all.
MR. GAYLE: May I ask her, Judge?
THE COURT: (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
BY MR. GAYLE:
Q I believe you stated that was approximately five to six miles?
THE COURT: Let me see the picture, please. Thank you.
A To my judgment, it seems to be.
Q Isn't it a fact that it is not over two and a half miles from
there past v/here 2/ou all marched?
A I don't know whether tiiat is a fact or not.
Q You just don't know?
A I don't know.
Q You just guessing it is?
A I am estimating; yes, sir.
Q All right. Now, you stated that your conscience told you to
march; is that correct?
A Yes, sir; I went on my own.
Q If your conscience told you to march or to commit any crime, would
you go ahead and do it because your conscience told you?
16
I®. HALL: If 3/our honor please, we object to that
question.
THE COURT: I sustain it to that question.
• GAYLti: We don’t have to except, your honor.
Q Would you disregard any law if your conscience told you to?
HR. HALL: We object, your honor.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. GAYLE: That’s all.
i-HE COURT: Any further questions from this witness?
REDIRECT EXAMINATION:
BY MR. NABRIT:
G Hid 1 understand you to say you are a college student?
A Yes, sir.
Q Attending college voluntarily? You are attending college
voluntarily, aren’t you?
A Beg your pardon?
account
is what
I
I
didn
MR. McLEAN PITTS: Excuse me, your honor —
iHE COURT: I sustain objection to that question.
MR. Me Lb AN PITTS: I was — I was objecting on the
’t think this was the same attorney that examined; that
was objecting to.
THE COURT: Well, your objection is sustained.
MR. McLEAN PITTS: I an not sure about whether it was
or not; it didn’t seem like —
MR. NABRIT: You are correct, Mr. Pitts; I wasn’t
1 7 -L (
aware of that when I questioned her.
THE COURT: Any further questions from this witness?
MR. HALL: No, sir.
THE COURT: Plaintiff’s 10 admitted in evidence. Si::
or eight pictures of this march already in evidence, gentlemen:
Intervenor’s 5 and -- well, this Intervenor’s 10, also, and
Intervenor’s 6, all -- all relate to this same march. Excuse this
witness. Call your next witness.
(END OF TESTIMONY CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSCRIPT)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
I, Glynn Henderson, Official Court Reporter of the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, do hereby
certify that the foregoing 17 pages contain a true and correct
transcript of proceedings had before the said Court held in the
City of Montgomery, Alabama, in the matter therein stated, or that
portion of said proceedings indicated in note on page 2 thereof.
In testimony whereof I hereunto set my hand on this the 2nd day of
April, 1965.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIYISION
Kosea V/llliaras, John Lewis
and Amelia Boynton, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
United States of America,
Pla intiff-Intervo nor,
vs
Honorable George C. V/allace, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and Janes G. Clark, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
Civil Action
No. 21&L-N.
FILED
O ms
R. C n O U S O N , C L tR K .
Hv......... ............................ “ ™
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomer
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, lvoi.
(NOTE: This transcript is an excerpt transcript
containing tie testimony of LEATHA MAE STOVER,
witness for the United States, in hearing in
above case March 11-12-13-15-16, 1 :6$f this
testimony having been adduced on March 13, 1/65.
Glynn Henderson,
Official Court
Reporter.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR.THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
. NORTHERN DIVISION . .
Kosea Williams, John Lewis
I and Amelia Boynton, on behalf
| of themselves and others
! similarly situated,
jj Plaintiffs,
' United States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
|
V S
Honorable George C. Wallace, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and James G. Clark, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomery,
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965*
Civil Action
No. 21&L-N.
A p p e a r a n c e s :
For the Plaintiffs: Gray & Seay
(Fred D. Gray and
Solomon S. Seay, Jr.),
Peter A. Hall,
Jack Greenberg,
Norman Amaker,
Charles H. Jones, Jr.
Oscar W. Adams,
Demetrius C. Newton,
James M. Nabrit, III,
Charles S. Ralston.
For the United States: Ben Hardeman,
John Doar,
David Reuben.
|
oA,
For George C. Wallace:
(and for A1 Lingo
3/11-12)
For A1 Lingo:
(from 3/13)
For James G. Clark:
Goodwyn & Smith
(Maury D. Smith,
Charles M. Crook, and
John S. Bowman).
John P. Kohn, Jr.
McLean Pitts,
P. H. Pitts,
J. E. Wilkinson, Jr.,
T. G. Gayle.
(NOTE: This transcript is an excerpt transcript
containing the testimony of LEATKA MAE STOVER,
witness for the United States, in hearing in
above case March 1 1-12-13-15-16, 1965, this
testimony having been adduced on March 13, 1965.)
3
LEATHA MAE STOVER, witness for the United States, having been duly
sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION:
BY MR. DOAR:
Q Will you tell the court your full name, please?
A My name is Leatha Mae Stover.
Q Could you speak up just a little louder so everyone can hear you-'
MR. MeLEAN PITTS: What is that?
A My name --
THE COURT: Stover; Stover; Stover.
A My name is Leatha Mae Stover.
Q Where do you live, Miss Stover?
A I live in Pleasant Hill, Alabama, but I board in Selma.
Q You go to school?
A Yes.
Q Did you go down to the Court House on the 10th of February, 196j?
A Yes.
Q And how long were you down there?
A I was down there about approximately an hour with fifteen minute
to stay.
Q What were you doing while you were there?
A I was demonstrating; I was just standing.
Q Did you have any kind of a sign?
A Yes.
Q What did the sign say?
ILr
The sign said, "One man one vote. '1
Did you -- were you directed to go on a march by Sheriff Clark
that afternoon?
I don’t know whether it was Sheriff Clark or not, but I was
instructed to go on a march.
And was that -- did this instruction come from a law enforcement
official?
Yes.
While you were on the march, were you ever struck by any —
struck by any lav; enforcement official?
He was not a law enforcement official.
He was not?
No.
Was he with the lav; enforcement officials?
Yes.
What happened to you, if anything?
He — I was cattle prodded.
And what happened then?
After I was cattle prodded, I was made to go on until I dropped
out of the line.
And after you dropped out, what did you do?
I fell beside the road; I got weak, and I fell beside the road
and —
Then what happened?
One of the officers, one with the helmet on, was trying to make
5
me go on.
And what if anything did the officer with the helmet say?
He told me I said I wanted to march, and he was going to show
me ho1,/, he was going to teach me how to march.
And what happened then?
He kept punching me in the back with his billy club and told me
to get up and go on, but I told him he would just have to kill
me, because I couldn’t.
And then what happened?
He told me to lie there until I rest and then get up and go back
toward Selma, but he had better not catch me in a car.
Then what did you do?
I stayed there.
And did you then get back to Selma that afternoon?
The freedom car came and picked me up.
About how far out of the City of Selma had you gone?
Well, I don’t know, but I was -- to me it felt like about five
or six miles.
Now, what kind of a speed did the officers make you travel that
day?
(Shook head)
What kind of a speed, fast or slow or walk?
Fast.
Did you — did you have to run?
6
MR. DOAR: That’s all the questions I have.
THE COURT: For the plaintiffs.
HR. HALL; No, sir.
MR. NABRIT: No, your honor.
MR. SMITH: II0 questions.
THE COURT; Mr. Kohn. Just a minute please
H103S EXAMINATION:
BY MR. GAYLE:
Q Where did you say you
THE COURT:
MR. GAYLE:
THE COURT:
MR. GAYLE:
THE COURT:
to go in order.
lived 9
Mr. Gayle, I believe it is Mr. Kohn’ 3
I beg your pardon, your honor.
