Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg Board of Education Appendix to Appellants' Brief

Public Court Documents
January 1, 1965

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg Board of Education Appendix to Appellants' Brief preview

Cite this item

  • Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg Board of Education Appendix to Appellants' Brief, 1965. e9b88b6c-c59a-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/b1e181c8-cf51-4f3a-a620-87f0b7e0e6c8/swann-v-charlotte-mecklenberg-board-of-education-appendix-to-appellants-brief. Accessed June 17, 2025.

    Copied!

    I n the

Initeft States (Cmui nf Appeals
F oe the F oheth Circuit 

No. 10,207

James E. Swann, et al.,
Appellants,

—v.-

The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 
a public body corporate,

Appellee,
—and—

The North Carolina Teachers A ssociation, 
a corporation,

Intervenor.

APPENDIX TO APPELLANTS’ BRIEF

Conrad O. Pearson
203% East Chapel Hill Street 
Durham, North Carolina

J. Levonne Chambers
405% East Trade Street 
Charlotte, North Carolina

Jack Greenberg 
Derrick A . Bell, Jr.

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York

Attorneys for Appellants



INDEX TO APPENDIX

Complaint ........      la

Answer ................................................................................ 9a

Interrogatories ..........................................................    15a

Answers to Interrogatories ............................. ....... ......  20a

Table 1 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 1  25a

Table 2 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 2  30a

Table 3 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 5  32a

Table 4 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory 
#16 ...............................................................    33a

Exhibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrog­
atory # 6  ........     37a

Exhibit “B” Attached to Answers to Interrog­
atory # 1 1 ...................    48a

Exhibit “ C” Attached to Answers to Interrog­
atory # 1 1 .................................................    50a

Plan for Compliance With Title VI, etc. .......................  53a

Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File 
Objections, etc. ..........      58a

Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Motion for Extension of 
Time, etc. ...............................................................   60a

Order Granting Defendant’s Motion for Extension of 
Time, etc. ...................      62a

PAGE



Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction ........... 63a

Answer to Motion for Preliminary Injunction ........... 65a

Exhibit “ A ” Attached to Foregoing Answ er...... 70a

Exhibit “B” Attached to Foregoing Answer ......  73a

Exhibit “ C” Attached to Foregoing Answer ......  76a

Exhibit “ D” Attached to Foregoing Answer ......  79a

Exhibit “ E ” Attached to Foregoing Answer ......  82a

Exhibit “ F ” Attached to Foregoing A nsw er......  85a

Exhibit “ G” Attached to Foregoing Answer ......  88a

Exhibit “H” Attached to Foregoing Answer  ......  91a

Exhibit “ I” Attached to Foregoing Answer .......  94a

Memorandum of Decision and Order on Motion for 
Preliminary Injunction..... .................... .... ......... .......  97a

Motion to Intervene, etc. .......... .... .... ......... ................. . 100a

Complaint in Intervention .... ........................................  102a

Answer to Motion to Intervene ..... ........ ................. . 106a

Answer to Complaint in Intervention  ...................... 107a

Interrogatories ............................ .................... ................  109a

Answers to Interrogatories ........_T..... .... .....................  112a

Exhibit “ A ” Attached to Interrogatories—Pupil 
Assignments ......... ............... ................................  115a

ii

PAGE



Exhibit “ B” Atached to Interrogatories—Pupil 
Assignments .......................................-..................  128a

Exhibit “ C” Attached to Interrogatories— Staff 
Report .................................................................... 142a

Memorandum of Decision........................................ -......  145a

Judgment .................................................... -......................  155a

Notice of Appeal .......................-................................ -....  156a

Letter Dated August 19, 1965 From Brock Barkley .... 157a

Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal .........................  158a

Order on Motion for Injunction ....................................  164a

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips..............................  167a

Transcript of Proceedings ......................................   193a

Plaintiffs’ Opening Statement ....    193a

Defendant’s Opening Statement ...........    194a

TESTIMONY

Plaintiffs’ W itnesses:

Reginald A. Hawkins
Direct ........................................................     200a
Cross .............        221a

Lewis I. Kramer
Direct  ............................................ ................ „ 233a
Cross .................................................................... 274a

I l l

PAGE



IV

Defendant’s W itnesses:

Dr. A. Craig Phillips
Direct ........... .....
Cross _________ __
Redirect .................

Robert Carpenter Hanes
Direct ......................
Cross ........ ..........

Frank Dowd, Jr.
Direct ........ .........
Cross ......- ........

David W. Harris
Direct .................. —
Cross ....... ........... ....

Betsy McC. Kelly
Direct ........ .............

PAGE

292a, 348a 
335a,367a 

........  412a

........ 413a

........ 415a

........  421a

........ 421a

____  426a
........ 429a

436a

EXHIBITS

Plaintiffs’ E xhibits:*

Defendant’s E xhibits :

A for Identification—Instructions

B—Map ..........................................

C—Drawing ------ -------- --------- ----

D— Photograph ....................... .......

E to Q— Photographs ... ............. .

T—Sheets of Paper ....... .............

Offered
Page

. 304a 

. 322a 

. 325a 

. 366a 

. 367a 

. 367a

Omitted from Record.



I n th e

Inttzb States Dtslrtrt (Emtrt
F oe the W esteen Disteict of Nobth Caeolina 

Chaelotte Division 
Civil A ction N o................

James E. Swann and E dith Swann , minors, by their 
parents and next friends, Rev. and Mbs. Daeiits L. Swann ;
Reginald A. H awkins, Je., W ayne B. H awkins and L oeena 
B. H awkins, minors, by their parents and next friends, 

De. and Mbs. Reginald A. H aw kins;
E zea M. Mooee, B eveely J. Mooee and M. J. Mooee, minors, 
by their parents and next friends, Rev. and Mbs. E. J. Mooee ;
W anda Neal, a minor, by her parents and next friends, 

M b. and Mbs. A. D. Neal;
Maey Deloees O’Reae, W ayne O’Reae, W anda D. O’Reae 
and Debbye C. O’Reae, minors, by their parents and next 

friends, Me. and Mbs. V ance O’Reae;
Donald Cunningham, Ronald Cunningham, Beveely Cun­
ningham, E eic Cunningham and Babby Cunningham, 

minors, by their mother and next friend,
Mbs. T. M. C u n n in g h a m  ;

Daniel C. Campbell, Je ., a minor, by his parents and next 
friends, Mb. and Mbs. Daniel C. Campbell;

Daeeyl Beice H ood, a minor, by his parents and next 
friends, Rev. and Mbs. Calvin H ood;

Sula E. Hendebson, a minor, by her father and next friend, 
Rev. E lo L. H endebson;

Cynthia Polk, Camilla Polk, Joseph Polk and James K. 
Polk, Je., minors, by their father and next friend,

Mb. James K. Polk,
Plaintiffs,

T h e  C haelotte-M ecklenbubg  B oaed of E ducation , 
a public body corporate,

Defendant.

Complaint



2a

I

This is a proceeding for a permanent injunction, enjoin­
ing the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, its 
members and its Superintendent, from continuing the 
policy, practice, custom and usage of discriminating against 
the plaintiffs and other Negro citizens of the City of 
Charlotte and the County of Mecklenburg, North Carolina, 
because of race or color.

II

The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 
Title 28, U. S. C. §1343(3), this being a suit in equity 
authorized by law, Title 42 U. S. C. § 1983, to be commenced 
by any citizen of the United States or other person within 
the jurisdiction thereof to redress the deprivation under 
color of statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage 
of a State of rights, privileges and immunities secured 
by the Constitution and the laws of the United States. 
The rights, privileges and immunities sought herein to 
be redressed are those secured by the Due Process and 
Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment 
to the Constitution of the United States.

III

The plaintiffs in this ease are James E. Swann and 
Edith Swann, minors, by their parents and nest friends. 
Rev. and Mrs. Darius L. Swann: Reginald A. Hawkins. 
Jr.. Wayne B. Hawkins and Lorena B. Hawkins, minors, 
by their parents and next friends. Dr. and Mrs. Reginald 

- Ezra ' Moore. Revere Moore arc ... . 
Moor-. nors. their parents and next friends. Re-

Complaint



3a

and Mrs. E. J. Moore; Wanda Neal, a minor, by her 
parents and next friends, Mr. and Mrs. A. D. Neal; Mary 
Delores O’Rear, Wayne O’Rear, Wanda D. O’Rear and 
Debbye C. O’Rear, minors by their parents and next 
friends, Mr. and Mrs. Vance O’Rear; Donald Cunningham, 
Ronald Cunningham, Beverly Cunningham, Eric Cunning­
ham and Barry Cunningham, minors, by their mother and 
next friend, Mrs. T. M. Cunningham; Daniel C. Campbell, 
Jr., a minor, by his parents and next friends, Mr. and 
Mrs. Daniel C. Campbell; Darryl Brice Hood a minor, 
by his parents and next friends, Rev. and Mrs. Calvin 
Hood; Sula E. Henderson, a minor, by her father and 
next friend, Rev. Elo L. Henderson; Cynthia Polk, Camilla 
Polk, Joseph Polk and James K. Polk, Jr., minors, by 
their father and next friend, Mr. James K. Polk. Plain­
tiffs are Negroes and bring this action on their own behalf 
and on behalf of all other Negro children and their 
parents in the City of Charlotte and County of Mecklen­
burg, North Carolina, who are similarly situated and 
affected by the policy, practice, custom and usage com­
plained of herein. Plaintiffs are citizens of the United 
States and of the State of North Carolina. All plaintiffs 
reside in the City of Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North 
Carolina, and the minor plaintiffs and other minor children 
similarly situated are eligible to attend the public schools 
of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School System, which are 
under the jurisdiction, management and control of the 
defendant. The members of the class on behalf of whom 
plaintiffs sue are so numerous as to make it impracticable 
to bring them all individually before this Court, but there 
are common questions of law and fact involved, common 
grievances arising out of common wrong- and common

Complaint



4a

relief is sought for each member of the class. The plain­
tiffs fairly and adequately represent the interest of the 
class.

IV

The defendant in this case is the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
Board of Education, a public body corporate, organized 
and existing under the laws of the State of North Carolina. 
The defendant Board maintains and generally supervises 
the public schools in the City of Charlotte and County 
of Mecklenburg, North Carolina, acting pursuant to the 
direction and authority contained in the State’s constitu­
tional provisions and statutes. As such, the Board is an 
arm of the State of North Carolina, enforcing and exercis­
ing State laws and policies.

Y

Defendant, acting under color of the authority vested 
in it by the laws of the State of North Carolina, has pur­
sued and is presently pursuing a policy, custom, practice 
and usage of operating the public school system under 
its jurisdiction on a racially discriminatory basis, to w it:

A. Defendant maintains and operates school zone lines, 
for the assignment of students to the various schools, 
which have been drawn on a racial basis with the purpose 
and effect of limiting racial mixing of students.

B. Defendant maintains and follows the practice of 
yenrdtrtug and encouraging those students who reside in 
a integrated school district to transfer to a school within 
a district where only students of their -*nee and color 
•cside iid attend. :u dear violation >c me Constitution

Complaint



5a

of the United States as interpreted in Goss v. Board of 
Education, 373 U. S. 683.

C. Defendant makes assignment of principals, teachers 
and other professional personnel on the basis of race 
and color. Negro principals, teachers and other profes­
sional personnel are assigned to schools reserved for 
Negro students and white principals, teachers and other 
professional personnel are assigned to schools reserved 
for white students.

Complaint

VI

On or about December 9, 1964, several Negro parents, 
including adult plaintiffs herein, petitioned the defendant 
Board on behalf of their children, requesting that the 
Board immediately take steps to eliminate the racially 
discriminatory practices complained of herein. On Decem­
ber 11, 1964, receipt of this petition was acknowledged 
by the Board, in a letter by the Superintendent, who fur­
ther advised that the matter would be brought to the 
attention of the Board. No further reply has been received 
by plaintiffs, nor has the Board taken steps to eliminate 
its racially discriminatory practices. Bather, the Board 
has taken steps to extend and to perpetuate its racially 
discriminatory policies and practices with respect to the 
assignment of students and teachers.

VII

Plaintiffs have made reasonable efforts, as set forth 
above, to communicate their dissatisfaction, with the 
racially discriminatory policies of defendant, but without 
effecting an- mange Plan: b . v. ia 1:17 further



6a

attempts would prove futile in providing the relief plain­
tiffs seek herein.

Complaint

VIII

Plaintiffs see here the elimination of all racially dis­
criminatory practices of defendant Board, the reorganiza­
tion of the school system into a unitary nonracial system 
wherein the educational opportunities offered by the de­
fendant are made available to students without regard 
to race or color, wherein there are no racial designations 
in the assignment of teachers, principals, and other pro­
fessional school personnel, and wherein school plans, 
operation, and all school activities are free from racial 
designation and restrictions.

IX

Plaintiffs and members of the class which they represent 
are irreparably injured by the acts o f defendant eom- 
piaiued of herein. The continued operation of racially 
gerrymandered school roue dues in. Charlotte and Ifeek- 
eaburg County. North Carodiua. the continued ow  ration 

% m U  transfer nhai,, the aaŝ aaMgah of teachers-, 
'oruieipa.s ami other :-etes$:cna_ school personnel ;n a 

• - ■ ' t ' - r r
'reseat- vchtea. -are secured I® d b *  hy nfc* W n^.. 
and Fates-. Tn»ceetion Clauses u the Facrteeam. 

.w se& utau; s- die Cbastitrdnofi. of the Ftuoad Fnooe- 
Ute- 'it. v. trfis amf asBBliwBs - '.ibb.

tf ttit Funv.uuv: > and 
-%si4; w tE bik  u x  .r-Ti^ertsd.'. uttii b y  ~2es

n,-. i.ut C- .... ^



7a

by such uncertainties and delays as to deny substantial 
relief, would involve a multiplicity of suits, cause further 
irreparable injury and occasion damage, vexation and in­
convenience to the plaintiffs and those similarly situated.

W herefore, plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court 
advance this cause on the docket and order a speedy hear­
ing of the action according to law and, after such hearing, 
enter a preliminary and permanent decree enjoining the 
defendant, its agents, employees and successors and all 
persons in active concert and participation with them:

1. From maintaining and operating racially drawn 
school zone lines and attendance districts;

2. From maintaining or sanctioning policies and prac­
tices permitting students on the basis of race to transfer 
from racially mixed schools and school districts to racially 
segregated schools;

3. From assigning teachers, principals arid other pro­
fessional school personnel to the public schools under their 
jurisdiction on the basis of race or color.

In the alternative, plamt.'rs pray that this CV-rt enter 
a decree directing defendant to present a eoreplete plan 
within & period of time which will permit Its ImpPsmecta- 
tfofi. during the school year of Itho-dd. reorganizing tee 
entire system of Chaar&sUSt and ifeafetderg County.
Xorsfc Care Ena. into a urrary system which - r i
^ cr-r«-e a plan for n e  a&efgasaent of jwpis- teacners- 
p iw m td  snd other sohrel persitmei oel a asezastti cases 
^ i -  the ^ -r h a r t r. of svy tther racial. SseriEkahm . in 
t ie  TcenhtiL «C the sehyi system <ar rrrrirna, when k 
rases m  rm?e *r •'.aflwr-

Complaint



8a

Plaintiffs pray that if this Court directs defendant to 
produce a desegregation plan, this Court will retain juris­
diction of this case pending Court approval and full and 
complete implementation of defendant’s plan.

Plaintiffs pray that this Court will allow them their 
costs herein, reasonable counsel fees and grant such other, 
further and additional or alternative relief as may appear 
to the Court to be equitable and just.

Respectfully submitted,

C onrad 0 .  P earson

203% Bast Chapel Hill Street 
Durham, North Carolina

J. L evonne  Chambers

405% East Trade Street 
Charlotte, North Carolina

J ack Greenberg

D errick A. B ell , J r.*
10 Columbus Circle
New York, New York 10019

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Complaint

' Captions, signatures and certificates of service on all subsequent plead­
ings are omitted.



9a

The defendant, answering the Complaint of the plaintiffs, 
says and alleges:

F irst Defense

The Complaint fails to state a claim or cause of action 
against the defendant upon which relief can be granted.

Second Defense

In the Complaint as filed, the plaintiffs undertake to 
maintain a class suit whereas under the facts alleged and 
the law they are not entitled to maintain such a class action.

Third Defense

The plaintiffs have failed to first seek any relief which 
they may demand by resorting to the rules and regulations 
prescribed by the defendant pursuant to law for the assign­
ment and reassignment of pupils.

F ourth Defense

There is no basis for affording the plaintiffs the relief 
they demand with respect to teaching personnel for the rea­
son that no teacher is a party to this suit as such and the 
teachers and the course of instruction they give in the 
schools attended by the minor plaintiffs are in no wise 
inferior to or less qualified than teachers and courses of 
instruction in all other schools in the Administrative Unit.

F ifth Defense

The plaintiffs demand future relief on the basis of al­
legations as to past assignment policies and any hearing

Answer



10a

by the Court on the merits should be based on assignment 
policies currently being formulated for school operations 
beginning with the forthcoming school term.

Sixth Defense

The defendant, answering the particular allegations of 
the Complaint of the plaintiffs and by way of a further 
answer and defense, alleges:

1 .

The allegations of paragraph I are denied.

2.
The allegations of paragraph II are denied.

3.

It is admitted the minor plaintiffs are citizens of the 
United States and the State of North Carolina and reside 
in the City of Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Caro­
lina, and are eligible to attend the Public Schools of the 
Mecklenburg County School Administrative Unit; and this 
defendant alleges that such of the minor plaintiffs as are 
actually enrolled in said schools have been enrolled pur­
suant to their assignment thereto by the defendant solely 
on the basis of their residence in attendance areas estab­
lished by the defendant without regard to racial considera­
tions. This defendant further alleges that no one of the 
minor plaintiffs in attendance upon said schools has hereto­
fore voiced any objection to his or her assignment nor ap­
plied for reassignment to any other school in the exercise 
of the right and privilege so to do for which reasonable

Answer



11a

rules and regulations of the defendant provide. Except as 
herein admitted, the allegations of paragraph III are de­
nied.

Answer

4.

The allegations of paragraph IV are admitted except 
this defendant alleges that it has exclusive original juris­
diction in the matter of assigning pupils to its several 
schools.

5.

The allegations of paragraph V and subsections A. B. 
and C. thereof are denied except as the same may be herein­
after admitted in the defendant’s further answer and de­
fense.

6.
Answering the allegations of paragraph VI, the defen­

dant alleges that it has received in its official capacity a 
communication from the National Association for the Ad­
vancement of Colored People by Mrs. U. S. Brooks, Presi­
dent of the Charlotte Branch thereof, to which was attached 
the signatures of a number of persons, among whom were 
some of the parents of the minor plaintiffs in this action; 
that said communication sought no specific relief in their 
behalf. The information contained in said communication 
as well as that contained in communications from other 
school patrons and received at public hearings has been 
and is being carefully considered and weighed by the defen­
dant in the course of deliberations in which it has been 
engaged and is now engaged for the purpose of establishing 
its school enrollment and assignment policy for the forth­



12a

coming 1965-66 school term. Except as herein admitted, 
the allegations of paragraph VI are denied.

7.

The allegations of paragraph VII are denied for that this 
defendant holds regular meetings which are open to all 
school patrons and it has always stood ready and willing 
and now stands ready and willing at all proper times to 
hear any and all patrons of the Public School System who 
may seek any change in any policy established by the de­
fendant.

8.

The allegations of paragraph VIII are denied.

9.

The allegations of paragraph IX  are denied.

A nd foe a F ubther  A n sw er  and  D efense , th e  
D efendant  A lleg es :

1 .

Over an extended period of time this defendant has 
moved progressively and as rapidly as administrative and 
school facility problems would permit toward a goal of 
full compliance with the requirements of federal law in its 
pupil enrollment and attendance policies. In 1963 it em­
barked upon a program of establishing attendance areas 
msec upon geographical factors along with each chela 
c" such area attending or having the right to attend the 
school sorving such area, Ik  that year attniritaw aureate 

for twelve schools for the ;A * r i  year

Answer



13a

1963-64 with the public announcement that the defendant’s 
policy contemplated the progressive extension of similarly 
established attendance areas. The defendant did greatly 
extend this policy for the school year 1964-65 by creating 
attendance areas on a strictly geographical basis for some 
fifty schools. Minutes of the defendant for May 31, 1963, 
and May 14, 1964, record the decisions of the defendant 
with respect to this program and declared its purpose to 
extend the same.

Answer

2.
For a considerable period of time prior to the institution 

of this action the defendant was engaged in extensive 
deliberations looking to the enlargement of this program 
and the establishment of broad attendance policies for the 
school year 1965-66, and said deliberations have been con­
tinued and are now in progress and this defendant expects 
to have such program and policies fully formulated and 
established before the end of the current school term; and 
this defendant is informed and believes and so alleges that 
such facts have been well known to the plaintiffs.

W herefore, having fully answered the Complaint of the 
plaintiffs, the defendant prays the Court:

1. That this Action be dismissed.

2. That no injunction, temporary or permanent, be issued 
against it upon the Petition of the plaintiffs.

3. That this Court hold and adjudge that no basis exists, 
nor has any proper legal ground been shown, for maintain­
ing class action in this ease.



14a

4. That further proceedings in this action he stayed and 
held in abeyance until a hearing on any questions of law 
or fact raised by the pleadings and on the merits of the 
case may be had in the light of school attendance and pupil 
assignment policies to be established by the defendant for 
the forthcoming school year and thereafter.

5. That this defendant recover its costs and that it have 
such other and further relief as it may be entitled to receive.

Answer



15a

To:

B rock B arkley , E sq.
820 Law Building
Charlotte, North Carolina

Plaintiffs request that the defendant, the Charlotte- 
Mecklenburg Board of Education, answer under oath in 
accordance with Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure, the following interrogatories:

1. List for each public school in the City of Charlotte
and County of Mecklenburg, North Carolina:

a. Grades served in each school;

b. Number of Negro pupils in attendance as of the 
most recent date for which figures are available 
for each school;

c. Number of white pupils in attendance as of the 
most recent date for which figures are available 
for each school;

d. Average class size for each school during the
1964-65 school year (most recent available 
figures);

e. Anticipated or projected enrollment of Negro and 
white pupils at each school for the 1965-66 school 
year;

f. Number of Negro teachers and other administra­
tive or professional personnel employed as of 
the beginning of the 1964-65 school year at each 
school;

Interrogatories



16a

g. Number of white teachers and other administra­
tive or professional personnel employed as of 
the beginning of the 1964-65 school year at each 
school;

h. Number of Negro and white teachers and other 
administrative or professional personnel antici­
pated or planned for the 1965-66 school year;

i. The planned pupil capacity of each school;

j. Pupil-teacher ratio at each school during the 
1964-65 school year (most recent available 
figures).

2. List for each school having Negro and white pupils 
in attendance:

a. The name of the school;

b. The number of Negro pupils in attendance at 
the school;

c. The number of white pupils in attendance at the 
school;

d. I f the school is otherwise predominantly white 
in attendance, the date the Negro pupil or pupils 
were assigned;

e. If the school is otherwise predominantly Negro 
in attendance, the date the white pupil or pupils 
were assigned.

* * * * *
5. As to each school to which students are assigned 

by the Board, including, if any, schools located out­
side of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District, 
please provide the following information for the 
1964-65 school year:

Interrogatories



17a

a. The name of each school which has been ac­
credited by the Southern Association of Colleges 
and Secondary Schools;

b. Percentage of students entering each school, who, 
based upon size of past graduating classes, are 
likely to graduate.

6. Give the standards employed, as to each school, if 
such standards vary with different schools, to deter­
mine the initial assignment of children to a par­
ticular public school:
a. When a child enters the school system at the first 

grade level;
b. When a child enters the school system at an upper 

grade level;
c. When a child is promoted from elementary school 

to junior high school;

d. When a child is promoted from elementary school 
to high school;

e. When a child is promoted from junior high 
school to high school;

f. When a child changes residence from one place 
within the school district served by the Board 
to another place within the district served by 
the Board;

g. When a child moves into the district served by 
the Board from another school outside of the 
Board’s jurisdiction.

7. State whether school zones, attendance lines or some 
geographic definition determines or is a factor in

Interrogatories



18a

assignment or transfer of pupils to either or all of 
the public schools under the jurisdiction of the 
Board.

8. I f the answer to Interrogatory 7 is in the affirmative, 
attach a map describing said school zones, attend­
ance lines or geographic definition with respect to 
each such school, or if this is not possible, state 
where such a map may be located, if available, and 
when such map may be inspected.

9. If the answer to Interrogatory 7 is in the affirmative, 
list for each school zone or attendance area the 
number of Negro school children regardless of 
grade currently residing in such zone or attendance 
area and the number of white school children re­
gardless of grade currently residing in such zone 
or attendance area.

10. If the answer to Interrogatory 7 is in the affirmative, 
state what standards or criteria were used to deter­
mine school zones or attendance areas.

11. If the answer to Interrogatory 7 is in the negative 
as to either school or all schools, state whether 
school zones, attendance lines or some geographic 
definition of assignment to the public schools have 
ever been employed by the Board and, if so, state 
when use was discontinued, specifically referring to 
minutes of Board meetings or other public records 
where this can be verified.

16. State any course, programs, or facilities, if any, 
which are available at schools attended by white

Interrogatories



19a

Interrogatories

pupils only (or predominantly by white pupils) 
which are not available at schools attended by 
Negroes only (or predominantly by Negroes).

Please take notice that a copy of such answers must be 
served upon the undersigned within fifteen (15) days after 
service.

Dated: February 9, 1965.



20a

The defendant, The Oharlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 
Education, by its Superintendent of Schools and Secretary 
to the Board, answers the Interrogatories served upon it 
by the plaintiffs on the 9th day of February, 1965, as fol­
lows :

1 . Interrogatory No. 1. Attached hereto, identified as 
Table 1, is a table listing all schools presently in operation 
within the Mecklenburg County Administrative School 
Unit, the number of negro pupils and the number of white 
pupils in each school, the average class size, the number of 
negro and the number of white professional employees in 
each school and the pupil ratio in each school, the same 
serving as an answer to subsections (a), (b), (c), (d),
(f), (g), and (j) of Interrogatory No. 1. With respect to 
subsections (e), (h) and (i), the defendant is unable to 
answer the same for that the projected enrollment of negro 
and white pupils at each school for the forthcoming school 
year cannot be anticipated at this time, nor can the number 
of white and negro teachers and other administrative or 
professional personnel for such year nor the planned pupil 
capacity for such year be anticipated; except that the 
normal annual increase in school population has varied be­
tween 2300 and 3400 in recent years, and such increases 
require a corresponding increase in teacher personnel.

2. Interrogatory No. 2. Attached hereto and identified 
as Table 2 is a table listing the schools attended by both 
white and colored pupils, the number of negro pupils in 
attendance and the number of white pupils in attendance 
at each of said schools and the approximate period of as­
signment to predominately white and predominately negro

Answers to Interrogatories



21a

pupils, the period as to each school being indicated by 
asterisks which appear in said table. The figures within 
parenthesis, in each case, refer to the number of pupils 
who were assigned or enrolled but later withdrew from a 
particular school. All of the pupils assigned, excepting 
fourteen negro and two white pupils, became enrollees.

# * # # *

5. Interrogatory No. 5. Attached hereto and identified 
as Table 3 is a listing of each school which has been ac­
credited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Sec­
ondary Schools and the percentage of students entering 
each school likely to graduate.

6. Interrogatory No. 6. Attached hereto and marked 
Exhibit “A ” is a complete copy of Rules and Regulations 
governing initial assignment of children to the Public 
Schools within the Mecklenburg County Administrative 
School Unit, including particular public schools, and govern­
ing initial entry at the first grade level and at upper grade 
levels including promotion from elementary school to junior 
high school, from junior high school to high school, change 
of residence, new residents, which Exhibit fully answers 
subsections (a), (b), (c), (e), (f) and (g) of said Inter­
rogatory No. 6, except that the defendant knows of no situa­
tion (Interrogatory 6-d) when a child would be promoted 
from an elementary school to a high school as distinguished 
from a junior high school. Except as set forth in these 
regulations, no particular standards are involved other than 
that the pupil be qualified from an academic and mental 
standpoint to enter the particular grade to which such child 
may be assigned.

Answers to Interrogatories



22a

7. Interrogatory No. 7. As set forth in Exhibit “A ” , 
attendance areas have been established for all schools 
within the Mecklenburg County Administrative School 
Unit, the boundaries of which areas have been established 
on a geographical basis, with certain temporary exceptions 
noted in said Exhibit.

8. Interrogatory No. 8. As set forth in Exhibit “ A ” 
these attendance areas have been platted on three maps 
officially adopted by the defendant, one map for elementary 
schools, one map for junior high schools and one map for 
senior high schools. These maps are on display in the office 
of the Superintendent and are available for inspection at 
any time during business hours by any interested person. 
Smaller prints for distribution are not yet available but 
will be within a short period of time, and, when available, 
prints will be furnished counsel for the plaintiffs.

9. Interrogatory No. 9. It is impossible to list for each 
school zone or attendance area the number of negro children 
currently residing therein and the number of white children 
currently residing therein. Racial factors were not con­
sidered in the establishment of such attendance areas, and, 
therefore, no effort was made by the defendant to either 
count or estimate the number of negro or white children 
within any given area. In the absence of any general assign­
ment of pupils under the new regulations, no school has a 
record of pupil enrollment in new attendance areas; and 
attendance figures are collected by individual schools. An 
exception would be where there is no change in an attend­
ance area boundary.

10. Interrogatory No. 10. Boundaries of such areas were 
determined on a basis of natural land marks, such as streets

Answers to Interrogatories



23a

or creeks, safety factors in travel between school and home, 
the area which could be most conveniently and efficiently 
served by any particular school, the location of a particular 
residential development with reference to a particular 
school, etc. but no effort was made to draw a circle and 
put a school in the exact middle thereof as such would be 
not only impracticable but impossible in the establishment 
of attendance areas.

11. Interrogatory No. 11. Under the former dual system 
the defendant, of course, made assignments of pupils to the 
Public Schools according to traditional methods then in 
effect, there then being a number of overlapping attendance 
areas. For the school year 1962-63, the defendant, through 
committee action, established attendance areas for Dilworth 
and Bethune Elementary Schools and assigned all pupils 
within each attendance area to the school serving such area 
with an option to transfer at the election of the pupil. For 
the 1963-64 school year, the defendant created twelve more 
attendance areas on a geographical basis. Attached hereto 
and marked Exhibit “ B” is a copy of a Resolution establish­
ing such areas, giving the names of the affected schools and 
containing option privileges, said Resolution being incorpo­
rated in the Minutes of a meeting of the defendant held on 
May 31, 1963. For the school year 1964-65, the defendant 
created new attendance areas on a geographical basis for 
forty-three additional schools. Attached hereto and marked 
Exhibit “ C” is a copy of a Resolution adopted by the de­
fendant creating such areas, naming the schools and con­
taining an option privilege, said Resolution being incorpo­
rated in the Minutes of the defendant for a meeting held 
on May 14, 1964. Said attendance areas continued in exist-

Amwers to Interrogatories



24a

Answers to Interrogatories

ence until the establishment of new attendance areas gen­
erally as set forth in Exhibit “ A ” . Henceforth, the rules 
and policies set forth in Exhibit “A ” will control.

* * * * *
16. Interrogatory No. 16. Attached hereto is a table, 

identified as Table No. 4, prepared by the Research Depart­
ment of the defendant and which undertakes to provide the 
information for which this interrogatory apparently calls.

Dated: April 14, 1965.



TABLE 1. ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORY #1 , CIVIL ACTION NO. 1974
(Answers a-d, f, g and j for each public school, March 6, 1965)

it

School
Grades
served

(a)

Negro 
pup i1s

(b) .....