He can waive it if he wants to.
turn
I beg your pardon.
In the absence of a waiver, we will have
MR. GAYLE: I thought he did.
BY MR. KOHN:
Q Did I understand you correctly to 303̂ that you were born in
Selma, but 3̂ ou live in Tuscaloosa?
A II o.
C What did 3/011 say; I didn’t understand what you said?
A I said I was born in Pleasant Hill.
Q Pleasant Hill?
A (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
Q Is that Dallas County?
Yes.
And you living in Tuscaloosa?
No.
7
Didn’t you say something about Tuscaloosa?
IIo.
’/here are you a student?
At Selma University.
Selma University?
Yes.
How did you happen to be demonstrating that day with this sign?
How did I happen to be?
That’s right; what brought you there to this demonstration?
I felt like I had a part to do; I had something to do for my
people.
Did you discuss it with any of your people before you demon
strated?
With my parents only.
Only your parents?
Yes.
Nobody -- who made this sign for you?
The sign was given to me at the church as we passed.
By whom?
I don’t know the person.
Did they go over with you the way to participate in the
demonstration, the tactics or the method of demonstrating; did
someone rehearse that with you?
| A Did someone --
| Q Go over it with you: you just didn’t — they didn’t give you a
■
sign and just turn you loose, did they?
A No, they gave us instructions.
Q Nov/, who is "'‘They'1 ?
A The people at the church.
| Q Who?
A The freedom leaders.
Q Freedom leaders?
j A Yes.
i Q Belonging to what organization, if any, if you know?
A I don’t know.
Q Well, can you identify any of these freedom leaders?
A No.
Q You don’t know any of them by name?
A Yes, I know same of them.
Q Well, now, tell me their names?
MR. HALL: Your honor please, we object to this
question and answer, the whole line; these are not related to the
matter in issue.
TIE COURT: Overrule.
Q Answer the question, please?
MR. NABRIT: Pardon me, your honor; is the question •-
is he asking her to name some of the leaders in general or some of
9
iiQ
I!A
l| Q
you
the leaders who gave her the sign?
THE COURT: The question has to do with the leader
of the group that gave you the sign.
A Well, there was someone at the door passing the signs out.
Can you name any leader that was on the scene when and where
were given that sign on this occasion?
No.
Were these people, that you are calling them, were they natives
of Selma or were they outsiders?
They were natives of Selma.
All of them?
Okay; the one that was passing the sign to me, he was a student
I would — I would think it was a student of Selma U.
The one that passed you the sign was a student at Selma U.?
(Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
How much did you charge anybody, if you did, to participate in
this demonstration?
How much did I charge?
That is correct; expenses or so much a day: did you get any
money out of it?
(Shook head to indicate negative reply)
Did you?
Ho.
Have you ever participated in a demonstration before this one o
February 10, 1965?
10
No, I haven’t.
Have you participated in one since?
Yes.
Which one?
Oh, I have participated — I participated in a demonstration the
next day, and also the next day.
Did anybody ask you to do it the next day and the next day, or
did you do it just on your own?
I did it on my own.
Did you have that same sign with you?
No.
Did you have any other sign?
I don’t recall.
You don’t recall. Do 3̂ ou belong to any -- any organisation,
firm, or association that sponsoring or participated in this
demonstration?
Ho.
No?
No.
Do you belong to CORE?
No.
You belong to N.A.C.P.?
No.
Did any of the officials
you during any of these
of any of these organisations talk to
ihree demonstrations that you participated
11
in?
A I don’t recall.
Q You don’t recall?
A No; no.
Q But you don’t know, do you? Did you observe any outside people
that you didn’t recognise as being natives of Selma that
participated in any one of these three demonstrations which you
testified about?
A No.
Q You don’t know whether they were outsiders or all Selma people
or not, do you? There were a lot of outsiders in town, wasn’t
there?
A I don’t know.
Q You don’t know •
MR. KOHN: That’s all
THE COURT: Mr. Fitts
BY MR. GAYLE:
Q I believe you stated that you belonged to no organisation —
A (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
Q — is that correct?
A Yes.
Q What is those buttons you have on there?
A This is a Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee button.
Q That is an organisation, isn’t it?
A But I --- I don’t belong to it.
Q But you are wearing their button?
A Sure.
Q And nobody told you to march; you just — your conscience told
you: is that right?
A (Nodded to indicate affirmative r’eply)
Q Didn’t have any meeting prior to the march; is that correct?
A Prior to the march?
Q Prior to the time that you marched that first time --
A (Shook head to indicate negative reply)
Q — you didn’t go to any meeting?
A Yes.
Q Who was at that meeting?
A I don’t recall.
Q Who spoke to you at that meeting?
A I don’t know.
Q Did you know — you said that 3/ou knew -- do you know any of the
non-violent officers there in town?
A Yes, I know some of the non-violent officers.
Q Did any of those speak to you at the meeting?
A Not to me.
Q Were you at the meeting — how many of you were in the meeting
when you got your instructions was what I was trying — if you
got your instructions?
A I don’t recall.
Q You have no idea?
12
13
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
r>Q.
A
What do you mean?
You all had — you stated, I believe, that you had a meeting
prior to the time that you went on this particular march, that
is, on the 10th, that you have testified to; am I correct.'1
We have been having mass meetings.
Well, prior to that date, did 3/pou have a meeting that --
No.
__ that told you decide to march on that day?
I donTt recall.
You don’t recall?
No, I don’t.
Can you recall who spoke at the meeting just before you left
there, or the night before at the mass meeting?
Really, I don’t remember that now.
MR. GAYLE: That’s all.
THE COURT: Cross.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION:
BY MR. DOAR:
Q Have you attended a number of mass meetings?
A What did you --
Q Before the 10th of February, had you attended a number of mass
meetings?
A Yes.
Q Would you speak up just a little louder?
A Yes, I had.
A
Q
Q
A
Q
A
BY
A
Q
A
Q
Now, after you went down to the Court House, how did you go
did you go in small groups that day?
We went in groups of five.
When you got to ohe Court Louse and stood there, did you receiv
any instructions or orders from any law enforcement official?
Prior to the time they told you to make a left face?
e
No.
Were you ever placed under arrest?
No.
MR. DOAR: Thank you.
THE COURT: Plaintiffs.
MR. NABRIT: Nothing further.
THE COURT: Mr. Smith.
RECR033 EXAMINATION:
MR. SMITH:
How many of the mass meetings or -- had you attended prior to
February 10? Just asking for your judgment or opinion, if you
have one?
I don't know, but I had gone to a number.
Were many of these held in Brown's —
Yes.
-- Chapel on Sylvan Street?
A Yes.
Q You are a member of that church?
A No.
15
I
I
I
I
Q
I
A
Q
Did you attend any of the meetings, meetings at Brown Chapel,
did you?
Attend an;/ of them?
Yes?
The mass meetings?
Yes?
Yes.
K
I
I
I
I
I
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
A
Q
Did you attend the meeting at that church?
At that church?
Excuse me: did you attend the meeting at that church on the
occasion that the late Malcolm X talked to the group?
Mo, I didn’t.
You did not?
No.
Did you know that ho was in Selma prior to February 10 of this
year?
That he was in -- prior to February — no, I didn’t; I don’t
recall, but I didn’t attend that meeting; I know I didn’t.
Do you know other people that attended?
No.
You do not?
I
I
I
I
A No.
THE COURT; Further questions from this witness?
You can be excused from the witness stand. Call your next one,
Doar.
(END OF TESTIMONY CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSCRIPT)
Mr.