Alexander Junior 7-9
c/Alexander Street 1-6 342
Ashley Park 1-6

cj 0a i n 1-9
Ba rr i nger 1-6

C> Serryh i 1 1 1-6
Bethune 1-6 343
B i cidl ev i 11 e 1-6 434
Bill ingsvi1le 1-9 729

c. Sriarwcod 1-6 2

Chantilly 1-6
^  Clear Creek 1-7

Cochrane Junior 7-9
c^Col 1 i nswood 1-6
Cornel ius 1-6

C^Cctswold 1-6
Coulwood Junior 7-9 3
Crestdale 1-6 97

C • Dav i dson 1 -6
Marie Davis 1-6 808

C- Der i ta 1-6 6
Devonsh i re 1-6 2
D i1 worth 1-6 100
Double Oaks 1-6 703
Druid Hills 1-6 520

Wh i te Average Profess ional Pupi1 -
pupi1s class Emolovees Teacher

s i ze Negro Wn i te rat io
(c) (d) .... .If)___ J s ) ____ (J)

577 25.1* 28.9 20.0
31.1 14.1 24.2

654 3 U 22.9 28.6
674 28.1 28.2 23,9
604 28.8 24.8 24.4

1026 29.3* 39.6 25.9
9 25,1* 17.6 20.0

31.0 17.2 25.2
26.0* 32.1 22.7

582 29.1 23.9 24.4

445 29.7 18.8 23.7
207 29.6 9.6 21.6
872 30.1 35.4 24.6
375 28.8 16.1 23.3
241 26.8 11.3 21.3

631 30.0 25.0 25.2
574 26.2* 27.1 21 .3

24.3 5.0 19.4
178 29.7 , 7.8 22.8

26.9*3 34.3 23.6

892 28.8 35.4 25.4
474 29.6 19.5 24.4
401 25.0*? 23,8 21.1

29.3 28.2 24.9
30.6 20.7 25.1

L' East Mecklenburg High 10-12 
Eastover 1"6
Eastway Junior 7-9
E1 i zabeth 1"6
Enderiy Park 1-6

1782 28.7
704 30.6
1046 28.3 „

5 448 23.8*2
368 30.7

79.2
27.1
43.2
22.9
14.9

22.5
26.0
24.2
19.3 
24.7

Fa i rvi ew 
First Ward 
Garinger High 
Alexander Graham Junior 

C, J. H. Gunn High

Hording High 
Hawthorne Junior 

C* H i ckory Grove 
H i gh1 and 

O  Hoski ns

1 -6 
1-6 

10-12 
7-9 

1-12

10-12
7-9
1-6
1-6
1-6

702
473

2

696

25

2

2266
1048

1002
670
530
273
342

29.3* 2
26.3 
26.7* 
26.9 
26,8*

!.Z

26.4*
24.0
29.4
25.0*
28.5*

28.0
22.8

33.6

100.0
43.8

48.0 
33.9
21.7
14.0
14.7

25.1
20.7
22.7
23.9
20.7

20.9 
20.5 
24.4 
19-6 
23.3

*Speci al educat ion~cTass^(es)^Jncl uded j, ^  ^  ° f ' *
*Th i s column shows Pupil —  .■■



25a

Table 1 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 1



26a

Table 1 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # l

(See Opposite)!®"



P. 2

TABLE 1.
(Answers

School

£>Huntersvi1le
Huntingtowne Farms 

Q y ! d 1 ew i 1 d
irwin Avenue Junior 

^  Amay James

(y Ada Jenkins 
'.akev i ew 

C- '.ansdowne
L i ncoln He i ghts 

Cy Long Creek

(y Matthews Junior 
£, McClintock Junior 

Merry Oaks 
A i dwood 

teflon tel a i re

Morgan
Myers Park Elementary 
Myers Park High 
Myers Street 
Nations Ford

C y Newel 1
C> North Mecklenburg High 
Af. Northwest Junior 

Oakdal e 
d-Oakhurst

Oaklawn 
Park Road 

<L Paw Creek
Piedmont Junior 

C. P i nev i 11 e

O  P i newood 
£. Plato Price Junior 

Plaza Road 
Quai1 Hoi low Junior 
Rama Road

Ranson Junior 
Second Ward High 
Sedgefield Elementary 
Sedgefield Junior 
Selwyn

ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORY #1, CIVIL ACTION NO. 197^
a-d, f, g and j for each public school, March 6, 1965)

Grades Negro Wh i te Average Professional Pup i1 -
served pup i1s pup i1s class Employees Teacher

s i ze Negro Wh i te ratio
(a) (b) (c) (d) (f) _ M ---- (J)

1-6 553 29.1 * 22.9 24.1
1-6 358 29.8 15.1 23.7
1-6 592 29.6 23.9 24.8
7-9 785 2 1.8*3 42.7 1.0 18.0
1-4 360 27.7 15.5 23.2

1-7 431 30.8 17.0 25.4
1-6 400 26.7* 18.5 21.6
1-6 633 31.7 23.9 26.5
1-6 783 32.6 29.1 26.9
1-6 423 30.2 17.6 24.0

1-9 937 27.6 39.7 23.6
7-9 1273 27.7 51.5 24.7
1-6 538 29.9 . 21.9 24.6
1-6 560 26.7*3 24.9 22,5
1-6 720 28.8 29.1 24.7

1-6 305 25.4* 14.9 20.5
1-6 575 27.4 24.9 23.1

10-12 31 1772 29.6 . 76.7 23.5
1-6 820 29.3* 32.2 25.5
1-6 513 28.5 21.6 23.8

1-6 463 30.9 18.3 25.3
10-12 1 1155 23,2 51.8 22.3

7-9 773 27.6 33.7 22.9
1-6 402 28.7 17.2 23.4

1-6 548 28.8 22.8 24.0

1-6 666 30.3 26.0 25.6

1-6
1-6
7-9
1-6

121

583
793
291
364

30.7 
30,5 , 
18.7* 
28.0*

22.7 
30.3
26.8 
16.2

25.7
26.2
15.4
22.5

1-6 719 30.0
25.4

28.1 25.6
19.9

5-9
1-6

505
400

24.0*
28.6* 17.7 22.6 

21.8
7-9 766 25.5 18.7 23.6
1-6 442 29.5

7-9
7-12

9
1411

658 26.7
26.1* 70.0

30.0
1.5

21.8

22.2
19.7
24.3

1 -6
7-9
1-6

3
6

526
920
531

29.4
26.5
29.5

40.5
21.9

22.9
24.2



27a



28a

Table 1 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory #1

(See Opposite)83^



TABLE 1. ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORY #1, CIVIL ACTION NO. 1974
(Answers a-d, f ,  g and j for each public school, March 6, 1965)

School Grades
served

(a)

Neg ro 
pup i1s

(b)

Wh i te 
pup i1s

(c)

Average 
class 
s i ze 
(d)

Professional 
EmD1ovees 

Negro White
If)_____k)______

Pup i1 - 
Teacher 
ratio 

(8)____

Seversv i 1 1 e 1-6 96 229 27.1 14.8 22.0
Shamrock Gardens 1-6 536 29.8 21.9 24.5

C  Sharon 1-6 591 31.1 22.9 25.8
oSmith Junior 7-9 1115 25.9 48.6 22.9

^  South Mecklenburg High 10-12 30 1430 24.7 72.0 20.3

JJpaugh Junior High 7-9 1 930 25.2*4 42.5 21.9
Starmount 1-6 481 28.3 20.9 23.0

fl,Statesville Road 1-6 650 29.5 25.9 25.1
c_ Steele Creek 1 -6 222 27.8 10.7 20.7
C, Ster 1 ing High 1 -1 2 699 25,9* 33.9 20.6

c Thomasboro 1-6 885 29.5
46.1

34.3 25.8
C- Torrence-Lytle High 1 -1 2 1005 27.2* 21.8

Tryon Hills 1-6 324 27.0 15.0 21.6
Tuckaseegee 1-6 631 31.5

25.8
23.9 26.4

University Park 1-6 700 31.8 2/. 1

Villa Heights 1-6 23 594 25.7*
8.3

28.3 21 .8
Wesley Heights 1-6 214 26.8 2.2 20.4
West Charlotte High 10-12 1560 30.0 65.0 2.0 23.3

6- West Mecklenburg High 10-12 1 1270 27.6
34.9

6 1.4 20.7
Williams Junior 7-g 752 25.9 21.5

W i1 more 1 -6 6 323 27.4 15.4 21 .4

C. W'i 1 son Junior 7-9 1064 26.6 45.6 23.3
d  Wi ndson Park 1-6 1 679 30.9 25.8 26.4

Wi nterf ield 1-6 455 30.3
14.8

18.7 24.3
Wood 1 and 1 -6 360 30.0 24.3

t' Wood 1 awn 1-6 283 25.7
18.6
49.9
19.6

14.0 20.2

1sabel1 a Wyche 
York Road H i gh 
Zeb Vance

1-6
7 -12

1-6

383
1041
465

25.5*o
26.7*
29.1

ZU c o
20.9
23.7

1 -1 2 20.341 51.995 Z L 3 .  & 1 * 3  .2263^0 2 1 ^ 3

*This asterisk in column j indicates one or more specia 
classes somewhat accounting for less class s^e.

of b =>nd c divided by sum of
*This column shows Pupi1-Professional ratio or sum 

_f and £.



29a



Table 2 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 2

(See Opposite)!®"



TABLE 2.
(School

ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORY 
s Having Negro and White 
at End of Sixth Month,

#2, CIVIL ACTION NO, 1974 
Pupils in Attendance 

March 6, 1965)

School Pupi1s in Attendance Date Duoils assianed - -
Negro(*) Wh i te(*) Neqro (if White (if 

predominantly white) predominantly Negro

(a) (b) (c) (d) __________________ (e)_______________

Bethune El. 343 9 (+2) irk

Griarwood El. 2 (+1) 582 -’wV
Coulwood Jr. HS 3 574 **
Deri ta El. 6 892 VoV Pupils were individually
Devonsh ire E1„ 2 474 ** assigned by School Board - 

**Before school opening
D i1 worth E1 . 100(+10) 401 *** (14 schools)
Cl izabeth El. 5 448 ****
Garinger Sr. HS 2 2266 ** ***Before and after school
Hawthorne Jr. HS 25 (+10 670 *** opening (7 schools)
H i ghland E1. 2 273 **

*>v**After school opening 
(2 schools)

Myers Park Sr. HS 31 (+4) 1772 ***
North Meek. Sr. HS 1 1155 ****
Piedmont Jr. HS 121 (+14) 291 A A
Ranson Jr. HS 9(+l) 658 VoV
Sedgefi eld El. 3 526 **

Sedgefield Jr. HS 6 (+1) 920 VoV

Seversvilie El. 96 (+4) 229 Vr-'oV

South Meek Sr. HS 30 (+15) 1430 ***

Herbert Spaugh Jr. HS 1 930
Villa Heights El. 23(+3) 594 ***

West Meek. Sr. HS 1 1270 V-'r

Wi1 more El. 6 323 VnV

W i ndsor Park El. 1 679 **

Total 819(64) 17,366(+2)

* i nd i cates 
except i ng 14 of

additional numbers which were 
Negro and 2 of white pupils,

assigned by School Board: 
become enrol lees.

A1 1 the a s s ig n e d ,



31a



32a

Table 3. A nswers to I nterrogatory # 5 , Civil A ction

N o. 1974

Schools Accredited by Southern Association of Schools 
and Colleges*

Table 3 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 5

Per Cent Entering 
10th Graders Who

Name of Accredited School Graduate

A. Integrated schools (and year accredited)

Garinger Senior High (1913) 77%

Myers Park Senior High (1952) 94%

North Mecklenburg Senior High (1953) 75%

South Mecklenburg Senior High (1961) 83%

West Mecklenburg Senior High (1953) 75%

B. Other accredited schools

East Mecklenburg Senior High (1953) 79%

Harding Senior High (1946) 70%

Second Ward Senior High (1937) 58%

West Charlotte Senior High (1948) 68%

York Road Senior High (1962) 63%

* Among the 23 schools having pupils individually assigned by the 
School Board, only Senior High Schools are accredited by the Southern 
Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools (n ow  nam ed  Southern 
Association of Schools and Colleges).



33a

Table 4. A nswers to I nterrogatory # 1 6 , Civil A ction

No. 1974

Status of Courses, Programs and Facilities of Schools

Table 4 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 1 6

Item

Courses—Elem­
entary 1-6

Programs

Facilities
(General)

Predominantly Negro Predominantly white

la. All schools have classroom teach­
ers for all state required courses:

All are self-contained classes
lb. All schools have (shared accord­

ing to size) teachers to enrich the 
program (art, library usage, mu­
sic, physical education and reme­
dial reading)

lc. Certain centrally located schools 
have classes for the retarded (11 
classes in predominantly Negro 
schools and 19 classes in predomi­
nantly white schools)

ld. There are six classes for the tal­
ented (2 at Elizabeth and 4 at 
Myers Park Elementary)

le. These programs (lb -ld  are avail­
able to all pupils, also, in the sum­
mer school

lf. All new schools share equally ac­
cording to classrooms in the facil­
ities to equip them

lg. Each principal in old schools pre­
sents his needs for budget review



34a

Table 4 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory $16  

T able 4. (Coni’d)

Item Predominantly Negro Predominantly white

and action is based on size and 
needs of each school wherever it is 
located

lh. See facility assets report (below)

Courses Junior 
High

N ogrsats

IV o schools have self-contained 7th 
grade classes sharing- in enrichment as 
the elementary grades—Ada -Jenkins 
N and Clessr Creek fur). AC other 

sc 'ce - ea ••• C .1 ;r - • g ~~ --
Che lunree :Cgh CCrrgram eonsiscs of 
svre .a mange-social studies bases

tocsign argmsge. argnm sa, nhysssd. 
sjdtieanofc. w »  veetyiete *  sjx-amr 
dh.- -V  ttSrde*-;i. t^B sW S t. m i?  S3XB$$$BZr

'ytognyn -its rttem v ss- tra * a il at Ct- 
%  Ce* 46NSS6

t.v. - S- Sss ■ SS aftMRS

' vs v s
S*? ~\ esjfi - Ĉ—.
ŜssSSSifc.

sin n_
sajauMts- w*c jess

re --- -- - v a s ' ::
;CS W' t

'̂ S&C



35a

Table 4 Attached to Answers to Interrogatory #16 

Table 4. (Coni’d)

Item Predominantly Negro Predominantly white

— .1-;

—J. H. Gunn has only 146 pupils in 
senior high served by 10 professional 
staff (or 15 pupils per staff)
—Sterling has only 66 pupils in senior 
high served by 8 professional staff (or 
8 pupils per staff)
— Torrenee-Lytle has 235 pupils in sen­
ior high served by 14 professional staff 
(or 17 pupils per staff). These may be 
compared to
—West Charlotte having 1560 pupils, 
67 professional staff for 23 pupils per 
staff ) and to

—Garmger .taring 2268 pupils. 100 
professional staff or 2$ oupi-s per 
staff

Toe- janor*,* *v : vtax/no son s. ovoe-pt 
d fe ske% haw  Jmt 
n or?&a  ssatf iasogratt» for ea* 
jnnu. Krt. T'disreiv**-: eomtaiuy, 
jKrgp- s-itwi- alary ejrn pyp>.. 

iitr eafli-y*- v* y-iir smijtttyuuW’ J.ftltyr 
m t ErKOiaruva-
ItessseziesL  ar anssn #aft nmune- oev 
rrmu' wit u "in -sgruar or-j^eatt of
id ^ 'gedt ter

± — •• r v -• - mine a-; Id. lx  lx. satin'*



36a

Table 4 Attached to Ansivers to Interrogatory #16  

TABLE 4 (Cont’d)
Status of Courses, Programs and Facilities of Schools 

Facility Assets Report of all schools who per pupil have least and 
most facilities:
A. Schools with less than $400 facility assets per pupil served

Negro (3)

No.
Profes­
sional

No.
Pupils

Crestdale 5.0 97 —57 employees affected or
Myers Street 32.2 820 57 of 877 =  6.5%
Zeb Vance 19.6 465 —1382 pupils affected

White (4)

No.
Profes­
sional

No.
Pupils

or 1382 of 20,341 =  6.8%

Berryhill 39.6 1026 —124 employees affected
Derita 35.4 898 or 124 of 2263 =  5.5%
Hoskins 14.7 342 —3151 pupils affected or
Thomasboro 34.3 •885 3151 of 51,995 =  6.1%

Schools with more thani $1600 facility assets per pupil served

Negro (1)

No.
Profes­
sional

No.
Pupils Affected

Williams Jr. 34.9 752 —4.0% of employees (N)

White (4) 

Coulwood Jr. 27.1 3 +  574

—3.7% of pupils (N)

— .2% of pupils (N)
— 7.1% of employees (w)

Davidson* 7.8 178
Harding Sr. 48.0 1002
Myers Park Sr. 76.7 31 +  1772 —6.8% of pupils (w)

Total 159.6 34 (N) 3526(w)

* Davidson School is not used to capcacity due to lack of pupils in the area.
Note: This computation was derived from the audit of the Charlotte Mecklenburg
Board of Education, June 30, 1964.



37a

Adopted 3/11/65

Be It Resolved By The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 
Education:

1.

Attendance Areas

Attendance areas are hereby established for all schools 
within the Mecklenburg County Administrative School 
IJnit (with the temporary exceptions hereinafter noted 
under the article entitled “ E xceptions” ) and the bound­
aries thereof are hereby established as shown on those 
three certain maps this day exhibited to the Board and 
approved by the Board. These maps are identified and 
designated as follows: “Map No. 1, Attendance Areas 
for Elementary Schools” , “Map No. 2, Attendance Areas 
for Junior High Schools” and “ Map No. 3, Attendance 
Areas for Senior High Schools” . The Chairman and 
Secretary of this Board shall each affix his signature to 
each map in his official capacity and the official seal of 
the Board shall be affixed, as evidence of its adoption by 
the Board. A copy of each map shall be kept at each 
school in the attendance areas shown thereon. The maps 
shall be open to public inspection in the office of the 
Superintendent and at the schools.

2.

Assignment of Pupils

All pupils within any attendance area shall be assigned 
to the school of his or her grade within such attendance 
area. Assignment for any forthcoming school term shall 
be made not later than the last school day of the preced-

Exhibit “ A”  Attached to Answers to Interrogatory i^6



38a

ing school term. In the case of children enrolled during 
such term, notice of assignment may he given by noting 
the same on the report card of the pupil. Except for 
beginners, pupils not then enrolled shall be assigned at 
the time of their application for enrollment.

3.

Assignment from Pre-School Clinics

Beginners (children entitled to enrollment under G. S. 
115-162) may attend any pre-school clinic but shall be 
assigned to the first grade of the school in the attendance 
area where the parent resides. Written notice of each 
assignment shall be given by mail to the parent at the 
same time as the report card notice to pupils already 
enrolled. (The word parent as used in these regulations 
shall denote the parents, if living together, or the parent 
or person in loco parentis with whom the pupil resides).

4.

Free Choice of Transfer

After original assignment, the parent of any pupil may 
apply to the Board for reassignment of such pupil to 
any school serving his or her grade and located in any 
other attendance area. Any such request for transfer shall 
be allo’wed as of course to the extent that the facilities 
and accommodations of the chosen school will permit. 
Application may be made for Choice I, Choice II and 
Choice III and transfer will be permitted, in the order 
of choice, to the school having the facilities and accom­
modations to admit such child or children. Requests for 
transfer shall be on a printed form available at the office

Exihibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 6



39a

of the Superintendent or at any school office. When 
signed, the form may he delivered or mailed to the prin­
cipal of the school of original assignment or to the office 
of the Superintendent. No reason need be given therefor. 
Application for transfer or reassignment shall be made 
not later than June 30 in the case of original assignments 
made on or before June 20. Pupils originally assigned 
thereafter shall make application for transfer within ten 
days after receipt of the notice of the assignment. If there 
should be requests for transfer to a particular school by- 
more pupils from other attendance areas than the trans­
feree school can accommodate, proximity to the school 
shall be the controlling factor.

5.

Transfers Limited in Case of New Schools

In the case of mass assignments of pupils to newly 
opened schools in newly created attendance areas, the 
Board may deny the request for the transfer of any pupil 
back to the school in which he was previously enrolled, if, 
in the judgment of the Board, it appears that the number 
of transfer requests is of such volume as to unduly reduce 
the enrollment in such new school or interfere with the 
orderly administration thereof.

6.

Varsity Athletics

A student who exercises the privilege of free choice 
under these regulations and is granted transfer to a senior 
high school (grades 10, 11 , or 12) other than the senior 
high school serving the attendance area in which he re-

Exihibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 6



40a

sides, shall not be eligible for participation in varsity 
athletics for the duration of the first school year of as­
signment in the chosen school: Except that where by 
reason of changes in the boundaries of attendance areas 
a pupil is originally assigned to a school other than the 
one in which he was previously enrolled, such pupil, if 
he chooses to return to said school and is assigned accord­
ingly, shall be immediately eligible for varsity participa­
tion. This rule shall also apply to rising tenth graders, 
who, but for the change in the attendance area boundaries, 
woud be entitled to enrollment in the school to which 
transfer is requested.

The Director of Physical Education and Athletics shall 
administer the above regulations pertaining to athletic 
participation and shall maintain appropriate records in 
his office and shall require that similarly appropriate 
records be kept in the individual senior high school offices 
pertaining to total athletic participation eligibility.

School Capacity to be Determined

A rated capacity shall be established and adopted by 
the Board for each school facility in the Mecklenburg 
County School Administrative Unit prior to the date of 
initial assignments for any ensuing school term. Under 
normal circumstances, additional assignments of students 
from outside the official attendance area of each specific 
school will be limited to a total anticipated enrollment to be 
established as of July 1 in each year not to exceed the 
rated capacity of the school plus five per cent of such 
capacity in elementary schools and ten per cent of such 
capacity in secondary schools. This limitation shall not

Exihibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 6



41a

apply to new residents in an attendance area. In elemen­
tary schools (grades 1-6) there shall also he a rated 
capacity for each grade.

The Board will act upon transfer requests immediately 
after determination as of July 1 of the anticipated enroll­
ment for an ensuing term, as hereinabove provided for, 
and the determination at that time shall control notwith­
standing subsequent changes in enrollment at any school.

8.

Transportation

Where transportation is provided in any school attend­
ance area the school buses will not normally operate beyond 
the boundaries of such attendance area, and, therefore, it 
will not be practicable to transport a pupil residing in 
one attendance area to the school of his choice in another 
attendance area. Provided, however, that a pupil residing 
in any attendance area and attending a school in another 
attendance area may have transportation to such school 
from any regular stop for receiving pupils and from the 
school to any regular stop for discharging pupils within 
such attendance area.

Exihibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory #6

9.

Enrollment Continues for School Term

Any child enrolled in any school after original assign­
ment or by transfer after original assignment shall remain 
in the school of enrollment for the school term, and no 
subsequent transfer will be permitted except for a change 
of residence from one attendance area to another or for 
other good cause shown. In the event of change of resi-



42a

dence, the pupil may elect to remain in the school of enroll­
ment for the remainder of the school term. A pupil en­
rolled in a school in an attendance area other than that 
of his or her residence shall he advanced, at the appro­
priate time, to the junior or senior high school, as the 
case may be, serving the attendance area in which the 
pupil resides. This provision shall not have the effect 
of denying such pupil the right of transfer to another 
school of his grade and choice at the end of the term of 
the school in which the pupil is enrolled.

10.

Exceptions

There exist attendance areas, serving certain schools in 
Mecklenburg County, which now overlap and embrace 
territories which include the attendance areas of other 
schools. The schools with attendance areas which overlap 
other attendance areas are Sterling School, Torrence- 
Lytle School and J. H. Gunn, which are known as union 
schools providing instruction at the elementary, junior 
high and senior high school level in grades one through 
twelve, the York Road Junior-Senior High School, the 
Plato Price and Billingsville Schools which combine 
elementary and junior high school courses of instruction, 
Crestdale Elementary School, Ada Jenkins Elementary 
School, Amay James Elementary School and Woodland 
Elementary School. The revision of the attendance areas 
from which these schools draw pupils so as to eliminate 
overlapping and to permit the children in these schools 
to be assigned according to geographically drawn attend­
ance areas will be undertaken as soon as a building con­
struction program, planned with that end in view and now

Exihibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 6



43a

underway, may be completed; not later, according to exist­
ing plans, than the beginning of the school term 1967-68. 
In the meanwhile:

(a) The senior high school program at Sterling- 
School shall be discontinued as of the close of the 
current school term, 1964-65, and the pupils in those 
grades assigned to the school or schools serving the 
attendance area or areas in which they reside.

(b) The 10th grade program at Torrence-Lytle 
School shall be discontinued at the close of the present 
school term. The entire senior high program at this 
school shall be discontinued by the close of the 1966-67 
term, depending upon the ability of the Board to 
complete its building program in that area by the close 
of that term. Bising 10th grade pupils at Torrence- 
Lytle School shall be assigned to the senior high 
school serving the area in which they reside. Rising 
11th and 12th grade pupils shall be assigned to the 
Torrence-Lytle School for the 1965-66 term. Upon 
the discontinuation of the senior high school program 
by the end of the 1966-67 term the remaining students 
shall be assigned to the senior high school serving 
the area in which they reside.

(c) Upon the completion of the Northeast Senior 
High School, the J. H. Gunn Senior High School pro­
gram will be discontinued. At that time the rising 
10th, 11th, and 12th grade students at J. H. Gunn 
Senior High School shall be assigned to the school or 
schools serving the area or areas in which they reside.

(d) The rising 7th, 8th and 9th grades at Torrence- 
Lytle Junior High School will be discontinued by the

Exihibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 6



44a

end of the 1966-67 term. At that time these students 
shall be assigned to the school or schools serving the 
area or areas in which they reside.

(e) The rising 7th, 8th and 9th grades at Sterling- 
Junior High School will be discontinued by the end 
of the 1966-67 term. At that time these students shall 
be assigned to the school or schools serving the area 
or areas in which they reside.

(f) Upon the completion of the Albemarle Road 
Junior High School, the rising 7th, 8th and 9th grades 
at J. H. Gunn Junior High School will be discontinued. 
At that time these students shall be assigned to the 
school or schools serving the area or areas in which 
they reside.

(g) Upon the completion of the Albemarle Road 
Junior High School, the Crestdale Elementary School 
will be discontinued. At that time the children (grades 
1 -6) attending that school shall be assigned to the 
school or schools serving the area or areas in which 
they reside.

(h) By the end of the 1966-67 school term, new 
attendance areas, based on good faith consideration 
of geographical factors only, shall be established for 
the Sterling Elementary School, the Torrence-Lytle 
Elementary School, the J. H. Gunn Elementary School, 
and the Ada Jenkins Elementary School. These attend­
ance area boundaries shall be contiguous with other 
elementary school attendance areas adjacent to these 
areas. The children attending these schools at the 
time the attendance areas are established shall then 
be assigned to the school or schools serving the area 
or areas in which they reside; or

Exihibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 6



45a

By the end of the 1966-67 school term the Sterling 
Elementary School, the Torrence-Lytle Elementary 
School, the J. H. Gunn Elementary School, and the 
Ada Jenkins Elementary School shall be discontinued 
and the children attending these schools shall be as­
signed to the school or schools serving the area or 
areas in which they reside.

(i) Upon the completion of the Southwest Senior 
High School, the Plato Price Junior High School 
(grades 7-9) shall be discontinued and the children 
attending that school in those grades shall be assigned 
to the school or schools serving the area or areas in 
which they reside. At this time, also, new attendance 
areas (or a new attendance area) shall be established, 
based on good faith consideration of geographical 
factors only, for the Amay James and Plato Price 
Elementary Schools. The boundaries of these new 
areas (or this new area) shall be contiguous with other 
elementary school attendance areas adjacent to these 
areas (or this area).

(j) Upon the completion of the Southwest Senior 
High School, a new attendance area, based on good 
faith consideration of geographical factors only, shall 
be established for the Woodland Elementary School. 
The boundaries of this attendance area shall be con­
tiguous with the boundaries of the adjacent attendance 
areas and children attending the Woodland Elemen­
tary School at that time shall be assigned to the 
school or schools serving the area or areas in which 
the children reside.

(k) Upon the completion of the Southwest Senior 
High School, the York Road Senior High School

Exihibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory #6



46a

program will be discontinued. At that time the rising 
10th, 11th and 12th grade students at York Road 
Senior High School shall be assigned to the school 
or schools serving the area or areas in which they 
reside.

(l) Upon the completion of the Southwest Senior 
High School, a new attendance area, based on good 
faith consideration of geographical factors only, shall 
be established for the York and Road Junior High 
School. The boundaries of this attendance area shall 
be contiguous with the boundaries of adjacent attend­
ance areas and children attending the York Road 
Junior High School at that time shall be assigned to 
the school or schools serving the area or areas in 
which the children reside.

(m) Upon the completion of the East Central Junior 
High School, the Billingsville Junior High School 
shall be discontinued and the children attending that 
school shall be assigned to the school serving the 
area in which the children reside.

11.

Effective Bate and Duration 
of Rules and Regulations

These rules and regulations shall control the assign­
ment and reassignment of pupils for the forthcoming 1965- 
66 school term and shall be and remain in full force and 
effect until amended, modified or altered by the Board 
and due public notice thereof given. Upon the opening of 
new schools, the policies set forth herein shall prevail in 
the establishment of new attendance areas for such 
schools.

Exihibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 6



47a

Exihibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory #6

12.
Notice of Rules and Regulations

These rules and regulations shall be spread upon the 
Minutes of this Board and notice of their adoption by the 
Board shall be given promptly after adoption by causing 
a copy thereof to be published once a week for two weeks 
in the Charlotte Observer and The Charlotte News and 
by such other means as the Board may consider desirable 
to give adequate and effective notice of the same.



48a

On motion of Mr. Dowd, seconded by Mr. Huntley, and 
carried, the Board adopted the following resolution:

W hereas the administrative officers of this Board have 
recommended that attendance areas be established for cer­
tain schools on a geographical basis, and, with the advice 
and consent of members and committees of this Board, 
have extended to all elementary pupils in such schools who 
heretofore have been enrolled in a school other than one 
located within such attendance area the option to attend 
the school serving the new attendance area or to continue 
in the school in which they have been enrolled:

It is now, therefore, R esolved:

1. The action of the administrative officers in establish­
ing such attendance areas is approved and confirmed, and 
such areas are hereby established, and all elementary school 
pupils within each of such attendance areas are extended 
the right and privilege of attending the school serving such 
area.

2. All elementary school pupils within each of such at­
tendance areas who heretofore have been enrolled in a 
school other than the one serving the new attendance area 
shall have the option of continuing in the school in which 
they have been enrolled or of attending the school in the 
new area. New pupils in the attendance areas concerned 
are also covered by the option provision.

3. The administrative officers arc authorized and di­
rected to recommend to this Board the assignment of pu­
pils within all new attendance areas upon the basis of the 
exercise of such option.

Exhibit “ B”  Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 1 1



49a

4. The new attendance areas to which this resolution 
applies shall be served by the following schools:

Morgan Elementary School 
Elizabeth Elementary School 
Alexander Street Elementary School 
Villa Heights Elementary School 
Chantilly Elementary School 
Billingsville Elementary School 
Wilmore Elementary School 
Isabella Wyche Elementary School 
Zeb Vance Elementary School 
Wesley Heights Elementary School 
Seversville Elementary School 
Biddleville Elementary School

R e s o l v e d  further that all attendance areas heretofore es­
tablished on a geographical basis by this Board shall be 
continued and assignments of pupils made to the schools 
within such areas on the basis of residence within such 
areas subject to the option privilege heretofore in effect 
and as set forth in this resolution.

* * * * *

Exhibit “B” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory #11



50a

On motion of Mr. Belli, seconded by Mr. Dowd, and car­
ried, the Board adopted the following resolution:

W h e r e a s  the administrative officers of this Board have rec­
ommended that attendance areas be established for certain 
schools on a geographical basis, and, with the advice and 
consent of members and committees of this Board have ex­
tended to all elementary and junior high school pupils in 
such schools who heretofore have been enrolled in a school 
other than one located within such attendance area the op­
tion to attend the school serving the new attendance area 
or to continue in the school in which they have been en­
rolled.

It is now, therefore, R e s o l v e d  :

1. The action of the administrative officers in establishing 
such attendance areas is approved and confirmed, and such 
areas are hereby established, and all elementary and junior 
high school pupils within each of such attendance areas are 
extended the right and privilege of attending the school 
serving such area.

2. All elementary and junior high school pupils within 
each of such attendance areas who heretofore have been 
enrolled in a school other than the one serving the new 
attendance area shall have the option of continuing in the 
school in which they have been enrolled or of attending 
the school in the new area. New pupils in the attendance 
areas concerned are also covered by the option provision.

3. The administrative officers are authorized and directed 
to recommend to this Board the assignment of pupils within 
all new attendance areas upon the basis of the exercise of 
such option.

Exhibit “ C”  Attached to Answers to Interrogatory # 1 1



51a

Exhibit “ C” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory #11

4. The new attendance areas to which this resolution ap­
plies shall be served by the following schools:

Elementary Schools

Ashley Park School 
Briarwood School 
Collinswood School 
Cotswold School 
Double Oaks School 
Driftwood School 
Druid Hills School 
Eastover School 
Enderly Park School 
Fairview School 
First Ward School 
Highland School 
Huntingtowne Farms School 
Idlewild School 
Lansdowne School 
Lincoln Heights School 
Marie Davis School 
Merry Oaks School

Midwood School 
Milton Road School 
Montclaire School 
Myers Park Elem. School 
Myers Street School 
Oakhurst School 
Oaklawn School 
Park Road School 
Pinewood School 
Plaza Road School 
Rama Road School 
Selwyn School 
Shamrock Gardens 
Sharon School 
Starmount School 
Thomasboro School 
Tryon Hills School 
University Park

Windsor Park School

Junior High Schools

Alexander Graham Junior High School 
Hawthorne Junior High School 
Irwin Avenue Junior High School 
Northwest Junior High School 
Piedmont Junior High School 
Williams Junior High School



52a

Exhibit “ C” Attached to Answers to Interrogatory #11

R e s o l v e d  further that all attendance areas heretofore es­
tablished on a geographical basis by this Board shall be 
continued and assignments of pupils made to the schools 
within such areas on the basis of residence within such 
areas subject to the option privilege heretofore in effect 
and as set forth in this resolution.

R e s o l v e d  further that the Board reserves the right to make 
assignment of pupils irrespective of the privileges herein 
granted when exceptional circumstances may make such 
action advisable.



53a

Plan for Compliance With Title VI of the Civil Rights 
Act of 1964 Adopted by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
Board of Education, Mecklenburg County School 
Administrative Unit, Charlotte, North Carolina

I. Proposed Policy Governing Assignment of Pupils in 
the School Administrative Unit. The plan adopted by 
The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education for com­
pliance with Title VI with respect to pupil personnel is 
set forth in Rules and Regulations adopted by the Board 
on March 11, 1965, a copy of which is attached hereto 
and marked Exhibit “A” . As to all schools In the 109- 
school system of Mecklenburg County except nine, these 
Rules and Regulations are not regarded as a plan but as 
a permanent policy established by the Board and the plan, 
as a supplement thereto, applies to the nine schools listed 
as exceptions.

II. Proposed Policy Governing Employment and As­
signment of Staff and Professional Personnel. In addition 
to these Rules and Regulations, the Board of Education 
on April 13, 1965, formally adopted a commitment resolu­
tion with respect to integration of staff and professional 
personnel reading as follows:

“ R e s o l v e d  by The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 
Education that, in recognition of the requirements of law, 
the development of a policy be undertaken looking to the 
ultimate employment and assignment of all staff and pro­
fessional personnel without regard to race or to factors 
other than training, competence and fitness.”

III. Maps to Show Attendance Zones. The maps re­
ferred to in the Rules and Regulations are in process of 
being reduced to smaller prints for distribution, and as 
soon as these are available copies will be sent forward as 
supplements. Attendance area boundaries were deter­



54a

mined on the basis of natural landmarks— streets, creeks, 
railroad tracks, safety factors in travel between school 
and home, the area which could be most conveniently and 
efficiently served by any particular school, the location of 
new real estate subdivisions, etc.

IV. Notice of Regulations. Exhibit “A” contains pro­
visions for publication once a week for two weeks in both 
local daily newspapers. In addition, it is the purpose of 
the Board to distribute a concise statement of free choice 
privileges with the year end report cards and among new 
first graders.

V. Certification. This is to certify that the plan for 
compliance referred to above and attached as Exhibit “A ” 
was adopted by The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 
Education in special session on March 11, 1965, and the 
commitment resolution with respect to employment and 
assignment policy quoted above was adopted by the Board 
in regular session on April 13, 1965.

C o m p l i a n c e  I n f o r m a t i o n  :

N o n d i s c r i m i n a t i o n  i n  F e d e r a l l y  A s s is t e d  P r o g r a m s

I.

Organization of School System

Mecklenburg County, which includes the City of Char­
lotte, North Carolina, is served by a single, consolidated 
public school system administered by The Charlotte-Meck­
lenburg Board of Education. The total population within 
the corporate limits of the City is estimated at 230,000; 
the total population of the County, including that within 
the City, is approximately 305,000. The public school

Plan for Compliance With Title VI, etc.



55a

system has 109 schools with a total enrollment in excess 
of 72,000. In addition, it is estimated between 4000 and 
5000 school age children are enrolled in parochial and 
other chnrch and private schools. For several years, the 
public school population has been showing an annual in­
crease varying from 2300 to 3400 pupils. These increases 
have made necessary constant expansion of school facil­
ities at a cost of several million dollars. There is no 
kindergarten system.

II.

Racial Characteristics of School Population

Of the 72,000 plus pupils enrolled in the school system, 
approximately 52,000 are white pupils and 20,000 plus are 
negro pupils. The residential pattern within the City is 
a sharply segregated one. Of the 20,000 negro youngsters, 
it is estimated that approximately ten to twenty per cent 
of them live in what would basically be white residential 
areas. A smaller percentage of white pupils live in what 
would basically be negro residential areas. Two tables 
furnished the plaintiffs in an integration suit against the 
Board of Education pending in Federal Court give a 
graphic picture of the current racial status within the 
public schools.

There is attached hereto a table, identified as Table 
No. 1, listing all schools within the County wide system, 
grades, number of white pupils enrolled, number of negro 
pupils enrolled, average class size, number of professional 
employees, negro and white, and pupil-teacher ratios. 
There is also attached a table identified as Table No. 2 
listing the schools having both white and negro pupils in at­
tendance. The schools listed in Table 1 are all of the schools 
over which the Board has jurisdiction. It has no control, 
of course, over parochial or other private schools. No

Plan for Compliance With Title VI, etc.



56a

pupil has been assigned from the public schools of this 
County to the public schools of another Administrative 
Unit or County.

The schools listed in Table 1 are all operated for a 
9-months or 180-day term in accordance with State law. 
In addition, the Board operates an extensive summer 
school attended by several thousand children, specific 
buildings being selected as the location for particular 
classes, and the pupils being chosen on the basis of ap­
plications for particular classes. These schools are com­
pletely integrated.

III.

Racial Characteristics of Teaching and 
Administrative Staffs

The racial division of teachers is shown in Table 1. 
The latest figures show that for the current regular term 
six white teachers are teaching full time in all negro or 
predominately negro schools and two white teachers are 
teaching part time; one negro teacher is teaching part 
time in an all white or predominately white school. These 
teachers are working in the fields of English, Science, 
Elementary Education, Distributive Education, Driver 
Education, and Counseling. For the past two summers, 
negro teachers have taught mixed classes in the Special 
Interest Program, Corrective Reading Program and 
Speech Therapy. Plans now under way for the 1965 sum­
mer school contemplate a continuance of the integrated 
staff. In addition to the teaching staff, negroes serve as 
principals, supervisors, and negro secretarial personnel 
has been employed in the central office.

Professional activities, such as grade level conferences, 
principals and general staff meetings, subject matter area

Plan for Compliance With Title VI, etc.



57a

meetings, general faculty meetings, workshops, the system 
wide advisory council and the like were fully integrated 
three years ago. The advisory council is composed of a 
teacher from each of the 109 schools.

IV.

School Bus Routes and Practices

Under State law, transportation by school buses is pro­
vided for certain schools and for children in such schools 
residing more than 1% miles from the school in which 
enrolled. Children entitled to transportation ride the bus 
to and from the school in which enrolled without regard 
to race.

V.

History of Transition Period

Under the former dual system, school attendance areas 
were overlapping and assignments of pupils were made by 
the traditional methods then in effect. For the school year 
196.2-63, the Board of Education established attendance 
areas for two schools on a strictly geographical basis. For 
the 1963-64 school year, the Board created twelve more 
attendance areas on a geographical basis and for the school 
year 1964-65, the Board created such areas for forty-three 
additional schools. In the new pupil assignment regula­
tions, submitted herewith as the Board’s plan for integra­
tion, attendance areas created on a strictly geographical 
basis are established for all schools except for the nine 
schools referred to in the new regulations and as to which 
a plan has been developed looking to the elimination of the 
overlapping attendance areas which they serve within a 
period of two years.

Dated April 15, 1965.

Plan for Compliance With Title VI, etc.



58a

The defendant moves the Court to extend until the 1st 
day of May, 1965, the time in which to file objections to 
the interrogatories served on the defendant or in which to 
answer said interrogatories for the following reasons, 
to wit:

1. Said interrogatories were served on the attorney of 
record for this defendant on February 9, 1965, and, as pro­
vided by Rule 33, require answers thereto within fifteen 
days from and after said date. For the most part, said in­
terrogatories contemplate the prosecution of this action on 
the basis of school enrollment and assignment policies of 
this defendant existing in the past with a demand for infor­
mation as to plans for the future.

2. As set forth in its Answer, this defendant is now en­
gaged, and has been engaged since November, 1964, in an 
extended review and reconsideration of all such policies 
looking to the establishment of a broad new program con­
trolling the enrollment and assignment of pupils in its 
schools for the forthcoming and successive school terms, 
and it is now contemplated that this program -will have been 
formulated and publicly announced, and submitted to the 
Court as a defense to this action not later than the first day 
of April or the first day of May of this year. It is to be 
presupposed that any hearing of this case on its merits 
will be based upon a program or policy then in effect rather 
than upon any allegations of any past program or policy; 
and the effect thereof may well be to render moot and 
objectionable many of the questions propounded by the 
plaintiff.

Motion



Motion

3. To extend or enlarge the time within which this de­
fendant may answer said interrogatories or in which it may 
file objections thereto would not unduly delay a hearing 
of this case on its merits or deny the plaintiffs any relief 
to which they may be entitled before the opening of the 
forthcoming school term, which will not occur until late 
August or early September, and it would enable the Court 
to pass upon the case on the basis of current rather than 
past policies of the defendant.

W h e r e f o r e , the defendant prays the Court that it may 
be granted until May 1, 1965, in which to file objections to 
the interrogatories or in which to answer those that are 
to be objected to.

Dated February 18, 1965.



Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for 
Extension of Time to Answer 

Interrogatories

Come now the plaintiffs, by their attorneys, and, in oppo­
sition to defendant’s motion for extension of time until May 
1,1965, to answer interrogatories filed by plaintiffs, respect­
fully show the Court as follows:

1. By this action, filed on January 19, 1965, plaintiffs 
sought an injunction against the racially discriminatory 
practices of defendant in the operation and administration 
of the C’harlotte-Mecklenburg public schools.

2. Answer to the complaint was filed by defendant on 
February 5, 1965.

3. On February 9, 1965, plaintiffs served interrogatories 
on defendant requesting, inter alia, information concerning 
its policies regarding assignments of students, teachers and 
professional school personnel, the school zone lines or at­
tendance areas of defendant, and the specific steps taken 
or planned by defendant to eliminate racial discrimination 
in the Gharlotte-Mecklenburg public schools since the Su­
preme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education.

4. Defendant has requested an extension of time to an­
swer interrogatories, contending (1) that the plaintiffs 
contemplate prosecuting this action on the basis of past 
practices of defendant with a request for information as 
to future plans; (2) that defendant is now engaged in an 
extended review of its policies contemplating establishing 
a broad new program which it hopes to present to the Court 
not later than April 1, 1965 or May 1, 1965; (3) that any 
consideration of this case on the merits will be based upon 
the policies of defendant then in effect; and (4) that the



61a

Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Extension 
of Time to Answer Interrogatories

extension requested will not unduly prejudice plaintiffs 
with respect to relief for the forthcoming school term.

5. The plaintiffs seek here relief against defendant’s 
discriminatory practices commencing and being imple­
mented during the ensuing school term.

6. The information sought by plaintiffs’ interrogatories, 
particularly with respect to school zone lines or attendance 
areas and assignment of teachers and professional school 
personnel, will require further study by plaintiffs in prep­
aration of their case in the hearing of this cause on the 
merits. In this connection, the policies and practices of 
defendant with respect to the assignment of students, 
teachers and school personnel which are presently in force 
are pertinent and material to the hearing of this cause on 
the merits and such information is presently available to 
defendant. Such information will also be pertinent and 
material to any consideration of any future policies and 
practices adopted by defendant.

7. To extend the time for defendant answering the inter­
rogatories of plaintiffs until May 1, 1965, particularly with 
respect to the information now available to defendant, 
would seriously and unduly prejudice plaintiffs in the prep­
aration of their case and in the relief they seek for the 
ensuing school term. No basis whatever is set forth in 
defendant’s motion, and none is known to plaintiffs, to 
justify extending the time for defendant furnishing plain­
tiffs with the information now available to defendant which 
is sought by plaintiffs’ interrogatories.

W h e r e f o r e , p l a i n t i f f s  r e s p e c t f u l l y  p r a y  t h a t  th e  e x t e n ­

s io n  o f  t im e  r e q u e s t e d  b y  d e f e n d a n t  b e  d e n ie d .



62a

Order

The defendant having filed a written Motion, supported 
by Affidavit, praying the Court that it may be granted until 
May 1, 1965, in which to file objections to the Interroga­
tories filed by the plaintiffs herein or in which to answer 
those Interrogatories that are not to be objected to, and 
the plaintiffs having filed a written Answer, supported by 
Affidavit, objecting to said Motion; and the Motion being 
heard and considered, and good cause being shown for al­
lowing an extension of time as prayed for by the defendant:

It is, therefore, O rdered that the defendant may have 
until the 15th day of April, 1965, in which to file objections 
to said Interrogatories or in which to answer those that are 
not to be objected to.

Dated March 11th, 1965.

/ s /  J. B. C r a v e n , Jr. 
United States Judge for the 

Western District of North Carolina



63a

Come now the plaintiffs, by their undersigned attorneys, 
and respectfully move the Court for an order preliminarily 
enjoining the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education 
from making assignments of Negro students to Sterling, 
Torrenee-Lytle, J. H. Gunn, York Road Junior-Senior, 
Plato Price, Billingsville, Crestdale Elementary, Ada Jen­
kins Elementary, Amay James Elementary, and Woodland 
Elementary Schools, pending hearing of this cause on the 
merits, and, as grounds therefor, show the following:

1. This cause was initially filed by Negro plaintiffs on 
January 19, 1965, seeking an order enjoining the racially 
discriminatory practices of the defendant in the operation 
and administration of the public schools under its jurisdic­
tion. Plaintiffs alleged in their complaint that the defendant 
maintained racially drawn school zone lines, permitted stu­
dents assigned to racially mixed schools to be transferred 
out of such schools on the basis of race and made racial 
assignments of teachers and school personnel.

2. Defendant has adopted a plan, which it has filed in 
this cause, providing for the assignment of some students 
according to a single set of school zone lines and the assign­
ment of Negro students, presently enrolled or residing in 
districts previously established in the following schools, 
solely according to their race and color: Sterling, Torrenee- 
Lytle, J. H. Gunn, York Road Junior-Senior, Plato Price, 
Billingsville, Crestdale Elementary, Ada Jenkins Elemen­
tary, Amay James Elementary, and Woodland Elementary.

3. Defendant has set June 2, 1965, the date for final dis­
tribution of report cards, as the date for making the purely 
racially discriminatory assignment of such students.

Motion for Preliminary Injunction



64a

4. Defendant contends that the rights of these students 
will be protected, if, following these racially discriminatory 
assignments, these students are permitted to request trans­
fers to other schools, but despite the initial discriminatory 
assignments, no assurance exists that any effective recourse 
is available to these students to attend schools on the same 
conditions as white students similarly situated. Moreover, 
defendant has proposed no change in its racially assigned 
school bus routes to provide transportation for those stu­
dents desiring to attend integrated schools, no assurance 
that following its assignments, space will be available for 
those students desiring to transfer or that space will be 
made available on a nonracial basis, and no change in its 
racial assignments of teachers and school personnel.

5. A hearing on the merits in this cause has been set for 
July 12, 1965. It would impose no undue hardship upon 
the defendant to restrain its racial assignments of these 
students pending hearing on the merits in this cause, while 
denial of the relief prayed for herein would effectively de­
prive the plaintiffs and others of their class clear consti­
tutional rights at least for another school term.

W h e r e f o r e , plaintiffs respectfully pray the Court to 
enter a preliminary injunction, enjoining defendant’s pro­
posed racial assignments of Negro students to Sterling, 
Torrence-Lytle, J. H. Gunn, York Road Junior-Senior, 
Plato Price, Billingsville, Crestdale Elementary, Ada Jen­
kins Elementary, Amay James Elementary, and Woodland 
Elementary Schools pending hearing of this cause on the 
merits and for such other, further or alternative relief as 
to the Court may appear equitable and just.

Motion for Preliminary Injunction



65a

The defendant answers the Motion of the plaintiffs for 
a preliminary injunction, filed herein on the 25th day of 
May, 1965, and alleges:

1. It is admitted this action was initially instituted, 
seeks the relief and that the Complaint contains allegations 
as set forth in this paragraph. Except as admitted, para­
graph 1 is denied.

2. It is admitted that the plaintiff, on the 11th day of 
March, 1965, adopted rules and regulations creating con­
tiguous, geographically drawn attendance areas for all 
schools within the Mecklenburg County School Adminis­
trative Unit except for the ten schools mentioned in this 
paragraph of the Motion, hut otherwise paragraph 2 is 
denied as alleged, the defendant alleging the truth to be 
as set forth in its Further Answer.

3. Paragraph 3 is denied except as the facts with respect 
to the allegations of said paragraph may he fully stated 
in the defendant’s Further Answer.

4. Paragraph 4 is denied except as the facts may be 
fully stated in the defendant’s Further Answer.

5. It is admitted that this cause has been set for trial 
on its merits for July 12, 1965, but otherwise paragraph 5 
is denied, the defendant alleging the truth to be as set 
forth in its Further Answer.

And as a Further Answer to the Motion of the Plaintiffs
for a Preliminary Injunction, the Defendant Alleges:

1. After prolonged study of many problems involved, 
the defendant on the 11th day of March, 1965, adopted

Answer to Motion for Preliminary Injunction



66a

comprehensive rules and regulations governing enrollment, 
assignment and transfer of pupils by which attendance 
areas were established on a strictly geographical basis 
without regard to racial considerations for 99 out of the 
109 schools in the Mecklenburg County School Adminis­
trative Unit. Attendance areas were not changed for the 
ten schools referred to in the Motion. As to these schools, 
the attendance areas which they serve overlap some of the 
geographically established attendance areas. The rules and 
regulations spell out with particularity the plans of the 
defendant for eliminating these overlapping areas and are 
incorporated, with respect to each school, in the notice of 
assignment for each school prepared for distribution with 
report cards by delivery to pupils on June 2, 1965. Copies 
of these notices for all ten excepted schools are attached 
hereto and identified as Exhibits “A ” through “I ” , inclusive.

2. The rules and regulations adopted by the defendant 
provide that any child in any school, including any one 
of the excepted schools, may apply for transfer to any 
other school of his or her grade without giving any reason 
therefor, and such request for transfer will be complied 
with to the extent that the accommodations of the chosen 
school will permit. Every child is allowed three choices 
so that if any one school is over crowded, the child might 
be assigned to a second school or a third school where 
accommodations are available. Within recent days the 
Board, after careful study, has established enrollment 
capacities for each school, and it has calculated on the 
generous side in order to be as liberal and circumstances 
may possibly permit in honoring transfer requests. These 
capacities have been purposely established in advance of 
the time set for transfer requests in order to avoid even

Answer to Motion for Preliminary Injunction



67a

the appearance of such calculations being influenced by 
the number of requests which may later be received. Of 
course, it cannot be determined in advance whether a 
school accommodations problem will or will not arise, but 
if any of the plaintiffs or those of the class they purport 
to represent are disturbed in their rights by the lack of 
accommodations the Court will be as free to act then as 
now and with a more comprehensive grasp of all problems 
involved and perhaps with fewer pupils being effected.

3. With respect to children assigned to any one of the 
ten schools having overlapping attendance areas, any 
child may request transfer to his or her grade in another 
school serving a geographically drawn area in which the 
child also resides, and in the event of transfer such child 
will be free to ride the school bus or buses serving the 
school within that area.

4. The defendant has not as of this time made assign­
ments of teachers to the several schools. Any complaint 
of the plaintiffs with respect to this subject should cer­
tainly await a trial of the whole cause on its merits. The 
allegations of the Motion with respect to teacher assign­
ments are not sufficient to justify an Order restraining the 
assignment of pupils.

5. With two exceptions, the schools referred to in the 
Motion are located in rural sections of Mecklenburg County 
and draw pupils from widely scattered areas. The ten 
schools serve about one-fifth of the total negro school 
population of Mecklenburg County.

6. The Board has been extensively engaged over a 
considerable period of time in arranging for pupil assign­

Answer to Motion for Preliminary Injunction



68a

ments which customarily have always been made, as to 
pupils enrolled, on the last day of the school term. Forms 
of report cards and forms of notices and transfer requests 
have already been distrbuited among the 109 schools of 
the System for delivery to the pupils on June 2, 1965. For 
the Court now to restrain the defendant from making as­
signments for the ten excepted schools would disrupt and 
disorganize the entire assignment procedure in all schools. 
Being unable to ascertain the number of requests for trans­
fer from the excepted schools, it could not match transfer 
requests from pupils in other schools with accommodations 
in schools to which transfer might be sought, certainly 
until too late in the summer to properly organize for the 
term beginning in late August or early September. Besides, 
such order of restraint would create a condition of un­
certainty for pupils in the excepted schools and would 
create communications problems for the defendant involv­
ing efforts to give later notice by mail rather than per­
sonal delivery; whereas action by the defendant in ac­
cordance with its accustomed schedule could be corrected 
by the Court later in the summer, should correction be 
found necessary.

7. Copies of the rules and regulations were available 
to and actually in possession of counsel for the plaintiffs 
within days after the adoption of the same by the defen­
dant on March 11, 1965. A copy of said rules and regula­
tions was filed in the record of this case and additional 
copies furnished counsel for of the purpose of the defen­
dant to make such assignments with respect to pupils of 
the ten excepted schools not later than the last day of 
the current school term. Notwithstanding this notice, they 
have permitted the defendant to proceed with and to com-

Answer to Motion for Preliminary Injunction



69a

Answer to Motion for Preliminary Injunction

plete all preparations therefor except for actual delivery, 
and have not sought the interference of the Court until 
seven days before the date set for distribution in which 
period is a Saturday and a Sunday. No injury would 
result to any of the plaintiffs or the class which they pur­
port to represent by permitting the assignment notices to 
go forward as scheduled and deferring the Judgment of 
the Court until it can review the whole program of the 
defendant upon the trial of this cause upon its merits.

W h e r e f o r e , having fully answered, the defendant prays 
the Court that the relief demanded in the plaintiffs’ Motion 
for a preliminary injunction be denied.



70a

Exhibit “ A”  Attached to Answer to Motion for 
Preliminary Injunction

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
720 East Fourth Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

June 2, 1965

Special Notice to Parents of Children
Assigned to the Sterling School (grades 1-9):

Your child has been assigned to the Sterling School 
(grades 1-9) for the 1965-66 school term in accordance 
with an assignment plan adopted by the Charlotte-Mecklen- 
burg Board of Education on March 11, 1965. The plan 
provides that, “after original assignment the parent of 
any pupil may apply to the Board for reassignment of 
such pupil to any school serving his or her grade and 
located in any other attendance area” and that “any such 
request for transfer shall be allowed . . .  to the extent that 
the facilities and accommodations of the chosen school will 
permit.” A  simple form is found on the back of this notice 
for your use if you are not satisfied with the assignment 
of your child and want to request reassignment. This re­
quest for reassignment must be made not later than June 
30, 1965.

Parents are assured that school personnel will neither 
favor nor penalize any pupil because of the choice he makes 
in the exercise of his rights under this plan.

The Sterling School boundary lines continue to overlap 
boundary lines of other schools serving the same area. The 
plan adopted by the Board of Education provides for the 
elimination of this overlapping not later than the begin­



71a

ning of the school term 1967-68. In the meanwhile, (1) 
the senior high school program at Sterling School shall 
he discontinued as of the close of the current school term, 
1964-65, and the pupils in those grades assigned to the 
school or schools serving the attendance area or areas in 
which they reside; (2) the rising 7th, 8th, and 9th grades 
at Sterling Junior High School will be discontinued by 
the end of the 1966-67 term. At that time these students 
shall be assigned to the school or schools serving the area 
or areas in which they reside; (3) by the end of the 1966-67 
school term, a new attendance area, based on good faith 
consideration of geographical factors only, shall be estab­
lished for the Sterling Elementary School; OR by the end 
of the 1966-67 school term the Sterling Elementary School 
shall be discontinued and the children attending this school 
shall be assigned to the school serving the area in which 
they reside.

A full copy of the adopted policy of the Board of Educa­
tion on school assignment along with maps showing school 
attendance areas may be found in the office of each school 
of the system and at the Board of Education office.

/ s /  David W. Habeis
David W. Harris, Chairman 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 

Education

/ s /  A. Cbaig Phillips
A. Craig Phillips, Superintendent 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools

Exhibit “A ” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction



72a

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
REQUEST FOR PUPIL TRANSFER

Exhibit “A ” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

Pupil’s last name

Street

First name Middle name

Telephone

City and State

School last attended .................... ............................................

Original assignment for 1965-66: Grade.....School...............

Date of original assignment ................................

Request for transfer

1st Choice ................... ................ ...............  School

2nd Choice ............. ..... ................ ..... ...... . School

3rd Choice ....... ...... ..... ....... ...... ........... . School

Signature of adult with whom pupil lives..........................

Relationship to pupil .......... ......... ......

Mail or deliver by June 30, 1965, to any school office or to the 
Pupil Assignment Office, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, 
720 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Do not write in this space

For school official receiving Assignment ..........................

Date ..........................

Signature ..... .....................

request:

Date Received 
or Postmarked: ....

By Whom Received:



73a

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
720 East Fourth Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

June 2, 1965

Special Notice to Parents of Children Assigned to the
Torrence-Lytle School (grades 1-9 and grades 11-12):

Your child has been assigned to the Torrence-Lytle 
School (grades 1-9 and grades 11-12) for the 1965-66 school 
term in accordance with an assignment plan adopted by 
the Charlotte-Meeklenburg Board of Education on March 
11, 1965. The plan provides that “after original assign­
ment the parent of any pupil may apply to the Board for 
reassignment of such pupil to any school serving his or 
her grade and located in any other attendance area” and 
that “any such request for transfer shall be allowed . . . 
to the extent that the facilities and accommodations of the 
chosen school will permit.” A simple form is found on the 
back of this notice for your use if you are not satisfied 
with the assignment of your child and want to request 
reassignment. This request for reassignment must be made 
not later than June 30, 1965.

Parents are assured that school personnel will neither 
favor nor penalize any pupil because of the choice he makes 
in the exercise of his rights under this plan.

The Torrence-Lytle School boundary lines continue to 
overlap boundary lines of other schools serving the same 
area. The plan adopted by the Board of Education pro­
vides for the elimination of this overlapping not later than 
the beginning of the school term 1967-68. In the meanwhile, 
(1) the 10th grade program at Torrence-Lytle School shall 
be discontinued at the close of the present school term. 
The entire senior high program at this school shall be

Exhibit “ B”  Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction



74a

discontinued by the close of the 1966-67 term, depending 
upon the ability of the Board to complete its building pro­
gram in that area by the close of that term. Rising 10th 
grade pupils at Torrence-Lytle School shall be assigned to 
the senior high school serving the area in which they reside. 
Rising 11th and 12th grade pupils shall be assigned to 
the Torrence-Lytle School for the 1965-66 term. Upon the 
discontinuation of the senior high school program by the 
end of the 1966-67 term the remaining students shall be 
assigned to the senior high school serving the area in 
which they reside; (2) the rising 7th, 8th, and 9th grades 
at Torrence-Lytle Junior High School will be discontinued 
by the end of the 1966-67 term. At that time these students 
shall be assigned to the school or schools serving the area 
or areas in which they reside; (3) by the end of the 1966-67 
school term, a new attendance area, based on good faith 
consideration of geographical factors only, shall be estab­
lished for the Torrence-Lytle Elementary School; OB by 
the end of the 1966-67 school term the Torrence-Lytle 
Elementary School shall be discontinued and the children 
attending this school shall be assigned to the school serv­
ing the area in which they reside.

A full copy of the adopted policy of the Board of Educa­
tion on school assignment along with maps showing school 
attendance areas may be found in the office of each school 
of the system and at the Board of Education office.

/ s /  D a v id  W. H a r r is

David W. Harris, Chairman 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 

Education

/ s /  A. C r a ig  P h i l l i p s

A. Craig Phillips, Superintendent 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools

Exhibit “B” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction



75a

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS
REQUEST FOR PUPIL TRANSFER

Exhibit “B”  Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

Pupil’s last name First name

Street

Middle name

Telejdione

City and State

School last attended ...................................................

Original assignment for 1965-66: Grade.....School

Date of original assignment ................... ............

Request for transfer

1st Choice ....... ............................................ School

2nd Choice ................... ............ ................. School

3rd Choice ..... ............................... ............ School

Signature of adult with whom pupil lives............ .

Relationship to pupil.............

Mail or deliver by June 30, 1965, to any school office or to the 
Pupil Assignment Office, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, 
720 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Do not write in this space

For school official receiving Assignment .........................

r81’Mst: Date ..........................
Date Received 
or Postmarked: ..................

By Whom Received: .............

Signature



76a

Exhibit “ C”  Attached to Answer to Motion for 
Preliminary Injunction

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
720 East Fourth Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

June 2, 1965
Special Notice to Parents of Children Assigned

to the J. H. Gunn School (grades 1-12):

Your child has been assigned to the J. 11. Gunn School 
(grades 1-12) for the 1965-66 school term in accordance 
with an assignment plan adopted by the Charlotte-Mecklen- 
burg Board of Education on March 11, 1965. The plan 
provides that “ after original assignment the parent of any 
pupil may apply to the Board for reassignment of such 
pupil to any school serving his or her grade and located 
in any other attendance area” and that “any such request 
for transfer shall be allowed . . .  to the extent that the 
facilities and accommodations of the chosen school will 
permit.” A simple form is found on the back of this 
notice for your use if you are not satisfied with the assign­
ment of your child and want to request reassignment. 
This request for reassignment must be made not later 
than June 30, 1965.

Parents are assured that school personnel will neither 
favor nor penalize any pupil because of the choice he makes 
in the exercise of his rights under this plan.

The J. H. Gunn School boundary lines continue to over­
lap boundary lines of other schools serving the same area. 
The plan adopted by the Board of Education provides for 
the elimination of this overlapping not later than the be­
ginning of the school term 1967-68. In the meanwhile, 
(1) upon the completion of the Northeast Senior High



77a

School, the J. H. Gunn Senior High School program will 
he discontinued. At that time the rising 10th, 11th, and 
12th grade students at J. H. Gunn Senior High School 
shall be assigned to the school or schools serving the area 
or areas in which they reside; (2) upon the completion of 
the Albemarle Road Junior High School, the rising 7th, 
8th, and 9th grades at J. H. Gunn Junior High School 
will be discontinued. At that time these students shall be 
assigned to the school or schools serving the area or areas 
in which they reside; (3) by the end of the 1966-67 school 
term, a new attendance area, based on good faith considera­
tion of geographical factors only, shall be established for 
the J. H. Gunn Elementary School; OR by the end of the 
1966-67 school term the J. H. Gunn Elementary School 
shall be discontinued and the children attending this school 
shall be assigned to the school serving the area in which 
they reside.