J . O
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
'l ' "i" "i' -i'
1 > C-lynn Henderson, Official Court Reporter of the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, do hereby
!certify that the foregoing 15 pages contain a true and correct
:transcript of proceedings had before the said Court held in the'
City of Montgomery, Alabama, in the matter therein stated, or that
portion of said proceedings indicated in note on page 2 thereof.
In testimony whereof I hereunto set my hand on this the 2nd day of
April, 1965.
MEMORANDUM TO CLERK
Re: Hosea Williams, et al, April 2, 1965
v. James G. Clark, etc..,
et al. - CA 2181-N
The motion to dismiss filed with your office on April
2, 1965, on behalf of Sheriff James G. Clark, Jr., attempts to
raise several matters which have already been ruled upon by this
Court's order of March 17, 1965. It may be that the motion will need a reappraisal if and when this case is set for a hearing on
the motion to make the injunction permanent. Until then, no action
should be taken with reference to this motion being placed on the
motion docket.
FRANK M. JOHNSON, JR.
United S tates D i s t r i c t Judge
LAW OFFICES
RECEIVED
P I T T S 8c P I T T S
HE CITY NATIONAL. BANK BUILDING
SELMA. ALABAMA 36702
ARTHUR M. PITTS (1880-I95B)
W. MCLEAN PITTS
PHILIP HENRY PITTS APR ? 1965
April 1, 1965
CLERK
U. S DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DIST. OF ALA.
MONTGOMERY, ALA.
MAILING ADDRESS
P. O. BOX 722
TELEPHONE
874-5214
AREA CODE 205
Mr* n» \j % Job son, Clerk
United Gtates District Court
Federal Building
Montgomery, Alabama
In re: Hosea Williams, et al vs. James G. Clark,
as Sheriff of Wallas County, et al
Civil notion ho. 21G1-W_________________
Wear Mr. Dobson:
We enclose herewith Motion to Dismiss on behalf
of Sheriff James G. Clark, Jr.
/ There is enclose an extra copy of this letter,
which I ask that you please stamp and return, and can serve
as your acknowledgment.
With very best -wishes
McLP/sg
Enclosures
CC: Mr. T. G. Gayle
Mr. J. E. Wilkinson, Jr.
/
i
i
i
«
I
i
«
I
%•
iliONOivAbUi GEOK.GE C. WALLACE,
as Governor of the State of Alabama; i
AL LIHGG, as Director of Public :
Safety for the State of Alabama; i
and JAMES G0 CLANK, as Sheriff of :
DALLAS COUNTY, iJLABAiIA, $
HOSEa WILL I Ac IS, JOI-IiT EEWIS
AND AMELIA BOYNTCN, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
ilaintiffs,
UNITED STATES OF AHELICA,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
VS. CIVIL ACTION NOo 2181-A1
defendants, i
ifows comes James G„ Clark, as Sheriff of Dallas County,
ALabaraa, one of the defendants in the above style cause, and
moves to dismiss tne complaint in intervention filed by the
United states of America, and in support of motion assigns the
-.olloxving separate and several groundsi
lo daid Complaint fails to state a cause of action,
oaid complaint seeks relief that is not within the
jurisdiction of this Court.
-° Said Complaint seeks relief that is not within the
venue of this Court.
That said Complaint seeks relief that is already
pending before a Three Judge District Court in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Alabama,
Low comes James '.■><, Clark, as Sheriff of Dallas Countv,
Alabama, one of tne defendants in the above styled cause, and
moves to dismiss the complaint of the plaintiff r.osea Williams,
et el, and for grounds of said motion assigns the following
-“ uu state a cause or accron0
r0 »>aid jomplainc seeics relief tnac is not within the
jurisdiction of this Court0
o. Said Complaint seeks relief that is not within the
venue of this Court„
4. That said Complaint seeks relief that is already-
pending before a Three Judge District Court in the United States
PITTS &. PITTS
Attorneys at Law
Selma, Alabama
To G. GAYLE
£kt- t o x n ^ y ci a L a w
Selma, Alabama
TILAIUSOU, WILONSOd &. RUSSELL
Attorneys at Law
•«>elma, *■ a o am a
AlTOi\NEYS FO-l THE DET'EUDATi'
j. xr u. Jr. u r v
th a t I h a v e on this
1 9 6 -a i, served a cop y
foregoin g p lead in g on counsel lo r a ll
p arties t / this p roceed in g by m ailin g the sam e b y
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
Civil Action
No. 21S1-N.
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge, at Montgomery,
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965.
(NOTE: This transcript is an excerpt transcript
containing the testimony of JAMES A. HARE,
witness for James G. Clark, in hearing in above
case March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965, this testimony
having been adduced on March 15, 1965.)
Glynn Henderson,
Official Court
Reporter.
Hosea Williams, John Lewis
and Amelia Boynton, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
United States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
vs
Honorable George C. Wallace, as
Governor of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama;
and James G. Clark, as Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE-MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
Hosea Williams, John Lewis
and Amelia Boynton, on behalf
of themselves and others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
United States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
Civil
No.
vs
Honorable George C. Wallace, as
Governor-of the State of Alabama;
A1 Lingo, as Director of Public
Safety for the State of Alabama; .•
and James G. Clark, as-Sheriff of
Dallas County, Alabama,
Defendants.
Before Hon. Frank M. Johnson, Jr., Judge,
Alabama, March 11-12-13-15-16, .196
A p p e a r a n c e s:
For the Plaintiffs: Gray Ec Seay
(Fred D. Gray and
Solomon S. Seay,
Peter A. Hall,
Jack Greenberg,
Norman Anaker,
Charles H. Jones, Jr
Oscar U. Adams,
Demetrius C. Newton,
James M. Nabrit, III
Charles S. Ralston.
For the United States: Ben Hardeman,
John Doar,
David Reuben.
Action
161-N.
at Montgomery,
2 *
Jr. ) ,
• j
9
2
For George C. Wallace:
(and for A1 Lingo
3/11-12)
For A1 Lingo:
(from 3/13)
For James G. Clark:
C-oodwyn & Smith
(Maury D. Smith,
Charles M. Crook, and
John S. Bowman).
John P. Kohn, Jr.
McLean Pitts,
P. H. Pitts,
J. E. Wilkinson, Jr.,
T. C-. Gayle.
(NOTE: This transcript is an excerpt transcript
containing the testimony of JAMES A. HARE,
witness for James G. Clark, in hearing in above
case March 11-12-13-15-16, 1965, this testimony
having been adduced on March 15, 1965.)
3
JAMES A . HARE. witness for James G. Clark, having been duly sworn,
testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION:
3Y MR. P. H. PITTS:
Q Would you state your name, please?
A James A. Hare.
Q And are you Judge of the Circuit Court of Dallas County —
A Yes, sir.
Q Alabama?
A Yes, sir.
Q And where are your offices, Judge Hare?
A On the second floor of the Court House: in fact, the — almost
Q
the entire second floor of the Court House is devoted to Circu
Court —
Court —
_t
A -- activities; the Circuit Clerk, court reporter, library, and
other incidental functions of the court are provided for on the
second floor.
Q And, Judge Hare, have you been in the Dallas County Court House
in your office when any of the demonstrations took place in and
around the Dallas County Court House
A Yes, sir.
Q And have you witnessed these demonstrations?
A Only on occasions, Mr. Pitts.
I understand.
A I have not devoted myself to observing the activities at all.
Q And I call your attention to February 3, 1965 —
A Yes, sir.
Q — and ask you as to whether or not the Circuit Court of Dallas
County, comma, Dallas County, Alabama, was in session?
A Yes, sir; it was.
Q And were there large groups of demonstrators which assembled o]
the outside of the Dallas County Court House on this particular
day?
MR. HALL: Your honor, we object to the method of
leading the witness.
THE COURT: I am sorry, Mr. Hall?
MR. HALL: We object to the method of asking these
questions, the manner in which —
THE COURT: Do not continue to lead your witness;
your objection is sustained.
MR. P. H. PITTS: Excuse me; uh, huh.
Q Did you see any demonstrators on the outside of Dallas County
Court House on this particular day?
A Yes, sir; virtually all day long was one demonstration after
the other.
Q Now, Judge Hare, I show you here Defendants’ Exhibit number 4,
and ask you as to whether or not you are familiar with the
scenes which are depicted in this Exhibit?
A Yes, sir; I am familiar with the scenes shown thereon; 679-3,
5
I suppose, the scene there in 679-6, 680 generally, and £0-1 ,
680-13-A, 681-15, I don’t know about that, 682-16, 685-33, and
I am not familiar with the others.
Q All right. Nov;, on this particular day we are talking about,
which is February 3, 1965, was there any obstruction to the
entrance to the Dallas County Court House?
A Yes, sir; there was obstruction that morning, there was
obstruction at noon, there was, as I recall, obstruction that
afternoon.
Q All right, and I believe you said that the Circuit Court of
Dallas County, Alabama, was in session on this particular day?
A Yes, sir; Mr. Pitts, as I recall, on February 3 we had
pleadings and nonjury cases called.
Q And so there would be witnesses coming in —
A Yes, sir.
Q -- and out of the Dallas County Court House?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, Judge Hare, I ask you, after you noticed this crowd that
you testified to assembled around the Court House, as to
whether or not you took any action?
A Yes, sir; on the 3rd day of February, 1965, I assued an ex mer
motu injunction and put it in the hands of the Sheriff to serv
Q And do you have a certified copy of this —
A Yes, sir.
Q -- order?
6
M R . P. H. PITTS: Please mark this for identificati:
THE CLERK: Defendant Clark Exhibit number 15 for
identification.
THE COURT: What number did you give it, Mr. Clerk?
THE CLERK: Defendant Clark 15.
Q And what was the substance of this order, Judge Hare, which waE
entered on February 3, 1965?
MR. GREENBERG: Object.
THE COURT: I sustain it; I will read it.
WITNESS: All right, sir; let me see where it is;
is this the one you offered?
THE COURT: Any objection to it going into evidence'’.
MR. NABRIT: No objection.
THE COURT: It is admitted.
Q Did you give this order to anybody?
A Yes, sir; I placed it in the hands of the Sheriff and the Chief
of Police in the City of Selma, Alabama.
Q Did you give them any instructions at that particular time?
A Yes, sir; I directed them to enforce it, read that order, ask
those assembled groups down there who were clapping and singim
to disperse, and upon failure to disperse to arrest them and
bring them up to the court room.
Q All right, and do you know as to whether or not there were any
arrests made on February 3, 1965?
A Yes, sir; I think there were some arrests made. There have bet
so many made that I couldn»t identify them particularly, but I
am certain there were some made that day.
All right, and do you know where these arrests were made?
They were made down in front of the Court House on my direction,
And did you send Sheriff James G. Clark down to the front of the
Court House to make these arrests?
As a matter of procedure, I called Sheriff Clark, had him come u
there, I took him to the window, identified the crowd, and told
him to go down there and read the injunction to them and tell
them to disperse, and failing to disperse to bring them up to
my court room.
All right, and were they brought up to your court room?
Yes, sir; yes, sir.
And were they tried at this time?
They were; I think there were some of them that were tried on
February 3; yes, sir; I am certain there were.
And while they wore brought up to the court room, Judge Haro,
did any occurrence occur in your court room at this particular
date?
Hot on that particular day; I think it was prior to that.
All right. In other words, then, there were some arrests made
prior to February 3, 1965?
Yes, sir; February 1, I think it was.
And do you know who made these arrests?
Yes, sir; the Sheriff made the arrests.
p
8
IQ On whose instructions did he make these arrests?
A . He made them on my instructions and under my direction.
Q All right, and do you remember as to whether or not the Circuit
Court of Dallas County, Alabama, was in session on February 1,
196p?
A It
Q And
did
A Yes
thi
court room and chambers. I called the Sheriff and had the court
reporter type a brief order and told the Sheriff to take it down
there and read it to them.
And do you have a copy of that?
I have the original, right there.
All right, sir.
MR. P. H. PITTS: Mark this for identification.
THE CLERK: Defendant Clark Exhibit number 16 for
identification.
MR. MILL: We are going to object to it.
THE COURT: Any objection to it?
MR. AMAKER: Yes, sir.
MR. HALL: Yes, sir; your honor.’ We object to this
paper; it is not dated, it is not identified, it has nothing on it
but a few lines of type.
o
THE COURT: All right.
MR. P. H. PITTS: Your honor, I believe he has
testified. —
THE COURT: You need not argue; it is admitted in
evidence.
MR. HALL: We object.
Q This is the --
THE COURT: Being an order that this Judge says he
entered on that date.
MR. P. H. PITTS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: All right.
WITNESS: (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
Q And this order was given to Sheriff James G. Clark?
A Yes, sir.
Q And do you know as to whether or not Sheriff Clark read this
order to anyone?
A Yes, sir; I went to the window and observed Sheriff Clark read
that by a megaphone to the crowd down there.
Q And was — you said this crowd — was this a crowd accumulated
outside of the Dallas County Court House?
A Yes, sir.
Q Judge Hare, I show you here Defendants’ Exhibit number 2, and
ask you if you will look through there and see if this — if you
can identify any of these pictures?
A Yes, sir; I can identify most of these, but I can’t say on which
.
particular occasion, it was that day that Sheriff Clark was
reading the order.
|Q All right.
A Several occasions.
Q Did you see Sheriff Clark reading this order?
A Yes, sir.
Q And what did the crowd which was gathered outside of the Dallas
County Court Mouse do after Sheriff Clark read the order, if
anything?
A They did nothing.
Q And did he read the order a second time?
A Ho, sir; I don’t think he read it the second time.
Q And were they — did they disperse?
A No, sir; they did not.
Q All right, did they just keep standing there?
A No, sir; Sheriff Clark marched them upstairs.
Q All right; in other 'words, he placed them under arrest?
A He did; yes, sir.
Q All right, and were they brought into the court room of the
Circuit Court of Dallas County, Alabama?
A Yes, sir; yes, sir.
MR. GRAY: Objection, your honor.
THE COURT: Do not lead the witness; do not lead the
witness.
Q Where were they brought, Judge Hare?
; 10
11
Well, I first saw them in the court room upstairs after they
left the streets.
And was this the same group which was arrested by Sheriff Clark
downstairs?
Yes, sir.
MR. NABRIT: Objection, your honor.
THE COURT: Sustain it.
Now, did you go into the court room, Judge Hare?
Yes, sir; I did.
All right, and did anything occur in the court room —
Yes, sir.
— or out of the ordinary, if anything?
Yes, sir.
And what was this?
Well, when one of the deputies called court to order, the
assembled group stood up and started singing.
Started singing?
Yes, sir.
And was this in the court room?
That was in the Circuit Court room of Dallas County; yes, sir.
All right, and were they subsequently tried in the Circuit Court
of Dallas County, Alabama?
Yes, sir; I would say right shortly, subsequently.
What were they tried for?
Contempt of court.