A full copy of the adopted policy of the Board of Educa­
tion on school assignment along with maps showing school 
attendance areas may be found in the office of each school 
of the system and at the Board of Education office.

/ s /  D a v id  W .  H a r r is

David W. Harris, Chairman 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 

Education

/ s /  A .  C r a ig  P h i l l i p s

A. Craig Phillips, Superintendent 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools

Exhibit “ C” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction



78a

Exhibit “C” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG- SCHOOLS
REQUEST FOR PUPIL TRANSFER

Pupil’s last name First name Middle name

Street Telephone

City and State

School last attended ............................................................... .

Original assignment for 1965-66: Grade.....School ...........

Date of original assignment ...... ..... ....... ............

Request for transfer

1st Choice ........ ..... ...... ............... ..... ..... . School

2nd Choice ........ .......... ............... ......... .....  School

3rd Choice __________ ____________ ____ School

Signature of adult with whom pupil lives..........................

Relationship to p u p il......... .......... .....

Mail or deliver by June 30, 1965, to any school office or to the 
Pupil Assignment Office, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, 
720 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Do not write in this space

For school official receiving Assignment ....... ...................
request:

Date Received 
or Postmarked:

Date

Signature

By Whom Received:



79a

Exhibit “ D”  Attached to Answer to Motion for 
Preliminary Injunction

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
720 East Fourth Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

June 2, 1965

Special Notice to Parents of Children Assigned to the
York Road Junior-Senior High School (grades 7-12):

Your child has been assigned to the York Road Junior- 
Senior High School (grades 7-12) for the 1965-66 school 
term in accordance with an assignment plan adopted by 
the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education on March 
11, 1965. The plan provides that “after original assign­
ment the parent of any pupil may apply to the Board for 
reassignment of such pupil to any school serving his or 
her grade and located in any other attendance area” and 
that “any such request for transfer shall be allowed . . . 
to the extent that the facilities and accommodations of 
the chosen school will permit.” A simple form is found 
on the back of this notice for your use if you are not 
satisfied with the assignment of your child and want to 
request reassignment. This request for reassignment must 
be made not later than June 30, 1965.

Parents are assured that school personnel will neither 
favor nor penalize any pupil because of the choice he makes 
in the exercise of his rights under this plan.

The York Road Junior-Senior High School boundary 
lines continue to overlap boundary lines of other schools 
serving the same area. The plan adopted by the Board 
of Education provides for the elimination of this over­
lapping not later than the beginning of the school term 
1967-68. In the meanwhile, (1) upon the completion of the



80a

Southwest Senior High School, the York Road Senior High 
School program will be discontinued. At that time the 
rising 10th, 11th and 12th grade students at York Road 
Senior High School shall be assigned to the school or 
schools serving the area or areas in which they reside; 
(2) upon the completion of the Southwest Senior High 
School, a new attendance area, based on good faith con­
sideration of geographical factors only, shall be established 
for the York Road Junior High School. The boundaries 
of this attendance area shall be contiguous with the 
boundaries of adjacent attendance areas and children at­
tending the York Road Junior High School at that time 
shall be assigned to the school or schools serving the area 
or areas in which the children reside.

A full copy of the adopted policy of the Board of Educa­
tion on school assignment along with maps showing school 
attendance areas may be found in the office of each school 
of the system and at the Board of Education office.

/ s /  D a v id  W .  H a r r is

David W. Harris, Chairman 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 

Education

/ s /  A. C r a ig  P h i l l i p s

A. Craig Phillips, Superintendent 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools

Exhibit “D” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction



81a

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS
REQUEST FOR PUPIL TRANSFER

Exhibit “D”  Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

Pupil’s last name First name Middle name

Street Telephone

City and State

School last attended .................... —-.........................
Original assignment for 1965-66: Grade..... School

Date of original assignment .......-............—........

Request for transfer

1st Choice ........................................ -.........  School

2nd Choice ............. -.......................... —....  School

3rd Choice .......................... -----..... -........... School

Signature of adult with whom pupil lives.......... -..............
Relationship to pupil ................ -........

Mail or deliver by June 30,1965, to any school office or to the 
Pupil Assignment Office, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, 
720 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Do not write in this space

For school official receiving Assignment ..........................
request: Date ..........................

Date Received Signature ..........................
or Postmarked: ....... ...........

By Whom Received: .............



82a

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
720 East Fourth Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

June 2, 1965

Special Notice to Parents of Children Assigned to the 
Amay James School (grades 1-4) and the Plato Price 
School (grades 5-9):

Your child has been assigned to the Amay James School 
(grades 1-4) or the Plato Price School (grades 5-9) for 
the 1965-66 school term in accordance with an assignment 
plan adopted by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Ed­
ucation on March 11, 1965. The plan provides that “after 
original assignment the parent of any pupil may apply to 
the Board for reassignment of such pupil to any school 
serving his or her grade and located in any other attend­
ance area” and that “any such request for transfer shall 
be allowed . . .  to the extent that the facilities and accom­
modations of the chosen school will permit.” A simple 
form is found on the back of this notice for your use if 
you are not satisfied with the assignment of your child 
and want to request reassignment. This request for re­
assignment must be made not later than June 30, 1965.

Parents are assured that school personnel will neither 
favor nor penalize any pupil because of the choice he makes 
in the exercise of his rights under this plan.

The Amay James School and the Plato Price School 
boundary lines continue to overlap boundary lines of other 
schools serving the same area. The plan adopted by the 
Board of Education provides for the elimination of this

Exhibit “ E”  Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction



83a

overlapping not later than the beginning of the school 
term 1967-68. In the meanwhile, upon the completion of 
the Southwest Senior High School, the Plato Price Junior 
High School (grades 7-9) shall be discontinued and the 
children attending that school in those grades shall be 
assigned to the school or schools serving the area or areas 
in which they reside. At this time, also, new attendance 
areas (or a new attendance area) shall be established, 
based on good faith consideration of geographical factors 
only, for the Arnay James and Plato Price Elementary 
Schools. The boundaries of these new areas (or this new 
area) shall be contiguous with other elementary school 
attendance areas adjacent to these areas (or this area).

A full copy of the adopted policy of the Board of Educa­
tion on school assignment along with maps showing school 
attendance areas may be found in the office of each school 
of the system and at the Board of Education office.

/ s /  P a v id  W .  H a r r is

David W. Harris, Chairman 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 

Education

/ s /  A. C r a ig  P h i l l i p s

A. Craig Phillips, Superintendent 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools

Exhibit “E ” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction



84a

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS
REQUEST FOR PUPIL TRANSFER

Exhibit “ E” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

Pupil’s last name First name Middle name

Street Telephone

City and State

School last attended ............ .......................................

Original assignment for 1965-66: Grade.....  School

Date of original assignment .................... ....... .

Request for transfer

1st Choice ................... ................................ School

2nd Choice ...... ......... ............. ....................  School

3rd Choice ..................... ..... ............. ........  School

Signature of adult with whom pupil lives

Relationship to pupil ..........................

Mail or deliver by June 30, 1965, to any school office or to the 
Pupil Assignment Office, Charlotte-Mecklenhurg Schools, 
720 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Do not write in this space

For school official receiving 
request:

Date Received 
or Postmarked: ..................

Assignment

Date

Signature

By Whom Received:



85a

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
720 East Fourth Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Exhibit “ F”  Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

June 2, 1965

Special Notice to Parents of Children Assigned to
the Billingsville Junior High School (grades 7-9):

Your child has been assigned to the Billingsville Junior 
High School (grades 7-9) for the 1965-66 school term in 
accordance with an assignment plan adopted by the Char- 
lotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education on March 11, 1965. 
The plan provides that “after original assignment the 
parent of any pupil may apply to the Board for reassign­
ment of such pupil to any school serving his or her grade 
and located in any other attendance area” and that “any 
such request for transfer shall be allowed . . .  to the extent 
that the facilities and accommodations of the chosen school 
will permit.” A simple form is found on the back of this 
notice for your use if you are not satisfied with the assign­
ment of your child and want to request reassignment. This 
request for reassignment must be made not later than 
June 30, 1965.

Parents are assured that school personnel will neither 
favor nor penalize any pupil because of the choice he makes 
in the exercise of his rights under this plan.

The Billingsville Junior High School boundary lines con­
tinue to overlap boundary lines of other schools serving 
the same area. The plan adopted by the Board of Educa­
tion provides for the elimination of this overlapping not 
later than the beginning of the school term 1967-68. In



86a

the meanwhile, upon the completion of the East Central 
Junior High School, the Billingsville Junior High School 
shall he discontinued and the children attending that school 
shall be assigned to the school serving the area in which 
the children reside.

A  full copy of the adopted policy of the Board of Educa­
tion on school assignment along with maps showing school 
attendance areas may be found in the office of each school 
of the system and at the Board of Education office.

/ s /  D a v id  W .  H a r r is

David W. Harris, Chairman 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 

Education

Exhibit “F ” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

/ s /  A. C r a ig  P h i l l i p s

A. Craig Phillips, Superintendent
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools



87a

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
REQUEST FOR PUPIL TRANSFER

Exhibit “F ” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

Pupil’s last name First name Middle name

Street Telephone

City and State

School last attended .......................................... ........

Original assignment for 1965-66: Grade.....School

Date of original assignment ...................... ....... -

Request for transfer

1st Choice ........- ......................................... School

2nd Choice ....... ............................... ..........  School

3rd Choice ................................................. School

Signature of adult with whom pupil lives.......... -

Relationship to pupil .............

Mail or deliver by June 30, 1965, to any school office or to the 
Pupil Assignment Office, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, 
720 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Do not write in this space

For school official receiving Assignment ..........................

rc,»uost: Date ..........................
Date Received 
or Postmarked: ..................

Signature

By Whom Received:



88a

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
720 East Fourth Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Exhibit “ G”  Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

June 2, 1965

Special Notice to Parents of Children Assigned to 
the Crestdale School (grades 1-6):

Your child has been assigned to the Crestdale School 
(grades 1-6) for the 1965-66 school term in accordance with 
an assignment plan adopted by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
Board of Education on March 11, 1965. The plan provides 
that “after original assignment the parent of any pupil may 
apply to the Board for reassignment of such pupil to any 
school serving his or her grade and located in any other 
attendance area” and that “ any such request for transfer 
shall be allowed . . .  to the extent that the facilities and ac­
commodations of the chosen school will permit.” A simple 
form is found on the back of this notice for your use if you 
are not satisfied with the assignment of your child and want 
to request reassignment. This request for reassignment 
must be made not later than June 30, 1965.

Parents are assured that school personnel will neither 
favor nor penalize any pupil because of the choice he makes 
in the exercise of his rights under this plan.

The Crestdale School boundary lines continue to overlap 
boundary lines of other schools serving the same area. The 
plan adopted by the Board of Education provides for the 
elimination of this overlapping not later than the begin­
ning of the school term 1967-68. In the meanwhile, upon the



89a

completion of the Albermarle Boad Junior High School, the 
Crestdale School will be discontinued. At that time the 
children (grades 1-6) attending that school shall be assigned 
to the school or schools serving the area or areas in which 
they reside.

A full copy of the adopted policy of the Board of Educa­
tion on school assignment along with maps showing school 
attendance areas may be found in the office of each school 
of the system and at the Board of Education office.

/ s /  D a v id  W. H a e r is

David W. Harris, Chairman 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 

Education

Exhibit “G” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

/ s /  A. 'C r a ig  P h i l l i p s

A. Craig Phillips, Superintendent
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools



90a

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
REQUEST FOR PUPIL TRANSFER

Exhibit “ G” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

Pupil’s last name First name Middle name

Street Telephone

City and State

School last attended ...................................................-.............
Original assignment for 1965-66: Grade----School ..............

Date of original assignment ................................

Request for transfer

1st Choice ........................ -..........................  School

2nd Choice .... .......... ....... .................... ......  School

3rd Choice ........... ....................— ...........  School

Signature of adult with whom pupil lives ......... .................

Relationship to pu p il..........................

Mail or deliver by June 30,1965, to any school office or to the 
Pupil Assignment Office, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, 
720 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Do not write in this space

For school official receiving Assignment ..........................
re9uest: Date .......................
Date Received Signature ...........................
or Postmarked: ................ -

By Whom Received:



91a

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
720 East Fourth Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Exhibit “ H” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

June 2, 1965

Special Notice to Parents of Children
Assigned to Ada Jenkins School (grades 1-7) :

Your child has been assigned to the Ada Jenkins School 
(grades 1-7) for the 1965-66 school term in accordance with 
an assignment plan adopted by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
Board of Education on March 11, 1965. The plan provides 
that “after original assignment the parent of any pupil may 
apply to the Board for reassignment of such pupil to any 
school serving his or her grade and located in any other 
attendance area” and that “any such request for transfer 
shall he allowed . . .  to the extent that the facilities and ac­
commodations of the chosen school will permit.” A simple 
form is found on the back of this notice for your use if you 
are not satisfied with the assignment of your child and want 
to request reassignment. This request for reassignment 
must be made not later than June 30, 1965.

Parents are assured that school personnel will neither 
favor nor penalize any pupil because of the choice he makes 
in the exercise of his rights under this plan.

The Ada Jenkins School boundary lines continue to 
overlap boundary lines of other schools serving the same 
area. The plan adopted by the Board of Education provides 
for the elimination of this overlapping not later than the 
beginning of the school term 1967-68. By the end of the 
1966-67 school term, a new attendance area, based on good



92a

faith consideration of geographical factors only, shall be 
established for the Ada Jenkins School; OR by the end of 
the 1966-67 school term the Ada Jenkins School shall be 
discontinued and the children attending this school shall be 
assigned to the school serving the area in which they reside.

A  full copy of the adopted policy of the Board of Educa­
tion on school assignment along with maps showing school 
attendance areas may be found in the office of each school 
of the system and at the Board of Education office.

/ s /  D a v id  W. H a r r is

David W. Harris, Chairman 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 

Education

Exhibit “H” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

/ s /  A. C r a ig  P h i l l i p s

A. Craig Phillips, Superintendent
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools



93a

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
REQUEST FOR PUPIL TRANSFER

Exhibit “H” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

.................. . ................... ........
Pupil’s last name First name Middle name

Street Telephone

City and State

School last attended ......... ....... -.......................................
Original assignment for 1965-66: Grade.....School.......

Date of original assignment ...............................

Request for transfer

1st Choice ......... ..... -...... -...................... ----- School

2nd Choice ........................-.......................  School

3rd Choice ................................................. School

Signature of adult with whom pupil lives.........................
Relationship to pupil .........................

Mail or deliver by June 30,1965, to any school office or to the 
Pupil Assignment Office, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, 
720 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Do not write in this space

For school official receiving Assignment .......... .............-
request: Date ..........................

Date Received Signature ........................-
or Postmarked: ..................

By Whom Received: .............



94a

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURGr SCHOOLS 
720 East Fourth Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

June 2, 1965

Exhibit “ I”  Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

Special Notice to Parents of Children
Assigned to the Woodland School (grades 1-6):

Your child has been assigned to the Woodland School 
(grades 1-6) for the 1965-66 school term in accordance with 
an assignment plan adopted by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
Board of Education on March 11, 1965. The plan provides 
that “after original assignment the parent of any pupil may 
apply to the Board for reassignment of such pupil to any 
school serving his or her grade and located in any other 
attendance area” and that “ any such request for transfer 
shall be allowed . . .  to the extent that the facilities and ac­
commodations of the chosen school will permit.” A simple 
form is found on the back of this notice for your use if you 
are not satisfied with the assignment of your child and want 
to request reassignment. This request for reassignment 
must be made not later than June 30, 1965.

Parents are assured that school personnel will neither 
favor nor penalize any pupil because of the choice he makes 
in the exercise of his rights under this plan.

The Woodland School boundary lines continue to overlap 
boundary lines of other schools serving the same area. The 
plan adopted by the Board of Education provides for the 
elimination of this overlapping not later than the beginning 
of the school term 1967-68. In the meanwhile, upon the 
completion of the Southwest Senior High School, a new



95a

attendance area, based on good faith consideration of geo­
graphical factors only, shall be established for the Wood­
land Elementary School. The boundaries of this attendance 
area shall be contiguous with the boundaries of the adjacent 
attendance areas and children attending the Woodland Ele­
mentary School at that time shall be assigned to the school 
or schools serving the area or areas in which the children 
reside.

A full copy of the adopted policy of the Board of Educa­
tion on school assignment along with maps showing school 
attendance areas may be found in the office of each school 
of the system and at the Board of Education office.

/ s /  D a v id  W. H a r r is

David W. Harris, Chairman 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 

Education

/ s /  A. C r a ig  P h i l l i p s

A. Craig Phillips, Superintendent 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools

Exhibit “1” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction



96a

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
REQUEST FOR PUPIL TRANSFER

Exhibit “I ” Attached to Answer to Motion for
Preliminary Injunction

....................................1 .......................................  ... .........
Pupil’s last name First name Middle name

Street Telephone

City and State

School last attended ...........-....................... ........ .....
Original assignment for 1965-66: Grade —  School

Date of original assignment ................................

Request for transfer

1st Choice ................—..............................  School

2nd Choice ............ ............ ......................... School

3rd Choice ... ...................... ......... ............. School

Signature of adult with whom pupil lives..........................
Relationship to pupil ..........................

Mail or deliver by June 30, 1965, to any school office or to the 
Pupil Assignment Office, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, 
720 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Do not write in this space

For school official receiving Assignment — ................... .
re(luest: Date ..........................
Date Received Signature ...........................
or Postmarked: ..................

By Whom Received: .......... .



97a

This motion is considered under Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure 78 and Local Rule No. 8.

The case is another school case which was begun Jan­
uary 19, 1965. Answer was filed February 5, 1965. On 
February 19, 1965, the defendant School Board asked the 
court to enlarge the time within which the defendant might 
answer interrogatories until May 1,1965, so that the School 
Board could base its answers to the questions on a new 
program controlling the enrollment and assignment of 
pupils in its schools which had been under consideration 
since November 1964. In order that such a program could 
be formulated, officially adopted, and publicly announced, 
and its provisions incorporated within the answers to the 
propounded interrogatories, this court enlarged the time 
for answering the same until April 15, 1965. Nothing is 
to be gained in this constitutional field by litigating past 
history, and it is advantageous to all concerned to focus 
attention on what is currently being done and being planned 
rather than what has been done in the past.

On March 11, 1965, the School Board adopted its con­
templated new plan: comprehensive rules and regulations 
governing enrollment, assignment and transfer of pupils 
for all of its 109 schools in the Mecklenburg County School 
administrative unit. For 99 of these schools attendance 
areas were established on a strictly geographical basis. 
The remaining 10 schools apparently adhere (temporarily) 
to the old dual attendance zones and these 10 schools 
serve about one-fifth of the total Negro school population 
of Mecklenburg County. Elimination of these overlapping 
areas within a maximum two year period is part of the 
plan. Quite possibly the trial will narrow itself largely to

Memorandum of Decision and Order on Motion for
Preliminary Injunction



98a

consideration of how much and how soon action must be 
taken with respect to such elimination.

Although the plan was adopted March 11, 1965, and re­
ceived wide publicity soon thereafter, plaintiffs waited 
until May 26, 1965, to file a motion for preliminary in­
junction to restrain the implementation of the plan with 
respect to the ten schools. The entire case is now set for 
trial on the merits on July 12, 1965. To allow the pre­
liminary injunction at this time is to judge the case first 
and hear it afterwards. Even in the constitutional area, 
preliminary injunctions are seldom used to change the 
status quo.

If it be assumed that failure to enjoin implementation 
of the School Board plan will work to the detriment of 
plaintiffs and others of their class, there is no showing 
that such detriment is irreparable. The court can as effec­
tively protect the rights of plaintiffs on July 12 as it can 
now. The plan will not actually go into operation until 
September 1965.

This is a tremendously large and complex school system. 
It would be absurdly presumptuous for a district judge, 
inexperienced in the administration of schools, to disrupt 
by entry of a preliminary injunction, without a hearing, 
a carefully considered plan of school operation governing 
109 school units. There has been no purposeful delay in 
the hearing and consideration of this case. From the filing 
of the complaint to the final trial there will have elapsed 
less than six months. Counsel for plaintiffs took in excess 
of eight weeks after knowledge of the plan to seek re­
straint of its implementation. Within six more weeks 
there can be a complete trial on the merits. We do not yet

Memorandum Decision and Order on Motion for
Preliminary Injunction



99a

Memorandum Decision and Order on Motion for 
Preliminary Injunction

have instant justice. Under such circumstances, there can 
be no justification for trial by affidavit.

The motion for preliminary injunction is denied.

This 31st day of May, 1965.

J. B r a x t o n  C r a v e n , Jr., Chief Judge 
United States District Court for the 
Western District of North Carolina



100a

Motion to Intervene or in the Alternative for Leave 
to Be Added as a Party-Plaintiff

The above named applicant for intervention respectfully 
moves the Court for an order permitting it to intervene as 
a party-plaintiff in this cause and permitting its proposed 
complaint in intervention annexed hereto to be filed in order 
to assert the matters set forth therein upon the following 
grounds:

1. Applicant for intervention is a professional teachers 
association, organized as a private, non-profit, membership 
corporation. The applicant has a membership of approxi­
mately 12,500, most of whom are Negro teachers, teaching 
in the public schools of North Carolina, including the 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg School System, the defendant here­
in. One of the objectives of the applicant is to support the 
decisions of the United States Supreme Court on segrega­
tion in education and to work for the assignment of students 
to classes and teachers and other professional personnel 
to professional duties within public school systems without 
regard to race, and to work against discrimination in the 
selection of such professional personnel. The association 
is the medium by which its members express their views on 
issues affecting public education and their employment. By 
virtue of this group association individual members are 
enabled to express their views and to take action with 
respect to controversial issues relating to racial discrim­
ination. Said intervenor wishes to assert here the right of 
its members teaching in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School 
System not to be hired, assigned or dismissed on the basis 
of their race or color.



101a

Motion to Intervene or in the Alternative for Leave 
to Be Added as a Party-Plaintiff

2. Applicant for intervention should be permitted to in­
tervene as a party-plaintiff in this action upon the following 
grounds:

(a) Applicant for intervention and its members are 
members of the class who will or might be affected 
by the relief prayed for by the original plaintiffs 
herein.

(b) Applicant for intervention and its members have 
a substantial interest in the subject matter of this 
action.

(c) Applicant for intervention and its members may 
be bound by any judgment in this case relating to 
desegregation of pupils and teachers.

(d) The claims of applicant for intervention and that 
of the original plaintiffs herein present common 
questions of law and fact.

(e) Intervention will not to any extent delay or preju­
dice the adjudication of the rights of the original 
parties who are represented by the same counsel.

W h e r e f o r e , it is prayed that an order be entered per­
mitting the above named applicant to intervene as a party- 
plaintiff pursuant to Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure or in the alternative permitting the applicant to 
be added as a party-plaintiff pursuant to Rule 21 of the 
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and permitting its pro­
posed complaint in intervention, attached hereto, to be filed.



102a

I

Intervenor adopts and reasserts the allegations of Para­
graph I of the original complaint herein.

II

This is a proceeding for a preliminary and permanent 
injunction enjoining the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 
Education, its members and its Superintendent from con­
tinuing the policy, practice, custom and usage of discrim­
inating against the plaintiffs, members of intervenor’s 
association and other Negro citizens of the City of Char­
lotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, because of 
race or color.

III
Intervenor is a professional teachers association, organ­

ized as a private, non-profit, membership corporation pur­
suant to the laws of the State of North Carolina. Said 
intervenor has a membership of approximately 12,500, most 
of whom are Negro teachers, teaching in the public schools 
of North Carolina, including the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
Public School System. One of its objectives is to support 
the decisions of the United States Supreme Court on seg­
regation in public education and to work for the assignment 
of students to classes and teachers and other professional 
personnel to professional duties within the public school 
system without regard to race, and to work against dis­
crimination in the selection of such professional personnel. 
The intervenor is the medium by which its members express 
their views on issues affecting public education and their 
employment. By virtue of this group association individual

Complaint in Intervention



103a

members are enabled to express their views and to take 
action with respect to controversial issues relating to racial 
discrimination. Said intervenor asserts here the right of 
its members teaching in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School 
System not to be hired, assigned or dismissed on the basis 
of their race or color.

IV

Intervenor adopts and reasserts the allegations of Para­
graph IV of the original complaint herein.

V

Intervenor adopts and reasserts the allegations of Para­
graph V of the original complaint herein.

Intervenor further alleges that defendant’s proposed plan 
of desegregation, filed in this cause, makes no provision for 
the elimination of its racially discriminatory practices with 
respect to teachers, principals and school personnel.

VI

Intervenor seeks here the elimination of all racially dis­
criminatory practices of defendant Board, including its 
policy of hiring, assigning and dismissing teachers, prin­
cipals and professional school personnel on the basis of 
race and color. Intervenor further seeks the reorganization 
of the school system into a unitary nonracial system where­
in the educational opportunities and employment offered 
by the defendant are made available to students, teachers 
and professional school personnel without regard to race 
or color, wherein there are no racial designations in the 
employment and assignment of teachers, principals and 
other professional school personnel, arid wherein school

Complaint in Intervention



104a

plans, operation, and all school activities are free from 
racial designation and restrictions.

VII

Intervenor and its members are irreparably injured by 
the acts of the defendant complained of herein. The con­
tinued operation of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School Sys­
tem on a racially discriminatory basis violates the rights 
of intervenor and its members secured to them by the Due 
Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth 
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

The injury which intervenor and its members suffer as 
a result of the actions of the defendant is and will continue 
to be irreparable until enjoined by this Court. Any other 
relief to which intervenor and its members could be remitted 
would be attended by such uncertainties and delays as to 
deny substantial relief, would involve a multiplicity of 
suits, cause further irreparable injury and occasion dam­
age, vexation and inconvenience to the intervenor and its 
members.

W h e r e f o r e , intervenor respectfully prays that this Court 
advance this cause on the docket and order a speedy hearing 
of the action according to law and, after such hearing, enter 
an order permanently enjoining the defendant, its agents, 
employees, successors and all persons in active concert and 
participation with them from hiring, assigning, releasing 
or dismissing intervenor and its members teaching in the 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg School System on the basis of race 
or color, from maintaining a biracial school system and 
from continuing any other practice, policy, custom or usage 
on the basis of race or color.

Complaint in Intervention



105a

Intervenor further prays that this Court retain jurisdic­
tion of this cause pending full and complete compliance 
by the defendant with the order of the Court, that the Court 
will allow the intervenor its costs herein, reasonable coun­
sel fees and grant such other, further and additional or 
alternative relief as may appear to the Court to be equitable 
and just.

Complaint in Intervention



106a

Answer to Motion of the North Carolina Teachers 
Association, a Corporation, to Intervene or Be 

Added as a Party Plaintiff

The defendant answers the Motion purportedly filed on 
behalf of a North Carolina corporation known as the North 
Carolina Teachers Association, Inc., and alleges:

1. The defendant is without knowledge or information 
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations 
of paragraph 1 and therefore denies the same, and the 
defendant alleges that the subject matter of this action 
does not deal with any issue involving any personal or 
property rights of the corporation under the Constitution 
and Laws of the United States nor with any threat of 
injury, irrepairable or otherwise, to said corporation.

2. The allegations of paragraph 2 are denied.

W h e r e f o r e , the defendant p r a y s  the Court that the 
Motion of said corporation to intervene or be added as a 
party plaintiff in this action be denied.

This the 8 day of June, 1965.



Answer to Complaint in Intervention

Without waiving its exception to the order of the Court 
permitting the North Carolina Teachers Association, a 
corporation, to intervene in this cause, the defendant, 
within the time allowed by the Court, answers the allega­
tions of the Complaint of the intervenor and alleges:

1. The defendant adopts and reasserts the allegations 
of paragraph 1 of its Further Answer and Defense con­
tained in its original Answer herein as its answer to para­
graph 1 of the Complaint of the intervenor.

2. The allegations of paragraph 2 are denied.

3. Answering the allegations of paragraph 3, the defen­
dant admits that the intervenor is a private, non-profit 
membership corporation organized and existing under the 
laws of North Carolina and that its membership is com­
posed of negro teachers and professional personnel em­
ployed in the public school systems of North Carolina 
but the remaining allegations of said paragraph are denied, 
and it is expressly denied that the objectives of the cor­
poration as set forth in its Charter contain any provision 
for advocacy by the intervenor with respect to practices 
pursued in the employment of teachers, whether discrimina­
tory or noil-discriminatory.

4. In answer to paragraph 4 of the Complaint of the 
intervenor, the defendant adopts and reasserts the allega­
tions of paragraph 4 of its original Further Answer and 
Defense.

5. In answer to paragraph 5 of the Complaint of the 
intervenor, the defendant adopts and reasserts the allega­



108a

tions of paragraph 5 of its original Further Answer and 
Defense and it further denies the allegations contained in 
the second paragraph of intervenor’s Complaint.

6. The allegations of paragraph 6 of the intervenor’s 
Complaint merely set forth the alleged purpose of the inter­
vention in this action by the intervenor and do not require 
an answer by this defendant.

7. The allegations of paragraph 7 are denied.
W herefore, having fully answered, the defendant prays 

the Court that the relief demanded by the intervenor be 
denied and that this action be dismissed and that the 
defendant recover its costs.

Answer to Complaint in Intervention



109a

To: Brock Barkley, Esq.
820 Law Building
Charlotte, North Carolina

Plaintiffs request that the defendant, the Charlotte- 
Mecklenburg Board of Education, answer under oath in 
accordance with Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure, the following interrogatories:

1. List for each elementary school in the school system,
for the 1965-66 school year:

(a) The number of students, by race, residing in each 
district;

(b) The rated capacity for each elementary school;

(c) The criteria used in determining rated capacity;

(d) The number of students, by race, initially as­
signed for the 1965-66 school year to each school;

(e) The number of students, by race, at each ele­
mentary school who have requested reassignment 
to another school outside of their district;

(f) The number of students, by race, at each ele­
mentary school, who have been reassigned, for 
the 1965-66 school year to a school outside of 
their district, the school to which they have been 
assigned, and the method by which these students 
will be transported to school;

(g) The anticipated enrollment at each school for the
1965-66 school year.

Interrogatories



1 1 0 a

2. List for each junior high school in the school system,
for the 1965-66 school year:

(a) The number of students by race, residing in each 
district;

(b) The rated capacity for each school;

(c) The criteria used in determining rated capacity;

(d) The number of students, by race, initially as­
signed for the 1965-66 school year to each school;

(e) The number of students, by race, at each junior 
high school, who have requested reassignment to 
another school outside of their district;

(f) The number of students, by race, at each junior 
high school, who have been reassigned, for the 
1965-66 school year, to a school outside of their 
district, the school to which they have been as­
signed, and the method by which these students 
will be transported to school;

(g) The anticipated enrollment at each school for the 
1965-66 school year.

3. List for each high school in the school system, for
the 1965-66 school year:

(a) The number of students, by race, residing in each 
district;

(b) The rated capacity for each school;

(c) The criteria used in determining rated capacity;

(d) The number of students, by race, initially as­
signed for the 1965-66 school year to each school;

Interrogatories



111a

(e) The number of students, by race, who have re­
quested reassignment to another school outside 
of their district;

(f) The number of students, by race, who have been 
reassigned, for the 1965-66 school year, to a school 
outside of their district, the school to which they 
have been assigned, and the method by which 
these students will be transported to school;

(g) The anticipated enrollment at each school for the 
1965-66 school year.

4. Please attach attendance areas or maps describing 
the school zones or attendance areas for each school 
having attendance areas for the 1964-65 school year, 
or if this is not possible, state where such maps may 
be located or when they may be inspected.

5. Please state the number of Negro teachers and pro­
fessional school personnel who have been assigned 
for the 1965-66 school year to formerly all-white 
schools.