12
Now, Judge Hare, directing your attention to after February 3,
1965; do you know as to whether or not Sheriff Clark read your
order which was issued on February 3, 1965, at any other time?
Yes, sir; I had several occasions to direct the Sheriff to go
down there and ask them to disperse and read the order to then,
and I had directed that one of the deputies take the order down
to the church and read it down there. I understood, I have
the report --
Was it read at the church?
MR. GRAY: We object.
THE COURT: Sustained.
I directed that it — all right.
You state that you directed it to be read at the church; do you
know as to whether or not it was read at the church?
Ho, sir; I was not in the church.
Now, Judge Hare, have you observed the demonstrations which have
occurred in and around the Dallas County Court House?
Since September of T63; yes, sir.
All right, and have 3'-ou observed the demonstrations which have
occurred since January of this year up to the present time?
Yes, sir; my office is in the Court House; I have to go in and
out and —
Have you observed the voter registration lines?
Not particularly; no, sir.
Now, Judge Hare, has there been any instances in January,
13
February, and March, of 196$, whereby any ox the passageways
or entrances to the Court House have been
Yes, sir: on February 1 and on February 3,
blocked or obstructed1’
and I would say
numerous other occasions.
Now, have you seen any of the people who would participate in
these demonstrations?
Oh, yes, sir.
Mere they mostly people over the age of twenty-one, or were they
juveniles, or just what was the majority of them?
Well, most of then were juveniles; however, on February 3 Edwin
Moss brought a group of adults of about fifty up there.
Who is Edwin Moss?
He is connected, I think, with the Good Samaritan Hospital there
in Selma, and he led a protest march group down, and the Sheriff
brought them to the court room, and I went in there and talked t
them, and they left, and left peaceably, and there was — that
c
was the end of that.
But the majority of then were juveniles?
Virtually ail of those, I think, who were dealt with were either
juveniles or organisers.
All right, and were there many residents of Dallas County,
Alabama in these groups?
Oil, yes, six'.
Now, Judge Hare, did you issue any other orders in the year of
July 9, 1964?
14
1 Q
A Yes, sir: I issued an injunction under date of July 9, 1964, of
a general nature.
Do you have a copy 01 this injunction?
A Yes, sir; yes, sir; it is certified.
THE CLERK: Defendant Clark number 17 for identifica
tion .
WITNESS: Henry, you can let them look at that one
and give this one to Judge Johnson; you hang on to that.
MR. P. H. PITTS: Would you like to examine this,
Judge Johnson?
THE COURT: I have already seen it.
MR. P. H. PITTS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Any objection to 17 going in evidence?
MR. AMAKER: No objection.
THE COURT: It will be admitted.
Q And when was this injunction or order issued by you, Judge Hare'
A That was on July 9, 1964.
And was this injunction or order issued on the petition of anyorfe
Yes, sir; it was on the petition of City of Selma, of Dallas
County, I think Sheriff Clark, and possibly the City of Selma.
And did this bill 01 complaint or petition, did it recite certain
instances which had occurred in Selma and Dallas County, Alabama ?
MR. DOAR: Objected to on the ground ---
THE COURT: Sustained.
Had there been any racial disturbance in Selma prior to theQ
15
issuance of this injunction?
MR. AMAKER: Objection.
THE COURT: Well, I sustain objection to that. I have
read the injunction.
A
Q
WITNESS: It was in --
THE COURT: It was in connection with another case —
WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: — I am on.
WITNESS: Yes, sir; he is very familiar with it.
THE COURT: I already know what is in it.
MR. P. H. PITTS: Like to offer this into evidence.
THE COURT: It is admitted in evidence.
Now, Judge Hare, have you had any occasion to witness the Dallas
County Sheriff’s Department in action in and around the Dallas
County Court House?
Well, just on the occasions, Mr. Pitts, where I have more or les
directed them to act on behalf of the court: generally, I have
tried to avoid those matters.
And have you ever seen any member of the Dallas County Sheriff’s
Department or of the Dallas County Sheriff’s Posse abuse or
intimidate any Negro citizen?
MR. MAKER: Objection.
MR. GREENBERG: Object.
s
THE COURT: Sustain it; i am going to sustain it until
next year as long as you keep phrasing it that way; that makes about
16
the twentieth time l have sustained it today.
MR. P. H. PITTS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: It would save a lot of time if you would
get away from that —
MR. P. H. PITTS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: — and phrase it right.
Q Have you seen any member of the Dallas County Sheriff’s Posse
or the Dallas County Sheriff’s Department hit or strike any
Negro in the Dallas County Court House?
No, sir; I haven’t.
Now, Judge Hare, have you — do you have a knowledge of the
events which have occurred in Selma during the months of January
through March?
Generally; yes, sir.
All right, and have you received reports as to the general
condition in Dallas County, Alabama?
Yes, sir; by telephone, personal —
MR. MABRIT: Objection.
THE COURT: Overrule; just asked as to whether he had
or — received them or not: not what they wore; and he said yes.
Q And from these reports that you have received, Judge Hare, and
based on your personal knowledge that you have gained, what woullld
you say was the general situation in Selma —
MR. GREENBERG: Object.
Q -- at the present time?
*1 rj
THE COURT: Sustain objection.
Q Judge Hare, has the situation in Selma during this period of
time, has it been a tense situation?
MR. GRAY: Objection.
MR. AMAKER: Objection.
MR. GREENBERG: Obje c ti on.
THE COURT: Overruled; calling for his own personal
knowledge, I take it.
A Yes, sir; yes, sir; there has been a tense situation.
MR. P. H. PITTS: ThatTs all.
THE COURT: All right; cross examination, Mr. Hall.
MR. HALL: Yes, sir. May I have the Judge’s injunct!
in order to -- ?
CROSS EXAMINATION:
BY MR. HALL:
Q Judge Hare, I show you the injunction issued by you on February
on July 9, I believe you said, of last year marked Defendants’
Exhibit 17?
A (Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
Q How, that — that injunction — that Injunction was removed to
the U. S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama,
was it not?
A Sometime In December, I believe it was.
Q In January, the time from January or from December until now,
that injunction was not operative, was it?
18
A Not so far as I was — well, it has not been dissolved; it is
still in force.
Q It is in the bosom of Judge Thomas, Middle District — in the
Southern District of Alabama?
A That is correct, but it has not been dissolved that I know of.
Q What I was trying to get at, Judge Kare, was that you, yourself.
are not enforcing this or causing it to be enforced at that time
A Neither is Judge Thomas, so far as I know.
Q All right, sir. Nov;, Judge Hare, I show you a copy of what you
say is an injunction issued by you at sometime.
A That is the 3rd day of February --
Q 3rd day of February.
A -- ’65.
Q Marked Defendants’ Exhibit 15?
A Uh, huh.
Q Now, are there any named parties involved here?
A None whatever.
Q Some parties respondent. And I believe you said this was done
ex mero motu?
A Yes.
Q There was no open hearing, no — no — no hearing at all?
A Same thing the eight Federal Judges have in Los Angeles.
Q To whom was this directed, sir?
A Just to anybody.
Q Everybody?
19
Everybody.
And how — I believe you testified that you directed the Sheriff
to serve it: how was he told to serve it; on whom was he told tc
serve it?
I don’t know that I directed him to serve it; I directed them
to fully enforce the same by legal means; I didn’t order any
service on them.
You did not order any service on it at all?
No.
Now, I believe you testified that on several occasions after you
issued that order, pursuant to your orders the Sheriff did arrej
groups of demonstrators?
Quite true.
I believe that those arrests were effected on February 3. 5, 8s,
and 16; do you recall those dates?
I believe the first arrests under this injunction were — well,
I think I had signed this at the time Edwin Moss was up there,
I think it came later on in the day, were the first arrests
t
under that.
On the first —
Well, if you call it arrest under the injunction; actually, I
dealt with them as contempts in present!, presence and hearing
of the court, rather than violation of the injunction.
I am sorry, Judge, I am sorry, but I got lost somewhere there;
I believe you had signed the injunction?
20
Yes.
Your injunction?
(Nodded to indicate affirmative reply)
On what date, sir?
February 3.
February 3; now, was that the date of the Moss arrest, the date
when Sheriff Clark brought Edwin Moss and the group he led up
to your court?
I think they were up there before I signed this, before.
Before you signed it?
Yes.
On the 3rd there was another group arrested?
I think there were three or four groups arrested.
On the 3rd?
Yes.
On the day of the 3rd?
Uh, huh.
The Sheriff brought them into your presence?
Right.
Is this correct? And you had a hearing, you said?
Well, I called them up and adjudged them to be in contempt of
court; the arrests were made by the Sheriffs on my — at my
direction.
Yes, sir; did you take testimony?
Yes: took some testimony.
21
Did you take testimony on behalf of the defendants?
I did not.
Did they request counsel?
Some of them did.
Did you allow them to have counsel?
I did not.
But you, yourself, had to have testimony to find them in contemo
Well, I took testimony to identify them as being the same group
that I had directed the Sheriff to bring up; yes.
Well, that is what I was trying to get at, sir, that you did
need some testimony in order to ascertain that they would be in
contempt in your judgment?
I asked them their names and —
But you did not allow them to give testimony or to have counsel?
I didn’t — I didn’t ask them for any testimony; I asked them
for identification, for identification —
Yes, sir.
— that is all.
But did they request an opportunity to be heard and for counsel?
Some of them certainly did.
And you denied this?
I cited to them the fact that
system of law they are not of
for six hundred years under
necessity permitted to have
our
counsc
What was your judgment, sir, on this hearing?
On what?
22
On this hearing, what was your judgment?
\Ie 11, I found most of them guilty; there were a
What was the sentence?
Fif—
few that were nc
And fine?
Fifty dollar fine and five days in jail, and I explained to all
of them that they could purge themselves of contempt and be
relieved at any time they saw fit.
Excuse me, please; and you did find them guilty of violating
your injunction which —
Ho, I found —
-- had been placed on them?
I found them guilty of contempt of court; that is what I found
them guilt}/ of.
How -were they in contempt, your honor, Judge?
Singing and clapping hands and creating a disturbance down there
in front of the Court House within the presence and hearing of
m}r court structure; yes.
But this was aside from the injunction; it was — was it a
violation of injunction or
without —
or was this just contempt in itself
Just contempt in itself; if there have been any citations under
this injunction, I donTt know of them.
Well, wore you not reding on the injunction?
I was not relying on the injunction; no.
ooO
You — the injunction was nothing at all; you — just the mere
j.act that they were there on the sidewalk, you considered to be
contempt of court?
The fact they were there and singing and clapping hands and
creating a disturoance and obstructing the doors and the entranc
to the Court House; those were the factors that I considered.
Now, would this be true in the case — in the cases, the other
cases, of arrests where Sheriff Clark brought the persons
immediately to your court, those cases of February 5, C, and 16?
Now, on February C I think there was a big crowd arrested; they
were all, I think, released under a bond, were they —
Those cases, but you arrested them and found them guilty under
the same circumstances; is that correct?
I think there have been about over two hundred arrests and
probably seventy-five, a hundred found guilty, something like
that.
Under the same circumstances?
Under the same or similar circumstances.
You were not relying on the injunction?
Ho.
Which 3>-ou have been talking about?
No.
But simply on the fact they were down there demonstrating?
Yes.
Were they all singing and clapping hands?
ithj.
A Well, it would be hard to say: generall};-, my attention was called
to them by their singing and clapping hands down there, and
sometimes when 1 went to the window they were not singing and
clapping hands, and I didnTt do anything about it.
Q Isn’t it a fact, Judge Hare, that some of these people were
arrested and brought into your court room without your knowledge,
that the first you knew of it was when Sheriff Clark brought
them in and told you?
A I think that is true; now, not without my knowledge. I ran
past lunch time, and there was another group down there, and I
just said, "Well, I am going to lunch, anyway, just put them in
the court ro
there when I
Q Yes, sir; A +•
1 O
to the U. S •
A That is quit
0 — of the So
A
a t Removed in t'
3C
within twenty-four hours.
Q And they were granted bond?
A Oh, yes.
Q And those cases are now pending?
A Uh, huh.
Q In all of these cases, we ask you, sir, if you recall the group
led by James Bevel?
Who ?
Bevel, Janes Bevel, B-E-V-E-L, the Reverend James Bevel?
lie was up there with a group one day, I recall that; I donTt
remember the date.
We ask you, sir, if that particular group were found guilty of
contempt of court and sentenced?
I think so; as I recall, I recall sentencing Janes Bevel and a
group who were up there with him.
We ask you if they did not ask for counsel and for an opportunity
to be heard, and if they were not denied?
That is quite true.
I will ask you, sir, if you, yourself, did not take testimony
in order to support your position?
I took testimony in order to support identification.
But you did not allow the defendants to give testimony or to
be — or to have counsel?
That is quite true.
Now, Sheriff -- Judge Hare, was your court in session on February
3, 1965?
Well, as a matter of fact, due to these demonstrations we have
had no court, now, in Dallas County since November. We squeezed
in two days of a criminal session, I think maybe the second week
in January, but the regular session of court, there must have
been twelve hundred people around the Court House there; we
had Negro plaintiffs, and we had Negro defendants, in civil
26
cases, and Judge Moore had cone down to assist in the trial of
cases, and we had to abandon the trial of anything there.
So that your court was not in fact in session on any of these
dates; is that correct?
My court is generally in session every day that cases are set.
Yes, sir.
Now, the jury sessions of ray court are rather incidental, in
view of the complex equity docket that we have there; we have
equity, criminal jury, civil, and nonjury civil. And I would
say that there are very few days that I an not engaged in the
trial of cases or the hearing of petitions or the matters of
divorce, of alinony, support, and naintenance, and a thousand
and other one things that go on.
Now, isn’t it — isn’t it a fact, though, jrour honor, that you
deal with these mostly in chambers, or your court was not
formerly organized to the extent that you were conducting court,
as we say?
On February 1 I think it was, I was conducting court.
On February 1?
I mean engaged in — in the trial of a case and hearing the
witnesses; yes.
This is the time when the juveniles were arrested and cane into
court and sang?
That is it; uh, huh.
They had already been arrested by Sheriff Clark when they started
2?
singing in your court, hadn’t they?
A I had told -- called the Sheriff up there and directed him to
go down there and -- and tell them to disperse or either — and
if they failed to do that, to bring them upstairs.
Q All right, sir: when he brought them upstairs, they were under
arrest, were they not?
A I assume so.
Q So that when you found them guilty of contempt, it was not for
the singing in your court room?
A It definitely was; that is what I asked them; I put that in
there specifically: yes.
Q Now, on February 3 —
A I forgot the rest of it and just dealt with that little issue.
Q I see. How, on February 3, was your court actually organised;
did you have an organised court?
A What do you mean by an organized court? I have a court
reporter --
Q Yes, sir.
A — she is there to take testimony, we have cases on the docket
and cases set; sometimes they are settled, sometimes they are
continued, sometimes they are tried; but I an there to enter ths
necessary orders and do the necessary business, whatever the
occasion may be.