6. Please state the number of white teachers and pro­
fessional school personnel who have been assigned for 
the 1965-66 school year to formerly all-Negro schools.

7. Please state, for the 1965-66 school year, the number 
of teachers, by race, who have been employed for the 
first time in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School Sys­
tem.

P lease take notice that a copy of such answers must be 
served upon the undersigned within fifteen (15) days after 
service.

This the

Int err o gat ones

day of June, 1965.



112a

The defendant, The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 
Education, by its Superintendent of Schools and Secretary 
to the Board, answers the Interrogatories served upon it 
by the plaintiffs on the 24th day of June, 1965, as follows:

1. Interrogatory No. 1:

(a) Records of students are not kept by race and it is 
impossible, therefore, to answer subparagraph 1 (a). It is 
generally known that there are all negro residential areas 
and all white residential areas, and the general division 
of the population by such areas is as well known to the 
plaintiffs as to the defendant.

(b) The maximum capacity for each school is shown on 
Exhibit “B” attached. In elementary schools maximum 
capacity is determined by adding to the rated capacity 
five percent (5%) of such rated capacity.

(c) See section 7 of School Assignments Regulations 
furnished with Answers to earlier Interrogatories and 
staff work paper hereto attached as Exhibit “C” .

(d ) , (e) and (f) See Exhibit “A ” attached. The statis­
tical data contained in Exhibits “A ” and “B” contains all 
of the detailed information the Board has been able to 
compile as of this date. It should be borne in mind that 
the deadline for filing transfer requests was June 30 and 
that since that date a Saturday, Sunday and holiday has 
intervened. In answer to the latter part of Interrogatory 
1 (f) with reference to school transportation: all pupils 
attending school in the attendance area of their residence 
will be provided with bus transportation without regard 
to race if the area in question is served by buses. As for

Answers to Interrogatories



113a

children residing in one attendance area and attending 
school in another see section 8 of the new Assignment 
Regulations.

(g) See Exhibit “A ” .

2. Interrogatory No. 2:

Exhibits “A ” , “B” and “ C” provide the answers to these 
Interrogatories to the same extent and in the same manner 
that they do to the Interrogatories contained in Interroga­
tory No. 1 and subsections. The answer to the latter part 
of Interrogatory 2 (f) is the same as that to Interrogatory 
1 (f). As to 2 (b) maximum capacity is ten percent (10%) 
above rated capacity.

3. Interrogatory No. 3:

Exhibits “B” and “ 0 ” apply to Interrogatory No. 3 and 
subparagraphs thereof in the same manner and to the same 
extent as they do to Interrogatories 1 and 2. The answer 
to the latter part of Interrogatory 3 (f) is the same as 
that to Interrogatory 1 (f). As to 3 (b) maximum capacity 
is ten percent (10%) above rated capacity.

4. Interrogatory No. 4:

Only working maps were ever made of attendance areas 
in effect for 1964-65 school year and these were discarded 
after descriptions of the areas were reduced to writing.

5. Interrogatory No. 5:

With the exception of pending requests for transfer to 
a new school station, previously employed teacher per­
sonnel have been assigned to the same schools for the

Answers to Interrogatories



114a

1965-66 school year as those in which they taught in the 
1964-65 school year.

6. Interrogatory No. 6:

The answer to Interrogatory No. 6 is the same as to 
Interrogatory No. 5.

7. Interrogatory No. 7:

As of this date, approximately 348 white teachers and 
approximately 14 negro teachers have been employed for 
the first time to serve during the school year 1965-66.

NOTE: All statistical data in Exhibits “A ” and “B” 
which show a division by race are predicated upon the 
basis of estimates the defendant is in a position to make. 
Pupil records are not kept by race and do not indicate 
the identities of pupils by race. It is necessary to rely 
upon the supposition that a child coming from an all negro 
school is a negro child and upon information based upon 
the personal observations of principals and teachers.

Answers to Interrogatories

Dated July 8, 1965.



CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 
Charlotte, North Carolina

PUPIL ASSIGNMENT 1965-66

SCHOOL

No. of pupiIs 
initially 
assigned for 
1965-66

White Negro

Transfer
requests

White Neqro

Transf 
reques 
a 11owe

Whi te

er
ts
d

Neqro

Pupils, 
received by 
transfer

White Negro

Anticipated 
I965-66 enrol 1 ■ 
ment

Whi te Negro

A lexander J r . 581 1 6 0 6 0 20 6 595 7 XT

Alexander S t r e e t 15 287 15 2 15 2 0 it8 0 333 V

A shley  Park 663 0 21 0 21 0 lit 0 656 0 IV

Bain 706 _ j k . 9 0 9 0 15 0 712 0 W

B a rr in ger 606 10 0 10 0 50 0 646 0 w

B e r r y h i l l 1010 0 15 0 15 0 8 2 1003 2 r r
Bethune _____ 12_ ____ 0 9 0 0 21 10 355 rr /

B i d d l e v i l l e 0 — M J __ 0 19 0 19 0 9 0 421 rV

B i l l i n g s v i l l e 6 __ B I _ 6 23 - 6 23 0 3 0 721 rv •
Briarwbffa ^ 613 2 9 0 9 0 19 5 623 7 -r-
k ,
C h a n t i l ly  t. 432 2 8 0 8 0 10 1 434 3 ~r

C lea r  Creek 202 0 9 0 9 0 2 0 195 0 y
C°chr^j^p Junior 901 1 2 1 2 1 62 10 961 10 ' T
C (S’l^n s wo od 37*+ 0 0 ■ it 0 8 0 378 0

------ \—
. / i;/

C o r n e l iu s 258 0 l*t 0 14 0 2 2 246 2 XT v
Cotsw old 673 0 72 0 72 0 19 0 620 0 7 /
Coulwood J u n io r 610 3 8 0 8 0 39 30 641 33 A



115a

Exhibit “ A”  Attached to Answers to Interrogatories 
(Pupil Assignment 1965-66)



1 1 6 a

E xhibit ”  Attached to A n sw ers to Interrogatories

(See Opposite)



SCHOOL

No. of pupils 
initially 
assigned for 
1965-66

Transfer
requests

Transfer 
requests 
a 1 lowed

PupiIs 
received by 
transfer

Anticipated 
1965-66 enrol 1 ■ 
ment

Whi te Neqro Whi te Neqro -White Neoro White Negro Whi te Neqro
Crestdale 0 91 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 87 / t /

Davidson 178 0 1 0 1 0 8 0 185 0 vr j
Marie Davis 0 823 0 11 0 11 0 1 0 813 A/ 1
Derita 899 19 10 1 10 1 59 4 948 22 i r

— __1

1
Devonshire, 535 2 24 0 .2 4 0 14 2 525 4 J T H
DiIworth 399 109 71 5 71 5 15 1 343 105 XT

— _

Double Oaks 0 788 0 5 0 5 0 3 0 786 A/
Druid H ills 4 468 4 0 4 0 0 17 0 485 M
East Mecklenburg 1833 2 26 2 26 2 123 4 1930 4 XT
Eastover 543 0 10 0 10 .0 117 1 650 1 j T /
iastway Jr. 1022 0 12 0 12 0 111 1 1121 1 XT /
Eli zabeth 312 89 39 10 39 10 56 0 329 79 XT
Enderly Park 296 0 5 0 5 0 65 0 356 0

- 4 ------- l

W
Fai rview 0 738 0 25 0 25 0 2 0 715 a/
First Ward 1 410 1 0 1 0 0 20 0 430 a/
Garinqer 2265 59 68 ' 1 68 1 52 7 2249 65

----------LX._____

Tf
Alexander Graham 1031 1 9 0 9 O j 83 17 1105 18 r r

-  2 -



117a



118a

Exhibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See Opposite)BST



SCHOOL

No. of pupi1s 
initially 
assigned for 
1965-66

Transfer
requests

Transfer 
requests 
a 1 lowed

PupiIs 
received by 
transfer

Anticipated 
I965-66 enroll 
ment

White . Neqro Whi te Nearo White Nearo White Negro Whi te Neqro

J . H. Gunn 0 730 0 40 0 40 0 17 0 707 * hi

H arding 937 16 56 0 56 0 149 13 1030 29 r r

Hawthorne J r . 853 104 13^ 6 134 6 10 4 729 102 J 7

H ick ory  Grove 536 0 3 0 3 0 1 0 534 0 w

Highland 339 2 44 0 . 44 0 7 1 302 3

H oskins 357 0 12 0 12 0 10 6 355 6

H u n te r s v ille 533 0 15 0 15 0 10 1 528 1 r T  y

Hunt. Farms 382 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 390 0 w
Id le w ild 526 0 3 0 3 0 20 0 543 0 W
Irw in  A ve. J r . <*7- 816 47 29 47 29 0 49 0 836 /V
Amay James 1 363 3 3 1 3 0 0 0 360 frf
Ada Jen kin s / 0 ¥+9 0 9 0 9 0 1 0 441 hi
Lakeview 376 3 10 0 10 0 19 0 385 3 r r

Lansdowne 667 0 1 0 1 0 6 0 672 0 W
L in c o ln  H e ig h ts 0 757 0 18 0 18 0 17 0 756 N

: T C reek 414 0 21 ' 0 21 0 9 0 402 0 V
909 0 8 0 8 0 18 1 919 1 if /

-3 -



119a



1 2 0 a

Exhibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See Opposite)!®”



SCHOOL

No. of pupi1s 
Initially
assigned for 
1965_66

T ransfer 
requests

Transfer 
requests 
a 1 lowed

PupiIs 
received by 
transfer

Ant icipated 
I965-66 enroll 
ment

‘ Whi te Neqro Whi te Neqro -While .-j-Jtegro Wh i te Negro Whi te Neqro

M cC lin tock  Jr. 1418 0 36 0 36 0 0 0 1382 0 I V

Merry Oaks 544 0 20 0 20 0 2 0 526 0
W

Midwood 497 0 17 0 17 0 17 0 497 0 I V

M o n tc la ire 648 0 9 0 9 0 5 0 644 0 V\I

Si.y Morgan 65 313 65 * 10 . 65 10 0 8 0 311 U

Myers Park Elen . 573 0 11 0 11 0 36 0 598 0 W -
! M yers Park H igf 1716 153 143 17 143 17 120 26 1693 162 r r

Myers S t r e e t 0 744 0 15 0 15 0 18 0 747 N

; N a tion s Ford 536 0 1 0 1 0 10 0 545 0 IV

N ew ell 487 0 7 0 7 0 6 0 486 0 \\!
N orth  M eck len . 1127 128 6 1 6 1 16 24 1137 151

/ ^ N orth w est J r . 36 808 36 37 36 37 0 47 0 818 A/

[ Oakdale 412 0 1 0 1 0 12 ,5 423 6 /'TV
1| Oakhurst 578 0 32 0 32 0 5 0 551 0 W

| Oaklawn 0 711 0 31 0 31 0 13 0 693 N
1 Park Road 590 0 14 0 14 0 28 0 604 0 i V

P Paw Creek 762 0 1 0 1 0 7 0 768 0 V
-4-



121a



Exhibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See Opposite)!®"



SCHOOL

No. of pupi is 
initially 
assigned for 
1965-66

Transfer
requests

Transfer 
requests 
a 1 lowed

PupiIs 
received by 
transfer

Ant i cipated 
1965-66 enrol 1 
ment

Whi te Neqro Whi te Nearo -While Negro Whi te Negro White Neqro

Piedmont Jr. ' 256 274 107 6 107 6 52 19 201 287 FT
P i nevi1le 374 0 10 0 10 0 3 0 367 0 w

Pinewood 686 0 4 0 4 0 22 0 704 0 W

Plato Price 0 539 0 36 0 36 0 6 0 509 A /

Plaza Road 284 0 9 0 9 0 57 2 332 2 rr
Quai1 Hoi low Jr . 859 0 6 0 6 0 25 0

00r-'.
00 0 vV

Rama Road 496 2 4 0 4 0 17 0 509 2 rr
Ranson Jr. 749 33 38 4 38 4 16 4 727 33 7r
Second Ward 125 1528 124 74 124 74 0 75 1 1529 j r

Sedgefield El. 539 5 10 0 10 0 32 0 561 5 n

Sedgefield Jr. 935 40 38 1 38 1 26 4 923 43 T T

Selwyn 545 0 23 0 23 0 11 0 533 0 vZ

S e v ersv i1le 36 220 24 4 24 4 7 10 19 226 rr
Shamrock Gardens 517 0 13 0 13 0 28 0 532 0 w
Sharon 576 0 9 0 9 0 1 0 568 0 ' W

Smith Jr. 1222 0 19 0 19 0 4 0 1207 0 w

South Mecklenburg 1638 122 122 3 122
------------ -

3 30 3 1546 122 • „



123a



124a

Exhibit “A ” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See Opposite) 13?"



SCHOOL

No. of pupi1s 
initially 
assigned for 
1965-66

T rans fer 
requests

Trans fer 
reques ts 
a 1 lowed

Pupi1s 
received by 
transfer

Ant i ci 
1965-66 
ment

pa ted 
enrol 1

Whi te Neqro Whi te Neqro Wh i te .Neoro Wh i te Negro White Neqro

S p a u g h  J r . 820 9 14 6 14 6 1 1 1 8 917 1 1

S t a r m o u n t 547 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 549 0 w

S t a t e s v i l l e  Roac 685 0 53 0 53 0 18 0 650 0 /

S t e e l e  Creek 219 0 4 0 4 0 5 0 220 0 /
//

S t e r l i n g 0 614 0 8 0 8 0 1 0 , O

,/

T h o m a s b o r o 968 0 48 0 48 0 6 0 926 0
/ A /

V 7

T o r r e n c e - L y t l e 0 969 0 35 0 35 0 10 0 944 h J

T r y o n  Hills 314 6 6 2 6 2 8 0 316 4

T u c k a s e e g e e 568 0 3 0 3 0 33 0 598 0 i  .

U n i v e r s i t y  P a r k 5 709 5 8 5 8 0 34 0 735

/ilia H e i g h t s 553 105 40 16 40 16 15 12 528 101 1 ""

W e s l e y  H e i g h t s 38 203 38 0 38 0 0 6 0 209 / /

West C h a r l o t t e 32 1753 32 78 32 78 0 20 0 1695

W e s t  M e c k l e n b u r g 1250 85 29 5 29 5 65 4 1286 84 f"

W i l l i a m s  Jr. 5 313 5 34 5 34 0 29 0 808

W i l m o r e 365 21 46 0 ' 46 0 14 1 333 22

W i l s o n  Jr. 1179 , 1 39 0 39 0 1 15 0 1155 1

-6 -



125a



:126a

Exhibit “A ”  Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See Opposite)



SCHOOL

No. of pupiIs 
Initially 
assigned for 
1965-66

White Negro

T ransfer 
requests

White Nearo

Transfer 
requests 
a 1 lowed

V/hite Nearo

Pupils 
received by 
trans fer

White Negro

Ant i c i pa ted 
I965-66 enrol 1 
ment

V/hite Negro

Windsor Park 704 1 9 0 9 0 9 0 704 1
. t —

W: field 59^ 0 18 0 18 0 1 0 577 0 w

W o o d l a n d 0 350 0 31 0 31 0 7 0 326

W o o d l a w n 282 1 13 0 13 0 3 0 272 1

Is a b e l l a  W y c h e _____ Z__ 371 7 1 7 1 0 6 0 376 N

Y o r k  Road 0 1094 0 18 0 18 0 51 0 1127 [ !

Z e b  V a n c e 1 527 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 525

TOTAL 52826 21893 2222 697 2222 697 2139 780 527^3 21976

ColtBHi beaded "trooof er ceq« cots" 1 efers 4:o requ sets fo r trace fera
icoa tuttae scho o l .

C e i n a  beaded 
aaae school.

irtroaif ar req« 08&8 *1 lowed" refers to tre tsfer £ roa

Colaaaa hooded "pupils recelv ed by tcansfei ,M refe :s to p ipils r eceived
by nose school •

, ,

-7 -



127a



128a

Exhibit B” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories 
(Pupil Assignments— July 1, 1965)

(See O pposite)^"





129a



130a

Exhibit “B” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See Opposite)!®^



SCHOOL

Ju
ne

 
2 

' 
j 

As
si

gn
me

nt
s

__
__

__
__

__
__

__

Re
qu

es
ts

 
to
 

En
te
r

*
Re

qu
es

ts
 
to
 j 

■L
ea
ve
 

j

O  >ca u
CO

<D i t  
C  i t

<✓>

Crestdale 91 °J 4 y 87

Davidson 178 8 1 185

Marie Davis 823 1 11 813

Der i ta 918 63 11 970

Devonshi re 537 16 24 529

D ? 1 worth' 508 16 76 448

Double Oaks 788 3 5 786

Druid Hills 472 17 4 485

East Mecklenburg 1835 127 28 1934

Eastover 543 118 10 651

Eastway Junior 1022 112 12 11 22

Elizabeth 401 56 49 408

Enderly Park 296 65 5 356

Fa i rv i ew 738 2 25 715

First Ward 2+11 20 1 430

Gar i nger 2324 59 69 2314

Alexander Graham 1032 100 .9 11 23

Ma
xi

mu
m 

C
ap

ac
i t

y

158_ 

378 

945 

1008 

756 

504 

756 

567 

1980 

756 

1 122  

662 

378 

819 

661 

2079 

1221

N
u

m
b

er
A

s
s

ig
n

e
d

 
• 

j 
1

s
t 

C
h

o
ic

e
.!

i 
.! <i)

o
"O • -
a) o

1— C -C
a) cn o

_ Q ' —
2  </>
D (A C  ^  <  CM N

um
be

r-
 

A
ss

 i 
g

n
ed

 
3

rd
 

C
h

o
ic

e

G
ra

d
e

 
12

 
& 

j 
E

li
g

ib
le

: 
G

e
o

g
ra

p
h

i-
 

r.
a 

1 
1 v

 
__

__
__ O4-J -M 

C
T) —  ' 0)
(l) (0 E  c  c  cL_ •— LT)
d  c n . -
4-J •— oi 
5) l  in

_

0 0 0 0

8 0 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0

63 0 0 0 0

14 2 0 0 2

16 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 3 7

1 7 0 0 0 0

1 1 2 1 5 0 0 13

1 1 8 0 0 0 0

1 1 2 0 0 0 1 0

5 6 0 0 0 0

6 5 0 0 0 0

2 0 0 0 2

2 0 0 0 0 1

0 0 0 5 9 1 9

9 7 3 0 0 0
--- ...---- . ------- ----------------- ..... ........... — .... . .  . .....



131a



132a

Exhibit “B” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See O pposite)®^



S C H O O L

i
Ju

ne
 
2 

' 
] 

As
si

gn
me

nt
s

Re
qu

es
ts

 
to
 

En
te
r

Re
qu

es
ts

 
to
 

Le
av
e

O  >*  m  i-
03

<d n  c  a
ZJ Z)

-0  </> Ma
xi

mu
m 

Ca
pa
c 
i t
y

i 1
jN
um
be
r 

" 
lA
ss
ig
ne
d 

’ 
j 

! 1
st
 
Ch

oi
ce

 . 
|

i 
. 

>

<1>o
• -

<D o 
l  c j :  
<D cn c_> 

_Q' —E ^  "O □ in cZZ <  CN

0o
“O •—. 0) o

1- C -C(!) cn o  
_Q —
E <n T) ZJ CO L- Z <  0̂

4> i
N 0) -C 
-  — CL 
1 .£> H3<1) —  t- >  
jj  cn cn r—
(0 — o  —
t- — <U (0 

LU CD U

0

C
0 —  0) 
4) (U E  
c  c  c  
- —  cn 

J  D l -  
+-»— </! 
(D L  ui
c£ O <C

J . H. Gunn 730 17 1+0 7QZ. ,  . . 2 0 6 1 6 i _.. -Q _ _ ____ 0__ 0

Ha rd i ng 953 1 6 2 5 6 1059 1155 l i+ 5 17 0 0 1 0

Hawthorne Jr. 9 5 7 11+ li+0 831 1089 11+ 0 0 0 11

Hickory Grove 536 1 3 5 3k 539 1 0 0 0 0 •-

Hi ghiand 3*+l 8 k b 305 378 8 0 0 0 0

Hoskins 357 16 12 361 378 16 0 0 0 0 -

Huntersvi1le 533 11 15 529 756 11 0 0 0______ 0

Hunt. Farms 382 8 0 390 378 0 0 0 8 0

!d iewiId 526 20 3 5k3 630 20 0 0 0 0 j

1rwi n Ave.'Jr. 863 k 3 76 836 1221 1+2 6 1 0 15 /  •

Amay James 361+ ' 0 k 360 ' 1+10 0 0 0 0 0

Ada Jenkins k k 9 1 9 i+ i+ l • 1+1+1 1 0»
0 0 0

Lakeview 379 19 10 388 501+ ' 19 0 0 0 0

Lansdowne 667 6 1 672 630 0 0 0 6 0

Lincoln Heights 757 17 18 756 7-56 17 0 0 0 0

Long Creek k ] k 9 21 1+02 567 9 0 0 0 0
Matthews 909 19 . 8 920 1187 18 0 1 0 8 1



133a



134a

Exhibit “B” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See Opposite) 8^°



SCHOOL

l/>
4-*co£

<M cOJ
CD •- 
C  IA 
3 < Re

qu
es

ts
 
to
 

En
te
r

i 
]

Re
qu

es
ts

 
to
 j 

Le
av
e

1

O  >> 
<00) f: c £

3  3  
"3  CO

>>£ +-> 3 —  £ O •- (0 
X  CL 05 OJ

s : o

McC 1 intock Jr. 1418 0 36 1382 1353_

Merry Oaks 544 2 20 526 567

M i dwood 497 17 17 497 693

Montclai re 648 5 9 644 788

Mo r ga n 378 8 75 311 378

Myers Park Elem. 573 36 11 598 630

Myers Park Hi gh 1869 146 160 1855 1980

M.yers Street 744 18 15 747 882

Nations Ford 536 10 1 545 756

Newe11 487 6 7 486 725

North Mecklenburg 1255 40 7 1288 1485

Northwest Jr' 844 47 73 818 ■ 924

Oakdale 412 17 1 428 441

Oakhurs t 578 5 32 551 630

Oaklawn 711 13 31 693 756

Park Road 590 28 14 604 630

Paw Creek 762 7 . 1 768 789

Nu
mb
er

 
As

si
gn

ed
 
' 

1s
t 

Ch
oi

ce
. 
S

Nu
mb
er

As
si

gn
ed

 
! 

2n
d 

Ch
oi

ce
 

j i
Nu
mb
er
- 

! 
As
s 
i g
ne
d 

3r
d 

Ch
oi

ce
 

i 1

o!> 1
04 a) _C —  —  CL _Q 05d) —  L_ >
~ o  c n  c n . —  
05 O  — 
L  -  (D (U (J LU O  U

o4-»
c

~o —  ' 0)(D 05 £  
C  C  c  
v -  • -  c n  
3  c n  —  •— u i
H) L  i/ )

OC O  <_

I

0 0 0 o I 0

2 0 0 0
' i
o !

1 7 0 0 0 0 1.
5 0 0 0 0 - i

8 0 0 0 0 •••*

36 0 0 0 0 -

111 33 2 0 26

18 0 0 0 0

10 0 0 0 . 0 1 '

6 0 0 0 0

35 3 2 0 15

44 2 1 0 3

17 0 0 0 0

5 0 0 0 0

9 4 0 0 1 0

27 1 0 0 0

7 0 0 0 0

•



135a



136a

Exhibit “B”  Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See Opposite)*3?°



SCHOOL

*-»co
£CM c

o —  C3 ui
< Re

qu
es

ts
 
to
 

En
te
r

Re
qu

es
ts

 
to
 

Le
av
e

O(v̂ U <u
d) £  C £  
3  3  

“3  </>

> - 
£  -M 
3  —  
£  O 

• - 0  
X  CL 
0  03 

s :  0

Piedmont Jr. 530 71 113 488 924

P i nev i11e 37*+ 3 10 367 539'

P i newood 686 22 4 704 756

Plato Price 539 6 36 509 684

Plaza Road 284 59 9 33*+ 473

Q.ua i 1 Ho 1 low Jr. 859 25 6 878 1188
«er-------

Rama Road 498 17 4 511 756

Ranson Jr. 782 20 42 760 891

Second V/ard 1653 75 198 1530 1485

Sedgefi eld-Elem. 544 32 10 566 662

Sedgefield Jr. 975 30 39 966 '1188

Selwyn 545 11 23 533 - 630

Seversv i11e 256 17 28 245 378

Shamrock Gardens 517 28 13 532 567

Sharon 576 1 9 568 630

Smi th Jr. 1222 4 19 1207 1419

South Mecklenburg 1760 33 125 1668 1848

1 O 
O

"O —0 O 
V - c  _ c  
0  cn 0  

_Q —
£  CO -M 
3  (/> i f )  

Z  <  — (N
um

be
r 

'A
ss

 i 
gn

ed
 

2n
d 

C
h

o
ic

e

jN
 u

m
be

r-
 

i 
(A

s
si

g
n

e
d

 
!3

rd
 

C
h

o
ic

e
' 

j
I 

!

u!> 1

CM 0  S Z  
—  —  CL 

-Q CO
0  —  > 

'O CD CD —  
0  —  O —  L- • • 0  nj 

(J  U  (J  u77]

0
+J 4j

c"O*— ”0
0  0  E c  c  c
^  CD
3 cn 

—  oi
0  l.

0  < c ____

1
6 9 2 0 8

3 0 -  0 0 3

2 0 2 0 0 2

6 0 0 0 0 •.

5 9 0 0 0 0 X *

2 5 0 0 ' 0 2 -

1 7 0 0 0 0

2 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 7 5 6 1  ,

t

31 1 0 0 3

28 1 1 0 21

11 0 0 0 0

"  1 7 0 0 0 0
... ... _- ■ — - ------------

28 0 0 0 1
---------- — — —

1 0 0 0 6.....------- - ------------------- - — ~ • — ....... -  '
4 0 0 0 0.............. - — ......— ' ........ .......... - ..........

31 2 0 0 0



137a



138a

Exhibit “B” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See O p p osite )^ "



SCHOOL

!
Ju

ne
 

2 
A

ss
 i 

gn
m

en
ts

R
eq

ue
st

s 
to

 
E

nt
er

R
eq

ue
st

s 
to

 
Le

av
e

o  >  
<00) nc [i=3 23 “5 </>

Spaugh Jr. • 829 119 20 928

Starmount 547 3 1 549

Statesv i 11e Road 685 18 53 650

.Steele Creek 219 5 4 220

Sterling 614 1 8 607

Thomasbo’ro 968 6 48 926

Torrence-Lytle 969 10 35 944

Tryon H ills 320 8 8 320

Tuckaseegee 568 33 3 598

Un i vers i ty Park 714 34 13 735

V il la  He i ghts 658 27 56 629

Wesley Heights 241 6 38 209

West Charlotte 1785 20 110 1695

West Mecklenburg 1335 69 34 1370

V/i 1 1 iams J r . 818 29 39 808

V/i Imore 386 15 46 355

Wi 1 son Jr. 1180 15 39 1156

M
ax

im
um

 
C

ap
ac

i t
y

' 
f

Nu
m

be
r 

" 
{ 

A
ss

ig
ne

d 
’ 

i 
1s

t 
C

h
o

ic
e.

!

Nu
m

be
r

A
ss

 i 
gn

ed
2n

d 
C

ho
ic

e 
|

a)o~u *—<D Ol- C -Ccu gio _a —!; 33 23 10 L-<. cr\ jG
ra

ce
 -

I2
&

 
E

li
gi

b
le

: 
iG

eo
gr

ap
hi

 -
rs

11
V 

—

— - 
o4-» 4-»c-0 — 0) 
a) <o ec c cu — CD
d cn •- — toa) to02 0  c

1188 116 3 0 oj 0

630 3 0 0 o 0

693 18 0 0 0 0

252 5 0 0

° 0 •-

737 0 1 0 0 0

945 6 0 0 0 0 -

1037 10 0 0 0 4

378 8 0 0 0 0 t

630 33 0 0 0 0

756 33 1 0 0 0

756 27 0 0 0 0

2 52 6 0 0 6 0

1485 ; 0 0 0 20 39 t

1386 67 1 1 0 9

1188 28 1 0 0 4

539 15 0 0 0 0

1188 15 0 0 0 0



139a



140a

Exhibit “B” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

(See Opposite)



SCHOOL

c
o

CM iCJJoc□ LA < Re
qu

es
ts

 
to
 

En
te
r

Re
qu

es
ts

 
to
 

Le
av
e

O  >> c<̂ u
0) C: c IZ D 73-3 L/> Ma

xi
mu

m 
Ca
pa
ci
 t
y

Nu
mb
er
 

As
si

gn
ed

 
' 

j1
st
 
Ch

oi
ce

.

Nu
mb

er
 

| 
As
s 
i g
ne
d

2n
d 

Ch
oi

ce
 

; 1

Nu
mb
er
- 

As
s 
i g
ne
d 

3r
d 

Ch
oi

ce
 

|

ui> i
CNl 'd) _C T  *—  Cl  

' _Q fO 0) —  L_ >x> cn cn —Q O  —
i- —  <u (0O UJ o  u

o4~»
c~o<—  ’ Q) 

<D <0 £ c c cV— •— cn 3 Dl-—  t/> d) 1- IAQT O <C

Windsor Park 705 9 9 705 756 9 0 0 0 l

Wi nterfield 59*+ 1 18 577 756 1 0 ' 0 0 0

Woodland 350 7 31 326 378 7 0 0 0 0

Wood lawn 283 3 13 273 3*+7 3 0 0 0 0 .
Isabella Wyche 378 6 8 37S 599 6 0 0 0 0 »»•

York Road 109*+ 51 18 1127 1122 *+6 0 0 5 20 /
7

Zeb Vance 528 0 __3_ 525 50*t 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 7*+719 2919 •2919 7*+719 2626 108 9 176 3*+5 *

T ansfers: 2919 '

•
Re turned t 5 origin 11 ass i g iments:- 3*+5

>
TOTAL 326*+

" ” T

— ..-...

________________



141a



142 a

Exhibit “ C”  Attached to Answers to Interrogatories 
(Staff Report on Capacity Study)

STAFF REPORT ON CAPACITY STUDY 
BUILDING AND SITES COMMITTEE 

M a y  25, 1965 
8:00 A.M.

B o a r d  R o o m

In undertaking a study of the capacity of the individual 
schools in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg system, a number 
of factors have been brought to bear upon the problem. 
These factors have been:

1. The expressed desire of the Board of Education to 
adopt maximum capacities where possible and prac­
ticable so that the vast majority of free choice re­
quests may be honored after June 2.

2. The practical limitations of efficiency and good opera­
tion that are controlled by numbers of students to 
be served in any specific school.

3. A practical judgment as to the number of pupils 
to be normally housed in each teaching station.

4. A judgment on the maximum per cent of utilization 
which might be reasonably expected.

5. A number of actual teaching spaces at a given school.

6. Related square footage where it has bearing on 
capacity itself.

Desire for Maximum Practical Capacity

Because of the serious problems involved in the transi­
tion to full geographic assignment and the implementa­
tion of the free choice concept, it has been felt highly



143a

Exhibit “ C” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

desirable from the very beginning that capacities be 
stretched as far as this can be possibly done. This simply 
means that the Board is anxious for most of the free choice 
requests to be honored in that the very philosophy of the 
assignment plan leans toward freedom of movement within 
the system under necessary limitations. This flexibility 
must be controlled only in terms of the limiting factors, 
of efficiency and operating procedure in the various schools. 
Because of this desire for maximum capacity, the number 
of pupils to be housed in each class, the per cent of utiliza­
tion which might be normally expected, and the identifica­
tion of teaching spaces in the various schools has been 
kept on the maximum side also. The number 30 has been 
used consistently in relating to the pupils to be housed 
in each teaching station. This is certainly a variable 
figure and, if lowered, would have the effect of lowering 
the total capacity of any given school.

Whether or not a classroom will be in use every period 
of the school day is also a factor in determining capacity. 
A 100 per cent utilization factor has been assumed for 
both elementary and junior high schools in this study. 
For senior high schools 90 per cent utilization has been 
assumed. It is important to make clear that 100 per cent 
utilization of all teaching spaces throughout the day and 
throughout the year is a desired yet difficult to attain ob­
jective, particularly in the secondary schools. A much 
more realistic figure over a long period of time for the 
junior and senior high schools would come closer to 75 
to 85 per cent utilization. This is something which needs 
considerable additional study before any final percentages 
can be established for our long range planning. Survey 
forms have been devised and utilized by each of the school 
principals in reporting the number of teaching spaces 
in the various schools. The forms were accompanied by



144a

Exhibit “C” Attached to Answers to Interrogatories

explanations so that the information gathered would be 
consistent for all schools. A considerable amount of time 
has been spent on the assessing of not only actual teaching- 
spaces but square footage involved and related informa­
tion which would help with an assessment of the number 
of spaces available for teaching purposes. In schools 
where construction now in progress will be completed by 
early fall the principal’s figures have been adjusted to 
reflect the additional space. Examples of this are Winter- 
field and Cochrane Junior High School. In most cases 
mobile units were left in their present locations and were 
counted as teaching spaces. Eight mobile units are 
presently held in reserve for difficult spots which will 
develop next fall. There exist more needs for these units 
than we have the actual units themselves yet we have 
held off in assigning these pending development of specific 
school areas.

Three examples are on board which show how the com­
bination of number of teaching spaces, pupils per class, and 
percentage of utilization have been put together to arrive 
at a suggested rated capacity. These three examples in­
clude an elementary school, a junior high, and a senior 
high. Attached to this material is a recommended list, 
of actual capacities for adoption for the 1965-66 term. 
These recommended capacities have come out of the exten­
sive study which has been made over the past month and 
a half and which has been based on the factors discussed 
above.

In accordance with the policy adopted by the Board of 
Education on March 11, a normal application of five per 
cent to the elementary rated capacity and 10 per cent 
to the secondary rated capacity would give the outer 
limits of acceptance of free choice youngsters into the 
various schools.



145a

This is another school case. Our adversary system 
of justice is not well-adapted for the disposition of such 
controversies. It is to he hoped that with the implementa­
tion of the 1964 Civil Rights Act the incidence of such 
cases will diminish. Administrators, especially if they 
have some competence and experience in school adminis­
tration, can more likely work out with School Superin­
tendents the problems of pupil and teacher assignment 
in the best interests of all concerned better than can any 
District Judge operating within the adversary system. 
The question before this court, even within its equitable 
jurisdiction, is not what is best for all concerned hut 
simply what are plaintiffs entitled to have as a matter 
of constitutional law. What can he done in a school dis­
trict is different from what must he done.

During March, 1965, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board 
of Education proposed a plan to comply with the consti­
tutional mandate embodied in Brown v. Kansas City 
Board of Education. On April 11, 1965, the Board re­
solved as follows: “Resolved by the Charlotte-Mecklen­
burg Board of Education that, in recognition of the re­
quirements of law, the development of a policy be under­
taken looking to the ultimate employment and assign­
ment of all staff and professional personnel without regard 
to race or to factors other than training, competence and 
fitness.” During the trial counsel for the School Board, 
the Chairman of the Board, and the Superintendent of 
Schools modified the proposed plan of March 11 to in­
clude in it the resolution with respect to teachers and 
staff set out hereinabove.

Plaintiffs’ complaints with respect to the plan as modi­
fied are:

Memorandum of Decision



146a

(a) Certain school districts have been gerrymandered 
to prevent the mixing of the races in the schools;

(b) There are no administrative problems sufficient to 
justify the proposed delay in geographical zoning of ten 
schools which are excepted from the plan;

(c) The above quoted amendment with respect to de­
segregation of teachers and staff looks to the far distant 
future and ought to be effective at once.

Most of the testimony at the trial, lasting a day and 
a half, dealt with alleged gerrymandering and the ex­
cepted schools. The testimony and the subject matter 
is exceedingly complex. This is not a simple school system. 
There are 109 schools in the district. On June 2, 1965, 
the Board sent a notice to the parents and/or guardians 
of every child in the system assigning the children in 99 
schools according to geographical zones. In addition each 
parent was advised that any child, without regard to race, 
and without regard to minority or majority of race in 
any particular school, might freely transfer to another 
school of his choice. In summary, with respect to the 99 
schools, and excepting 10 schools, all the children were 
assigned according to their place of residence in a geo­
graphical zone, and all children were accorded the privi­
lege of transferring to another zone—without the necessity 
of giving any reason for the requested transfer. The 
privilege of free transfer extended to the children in the 
excepted schools.

By reason of geography, it happened that 1,955 Negro 
children were initially assigned to schools largely popu­
lated by white children (hereinafter called for convenience 
“ integrated” schools). In addition, 262 Negro children

Memorandum, of Decision



147a

elected to transfer from schools entirely or almost entirely 
populated by Negro children (hereinafter called for con­
venience “Negro” schools), making a total of 2,217 Negro 
children being assigned, either initially or by reason of 
transfer, to integrated schools. However, 91 of these 
Negro children elected to be reassigned to a Negro school 
so that there now remain for the school year beginning 
September, 1965, approximately 2,126 Negro children in 
43 integrated schools in the system. One school is racially 
“balanced” , i.e., about one-half white and one-half Negro.

Approximately 396 white children, under the geo­
graphical plan, were initially assigned to Negro schools. 
All, or practically all, of them requested transfer and 
were transferred out of the Negro schools to an integrated 
or white school.

There are about 75,000 children in the entire system. 
Over the last several years enrollment has increased ap­
proximately 3,000 children per annum, requiring the 
addition of approximately 70 classrooms each year. Thirty 
million dollars has been spent or committed in a period 
of approximately five years for new construction. Racially, 
about 52,000 are white children and the remainder are 
Negro.

Excepted Schools

The 10 schools excepted from the plan are Negro 
schools. Several new schools in the area of the excepted 
schools are being built and are expected to be completed 
by September, 1967, and most probably by September, 
1966. Until these new schools are available the 10 excepted 
schools cannot be permanenlty rezoned. If the Negro 
children in these 10 schools were incorporated into the 
geographical zone plan now most of them would have to

Memorandum of Decision



148a

be assigned to yet another school next year or the year 
after. In the opinion of the Board multiple assignment 
changes are disruptive to the child and the school ad­
ministration. It takes time to appraise and evaluate 
schools and their proper locations, and thereafter to in­
telligently determine upon abandonment, restoration or 
replacement of a given school. It does not seem unreason­
able, in view of the complexity of the entire system, to 
approve a maximum delay of two years and a probable 
delay of only one year for the purpose of making these 
difficult determinations and to facilitate a degree of 
permanence in the rezoning to be achieved. Lacking 
special competence and experience in public education, it 
would be presumptuous for a District Judge to brush 
aside the determination of these problems by the Board 
and its staff, absent a clear showing of an arbitrary re­
fusal to grant plaintiffs their constitutional rights. There 
is no such showing. The Board is just as determined as 
are plaintiffs that the 10 schools will be incorporated into 
a geographical plan. The disagreement is only as to when. 
It is not suggested that the right granted to the Negro 
children in the 10 excepted schools to request transfer 
out of those schools is a sufficient compliance with the 
constitution. A freedom of choice plan in order to be 
constitutional must include correctives at the time of 
initial assignment. This, however, is only an interim plan 
and for a very short period—probably only a period of 
one year with respect to most of the schools. The excep­
tion of the 10 schools will be approved in accordance with 
the plan but without prejudice to the right of plaintiffs 
to renew their motion next summer and to request re­
examination at that time of the progress made.

Memorandum of Decision



149a

Memorandum of Decision 

G-errymandering

The gerrymandering contention is exceedingly intricate 
and complex. Plaintiffs’ expert witness (Mr. Louis 
Kramer) necessarily testified abstractly from a study of 
the plan and the maps available to him and without per­
sonal knowledge of the Mecklenburg terrain. He was 
commendably candid in stating that he had not spent 
enough time to be able to recommend generally a new 
and better zoning pattern. If Mr. Kramer, competent and 
experienced in the field of education, does not feel able 
to intelligently alter the general zoning pattern, it seems 
unikely to me that a District Judge could intelligently do 
so based upon information made available to him in only 
a day and a half. Even so, Kramer’s testimony with re­
spect to particular schools has been carefully considered 
and compared with the testimony of Dr. A. Craig Phillips, 
Superintendent of Schools. The maps have also been 
studied with respect to the allegations of gerrymandering 
and the limited testimony in support thereof. It is fair 
to say that most of Kramer’s testimony is ad hoc: The 
results with respect to mixing of the races are assumed 
to be intentional where little mixing occurs. But there is 
no testimony tending to show that boundary lines were 
chosen for the purpose of diminishing integration—unless 
it be assumed that the result proves the unlawful intention. 
I am unwilling to make the assumption.

Kramer testified with respect to gerrymandering about 
Lakeview Elementary School, Thomasboro Elementary 
School, Paw Creek Elementary School, Ashley Park 
Elementary School, Barringer Elementary School, Newell 
Elementary School, Eastover Elementary School, Berry 
Hill Elementary School and Billingsville Elementary



150a

School. With respect to many of these schools, notably 
Thomasboro, Paw Creek, Ashley Park, Newell, Eastover 
and Berry Hill, changing the line questioned by the expert 
witness would not result in a greater mixing of the races 
but instead would merely throw certain students into an­
other similar zone with respect to racial composition. The 
objections to these lines are irrelevant. For example, in 
Thomasboro, Paw Creek and Ashley Park, enlarging the 
zones in accordance with the contention of plaintiffs and 
the testimony of Mr. Kramer would not increase the 
number of Negroes in these schools until the excepted 
schools are incorporated into the zoning plan. For another 
example, changing the line of Eastover Elementary School 
in accordance with Mr. Kramer’s testimony would result 
simply in putting a few more white students in the already 
heavily white Elizabeth zone.

As a general proposition, it is undoubtedly true that 
one could deliberately sit down with the purpose in mind 
to change lines in order to increase mixing of the races 
and accomplish the same with some degree of success. 
I know of no such duty upon either the School Board 
or the District Court. The question is not whether zones 
can be gerrymandered for the assumed good purpose of 
racial mixing, but whether gerrymandering occurred for 
the unconstitutional purpose of preventing the mixing of 
the races. I am unable to find from the evidence a sufficient 
showing of the unconstitutional purpose with respect to 
any school zone. The strongest case of plaintiffs is that of 
Billingsville zone. This is a zone which embraces a Negro 
housing pattern almost exclusively. Only six white children 
reside within the zone. Mr. Kramer insisted that the 
southern boundary line should be moved south to McAlwav 
Road and that the effect of the present line is to keep

Memorandum of Decision



151a

Negroes out of the Cotswold School. But the testimony 
plainly discloses that the southern line follows the new 
Belt Road surveyed route and that the streets in the 
Cotswold area dead-end at the boundary line and do not 
cross into Billingsville. The southern boundary, therefore, 
follows a natural geographical “buffer” zone between 
Cotswold and Billingsville. This is a housing pattern, 
and however unfortunate its existence may be, the fact 
remains that it does exist. To reiterate, the question be­
fore the District Court is not whether a “ better” zone 
might be established but simply whether the zone which 
was established is an arbitrary and unreasonable one 
based on race and without regard to natural boundary 
lines. Thus far it has not been held unconstitutional to 
assign children to a school on the basis of their residences 
in a cohesive and contiguous geographical area. The 
Board has done better than might be required in that 
it has allowed free transfer out of Billingsville to those 
Negro children who wish it. Cf. Taylor v. Board of Educa­
tion of City School District of City of New Rochelle,
D.C.S.D.N.Y., 191 F. Supp. 181; Taylor v. Board of 
Education of City School District of City of New Rochelle, 
D.C.S.D.N.Y., 195 F. Supp. 231; Taylor v. Board of 
Education of City School District of City of New Rochelle, 
2 Cir., 294 F. 2d 36.

Considering all of the testimony I am unable to find 
from the evidence and by its greater weight that any of 
the geographical zones for the 99 schools incorporated 
in the plan have been gerrymandered for the purpose 
of avoiding the constitutional mandate, and I fail and 
refuse to so find.

Many of the gerrymandering complaints of plaintiffs 
will be minimized when the other 10 schools are incor­

Memorandum, of Decision



152a

porated into the zoning system. Probably, when this is 
done, the initial assignments of Negroes to integrated 
schools will about double. There are about 4,000 Negroes 
in the excepted schools and it is contemplated that about 
half of them will, next year or the year after, be initially 
assigned to integrated schools. Indeed, Mr. Kramer 
testified that the gerrymandering complaints relate entirely 
to schools that will be affected or are now affected by the 
status of the excepted schools except for five, i.e., Bast­
way Junior High School, Hawthorne Junior High School, 
Billingsville Junior High School, Barringer Elementary 
and Wilmore Elementary.

Derita Elementary School is said to be gerrymandered 
because the zone is cut in two by 1-85. But this problem 
is related to the excepted schools and the Board intends 
to rezone next year when the new school at Hidden Valiev 
is completed.

Assignment of Teachers and Staff

The amendment to the plan with respect to assignment 
of staff and professional personnel is acceptable except 
with respect to when it shall be accomplished. The word 
"ultimate” contained in the resolution is disapproved and 
the Board will be directed to substitute in the resolution 
the word ‘•immediate” . In this connection it is worth­
while to quote from the opinion of Chief Judge 
Haynsworth in Bradley v. City of Richmond. 345 F. 2d, 
310, 1965: "When all direct discrimination in the assign­
ment of pupils has been eliminated, assignment of teachers 
nay be expected to follow the racial pattern established 
in the schools."

It is especially difficult to determine in a judicial pro- 
:-*s> the state of mind of an individual. The difficulty is

Memorandum of Decision



153a

multiplied by the number of members of the School Board 
and the administrative staff participating in decisions. Yet 
the attempt must be made to appraise the overall purpose 
of the Board with respect to its constitutional duty. 
Reference has already been made to much of the evidence 
said to indicate bad faith. This is counter-balanced by 
the record of this Board of Education, certainly since 
the superintendency of Dr. Phillips beginning in 1962. 
Since then much progress has been made in integrating 
school activities and faculty meetings. For the first time 
this year a joint and mixed baccalaureate service was held 
for graduating high school seniors. The photographs 
offered in evidence illustrate the testimony of interracial 
activity in the administration of the school system. It is 
perhaps worth noting that the Board has determined to 
zone the Crestdale Negro School geographically over the 
opposition of the Negro commetteemen and parents in 
that school who would prefer to keep it segregated. This 
does not sound like a School Board bent upon maintaining 
a segregated system. It is also worth noting that Morgan 
Elementary School was previously a Negro school de­
liberately gerrymandered under the former and now un­
lawful dual attendance zone system to keep out white 
children so as to separate the races, and that that has 
now been changed. The Board has now straightened the 
line to follow natural boundaries with the result that 65 
white children were initially assigned to this previously 
all Negro school. This is scarcely consistent with the 
unsupported contention that this is a School Board deter­
mined to perpetuate unconstitutional segregation.

I accept the testimony of Mr. David W. Harris, Chair­
man of the Board, that the zones are determined by (1) 
the location of the schools and (2) housing patterns, and

Memorandum of Decision



154a

that this was done without regard to race. In evolving 
its plan, the Board sought and obtained the advice and 
counsel of Inglehardt, Inglehardt and Leggett. Plaintiffs 
expert witness admits that this firm is competent and 
expert in the field of educational consultants.

Considering all of the evidence, it is concluded that the 
plan proposed by the Board, as amended to incorporate 
the policy with respect to teachers and staff, is a sufficient 
compliance with the duty imposed upon the Board by the 
constitution as interpreted in Brown v. Kansas City Board 
of Education and subsequent decisions. The plan will 
be approved verbatim except for the change hereinabove 
indicated with respect to teachers and staff.

It is a temptation to afford to the 4,000 Negro students 
in the excepted schools yet another opportunity to request 
transfer to a school of their choice. The School Board 
itself allowed these children 28 days within which time 
to request transfer. At the trial the following colloquy 
occurred in open court:

Court: “ Is it fair to say that the plaintiffs do not ask 
the Court for that type of interim relief, namely, to order 
further freedom of choice for the students in the 10 ex­
cepted schools?”

Mb. B e l l : “ I  would think that in view of all of the 
testimony that that would be fair for the Court to conclude. 
We are more interested in having the schools included 
within the general zoning.”

I hesitate to confer a benefit which is not sought. An 
appropriate judgment will be entered approving the plan. 
This 14th day of July, 1965.

Memorandum of Decision

/s /  J. B. Craven, Jb. 
United States District Judge



155a

Judgment

Pursuant to the findings of fact and conclusions of 
law and the reasons expressed in a Memorandum of 
Decision filed herein today, the proposed plan of desegre­
gation submitted by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of 
Education is approved, except that the resolution with re­
spect to teachers and staff is Ordered to be amended so 
as to delete the word “ultimate” and substitute the word 
“ immediate” .

Jurisdiction is retained to consider at appropriate in­
tervals, upon motion of the parties, implementation of the 
plan.

This 14th day of July, 1965.

/s /  J. B. Craven, Jr.
United States District Judge



156a

Notice of Appeal

I
N o t ic e  o p  A p p e a l

Notice is hereby given that J a m e s  E. S w a n n , et al., Plain­
tiffs, above named, on this 15th day of July, 1965, hereby 
appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth 
Circuit, from the Order approving a modified plan for de­
segregating the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Public Schools, 
entered by the United States District Court for the West­
ern District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division, on July 
14, 1965.

II

D e s ig n a t io n  o p  R e c o b d  o n  A p p e a l

Plaintiff's, by their undersigned attorney, pursuant to 
Rule 75(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby 
designate all the original files and the complete transcript 
of the evidence in the subject case for inclusion in the 
record on appeal, including all pleadings, exhibits, affida­
vits, testimony, orders, notice of appeal and this designa­
tion.

July 14, 1965.



157a

Letter of August 19, 1965 From Brock Barkley

August 19, 1965

Miss Elva McKnight 
Chief Deputy Clerk 
United States District Court 
Federal Building 
Charlotte, North Carolina

B e: Swann vs Board of Education 

My dear Miss McKnight:
On July 27, 1965 I filed with your office a designation of 

additional parts of the Becord on Appeal which included 
three maps showing school attendance areas. After Com­
municating with Mr. Chambers, I wish to withdraw the 
designation in so far as it applies to these three maps. I 
understand Mr. Chambers has agreed that we may stipu­
late outside of the record that either party may use the 
maps or refer to them in Briefs or argument without their 
presence as part of the record proper.

Sincerely yours,

/ s /  B rock B arkley 
Brock Barkley

BB :mdb
cc: Mr. J. LeVonne Chambers



158a

Appellants, by their undersigned attorneys, respectfully 
move this Court for an injunction pending appeal, restrain­
ing appellee from continuing to make racial assignments 
of Negro students to the ten all-Negro schools and from 
refusing to include these schools within its plan for deseg­
regation of the public schools of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
School System, and, as grounds therefor, show the follow­
ing:

1. This action was initially filed by appellants on Janu­
ary 12, 1965, on behalf of themselves and others of their 
class seeking an order restraining appellee from continuing 
its policy and practice of operating the public schools of 
the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School System on a racially dis­
criminatory basis. Appellants alleged in their complaint 
that appellee School Board made racial assignments of 
students to the various schools, adopted geographical school 
zones for some schools which were gerrymandered accord­
ing to race, followed a practice of granting transfers to 
students in racially mixed schools based on race in viola­
tion of the Supreme Court’s decision in Goss v. Board, of 
Education, 373 U. S. 683, and made racial assignments of 
teachers and school personnel.

2. Appellants submitted interrogatories to appellee in 
February 1965; appellee moved the Court for extension of 
time to file answers to same through and including May 1, 
1965 and was granted an extension of time until April 15, 
1965.

3. Appellee adopted a plan of desegregation on March 
11, 1965. The plan established geographical attendance 
areas for 99 of the 109 schools in the school system. Ten

Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal



159a

all-Negro schools were excepted from the plan. Appellee 
proposed to continue making racial assignments of Negro 
students to these schools, transferring Negro students, in 
many areas, across several white attendance zones for 
several miles to the ten excepted Negro schools, and per­
mitting these students to request transfer to other schools. 
The Negro students in the 10 excepted Negro schools con­
stitute one-fifth of the total Negro school population.

4. Because of the patent racially discriminatory practice 
with respect to the ten excepted Negro schools, appellants 
moved for a preliminary injunction on May 28, 1965, seek­
ing an order restraining assignment of students to these 
schools pending hearing of the cause on the merits. The 
motion for preliminary injunction was denied by the Dis­
trict Court on June 1, 1965.

5. On June 1, 1965, motion to intervene was filed by the 
North Carolina Teachers Association along with a Com­
plaint in Intervention challenging appellee’s racial assign­
ment of teachers and school personnel.

6. The cause came on for trial on July 12 and 13, 1965, 
upon stipulations of facts and oral testimony. Appellants 
introduced evidence showing the racially discriminatory 
practices of appellee in initially assigning the Negro stu­
dents to the ten excepted schools; that many of these 
students were being transferred across several white at­
tendance zones to the Negro schools; that in many instances 
Negro students were being bussed eight to ten miles; that 
the ten excepted Negro schools offered poorer facilities 
and curricula than comparable white schools in the area; 
that practically all of the Negro students in these schools

Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal



160a

could adequately be absorbed in the surrounding white 
schools without administrative problem to the School Board 
where better facilities and curricula are offered. Appellee 
offered evidence to the effect that plans for new school 
construction, which it felt would be completed in two years, 
would make it necessary to rezone the areas again and that 
it considered it educationally unsound to have to shift the 
students from one school to another.

7. Appellants also offered evidence to show that certain 
of the school district lines were racially gerrymandered 
and that teachers and school personnel were racially as­
signed. Appellee offered evidence to the contrary.

8. In an order, dated July 14, 1965, the District Court 
approved the plan submitted by appellee, except to amend 
the plan to require immediate nonracial assignment and 
employment of teachers and school personnel. The Court, 
recognizing this Court’s ruling in Wheeler v. Durham City
Board of Education,------F.2d------- , 4th Cir. No. 9630, June
1, 1965, prohibiting initial racial assignments of students, 
nevertheless approved appellee’s racial assignments of 
Negro students to the ten excepted schools, reasoning that 
appellee did not contemplate this practice indefinitely.

9. Notice of appeal was filed below on July 15, 1965.

10. More than ten years have passed since the Supreme 
Court’s ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U. S. 
294. At this late date appellee proposes, and the District 
Court has accepted, a plan which provides for continued 
racial assignments of Negro students to ten of the one 
hundred and nine public schools in the school system by

Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal



161a

continuing the use of dual, overlapping attendance areas, 
a practice unequivocally reproved by this Court in 1962 in 
Wheeler v. Durham City Board of Education, 309 F.2d 630. 
See also Jeffers v. Whitley, 309 F.2d 621 (4th Cir. 1962); 
Bradley v. School Board of City of Richmond, 317 F.2d 
429 (4th Cir. 1963); Bell v. School Board of Powhatan 
County, 321 F.2d 494 ( 4th Cir. 1963); Buchner v. County 
School Board of Greene County, 332 F.2d 452 ( 4th Cir. 
1964). The District Court has approved this patently dis­
criminatory practice on the plea of additional time by 
appellee notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s decision in 
Griffin v. School Board of Prince Edward County, 377 U. S. 
218, (“The time for mere deliberate speed has run out” ) ; 
see also Calhoun v. Latimer, 377 U. S. 263. To specific in­
quiries by the District Court whether appellee could dis­
continue these discriminatory practices at least by the 
beginning of the 1966-67 school term, appellee admitted 
that it could. Nevertheless, the District Court approved of 
continued racial assignment of Negro students to the ten 
excepted schools with no expressed time limitation imposed 
as to when these practices should cease.

11. The practice here approved by the District Court 
runs afoul of the minimum requirements of the Department 
of Health, Education and Welfare as steps that should be 
taken by school boards to continue receiving federal funds 
in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964. See General Statement of Policies Under Title VI of 
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Respecting Desegregation of 
Elementary and Secondary Schools, HEW, Office of Educa­
tion, April 1965, reprinted in Southern School News, May
1965, p. 8. Even such minimum steps as authorized in the 
Department’s Regulations are not accepted where, as here,

Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal



162a

administrative problems and circumstances would not pre­
vent the Board from going further in completely desegre­
gating the School System. Thus, despite the rulings of this 
Court prohibiting approval of the practices complained of 
herein (See, e.g., Wheeler v. Durham City Board of Educa­
tion, ------F .2d ------- , 4th Cir. No. 9630, June 1, 1965), the
District Court here has invited by its ruling the type of 
Executive-Judicial conflict which the Fifth Circuit only 
recently in Singleton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School
District,------F.2d------- , 5th Cir. No. 22,527, June 22, 1965,
Price v. Denison Independent School District, ------  F.2d
------ , 5th Cir. No. 21,632, July 2, 1965, admonished the Dis­
trict Courts under its jurisdiction to avoid.

12. Appellants, and members of the class they represent, 
will be irreparably injured by the delay necessarily at­
tendant upon their appeal from the judgment of the District 
Court. Despite prompt dispatch of this appeal, it is unlikely 
that decision can be had prior to the beginning of the 
1965-66 school year. Thus, unless this Court issues an in­
junction pending appeal, securing the rights of appellants 
which are firmly established by decisions of the Supreme 
Court and of this Court, appellants, and those of their 
class, will continue to suffer irreparable injury without 
any legal justification. There will be no comparable injury 
to appellee by the issuance of the requested injunction.

13. The granting of this motion is necessary in aid of 
this Court’s jurisdiction and to preserve the effectiveness of 
any orders to be entered if appellants prevail upon appeal, 
and there is every likelihood that appellants will ultimately 
prevail upon appeal, the material facts being undisputed 
and the law applicable to these facts being settled.

Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal



163a

W h e r e f o r e , appellants pray that this Court will issue 
an injunction restraining appellee from making initial racial 
assignments of Negro students to the ten all-Negro schools 
excepted from appellee’s plan of geographical assignments 
and from refusing to include these schools within its plan of 
desegregation of the public school system.

Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal



164a

Order

On yesterday the plaintiffs-appellants filed with the Clerk 
in Richmond a motion for an injunction pending appeal, 
and a supporting brief. Copies of the motion and brief were 
mailed to the attorney for the School Board on August 20 
and received by him on yesterday, August 23. The papers 
and the record on appeal reached me in my chambers in 
Greenville, South Carolina, this morning, August 24.

It appears from the record and papers that the initial 
assignments in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina, 
school system are generally on a geographic basis. How­
ever, 10 of the 109 schools in the system are excepted. The 
pupils assigned to those schools are in areas which are 
included within the attendance zones of other schools.

All pupils attending those 10 schools are given an unre­
stricted right, upon application, to transfer out.

The School Board offered as an explanation of its failure 
to have zoned the 10 schools, that it began its zoning pro­
gram in 1963, when certain zones were established, and the 
number of zones was extended in 1964. Of the 10 remaining 
unzoned schools, the Board contended that it had plans to 
phase out some of them and to establish attendance zones 
for the remainder but doing so, it contended, was dependent 
in part upon the progression of the construction program 
which had been undertaken. Assignments for the school 
year 1965-66 on the basis of zones established for those 10 
schools in general, contended the Board, would result in a 
second transfer of the pupils in the school year 1966-67 or 
1967-68 at the latest, a result which the School Board 
thought undesirable.

The District Court approved the School Board’s plan, 
stating that it found substantial evidence that the School 
Board was proceeding reasonably and in good faith.



165a

Order

The District Court’s order was dated July 14, 1965 and 
the notice of appeal was filed on July 15, 1965.

The motion for an injunction pending appeal asks that 
the School Board be required to establish attendance zones 
for the 10 schools for which attendance zones have not 
yet been established. In a letter from counsel for the 
plaintiffs, an early hearing is requested while counsel for 
the School Board requests leave to prepare and file a 
response to the motion.

I assume that the plaintiffs’ request for an early hearing 
is made in the expectation that an injunction pending the 
appeal might be issued in time to be effective for the school 
year 1965-66. It seems impossible, however, that an injunc­
tive order might be framed in time to be effected and com­
plied with during the first semester of the pending school 
year. I am informed that the teachers will report tomorrow, 
August 25, and that the pupils will report for the opening 
of school on Friday, August 27. Even with so little time, if 
it were a matter of the allowance of voluntary transfers, 
something might be done, but when the relief sought is 
the creation of attendance zones and a geographic reassign­
ment of pupils in accordance with them, the School Board 
would need a substantial amount of time to comply with an 
injunctive order after it was informed of its terms. If an 
order were issued in accordance with the motion therefor, 
it would result in a postponement of the opening of the 
schools or in a rather wholesale reassignment of the pupils 
in midsemester. Either consequence is undesirable from the 
standpoint of all the pupils concerned.

Bearing in mind the fact that each of the pupils assigned 
to the 10 schools involved has been given an opportunity to 
transfer out, I think the motion does not call for precipitate



166a

Order

action which, if the requested relief should be granted, 
would be so disruptive to the school system.

After consultation with my brother, Judge J. Spencer 
Bell who lives in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, and 
who has authorized me to say that he shares the views 
herein expressed, I have concluded that a hearing on the 
motion should be postponed until the hearing on the merits. 
The hearing of the case will be advanced to the earliest 
possible session following the filing of briefs and the parties 
will have leave in their briefs to address themselves to 
the motion as well as to the merits.

I t is  so  o r d e r e d .

August 24, 1965

C l e m e n t  F. H a y n s w o r t h , Jr. 
Chief Judge, Fourth Circuit



167a

Dr. A. C r a ig  P h i l l i p s , having been first duly sworn, 
testified as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Chambers:

Q. Will you state your name and occupation for the 
purpose of the record! A. A. Craig Phillips, Superin­
tendent of Schools, Charlotte-Meeklenburg Board of 
Education.

Q. Do you also serve as secretary to the Charlotte- 
Meeklenburg Board of Education! A. I do.

Q. How long have you been in the capacity of super­
intendent of schools! A. Completing my third year. 
This is three years.

Q. That would mean you started as superintendent in 
1962! A. I became superintendent July 1, 1962.

Q. Were you serving with the Board of Education in 
any capacity prior to that time! A. From May 1st until 
July 1st I was employed by the Board of Education with­
out title to succeed Dr. Elmer G-arringer. I am not sure 
of the technical position. I was released from Winston- 
Salem to come here. July 1st was the effective date.

Q. That was July 1, 1962? A. Yes.
Q. In coming to the school system, would you of your 

own knowledge know whether the Board at that time was
— 3—

making assignments of all pupils in the school system 
according to race? A. I had no direct knowledge prior 
to coming to the school system of any basic policy of the 
system.

Q. Beginning with the 1962-63 school year, would you 
say the Board at that time made assignment of pupils 
according to race? A. It was my understanding upon

— 2—
Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



168a

assuming the role of superintendent in 1962 that the Board 
of Education of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools was 
going under the rules and regulations adopted undei the 
Pupil Assignment Act of the State of North Carolina.

Q. That required, did it not, at least for pupils in school, 
that they be re-assigned back to the school they were at­
tending the previous school year? A. This is correct, yes.

Q. Did it not also require that pupils who were enroll­
ing in schools for the first time, would be assigned as 
pupils were assigned previously, that is negro to negro 
schools and white to white schools? A. This is correct.

Q. In other words, would you say that beginning with 
the 1962-63 school year with which you are familiar, there 
had been no basic change in the manner and method of 
assigning students except for the adoption of legislation 
by the North Carolina Assignment Act? A. Yes, there

—4—
had been a basic change. The change was in the—no change 
in concept of the initial assignment; the change came 
about in recognition of a request for change of assign­
ment, that assignment being approved where a child was 
living in an area served by the school to which he was 
requesting attendance. This was a basic change. I don’t 
know how far back it went but I assume back to—

Q. Considering the initial assignment, how was the 
change— A. No change in initial assignment. The change 
came in recognition of a request for change of assignment 
by the individual.