Q Judge Hare, what we had in mind was whether or no you were
actually sitting on the bench in the court room in the trial of
28
a case rather than considering natters in chambers or some other
place ?
Well, as a natter of fact, we have an equity hearing room, we
seldom use — we try not to use the big court room because of
heating and cooling problems there —
Yes, sir.
-- and in the average run of cases, where there are limited
witnesses, they are heard in the equity hearing room, and there
is a Stenotype and table: there is not a so called judicial bench
in there, but I sit in judicial capacity in there as much so as
in the court room.
Where is that equity hearing room, sir?
That is on the west side of the building, and that is where I
was when this ruckus started on February 1.
That is the west side of the Dallas County Court House?
That’s right; yes.
Would it be fair to say that considering the front on Lauderdale
Street —
Uh,huh.
— that the west side is the rear of your- Court House building?
That is quite true.
And then you were on the second floor in the rear?
That is right.
And the demonstration was on the front of the Court House?
I think I could have locked the doors to the — my office and the
29
Q
reporter’s oifice and maybe shut the doors into the equity room,
and I may not possibly would not have been particularly
disturbed, but I didn’t feel that that obligation was necessaril
on me.
I see. Excuse me, please, sir. Sheriff — I am sorry, Judge
Hare, please forgive me — Judge Hare, I direct your attention
to February 16, 1965, when I believe about fifteen Negroes who
were allegedly demonstrating at the Court House were brought to
your court and found to be in contempt: do you recall that
occasion?
A
Q
Q
Q
A
Q
A
Q
February IS; was that the day of the night of the ruckus in
Marion?
Mo, sir -- I don’t know.
MR. MAKER: Yes; yes; yes.
If that was the same time.
MR. MAKER: Yes.
It may have been. I believe on that occasion, Judge Hare, to
refresh your recollection —
Uh, huh.
— if I can, I believe about fifteen were involved, and you —
the arrests — I believe you found about five in contempt, if
you recall this?
I don’t remember them particularly, Pete, I have the record of
Mrs. — my court reporter made a complete record of those matter
Assuming that this is true —
30
A Uh, huh.
Q — and the fact could refresh your recollection, I wanted to
know if you recall that you, yourself, did not know these five
persons had been arrested until you were summoned to the court
room; do you recall this?
A Wait, now; no, those are the ones down — I think I recall that
downstairs in the hall there —
Q Yes, sir.
A — demanding to see the —
Q Yes, sir.
A — Registrar.
Q Yes, sir.
A Yes; well, I called the Sheriff and told him to cane upstairs,
or bring them upstairs, that is what I sent word for; I think
he brought them up.
Q These are the persons who wanted to see — they were inside the
hall, wanted to see the Registrars?
A Yes; yes, I remember that very well.
Q And you found these five persons in contempt?
A I certainly did; yes.
Q You did take testimony in this case, maybe some testimony as to
identity of them at least down there, but the defendants were
not allowed counsel?
A No.
Q Nor d i d t h e y g i v e t e s t i m o n y ?
31
I think you were probably there speaking for then, but I proceede
under the established law in connection with those cases.
Yes, sir; we requested an opportunity to get witnesses and
prepare defense?
Uh, huh.
Your honor denied it?
Uh, huh.
Judge hare, I wanted to ask you about the order which you entered
on February 1; I believe you said this is —
That wasn’t —
— narked -- Defendants’ Exhibit 16.
I went -- I called the court reporter and asked her to type that
up and gave it to the Sheriff and told him to take it down there;
and read it to then —
Yes, sir.
— and he did take it down there and read it to them, and they
didn’t disperse, and that is the bunch that came up there and
proceeded to sing Christmas carols to me.
Was that the group on the 1st?
Yes.
Is that the first group?
Yes.
That was the — before the injunction?
That was before this was prepared --
I see, sir.
32
— before I got a copy of it.
And this was taken to then -- did you ascertain — I will withdij-
that question. Now, on the occasion, I believe it was February
3, that you have testified to that Edwin Moss led a group to
the Court House?
I think that was it; yes.
And on that occasion they were arrested by Sheriff Clark and
brought to your court room?
No, I don’t think they were arrested. They appeared down there,
I think I riad been to the drug store or something — at any
rate, when they were confronted with the Sheriff, Edwin Moss
wanted to know if he could talk uo me, and the Sheriff said,
’•Yes, just take your whole crowd up to the court room, ’1 and
that is -- I don’t believe they were under arrest, because —
They were brought to your court room?
Well, they were in my court room.
By the Sheriff?
As a group they were —
You did not sentence them?
No, I didn’t.
You did not find then in contempt?
No, they came — said they had some statement to make, and they
made their statement, and then I made a statement to them and
told the bailiff to — that they were free to go so far as I was
concerned, there were no charges, they voluntarily come up there,
33
and they could voluntarily leave, and they did leave.
Are you saying that they cane to your court voluntarily, and
Sheriff Clark did not bring them up there or require them to con:
I was not downstairs; my memory of it is they came down there,
I don’t know whether Sheriff Clark or Mr. Crocker, who it was,
asked them to disperse; they said they wanted to talk to Judge
hare, and they said, “Well, you can do that in the court room
up there then, go on up there"; now, whether he led them up
there or directed them up there or how they got there, I don’t
know, but they were there when I went in the court room.
Judge, is there any reason why you did not find this group in
contempt as you have — as you found some others?
MR. SMITH: Object to this, if the court please.
THE COURT: I sustain it.
I don’t think there had been a —
THE COURT: I sustained that.
— clapping of hands.
THE COURT: I have sustained objection.
Yes, sir: blocking of doorways.
Judge Hare, have you made statements to the press, on the radio,
or otherwise public statements indicating your belief in the
theory of the inferiority of Negroes?
No, I have not.
MR. SMITH: Object to this.
Mr. Kennedy —
34
THE COURT: I sustain objection to that.
WITNESS: I will answer it, if your honor please.
THE COURT: I sustain it.
MR. SMITH: Just a minute, Judge; we object.
THE COURT: The lawyer objected to it; not a
question of that, the lawyers are objecting to it.
MR. KOHN: Your honor, we ask they please speak a
little louder.
THE COURT: Yes, speak up.
Q Judge Hare, you have been sitting here at the counsel table by
way of agreement of counsel —
A Yes.
Q -- all through this trial, have you not?
A Yes.
Q You have been consulting with counsel for Sheriff Clark and —
A Well, I am sitting over there with counsel for all the group.
MR. HALL: I believe that’s all at this time.
THE COURT: For the United States. Anyone wants to
leave or enter before this examination starts may do so.
BY MR. DOAR:
Q Judge Hare, were you in Selma on the 7th of March?
A Was that Sunday?
Q That’s right?
A Let’s see, I think I went to the farm Sunday morning; I was in
Selma Sunday afternoon; yes.
35
Q Were you out at the place where the State Police stopped the
demonstrators?
A No.
Q Did you consult with Sheriff Clark about what he was to do out
there that day?
A No, sir; I did not.
Q Now, these demonstrations around the Court House, were they
in connection with the voting?
A I would hesitate to say that.
Q There has been —
A It has been some word that is what it was about.
Q The signs that the students carried related to voting?
A Oh, yes; they had them up there six years old carrying a sign
demanding the right to vote.
Q And on the 1st of February, when you made these first arrests,
there were — that was a registration day, was it not?
A I believe so: I believe they — they — if it was the first
Monday in the month, which I assume that it was. it was registr.
tion day.
Q Registration at that time was going very slowly, sixteen or
eighteen people per day?