Q. That is the request for re-assignment? A. That's 
correct.

Q. And this was only the policies adopted by the North 
Carolina Pupil Enrollment Act; that is recognition of 
the rights to transfer from one school to another following

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



169a

initial assignment by the Board of Education? A. I think 
this is reflected in the local rules and regulations which 
was based on permissible concept of the Act.

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge when those 
rules and regulations were adopted? A. No I don’t. It 
can be checked in the record.

Mr. Barkley: You are talking about 1962 now?
Mr. Chambers: 1962-63.

A. Repeat that again please?
— 5 —

Q. The local rules regarding the right to transfer be­
ginning with the 1962-63 school year. A. This didn’t 
begin with the 1962-63 school year. It was my assump­
tion, although I have no first hand knowledge, not being 
here, that this began with 1957 recognition of the request 
of change of assignment. I believe this was the correct 
year.

Q. Do you recall the criteria established by the Board 
in its policy covering applications of transfer? A. I 
wasn’t here at that time.

Q. Do you recall the policy or criteria was established 
with the 1962-63 year? A. The administrative work 
which was my responsibility, was based upon the fact of 
residence of the youngsters applying for change of assign­
ment.

Q. Was there any criteria or standard used? A. None 
to my knowledge.

Q. When was the first time a negro was assigned by 
the Mecklenburg Board of Education to a formerly all 
white school? A. I don’t know quite how to answer it 
in that the two systems were separate systems.

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



170a

Q. Had the Mecklenburg Board of Education made any 
assignments of negro students to formerly all white 
schools prior to September, 1962 ? A. Yes. Of my know­
ledge I don’t know exactly when or what schools but this 
is in the record somewhere I am sure.

Q. Had the Charlotte School Board made any assign­
ment of negro students to a formerly all white school? 
A. When tailing about the Mecklenburg County unit, this 
was the Mecklenburg County unit that consolidated. I had 
no contact with the former Mecklenburg unit nor the 

hariotte city ttttt. Upon consolidation the consolidated 
-• -o-m vc- known in hs drst stages as tie Meekienfruig 
tunny ~mir.

her me get ~ms -viigrir. When was tie ii-ecnemurg 
' runrr 3«>ari ir Education md h e  City if Charistm 

Ifc w l  r f  TKfhm iffre u n iiltm ft mm- mtmgpUS JL. ’g fe  mSmamB 
taste ttc- h .“ 1 796Z x r  I a> not knew tmir if ar~ rwn

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips

... 3' w m  nr s m m  k  ~ u r  « n  iairdeaE. in-
wt l e s a i u r p  l a ® t  Joani i f  

t»  hat rnsse m

An 3*css“»~ la? e  w- sirw iae 'e e t r t g
3 E f t  b  t s n s :  w e - 3 B K  is s z  - j * g -  S 2 S * £ -

tae aaesanm msrrs- «f da* -Itf- - *f 35s*cresa; 
i f  usem tse s  rrrwr t* -Aek  A.. A*r£ ices? u s e r  

jBTrtttwiw: *  « * «  -raiis*. I r  i f e
1~- c haafit^ saswot as i&. ISssemi «s S a n  i 
aimtuSBaagys. : dfc- f i r  <r bisvr.-tt > e » >

4B3s$e- uss M B isne- JoeiB *  u»t -jjaty nscss:



171a

years and years, been under the- jurisdiction of 
an agency of the state known as the Mecklenburg 
County Board of Education. These two were 
separate administrative school units. As of July 1, 
1962, the two were consolidated so to speak but 
actually the former, or the Mecklenburg County 
Board of Education took over all of the City schools 
and the Board of School Commissioners of the 
City of Charlotte, the charter creating them, was 
repealed and it continued as the Mecklenburg 
County Board of Education until about 1961 when 
an act of the legislature changed the name to the 
Charlotte-Meeklenburg Board of Education.

Q. Xow Dr. Phillips, let me retract a moment and ask 
a question I probably asked a moment ago. Do you know 
of your own knowledge, whether prior to 1960 the Meck­
lenburg County Board of Education had made any assign­
ment of negro students to a formerly all white school? 
A. Xo, I don’t know that.

Q. Do you know of your knowledge, whether prior to 
1960 the Board of School Commissioners of the City of 
Charlotte had made any assignment of negro students 
to a formerly all white school! A. Only by hearsay.

Q. Beginning with the school year 1962-63. were any 
negroes assigned to or re-assigned to formerly all white 
schools? A. I have to check the records. I dont know 
how to answer that. There were some negro youngsters 
in predominantly white schools, but how many I don’t 
know.

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge which schools 
presently existing in the school system were formerly

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



172a

under the Mecklenburg County Board of Education? A. 
Yes.

Q. Would you list these schools? A. I do not know 
right off the construction date of a few of the newest. 
Alexander Graham, Jr. I don’t know whether that was 
built before the consolidation or after. This is a two year 
span of time in here of consolidation. Bain, Berryhill, 
Briarwood, Clear Creek, Collinswood, Cornelius, Cotswold, 
Crestdale, Davidson, Derits, East Mecklenburg, J. H. Gunn, 
Hickory Grove, Hoskins, Huntersville, Idlewild, Ada

—9—
Jenkins, Landsdowne, Long Creek, Matthews, McClintock, 
Montclaire, Nation’s Ford, Newell, North Mecklenburg, 
Oakdale, Oakhurst, Paw Creek, Pineville, Pinewood, Plato 
Price, Sharon, Smith, South, Statesville Road, Steele 
Creek, Sterling, Thomasboro, Torrence-Lytle, West Meck­
lenburg, Wilson, Windsor Park, Woodland. To the best 
of my knowledge, that’s all of them.

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge whether the 
schools not named as formerly being under the Mecklen­
burg County Board of Education were formerly under 
the jurisdiction of the Board of School Commissioners of 
the City of Charlotte? A. Yes, with the exception of 
those built since the time of consolidation to the best of 
my knowledge.

Q. And you do not know at this time which schools 
were or have been built since the time of consolidation? 
A. I can give you a list of them, of the ones that have 
been. It may have to be researched.

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge, whether begin­
ning with the 1962-63 school year, teachers and school 
personnel were assigned according to race? A. They were 
assigned according to race, yes.

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



173a

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge whether the 
school budget or extra-curricular school activities and all 
school planning were designed on the basis of race? That 
is you planned the budget for West Charlotte High 
School on the basis it was a negro school? A. We don’t

—10-
budget by schools to start with so the total budget was 
always planned without regard to race directly. There 
was no implication of race in the budget as I understand 
your question. We do not budget school by school.

Q. Were extra-curricular activities planned on the basis 
of race? A. Yes, so far as athletics are concerned they 
have been on the basis of race since 1962 to my know­
ledge, yes.

Q. In effect then, the basic change or only change that 
existed in the school system beginning with the 1962-63 
school year, was that the Board had adopted the plan 
which would permit the student to request and be re-as­
signed after the initial assignments by the Board? A. 
This was change in assignment. You need to re-phrase 
your question for me.

Q. You stated that the Board beginning with 1962 or 
prior to 1962, and certainly with the 1962-63 school year, 
made initial assignments according to the same procedure 
they followed in prior years, is that correct? A. I indi­
cated they were working under the rules and regulations 
adopted under the Pupil Assignment Act.

Q. And this was according to the race of the pupil? 
A. The initial assignment, yes.

— 11—

Q. And you had adopted the plan which would permit

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



174a

the student to request and be re-assigned after the initial 
assignment! A. Yes.

(Discussion off the record)
Q. Are you saying Dr. Phillips, that beginning with 

1962-63, that you had instituted a policy of assigning some 
students according to a unified geographical line! A. Yes. 
The Bethune School was the first instance of setting of 
geographical lines around a school and every child in the 
school district being assigned to it.

Q. And although not positive, you think this began in 
1962-63! A. That’s correct.

Q. With the exception of that change which you think 
began in 1962-63, was there any other change that the 
Board had adopted relative to desegregation of the public 
schools of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg system! A. A num­
ber of things can be listed. Professional workshops, prin­
cipals, staff, all meetings of professional personnel were 
on an integrated basis. I can’t go back before 1962-63. 
I don’t know for a fact, but starting 1962-63 I know of 
my own knowledge staff meetings of all sorts were on an 
integrated basis.

Q. Is there any other change whatsoever—any other 
change at that time! A. Summer school programs for

—12—
that summer were on an integrated basis, both pupil as­
signment and staff.

Q. Beginning 1963! A. That would be the summer of 
’63, yes. I could ascertain for sure about the summer of 
1962. I believe that there was some integration in the 
summer program that summer but I can’t say for a fact. 
I am not absolutely sure. I do know in 1963 both staff

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



175a

and pupils integrated in certain phases of the summer 
program.

Q. You are stating that you believe there was some 
integration in the summer program in 1962? A. Yes.

Q. And you know of your own knowledge that the sum­
mer school program for 1963 was integrated, both student 
and staff? A. That’s right.

Q. Was there any other change in the system? A. We 
talked about pupils, we talked about teachers, staff, 
programs. I don’t know of any other area we haven’t 
covered. No, not to my knowledge.

Q. Beginning with the 1963-64 school year, was there 
any basic difference or change in the method for assign­
ing students to the various schools? A. Yes, it was in 
this school year that the number of schools geographically 
established was increased. I think these numbers are in

—13—
the record, I believe to 12 officially.

Q. Did you draw lines on the school maps with respect 
to these 12 schools for assigning students? A. Yes, lines 
were drawn to establish the geographical areas. These 
were not officially adopted but they were in the pupil as­
signment office and were adhered to.

Q. Do you have copies of these maps presently avail­
able? A. No, not to my knowledge. They probably can be 
ferreted out of some of the old files.

(Discussion off the record)
Q. In the 1963-64 school year, did you still pursue a 

policy of permitting students after initial assignment, to 
request re-assignment to another school? A. Yes.

Q. What criteria did you follow in that year to govern 
applications for transfer? A. No. 1, the Pupil Assign­

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



176a

ment Act, the so-called safety valve provision of the Pupil 
Assignment Act which was also part of the rules and 
regulations of the Board of Education was used as one 
criteria. A child not desiring to attend a school where 
there was racial mixing, could request assignment to an­
other school. The request for a specific school was not 
automatic. It was a matter of whether there was space 
available. Another criteria we used was typically emo-

— 14—
tional problems, transportation problems, hardship prob­
lems. These are the best descriptive terms I can use and 
these were pursued on the individual basis and evaluated 
by the staff and recommendations made to the Board of 
Education and acted upon officially by the Board of 
Education. There were administrative decisions based on 
normal recognized criteria such as emotional problems. 
These were done under the power provided the super­
intendent by the Board.

Q. Did you permit the student who was assigned to a 
school in which his race was in the majority or entirely 
composed of members of his race, to transfer to another 
school! A. Say that again.

Q. Did you permit the negro student who was assigned 
to a school that was predominantly or entirely negro, to 
transfer to another school! A. You’ve got two different 
questions there. There’s a difference between predominantly 
and entirely.

Q. Did you permit a student in a school entirely negro, 
to transfer to another school? A. Depending on the re­
quest or reason. '

Q. How could he transfer? A. By request for assign­
ment.

Q. Could he set out for instance, he wanted to go to an

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



177a

integrated school! A. This reason was given but not
—15—

used as a basis of approval.
Q. You mean the school board would deny an applicant 

setting out that as a reason? A. Yes.
Q. Did you apply this same criteria to a negro student 

in a school predominantly negro? A. If he based his 
request on not wanting to attend a racially mixed school.

Q. The situation where a negro student assigned by 
the Board to a school predominantly negro, who wanted 
to transfer to a school which might be predominantly 
white, could he indicate as a basis of the request for 
transfer, that he wanted to attend an integrated school 
and be transferred? A. He could indicate it, yes. I think 
you have to take the individual case because they are 
handled on the individual case.

Q. Would that be a valid basis for transfer—that he 
wanted to attend an integrated school? A. It was not 
approved on that basis, that’s correct.

Q. Would the same thing apply to a white student— 
that is in a school entirely white in attendance, that wanted 
to be transferred to a school that was predominantly or 
entirely negro? A. Yes. I don’t know of a case but it 
would have been treated the same way if it happened.

(Discussion off the record)
—16—

Q. Dr. Phillips, did your same policy covering assign­
ments of faculty members and school personnel prevail 
in 1963-64? A. Yes. Let me qualify. I am not exactly 
sure when the first—I guess the bible teacher was the 
first place where a teacher of one race taught at least part 
of the time in a school of another race, serving youngsters

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



178a

of another race. I am not sure this occurred in 1963-64, 
but I think it did. The summer school is the only place 
where teachers of both races taught youngsters either 
in mixed groups or solely one race or the other.

Q. You had the same policy as you stated existed in 1963 
summer school, in the 1964 summer school1? That is, 
students assigned without regard to race? A. Yes.

Q. And faculty members assigned without regard to 
race? A. Yes.

Q. Did your same policy governing extra-curricular 
school activities apply in 1963-64? That is extra-curricular 
activities planned and adopted according to the composi­
tion of the school? A. Basically this is correct. There 
were begun some activities which involved both negro 
youngsters and white youngsters, some mixed groups 
participating together, some meetings of student council 
officers together—this type of thing was begun in the 1963-

—17—
64 term. Now we are talking about students here. 

* * * * *
—19—

* * * * *
Q. Did you make any change in the method governing 

request for transfer in 1964-65? A. No, the same basic 
criteria.

Q. The same practice you followed in 1963-64 covered 
1964-65? A. That’s correct.

Q. Did you make any change in the method of assigning- 
teachers and school personnel in 1964-65? A. During the 
school year of 1964-65, which is the year we find ourselves 
in now, I think the figure is eight white teachers are teach­
ing in either predominantly negro or full negro schools

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



179a

serving the full negro population or predominantly negro. 
We have the actual dates of assignment. They could be 
made available to you. This is a teacher at West Charlotte

- 20-

Senior High School teaching English, a white teacher up 
at Second Ward teaching science, two elementary teachers 
at Wesley Heights, a teacher splitting time between East 
Mecklenburg Senior High and West Charlotte Senior High 
School. Bible teachers teaching North and Torrency-Lytle; 
this is a white teacher. Counsellors at Ervin Avenue 
Junior High School and staff people, a speech therapist, 
corrective reading. I don’t have any counting of young­
sters but supervisory people working with both white and 
negroes. These are the changes taken place during this 
school year. Driver education teaching at West Mecklen­
burg and Second Ward.

Q. Did you have any negro teacher in the academic field 
teaching in a predominantly white school? A. Not in the 
regular term.

Q. This negro driver you say is where? A. West Meck­
lenburg. Its a regular Second Ward. This is behind the 
wheel training.

Q. Did you have any negro teacher or supervisor work­
ing any of the white or predominantly white schools? 
A. The co-ordinators for the system work with all teachers 
and this relates direct to youngsters. Our co-ordinating 
personnel because of shift in responsibility are working 
on a system-wide basis and without regard to race. We 
have no one at the director level of the negro race. We 
have no one at the assistant superintendent level of the

- 21-

negro race but all of our staff people are working on a 
system-wide basis.

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



180a

Q. Did you, in the school year 1963-64, turn down any 
application for transfer on the basis that the school was 
overcrowded! A. In 1963-64 on the basis of being over­
crowded? I don’t know. I would have to check the actual 
records.

Q. Do you recall of your own knowledge, whether in 
1964-65 you turned down any applicant for transfer on 
the basis the school was overcrowded? A. I don’t know. 
I would say this would be a basis for turning down as­
signment and I would have to check the individual records 
but it would be one of the basic criteria for not assigning 
a youngster to a particular school. Actually, the assign­
ment policy provides for request for change of assign­
ment from a school and did not necessarily carry with 
it a request for assignment to a school. The Board re­
served the right to assign to a school that was most 
appropriate for that particular case. This would be a basic 
factor in assignment.

Q. Do you mean if a student who was assigned to an 
integrated school, indicated that he wanted to go to an­
other school, that he would merely request assignment 
from a school and you would assign him to a segregated

- 22- -
school? A. That’s correct. Normally the individual indi­
cates the request. I am sure this happened but I don’t 
know of any specific case.

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge that you have 
schools today that are overcrowded? A. Yes, a number 
of schools.

Q. You don’t know of your own knowledge which schools 
those are, do you? A. We have a number of overcrowded 
situations and we can take them school by school. We are

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



181a

working right now on some deficiencies of normal capac­
ity—been working at it for years.

Q. You don’t know of your own knowledge whether you 
can say today you have some schools that are overcrowded? 
A. Yes we do have some that are overcrowded.

Q. You don’t know of your own knowledge which schools 
those are? A. I can’t give you a complete list at this 
moment, no.

Q. What basis do you use to determine whether a school 
is overcrowded? A. I was going to ask you to define 
what’s ‘overcrowded’. We have no specific routine defini­
tion of an overcrowded school at this point, no, if that’s 
what you are asking. We are working on that.

—23—
Q. You stated you constructed some schools since 1960 

following consolidation. Did you, in the planning of those 
schools, decide how many students these schools would be 
able to hold or adequately accommodate? A. Yes.

Q. Did you know whether the schools that you brought 
into the system with the merger, had a number of students 
that the schools were able to accommodate? A. I don’t 
have any knowledge of this because I wasn’t here when 
they merged.

Q. When you came into the system in 1962-63, were you 
able to determine the number of students each school was 
able to accommodate? A. I don’t have a direct knowledge 
of a listing of specific activities, no.

Q. There was some limit on the number of students? A. 
I think normal limits, yes.

Q. And you had some figure or estimated figure on that? 
A. Yes.

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



182a

Q. That is with respect to each school ? A. Yes.
Q. And that’s the same thing today? You have some idea 

of the number you can adequately accommodate? A. 
That’s correct.

—24—
Q. What do you mean in your plan for governing assign­

ments of next year—rated capacity of each school? A. 
The best definition I can give you of rated capacity is a 
formal statement of capacity and this would be based on 
the best guess we have as to spaces and this would be 
square foot spaces, actual teaching spaces, how much multi­
purpose space or the larger library, etc., would affect the 
total capacity of a school and the Board has in its rules 
and regulations, instructed the staff to recommend a listing 
of rated capacities and the Board anticipates a normal 
capacity for each school which would be based on the spaces 
that are available.

Q. You indicate that this space you are talking about is 
going to take into consideration both spaces in class rooms 
as well as spaces for other facilities of the school. A. 
That’s right from the elementary to junior high to senior 
high and also have some relation to the number of pupils 
to a teacher.

Q. How does the rated capacity differ from the planned 
pupil capacity that we requested information concerning 
in the interrogatories? A. I am not sure what your actual 
question was, but I assume planned pupil capacity is the 
same as rated capacity. Its in the plan that’s been written. 
The limits as drawn would be presently above the rated

- 2 5 -
capacity. Rated capacity would be a base figure of normal

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



183a

capacity and in any school there’s a certain need for flexion 
in terms of some overage.

* * * * *
Q. You stated in the interrogatories, your answers to 

the interrogatories that in drawing these school zone lines 
you used as a basis the natural land marks and streets or 
creeks, safety factors and travel between school and home 
and the area which could be most conveniently and effi­
ciently served by the particular school and location of the 
particular residential district with relation to a particular 
school. Did you also use the capacity of the school1? A. 
Our normal understood capacity, yes.

Q. So you did use the capacity of the school in drawing 
the line? A. Normal capacity, yes. There’s a difference

—26—
between general understood capacity. This has always 
been a factor in the establishment of lines.

Q. Did you also consider the number of students that 
would be in a particular area? A. In a general way, yes.

Q. Did you have some idea about the number of students 
involved in each district? A. Of a general nature, yes.

Q. And the committee that prepared this would have some 
idea also of the number of students involved in each dis­
trict? A. There’s no listing of any specific number of 
youngsters in an area.

Q. Do you have any idea of the racial composition of a 
particular district? A. No.

Q. How did you form the idea or opinion about the normal 
capacity of the school? A. Just as you read there, the 
normal area that would be served. I am not sure what you 
want.

Q. You stated you used as a criteria in the drafting of a

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



184a

school zone lines, the normal capacity of the particular 
school? A. Yes.

Q. Therefore you had some idea about the number of
- 2 7 -

students that the school could serve. You also stated you 
used the general idea of the number of students within the 
particular district. A. That’s right.

Q. I was asking you—did you form the opinion, or what 
information you used to form the opinion of the general 
number of students in the particular district. You have to 
have some idea about the number of students in the district. 
A. The normal pattern of the school serves the area that’s 
been there. There have been very few actual changes in 
lines on your maps if you look at them when you get them. 
Actually the number involved was an estimate from the 
standpoint of what school has been serving in the past and 
changes in the area, etc. that went with it.

Q. You would have some idea generally at least, about 
the number of negroes in each particular district, would 
you not? A. You would have to define your concept of 
‘some idea’. In the three years I ’ve been here I have some 
knowledge of the residential patterns of Mecklenburg 
County and the distribution of racial patterns as part of 
this knowledge, but not specifically in terms of the number 
of youngsters of a school area. We had some history of 
this in setting up geographical areas in 1963-64 and 1964-65.

—28—
Q. You say 1963-64 and 1964-65? A. Yes, the geograph­

ical areas set up.
Q. You have these available also? A. In the official state 

record and I would have to check the comptroller’s office 
on this.

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



185a

Q. Would your satistics show the number of districts 
used for 1964-65, the number of negro and white students! 
A. Aren’t these reflected in these statistics!

Q. Would they reflect or do you have statistics of the 
number of negro and white students in the district for 
1963-64! A. I suspect it can be compiled from the records.

Q. You said that the 1965-66 plan with respect to the 
lines does not differ materially from the 1964-65, is that 
correct! A. I said there weren’t any major changes in 
large numbers. There are some changes in lines because of 
the first paragraph in the attendance area plan that was 
set out, but we won’t have any actual statistics on racial 
distribution unless we are required to count these upon the 
initial assignment of the youngsters in the area. You 
studied the pattern and know the basis upon which young­
sters will be initially assigned this coming year under this 
policy. If we are required to make a record of the numbers 
of negroes and white youngsters, this will be possible but 
we don’t intend to keep our records on that basis.

—29—
Q. One might say generally though, that you had approx­

imately the same number of negro and white students at­
tending integrated schools excluding requests for re-assign­
ment as you have this year! A. No, I think a study of the 
basic residential area would indicate no change in the num­
ber of lines with the residential areas which are basically 
negro in the same areas and basically white. I don’t have 
any direct specific information.

Q. You said there has been some change, however minor, 
in the lines that existed for the 1965-66 school year! A. I 
didn’t use the word ‘minor’.

# * * • #

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



186a

* * * * *
Q. What white school personnel serves the area of

- 4 2 -
Sterling School! A. The overlapping districts, since Sterl­
ing is grade 1 through 12, would include Pineville Ele­
mentary School, Nation’s Ford Elementary School, Quail 
Hollow Junior High, Smith Junior High School, South 
Mecklenburg Senior High School. I believe this is all in­
cluded in that area.

Q. What about Torrence-Lyttlef A. It would serve 
grades 1 to 12 and overlaps the areas served starting at 
North Mecklenburg Senior High, Alexander and Ranson 
Junior High Schools, Huntersville, Long Creek, Statesville 
Road, Derita, Oakdale Elementary Schools. I believe that’s 
all.

Q. And J. H. Gunn? A. J. H. Gunn School which serves 
grades 1 through 12 overlaps areas served by Garringer 
Senior High School, East Mecklenburg Senior High School, 
Cochran Junior High School, Clear Creek Elementary 
School. That’s grades 1 to 7. Part of Matthews grades 1 
through 9. Eastway Junior High School, Idlewild Ele­
mentary School, Wonderfield, Hickory Grove, Windsor 
Park, Newell, Briarwood, Plaza Road, Shamrock Gardens, 
Merry Oaks, McClintock Junior High.

Q. York Road Junior-Senior? A. York Road Junior- 
Senior High School overlaps with Harding Senior High, 
West Mecklenburg Senior High, Myers Park Senior High, 
Smith Junior High, Spaugh Junior High, Sedgefield Junior 
High.

Q. And Plato Price and Billingsville ? A. Plato Price 
grades 1 to 9 overlaps Wilson Junior High, Colwood Junior

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips

—41—



187 a

High, Tuckaseg'ee Elementary, Berryhill, Thomasboro, 
Hoskins and Barringer.

Q. And Billingsville ? A. Only the Junior High School. 
The elementary school does not overlap. The Junior High 
School overlaps Alexander Graham and McClintock.

Q. You have four elementary schools that will not he 
affected and perhaps you can—Ada Jenkins. . . .  A. Ada 
Jenkins overlaps Davidson and Cochran; Amay James 
with Barringer.

Q. And Woodlawn? A. Amay James may overlap with 
Berryhill and Woodlawn overlaps with Paw Creek, Tucka- 
segee and part of Oakdale.

* * # * #
—48—

*  *  *  #  *

Q. With respect to transportation in the areas where the 
schools are not affected by the school zone lines or new 
school zone lines recently adopted by the Board, how have 
the children there been transported by the bus, pursuant 
to dual system of bus transportation—that is negro busses 
for negro students and white busses for white children? 
A. In the schools serving overlapping areas, there have 
been overlapping routes, yes.

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge whether this 
same system will be continued for the 1965-66 year! A. 
Only in the 9 exception areas listed here would there be 
any existing dual transportation.

Q. With respect to these nine areas, you will have a 
continuation of negro busses for negro students? A. By 
necessity, by the busses serving these schools, going to 
those schools will be, yes.

Q. With respect to the Crestdale school, what happens

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



188a

to the junor and high school student next year? A. These 
will follow the same feeder pattern that they have followed 
without change in accordance with the exceptions and these

- 4 9 -
will have assignment to Gunn Junior High.

Q. And Gunn is a negro school? A. Yes.
Q. And this is the feeder system you followed prior to 

1964? A. Right, but its geared for in the exceptions set 
out.

Q. And does this same thing apply to the other schools? 
That is, do you propose to continue until you discontinue 
those schools? A. Which school are you talking about?

Q. Let us consider Sterling High School. You state here 
though that the high school students I guess will be as­
signed according to the attendance area in which they re­
side. A. Rising tenth graders since the Sterling High 
School has been discontinued, will be assigned to a school 
serving the area in which they live. The majority which 
live in the South Mecklenburg area and a few in the York 
Road Senior High, the majority will be assigned.

Q. What about the Woodland Elementary School? A. 
The rising seventh graders, most of them feed into at 
present, into the Plato Price Junior High School program. 
A few, I am not sure whether any would feed into the 
north-west.

Q. Is Plato Price an all negro school? A. It serves 
negro youngsters, yes.

—50—
Q. And the rising junior high students from Amay James 

Elementary school? A. That is one through four. The 
rising fifth grader from Amay James would be assigned 
initially on report card to Plato Price.

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



189a

Q. And we stated Plato Price is a negro school1? A. Yes 
and this is taken care of in the exceptions.

Q. And the person completing grades at Ada Jenkins 
Elementary School? A. Actually we are proposing to 
move the seventh grade youngsters who have been as­
signed, the rising seventh who would have been assigned 
back to Ada Jenkins, grade 1 through 7, its our hope that 
those seventh graders will have initial assignments—I plan 
they be initially assigned to Torrence-Lyttle pending the 
completion of the exception but the rising eighth grader 
would initially be assigned to Torrence-Lyttle, that’s cor­
rect.

Q. And Torrence-Lyttle is an all negro school? A. Cor­
rect.

Q. What about the person completing grades at Plato 
Price Junior High? A. The rising tenth grader coming 
from Plato Price would be normally assigned to the York 
Road Senior High School. There are a few youngsters at 
Plato Price right now being assigned to West Charlotte

— 5 1 -

Senior High School. This would continue pending the 
completion of the exceptions.

Q. And both of these senior highs that you mentioned 
are negro schools? A. Yes.

Q. And the rising junior at York Road Junior-Senior 
High would go to the senior high pending the completion 
of the project? A. That’s right.

Q. And the rising senior from Billingsville? A. Would 
be assigned to the Myers Park Junior High School.

Q. And the Myers Park school is a predominantly white 
school? A. Its serving both white and negro, yes, and 
has been for a number of years. I would like to correct

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



190a

one word in there—will attend or will go to, actually will 
be initially assigned to.

Q. To make it clear in the record, this feeder policy 
that you just described, with the exception of the student 
leaving Billingsville going to Myers Park, was the feeder 
policy you followed prior to 1954, or certainly the policy 
you followed at the time you assumed the job? A. Yes.
I wouldn’t speak for around 1954.

Q. Was it the policy you followed at the time you be­
came superintendent? A. Yes.

—52—
Q. Dr. Phillips, could you briefly describe the condi­

tion of these nine schools that are left out of this plan? 
Are they in any way comparable to the white or pre­
dominantly white schools in the area? A. Let’s be specific. 
In what category? Can we take various categories? How 
do you measure schools? Are you talking about physically, 
about the teaching faculty, student achievement?

Q. Can we consider the over-all plant and program 
at these schools and get an opinion from you of the 
program offered by the particular school in comparison 
with the white schools in the area? A. I don’t know 
how much detail you want. This would be the same 
thing if we took the 109 and tried to compare. Let 
me see if I can give you a general statement on it. 
I think you see the problem and each one is different. 
Let me make a general statement first. From the stand­
point of physical facilities, the facilities in the nine schools 
that are listed in the exceptions, with the possible excep­
tion of Crestdale, and even this when its compared with 
Hoskins and the Dilworth at this point is not vastly 
different in its physical facilities. Leave Crestdale out 
for just a minute. Basically physical facility-wide, the

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



191a

Woodland and Plato Price, the Amay James, the Ada
—53—

Jenkins, Torrence-Lyttle, compare favorably with other 
schools of similar age in the school system and there is 
no differential here because of any racial factor that’s 
involved. This is physically. Program-wise the limita­
tions at the senior high school are directly related to the 
enrollment and this is the very factor that prompted the 
Board of Education to begin two years ago with this 
avowed plans to eliminate the Union School from the 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg school system. This is a matter 
of public record that this was established prior to the 
court’s decision. The senior high school limitation there 
for Sterling of course has been closed up this year. This 
was the smallest of the three. Torrence-Lyttle is the 
largest. On the basis of standards of size in other school 
systems in North Carolina and states like Nebraska, its 
larger than a majority of high schools in terms of number 
right now, yet the Board in its consideration of quality 
based on numbers of youngsters available for course 
offerings, has identified Torrence-Lyttle as one of the 
senior high schools that should be closed. Gunn is in a 
similar position, yet smaller than Torrence-Lyttle. Junior 
high school-wise, I think the same general statement 
applies with three junior highs involved plus Plato Price. 
We are not satisfied and have not been with split between 
the—well, with the alignment of the fifth through the

- 5 4 -
ninth grade at Plato Price. This is the basis again of the 
elimination of it in the exceptions. Limitation in course 
offerings come by limitations in number. Billingsville 
falls into this category and this is one of the basis of 
the plan that began two years ago for the creation of

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



192a

the junior high schools to serve that general area. Ele­
mentary-wise, the elementary schools involved here, 
program-wise have the same class loads and some maybe 
lesser loads and this shows up in the total analysis in 
the materials so there’s no need to go into that. There’s 
no differential from the standpoint of numbers of young­
sters and the materials that are available.

* * * * #

—64—
* * * * *

Q. Dr. Phillips, do you have from any prior history 
in the administration of the school, any idea of the hous­
ing pattern of the particular district or families within 
the particular district which you might have used or con­
sidered in the drawing of the school zone line! A. Yes.

Q. And this was a factor was it not, in the drawing 
or consideration in the drawing of the particular school 
zone lines! A. A general knowledge of the number of 
youngsters anticipated in a school district rvas a factor 
and always has been a factor in the drawing of the lines. 

* * * * *

Deposition of Dr. A. Craig Phillips



193a

Transcript of Proceedings
# # # # * #

Court: Do you wish to make an opening statement in 
this case, gentlemen, for the plaintiffs or for defendant?