A I donTt know, sir: it went very slowly in January.
q you — I mean as far as the Board taking the number of people?
A I don’t keep up with that, Mr. Doar; I try to —
Q D i d y o u e v e r make a n y i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o t h e r e g i s t r a t i o n
36
procedures of Dallas County?
No, sir: I have tried to stay as far away from that as I could.
I see.
Yes, sir; I have nothing whatever to do with it.
You -- you were aware of the fact that Judge Thomas, the Federal
District Judge for the Southern District of Alabama, had entered
an order late in January?
Yes, sir; the 23rd of January, I think.
Directing the Sheriff to permit persons to come to the registra
tion -- to the Court House and line up at the Lauderdale
entrance and to — directed the Board to process —
Yes, sir; I think he amended that on the 30th of January.
And he also stated that people had a right to come to the Court
House peacefully, to assemble --
Oh, yes.
— and protest voter registration?
Yes, sir; yes, sir.
And you were aware of those orders?
Yes, sir; and I was aware that I had session of court going on;
I didn’t think — read anything, though, that hindered me from
dealing with people who were out there clapping, shouting,
screaming, singing; that may be part of it, I don’t know, I coul:
be in error.
You are satisfied that all of the arrests and convictions that y:
entered that time were against people who were outside shouting,
37
clapping, and singing?
A So far as I know, they were; yes, sir.
Q But you took no testimony in your court except testimony from
Sheriff Clark before you convicted them?
A They were -- the groups that I dealt with, Mr. Boar, were brought
upstairs on my specific order to the Sheriff to bring them up
there. How, there were some that I released without anything,
when they came up there and told me that they were down there
to defy Judge Thomas’s injunction, I let them go; I didn’t — I
didn’t bother with them.
Q You -- you
A Yes, sir.
Q -- in w h i c h
A Yes, sir.
Q — in conne
A Yes, sir.
Q And those i
AA Yes, SIX* *
Q — e ither t
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, prior
Next to Mr. Hoffa, I expect I am number one.
Sheriff Clark as to how he should handle the demonstrators on
Sunday?
A Sunday — no, sir: I — I don’t think I was —
Q What I am interested in is whether or not you told him that —
not to make arrests, but to use force to disperse that crowd?
I was not — that was —
On Sunday?
— the State Troopers’ deal, Mr. Boar; I -- I wasn’t — that
was --
You weren’t consulted about that at all?
Oh, I might have been -- I would frankly say that seme features
of it were discussed with me, but I was — I was not making any
decisions at all; I had no — I had no authority to make any
decisions.
Do you recall, Judge Hare, what features were discussed with you,
and when ?
How, this is as to the 7th?
This is as to the 7th?
I don’t think I had any discussion with anybody on the 7th.
You are sure of that?
Mr. Boar, I have had —
Well, if you are not sure of it —
— a year and a half, it has just been a constant matter of
discussions and dealings with these natters; I may have had sous
discussions on —
But you don’t recall any?
I don’t recall it; Sheriff Clark was not in town, as I recall.
Now, I went -- I worked on my income tax at the office on
39
Saturday, I believe, when they had the Lutheran march down there,
and I had a brief discussion with — with a reference to that
with Deputy Crocker.
Did you have any discussion with Deputy Crocker as to how he
should handle the white crowd around the Court House that were
there that day?
Well, his particular problem was, as I recall that we discussed,
was the matter of police protection; they had sent word that
they were going to march from Jeff Davis to Broad Street and
up Broad Street to Alabama Avenue and across to the Court House,
and Hr. Crocker was very much concerned about police protection
for these marching ministers. And in view of the Saturday
crowds and traffic, I am frank to say that I suggested to him
that he use patrol cars in — in the least obvious manner that
he could to protect them. They were not marching; they were
just coming down in groups of a few together — and not make an}-
display along Broad Street that would have ATTACTED — have
attracted all the shoppers in Selma around the Court House that
afternoon; I did make that suggestion to him; yes, sir.
MR. DOAR: Thank you.
THE COURT: For Governor Wallace.
1R. SMITH:
Judge Hare, there are two Circuit Judges within the Fourth
Judicial Circuit —
Yes, sir.
40
-- of Alabama?
Judge Moore lives in Centreville, and I live in Selma.
And you arc one of the Circuit Judges of the Fourth Judicial
Circuit?
Yes, sir.
Is this an elected office?
Yes, sir.
Hoy/ old are î ou, sir?
Fifty-nine.
How long have you served as a Circuit Judge of this Fourth
Judicial Circuit of Alabama?
Eleven years.
Has any Negro citizen in Dallas County appealed to your court
from a denial of the right to register as a qualified voter in
Dallas County?
No, sir; I never recall one.
Over this entire period of time, no appeals have been filed into
your court?
That is quite true; I donTt recall one ever having been filed.
In this regard. Now, I want to direct your attention back to
February 3; did the Sheriff or the person from the Sheriff’s
office who called 3/our court to order act as your bailiff?
That is the capacity he was serving in; yes, sir.
Were these people within the presence of the court, within your
court room?
A They were sitting in the middle section as far as from me to
those seats out there; yes, sir.
Q And when he called court to order, they commenced singing; is
that —
A Yes, sir.
Q -- what your honor says?
A Yes, sir; they were singing when I walked in the court room.
Q How long did they sing?
A Hot very long, I’ll tell you.
Q Did you ask them to stop singing?
A Yes, sir; I made a call for order, and we — we got some order.
MR. SMITH: l believe that’s all.
THE COURT: For Colonel Lingo.
MR. KOHII: Mo questions, your honor.
THE COURT: Any redirect for Sheriff Clark?
MR. P. H. PITTS: Ho, sir.
THE COURT: Any other questions from this witne
MR. HALL: One -■- one question, your* honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Hall.
BY MR. HALL;
Q Judge Hare, you said that on some occasion you found out that
the purpose of some demonstration was to defy Judge Thomas’s
injunction?
A That is what they told me; yes.
Q Can y o u t e l l u s - - c o u l d y o u i d e n t i f y t h e p e r s o n wh o t o l d y o u
42
this 7
A Well, I had -- you see, Judge Thomas’s first order was issued
on November 23, I think; there were some arrests for unlawful
assembly, and I don’t know, one day we must have had thirty or
forty up there that were not down there — what they were down
there to do was to defy Judge Thomas’s order, not — not anything
I had to say, and I turned them loose.
Q I have asked Mrs. Bailey to transcribe for me — did you have
her report whatever you did —
A Yes.
Q -- on these situations? And I have had her transcribe some of
these proceedings for me; would this appear in any of — of
these records?
A Oh, I don’t think so. In my conference with Edwin Moss, now,
all I have is -- iI did have Mrs. Bailey come in and transcribe
what I; had to say to the group --
n I see.
A — just as a matter of precaution, and what was — the group
said to me I did not make of record.
MR. HALL: I believe that’s all.
THE COURT: Anything further?
MR. F. H. PITTS: No, sir.
THE COURT: Step down, Judge Hare.
WITNESS: All right, sir.
(END OF TESTIMONY CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSCRIPT)
w | ' ' I ' *T*
43
IK THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA.
NORTHERN DIVISION
I, Glynn Henderson, Official Court Reporter of the United States
District Court for the I-Iiddle District of Alabama, do hereby
certify that the foregoing 42 pages contain a true and correct
transcript of proceedings had before the said Court held in the
City of Montgomery, Alabama, in the natter therein stated, or that
portion of said proceedings indicated in note on page 2 thereof.
In testimony whereof I hereunto set my hand on this the 1st day of
April, 1965.