Mr. Chambers: Yes, sir.
Your Honor, this is a suit filed by Negro plaintiffs 

seeking to have enjoined specifically the assignment of 
students in the school system according to racially gerry­
mandered school zone lines, the use of a transfer system 
which permits or permitted students to transfer out of a 
school that was integrated to a school that was segregated, 
and the assignment of teachers and school personnel on a 
racial basis. The complaint in this action was filed on 
January 19, 1965, and the defendant filed an answer to the 
complaint on February 5, 1965, denying some of the allega-

—9—
tions in the complaint and the specific allegations to which 
I referred and asserting that it planned to adopt a plan 
that would eliminate some of the practices to which we 
referred. We filed a motion following the answers filed 
by the defendant to interrogatories filed by plaintiff in 
which the defendant enclosed a plan which it had adopted 
to eliminate what we alleged were the discriminatory 
practices it followed in the past requested that the Court 
preliminarily enjoin the assignment of Negro students to 
attend excepted schools as set out in the plan. This mo­
tion was disallowed and the cause now is before the Court 
on the merits in which we plan to show that the lines as 
drawn by the defendant in the plan submitted and the 
maps which it has filed with us have been drawn so as 
either to keep out of some of the schools in the school 
system Negro students or white students which would, if 
properly drawn, integrate some of the schools in the school 
system or integrate them more fully. We plan to show 
secondly that the School Board still has not eliminated its

—8—



194a

racially discriminatory assignment of teachers and school 
personnel and, thirdly, that the School Board has excepted 
without reason or just cause ten Negro schools in the 
school system. We plan to show that, there being no basis 
for the exceptions, that the School Board should be or­
dered to integrate immediately these ten excepted Negro 
schools.

That is the contentions of the plaintiffs and the proposed 
order of proof.

— 10—
Mr. Barkley: If the Court pleases, I ’d like to call atten­

tion of the Court to the fact that they brought this action 
in January on the basis of the organization of the school 
system at that time. They asked for an immediate tem­
porary preliminary injunction. We filed an answer in 
which we set forth that since the previous October the 
defendant had been extensively engaged in the develop­
ment of its plan of complete integration through an ex­
tension of its geographic zones, quite a number of which 
it had established as far back as three years ago. The 
plaintiffs have called on us for a great mass of statistical 
matter. We would like to suggest that this is an action 
for an injunction, that it is seeking equitable relief here. 
As I understand it, an injunction acts presently and 
prospectively and what might have gone on heretofore 
in this school system is not material to the main issues 
of this case except as it may show motive on the part of 
the defendant, either good or bad.

We propose to show and we contend that those lines 
on the map are not gerrymandered, that where some of 
them may appear irregular there are good reasons for 
that appearance and that in most cases where they do 
appear irregular they are not in areas of the city or county 
where to change them would have any effect on the enroll­

Defendant’s Opening Statement



195a

ment of any child in any Negro school who is a white 
person or any Negro in a white school by reason of that 
change.

— 11—

We expect to show and we have a map here for that 
purpose that the City of Charlotte in particular is very 
sharply segregated itself in that you get away from certain 
highly populated Negro areas and there is only a scattered 
Negro population in the remainder of the county and that 
complaints of gerrymandering should be considered in the 
light of not whether the lines are straight or not straight, 
or whether the school is in the middle of a zone or at the 
edge of a zone as well as that is prejudicial to the rights 
of the Negro pupil that the line should not be drawn that 
way regardless of that fact.

We expect to show that this Board has a record of 
moving progressively towards compliance with the law, 
that actually we admitted the first Negro pupils in the old 
Charlotte City Schools in 1957, we have had Negroes in 
white schools at all times since then. In 1962 we began 
this plan of setting up geographically drawn zones and 
assigning all the pupils living within that zone to the 
school serving the zone regardless of residence. We ex­
tended those zones in ’63 and again in ’64. I believe at the 
end of ’64 out of the hundred schools then—there have 
been schools added since that to 105—that we had com­
pletely rezoned about 60 or 70 of the schools.

At the time this suit was brought and to the knowledge
— 12—

of the plaintiffs, we contend, the Board was engaged in 
the development of this new assignment policy. We did 
complete a completely new assignment policy embodied 
in the new regulations adopted in March of this year. We 
think that the plan is as fair as it is possible to make a

Defendant’s Opening Statement



196a

plan. I don’t understand the position of the opposition in 
some respects, whether they don’t like the geographical 
zoning system, whether they think we should have initial 
free choice. I only know that in the case of Bradley v. 
Richmond, which has been recently decided, in April I 
believe, and I believe that these attorneys did not appear, 
but the plaintiffs in that case were complaining because 
the Richmond Board did not have geographically drawn 
zoning boundaries. But in our plan we have divided the 
99 schools of the system into attendance areas, assigning 
all pupils within a particular area to the school served 
by that area regardless of race. We have omitted tem­
porarily with a deadline which we have set ourselves, 
based upon construction requirements for which the money 
is available, for which the land has been acquired and 
for which plans are now on the drawing board, with the 
idea of relieving the situation with respect to those ten 
schools. Our plan, applying to the 99 as I say, provides 
for assignment according to residence in the area. After 
that has once been done, any child in any area without any 
reason for it can petition the Board for transfer to any

- 1 3 -
school in the county that he chooses. He can state his 
preference of three choices.

Court: This is true of the children in the ten schools!
Mr. Barkley: That is also true of the children in the 

ten schools. The only distinction between the children 
in the ten schools and those in the 99 is that those schools 
are Negro schools and they are first assigned to those 
schools. We sent a notice to every child in each one of 
the 10 schools by the report cards where they were en­
rolled, by letter where they were pre-schoolers setting 
forth that we proposed to abandon this school not later 
than a certain date and that in the meantime anyone who

Defendant’s Opening Statement



197a

desired transfer to another school could file a simple 
form requesting transfer and that form was attached, 
on the opposite side, on the back page of the notice to 
those pupils. Some of them have taken advantage of it. 
By the very act of rezoning our 99 schools we are bring­
ing into the predominantly white or the presently in­
tegrated schools some 1700 children who were not in the 
white or integrated schools last year. All together, with 
the pupils who were in last year and with the transfer 
requests, we will have 2526 children in round figures in 
either predominantly white schools or integrated schools. 
Those schools range from integrated school with 250 
Negro pupils and 14 white children to schools where it

—14—
is 50% each way. Two or three schools are just about 
evenly divided on up to where there is one or two Negroes 
in a predominantly white school. That has all been 
brought about either by residence and not by race or 
by request for transfer regardless of race.

We say that we have moved rapidly, that we have 
moved fully, that we have administered in good faith, that 
we have no tricks up our sleeves, that we propose to 
administer it in good faith, and we say that this system 
meets the requirements of law and has the approval of 
the decisions of the Supreme Court and of our Circuit 
Court most recently expressed in Bradley v. Richmond.

As to the teachers, we have been going through a 
constant, steady program of preparing the different races 
in this county to receive teachers without regard to race. 
Our staff meetings are completely integrated. All activi­
ties that bring teachers together within our schools bring 
white and Negro teachers together and that includes the 
banquets, dinner meetings and all other activities in the

Defendant’s Opening Statement



198a

Colloquy

way of meetings of teachers. We have got a show going 
on up here that we’d like for Your Honor to see. It’s 
a 12:30 each day at the Imperial Theatre where we have 
Negro teachers and white teachers in our Arts Depart­
ment training those children in the performance of a 
play in which white and Negro children participate. AVe 
have any number of photographs we propose to show in

- 1 5 -
due course of activities that have brought the teachers 
together and the children together. We have Negro 
teachers who have lectured white P.T.A. Associations; 
we have Negro teachers teaching white children in the 
Summer Schools that are now in progress in which some 
12,000 children are now engaged. We are paving the way 
but we can’t do it all overnight. We have got eight or 
nine white teachers in Negro schools now and we think 
that under the ruling of the Court in the Bradley v. Rich­
mond case that today is not the proper time or place 
to decide what should be done in the way of teacher 
integration. This is a matter that we have no objection 
to the Court retaining jurisdiction in this case and review 
it a year from now or whenever it sees fit upon motion 
of the other side. We are here saying that we want to 
do what the Court thinks we ought to do.

Court: All right. Call your witnesses for the plaintiff.
Air. Chambers: Before we call witnesses we wanted 

to request counsel for the defendant that he stipulate or 
permit us to mark as exhibits some of the answers to 
interrogatories and depositions that would avoid some of 
the testimony we would have to get otherwise.

Court: The interrogatories, I imagine, are in the court 
file.

Air. Chambers: Yes, sir.



199a

Colloquy
— 1 6 -

Court: By consent let all interrogatories and answers 
go into evidence. Any objection?

Mr. Barkley: None for the defendant.
Court: They are received in evidence.
Mr. Chambers: We have depositions taken of Dr. Craig 

Phillips, the Superintendent, which we’d also like to stipu­
late into evidence.

Mr. Barkley: No objection.
Court: Let it be received.
Mr. Chambers: One final thing, we have letters that 

were sent by the Board to the children in the 10 excepted 
schools attached to the answer filed by the defendant to 
our motion for preliminary injunction and these are also 
in the court records but we wanted to get these in evi­
dence as the letters that were sent to the students of the 
10 excepted schools.

Mr. Barkley: You want to introduce the letter that went 
to the parents of the children in each of the 10 excepted 
schools with regard to transfer rights?

Mr. Chambers: Yes, sir.
Mr. Barkley: And the notice which I believe is on the 

opposite side of their request for transfer?
Mr. Chambers: Bight.
Mr. Barkley: We have no objection to that.
Court: Beceived.

— 1 7 —

Mr. Chambers: We received, either in answer to the 
first or second set of interrogatories, three maps, one 
showing the elementary schools, the other showing the 
junior high and the third the senior high, and we wanted 
to make special reference that these, too, are included in 
the answer to the interrogatories.

Mr. Barkley: I think that’s correct. We have the same 
maps probably a little clearer from the standpoint of



200a

actual geographic lines than those lines show there. In 
other words, we have emphasized the lines somewhat. 

Court: Whose maps are these?
Mr. Chambers: Those are ours. We have worked with 

them and prepared this evidence from them.
Mr. Barkley: That’s all right. If the Court finds it can 

see better the lines, we do have them.
Court: By consent let the record show that all maps, 

everybody’s maps are received in evidence.
Mr. Chambers: We have subpoenaed seven witnesses 

and we have two others. Would the Court want to swear 
them all in at one time?

Court: Yes, sir.

(The witnesses are sworn.)

R e g in a l d  A. H a w k i n s , a  w i t n e s s  f o r  th e  p la in t i f f s ,  h a v ­

i n g  f i r s t  b e e n  d u l y  s w o r n ,  w a s  e x a m in e d  a n d  t e s t i f i e d  a s  

f o l l o w s :

—18—
Direct Examination by Mr. Bell-.

Q. State your full name and address, please. A. Regi­
nald A. Hawkins, 1703 Madison Avenue, Charlotte, North 
Carolina.

Q. Are you a plaintiff in this case, Dr. Hawkins? A. 
Yes, I am.

Q. How long have you been a resident of Charlotte? 
A. I have been an active resident of Charlotte for the 
past 18 years. I went to school here for four years. In 
1941 I established my residence here.

Q. What is your work? A. I am a practicing dentist 
and an ordained United Presbyterian Minister.

Q. Do you have a dental office here in the city? A. Yes, 
1218 Beatty’s Ford Road.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



201a

Q. What is your responsibility and duties as a Presby­
terian Minister? A. I am ordained as an evangelist in 
the area of social education and action. I am active for 
my General Assembly on its Commission which involves 
over 10,000 churches in the United States.

Q. Are you active at all in the Civil Rights movement?

Mr. Barkley: I object to that.
Court: Overruled.

—19—
A. Yes, I am active in the Civil Rights movement. I am 
Chairman of many Civil Rights groups; I have been active 
with all the national Civil Rights groups and I have led 
protests here in Charlotte for civil rights and have been 
accused of being responsible for bringing about many civil 
rights changes in the community.

Q. What groups are you associated with? A. I am 
Chairman of the Mecklenburg Organization on Political 
Affairs; I am Chairman of the Citizens-Student Non-violent 
Coordinating Committee; I was Chairman of the Westside 
Parents Counsel; I am Chairman of the Job Opportuni­
ties For Better Security, which is a poverty group here 
in this community; I am on my church’s Commission, a 
member of its Executive Committee on Religion and Race; 
I am Vice-president of the Presbyterian Inter-racial Coun­
sel; I am a member of the N.A.A.C.P., Southern Leader­
ship Conference and Corps.

Q. Do you know something about a Governor’s Good 
Neighbors Counsel? A. Yes. I am a member of Gov. 
Terry Sanford’s Good Neighbor Counsel.

Q. Is this in the area of civil rights? A. This is in the 
area of civil rights statewide.

Q. Would you review generally your involvement with 
the school desegregation efforts here in Charlotte? A.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



202a

Well, as soon as the May 17, 1954, decision was handed
— 20-

down we became active for desegregation. We had been 
active against the School Board to bring about better 
quality education before 1954 but in 1954 I, along with other 
Negro citizens in this community, got petitions to ask that 
the School Board be desegregated in accordance with the 
May 17th ruling. I have filed petitions for my children 
every year since 1954 that we have filed petitions.

Q. How many children do you have? A. I have four, 
one in college now. I have three in the present school sys­
tem. I have appeared before the School Board many times 
asking that they desegregate the schools in line with the 
court’s decision. I have led protests against the School 
Board because of their practices of segregation in mixed 
communities and now I am a plaintiff against the School 
Board because of this practice of segregation.

Q. During all of your period of activity in your efforts 
to get the schools desegregated have you come in contact 
with many or few Negro people in the community? A. I 
say I have more or less come in contact with most people 
who have had children in school because we attempted, 
working night and day, to get Negro parents to file peti­
tions under the pupil assignment plan asking that their 
kids be allowed to attend desegregated schools which car­
ried me into more or less all the neighborhoods in Char­
lotte, and also, having worked with P.T.A. groups and

— 21—

having led a protest also, I came in contact with many 
parents and students in this city.

Q. Where are your children attending school at the 
present time? A. I have one attending West Charlotte, 
one attending Northwest and one attending Oaklawn Ele­
mentary School.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



2 0 3 a

Q. Are those Negro schools or white schools? A. They 
are all Negro.

Q. You indicated that in the past you had made applica­
tion for transfer under the old plan, is that correct? A. 
That is correct.

Q. Were any of the applications ever granted? A. They 
were never granted.

Q. Now, I ask you whether you have made application 
under the new free choice transfer plan that the Board 
has recently put out. A. No, I did not make application 
under the present choice that was given this past June 
because I did not believe in the sincerity of the School 
Board in trying to bring about desegregation in the City 
of Charlotte. I considered this as a stratagem to get 
around the law, to further intimidate Negroes as they had 
done in the past with the pupil assignment plan and so 
forth, and I did not apply under this system because I 
am a plaintiff in this case and I did not believe in the 
sincerity of the School Board in bringing about desegrega­
tion.

— 22—

Mr. Barkley: If the Court please, I am going to 
ask that all of that answer be stricken except that 
he did not make application this year. That is simply 
a jury argument and not testimony.

Court: Fortunately we have no jury.
Mr. Barkley: I will ask Your Honor to instruct 

the Court to ignore it.
Court: Gentlemen, I have a practice in non-jury 

cases that I believe is correct—not just this type 
of case but all non-jury cases—of being extremely 
liberal about the rules of evidence. I think the rules 
of evidence strictly applied can keep something

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



204a

out that ought to come in and is very relevant and 
very little harm is done by getting irrelevant mat­
ters into a record where there isn’t a jury to he 
confused by it. So, objection overruled. I do want 
to ask Dr. Hawkins to clarify the answer. I under­
stand that you say you did not apply because you 
doubted the sincerity of the Board and I think I 
understand you to mean that as a stratagem, that 
is, to permit your children to request transfer in­
stead of going straight to a geographical systqm but 
I ’m not sure. You don’t mean to say, do you, that 
if you applied for your children to go to a school of 
their choice that you think they wouldn’t grant the

—2 3 -
application!

A. My experiences in the past have been, and I have been 
applying almost every year that we did apply, that they 
did not allow my children to go to the school that they 
requested and my wife and I decided that this, too, was a 
stratagem and that they would not be allowed to attend 
the school and we were a little apprehensive about the 
geographical plan and the freedom of choice plan they 
were talking about.

Court: So your doubt of sincerity is in both
respects.

A. That’s right.
Q. Would you explain to the Court perhaps in further 

response to the Court’s question, Dr. Hawkins, what you 
told me is your opinion based on your experience in deal­
ing with the Negroes and on the school desegregation 
problem as to the general reaction to this free choice plan

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



205a

coining, as it does, after a long period of experience with 
the transfer plans. A. In securing applications from other 
Negroes to apply for desegregated education and my own 
experiences, we had, more or less, been browbeaten. Every 
time that we applied for transfer of our children we had 
to undergo this procedure of getting it notarized and hav­
ing ten days and we had to appear before the School 
Board and every time that we appeared we were turned 
down. The names of the people were published in the 
newspapers, their addresses. Some of our people even

—24—
suffered economic reprisals because of their seeking trans­
fers and my experience and in conversation with others 
was the fact that this was a continuation and closely allied 
with the scheme that had been used under the pupil as­
signment plan. It followed the same type of procedure and 
we felt that we would not undergo this type of harrass- 
ment in order to seek desegregated education for our 
children. We thought it should be done on a more equitable 
basis. Because of the close link of the procedure we 
haven’t yet discerned any difference in this procedure 
other than the fact that we don’t have to appear before 
the School Board. But the responsibility for seeking a 
desegregated education still rests on the Negro parent. 
The Negro parent had to ask for this.

Q. Let me ask you here, could you put in one, two, three 
fashion some of the reasons why your experience indicates 
that there is a significant burden on the Negro parents 
in having to seek these things!

Court: Could you relate to what you say the bur­
den is now, if any, more than past history. I under­
stand your contention about the past.

Reginald A. Hatvkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



206a

A. The burden now is the fact that the Negro parent had 
to fill in this letter, seek this request. I think they were 
given thirty days, up to June 30, to ask for a transfer, 
and we felt now that they would perhaps select one Negro

- 2 5 -
child and put that one Negro child in the all white school, 
in a strange environment where the child perhaps would 
undergo intimidation and harrassment and so forth, and 
many of these parents and myself did not know all the 
schools in Charlotte. We do not know which schools that 
we should request because we have not had access to all 
the 109 schools, and then there is fear in the community 
about economic reprisals. We have had parents fired 
seeking transfer for their children and so forth. It has 
been a bad experience and because of these difficulties 
because of the responsibility resting on the Negro parent 
and the School Board not assessing its own responsibility 
we felt that this, too, is a continuation closely allied to 
the pupil assignment plan that has been used in the past 
and we did not feel that this should be our responsibility 
to seek a desegregated education. This should be the 
responsibility of the School Board in a more equitable way.

Q. I gather from your testimony that you have done 
this in the past, did you try this year to get the Negro 
parents to seek these transfers and, if so, how did the 
responses of the parents that you talked to differ from in 
the past years? A. It did not differ at all. Many of the 
parents who called me—many of them called me and talked 
with me about this new procedure—and the Negro is a 
little suspicious of this procedure. They were not at all

—26—
believing that this system is actually a scheme to bring 
about legal desegregation of the schools and they assume

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



2 0 7 a

more or less a laissez faire type of attitude because of past 
experiences. Some in the community did talk to Negroes 
trying to get them to leave their kids in the schools where 
they were assigned and so forth. And because of the brow­
beating and so forth in the past it’s been difficult to get 
Negroes to believe in this system.

Mr. Barkley: I don’t want to keep disturbing 
the Court and I ’m not going to. I want to move 
again that all of that testimony be stricken as purely 
hearsay. My only concern is not the effect it may 
have on Your Honor but how it would appear in 
the record if this case goes up to a higher court.

Court: Motion denied. I think it’s very helpful 
in lawsuits to let everybody say almost everything 
they want to say within reason. I think our rules 
of evidence are extremely antiquated and that is 
especially so where you don’t have a jury. We are 
not concerned with the possible arguments and the 
jurors, being unschooled in law, may be confused. 
I ’m not sure that’s so. I don’t see any reason to 
strictly apply rules of evidence in non-jury cases. 
Objection overruled.

Q. Dr. Hawkins, I understand and I ’d like you to relate 
your answer to what you just said that there are some

- 2 7 -
Negro parents whose children were assigned by the 
School Board to desegregated schools who have sought 
and obtained transfers back to the old Negro schools. 
Now, how do you explain that? A. This did come up 
very clearly at our meetings. We have held meetings to 
try to find out the reason why.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



208a

Court: May I interrupt you here. This year 
you didn’t apply.

A. I didn’t but as a community leader I have been con­
sulted and have been in consultation with parents.

Court: Did you try to encourage them to apply 
even though you weren’t applying!

A. I didn’t encourage them either way. I listened to what 
they had to say. In our meetings I didn’t take an active 
part of seeking parents to apply under this procedure. 
But the reasons that they gave to us was the fact that 
they were afraid their children would be mistreated in 
the academic area. They did not think that any Negro 
teachers would be assigned to the schools and they had 
some bad experiences where Negro children, one or two, 
had attended all white schools and they had been put 
behind. They felt that the children’s academic rating 
would be altered and there had been some complaints 
about mistreatment in the schools and generally these 
parents were apprehensive for their own economic security 
wthere only one or two would be assigned to what was 
predominantly all white schools. And because of this

- 2 8 -
fear as a basic fear in the heart of the Negro because 
of what has been happening and they felt that the same 
thing would be applicable to the procedure that is now 
being instituted. I did not try to encourage them otherwise 
because my experiences in the past is that we have had 
to help to pay salaries and maintain Negroes who had 
actually suffered under the system of trying to get their 
children in school.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



2 0 9 a

Q. Had you ever reached the conclusion that Negroes 
by and large aren’t really interested in desegregated 
education for their children? How about the children 
themselves? A. I would say that the basic Negro parent 
over 35 years of age might not be as enthusiastic about 
desegregation as the children. I have found in talking 
with the children that they are interested in a desegre­
gated education but I would not make the statement that 
all Negro parents, especially those over 35, are as en­
thusiastic about desegregated education because of past 
experiences as the children are interested in a desegregated 
education.

Court: To protect the School Board let the record 
show a continuing objection by Mr. Barkley to hear­
say testimony. Objection overruled.

Q. Now, notwithstanding your suspicion about the thing, 
you are cognizant of the fact that the Board has come 
up within the last few months with a new desegregation 
plan, is that correct? A. We appeared before the Board

- 2 9 -
last fall—our groups did—families did—and asked that 
they desegregate the schools according to the law. The 
Board, as I understand it, came out with this new plan 
and it was published in the newspapers sometime in March 
or April. We did not know what the plan was until 
actually June when we got these letters. They had talked 
about freedom of choice and a geographic plan but we 
did not know actually what the letter would state or what 
would happen until this past June. But we had heard 
all along through our appearances before the School

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



210a

Board they were working on a plan for desegregating the 
schools.

Q. Have you become at least generally familiar with 
the provisions in the new plan? A. More or less generally.

Q. Based on your review is there anything there that 
has caused you to alter your opinion or reinforce your 
opinion that you have already expressed here as far as 
the Board’s good faith on desegregation? A. As I said, 
personally I am not at all convinced that the School Board 
is sincere in bringing about desegregation in the City of 
Charlotte as it should, and I say this from having viewed 
the maps and having some knowledge of the Negro com­
munities in this area.

Q. Well, let’s just take some of the aspects of the plan 
that are being contested here and indicate whether or

—30—
not they fit in with your view that the Board hasn’t 
changed or led you to believe that the Board has changed 
in your opinion. Are you familiar -with the fact that 
10 former Negro schools in the county have been excepted 
from the zoning system that the Board has initiated? A. 
I am aware of that.

Q. Now, based on your understanding of the community, 
what is the effect of that exception of these schools on 
the desegregation process? A. That makes us question 
the sincerity of the School Board very closely because 
these 10 excepted schools are in neighborhoods where 
you would have equal balancing of Negro and white pupils, 
where you have white kids going past Negro schools to 
go to formerly all white schools and you have Negroes 
going past formerly all white schools in order to get to 
Negro schools where you would have an equalization

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



211a

more or less of desegregation. These schools have asked 
to be excepted and more or less the lines have been ex­
tended where one or two Negroes might he included in 
what was formerly an all white school. And then from 
knowing that they speak of desegregated schools that 
have one Negro in a school or one white student in a 
school, they speak of this school as being a desegregated 
school and use the statistics, and by asking for the excep­
tion and knowing what would be the result if these schools

—31—
were included in the plan, I question and many of us 
question the sincerity of the School Board in trying to 
bring about an effective plan of desegregation.

Q. Hasn’t the School Board indicated that while they 
have excepted the 10 schools for the next year or perhaps 
two years that all pupils within those schools have an 
opportunity to transfer to a desegregated school if they 
want to? A. In these excepted school areas most of our 
people are domestics, are menial workers. This takes in 
what was formerly the old county school system or some 
schools that are on the fringe area. Many of these people, 
their economic situation is below $3,000.00 which would 
consider them in the poverty area. Many of them work 
for people who have protested desegregation in this area. 
We  had some white parents this year from Long Creek 
section and other sections of the county to complain about 
desegregation and we, from our experience, have learned 
that many of these Negroes are afraid to ask for freedom 
of choice for their children in the excepted school areas. 
This is a real problem.

Court: None of your children happen to he in 
those 10 excepted schools?

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



212a

A. No, sir, none of them are. Most of the Negroes live in 
the western section of town but the 10 excepted schools 
are out in the county or right in the fringe areas where 
you have a greater mixture of Negroes and white because 
of housing intermixing there.

— 32—
Q. You say most of the Negroes live in the western 

section of town. What is the representation of Negro 
families in the other sections of the city? A. I would 
say anywhere from a third to a half of the Negroes live 
in the northwest or western section of Charlotte and the 
other half are more or less equally scattered accross the 
rest of the county in equal proportion. I don’t think that 
anyone has ever done a population survey. I would esti­
mate that there are around 75,000 Negroes in the county 
and we estimate anywhere from 25 to 35,000 of them 
are living in the western or northwestern sections of the 
city.

Q. Would you have large sections of the city or any 
section where no Negroes would be found? A. Not in 
Charlotte. We have run surveys and we have not found 
—actually, if the school boundaries wrere drawn in a 
circle in order to populate the schools according to their 
maximum capacity there would not be a school in Charlotte 
that would not include more than one Negro child in that 
school. This has been our experience.

Court: Say that again, I ’m not sure I understood 
you.

A. From our investigation of the locations of the schools 
in Mecklenburg County, if a circle was adequately drawn—

Reginald A. Hatvkins— for Plaintiffs—Direct



213a

say a school would have a population of 600 students, if a
—3 3 -

circle was drawn to get 600 students for that school, 
what the maximum would be, there would not be a school 
in the City of Charlotte that would not have more than 
one Negro child in that school because Negro families 
live in most of the vicinities of this city, not in a con­
centrated area like they do in the northwest but in all of 
the sections Negroes live in Mecklenburg County except 
perhaps what might be a housing development but sur­
rounding that housing development or in that vicinity 
Negroes live.

Q. Let me see if I can get at it this way. I think you are 
familiar with Exhibit A to the second set of answers 
to the interrogatories provided by the defendants, which 
exhibits indicates as to each school the number of pupils, 
white and Negro, who were initially assigned under the 
new zones for the 1965-66 school year. Now, I direct your 
attention to the Ashley Park School where the exhibit 
shows that 663 whites and no Negroes were initially as­
signed to that school and ask you if what you are indicat­
ing is that if you drew a circle around the Ashley School 
sufficiently broad so as to include 663 pupils of a grade 
level eligible to enter that school that whether in your 
opinion you would also include in that circle a goodly 
number of Negro families who have children within that 
grade level served by that school. A. That is correct.

Q. On the Ashley Park situation, I use that as my 
illustration but as a matter of fact are there any Negroes

—34—
in the general area of the Ashley Park School! A. That’s 
right—

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



214a

I don’t see here what the maximum is allowed, the num­
ber of students. I see they have 663 students can you 
tell me the maximum capacity of that school!

Q. I think on Exhibit B to the second set of interroga­
tories it indicates there is a maximum capacity of 725 
pupils at Ashley Park. A. I would say that if they would 
draw a circle in the Ashley Park area to include 700 and 
some students that there would definitely be Negro 
students involved in that circle.

Q. You indicate there are Negro children within the 
area of the school, do you of your own knowledge know 
where the children have been assigned! A. In the past!

Q. No, for this year. A. No, I don’t know where they 
are going this year. I see here that none of them are as­
signed to Ashley Park.

Q. Let me ask you whether or not it is correct that the 
Negro pupils in that area were formerly assigned to 
schools which this year are designated as excepted schools, 
perhaps Amay James or Plato Price. Are you familiar 
with that! A. Yes, that was the practice in the past. 
Those kids who lived in that area went to the Plato Price 
and Amay James Schools and from my knowledge the 
Amay James and Plato Price Schools—

—3 5 -
Court : It would help me—I’ve got enough

historical background. In fact, no one contends, I am 
sure, that this Board was any different from any 
board in the south pre-1964, so it really would 
help me to state what now is. That’s what we’re 
concerned with.

Q. I think my question was directed to now. I was ask­
ing, Dr. Hawkins, whether you, of your own knowledge,

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



215a

know that the Negro pupils that you speak of this year, 
Negro pupils within the Ashley Park area this year are 
going to be assigned to either Amay James or Plato Price. 
A. They are not assigned to Ashley Park, according to 
the record.

Q. I will let you look at Exhibit A again. I notice on 
the Bain School there is listed 706 whites assigned and 
no Negroes. Are you familiar with the area of the Bain 
School and can you tell me whether there are Negroes 
living in that area! A. There are Negroes living in that 
area.

Q. Do you know where they have been assigned to school 
this year? A. I know where they were assigned in the 
past but I don’t know where they are assigned this year; 
I know where they have been assigned in the past.

Q. How about the Barringer School? A. There are 
Negroes living in the area of the Barringer School I know 
where they have been assigned in the past but I don’t 
know where they are going this year.

—36—
Q. In the past is it correct that they were assigned to 

the Amay James School? A. That is correct.
Q. Do you know whether or not Amay James is one of 

the excepted schools? A. Yes, it is one of the excepted 
schools.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Court: You’re getting ahead of me now. Let me 
ask counsel, maybe you can stipulate. These three 
schools that have been mentioned, are there Negroes 
in the geographic zone for those schools?

Mr. Bell: Unless we have the wrong information, 
within these schools, and there are several of them, 
predominantly white schools where no Negroes are



2 1 6 a

assigned, there are Negroes in those areas hut they 
were previously attending one of the 10 excepted 
schools and for that reason this year will again be 
taken away from these zones and assigned to the 
excepted schools.

Mr. Barkley: Ashley Park, Bain and Barringer 
Schools, the Negro children in those areas are in 
those excepted schools, have been, and the Board 
has made no change.

Court: In the dual attendance zone you have asked 
to be allowed to maintain for another year or so ?

Mr. Barkley: That’s right.
—37—

Q. Let’s look at the situation in the city. Turn on Exhibit 
A to the second page to the Eastover School.

Court: Mr. Bell, as we go along I think it can be 
more meaningful if you tell me what your contention 
is going to be. I can relate the evidence and I will 
ask Mr. Barkley to reply to it.

Mr. Bell: The first aspect is that there are several 
predominantly or almost all white schools which but 
for the excepted school policy would have a substan­
tial number of Negroes assigned to them.

Court: I don’t think there’s any doubt about that. 
That’s admitted, is it not?

Mr. Bell: The second area is as to schools located 
within the city where there are no Negroes assigned.

Court: Wait a minute, these first three you men­
tioned I better write them down. Ashley Park and 
What?

Mr. Bell: Bain and Barringer.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



217a

Court: Are they outside the city!
Mr. Bell: No. As I understand it, Your Honor, and 

correct me if I am wrong on this, they are within 
the city and there are at least 10 or 12 other all 
white schools in the same situation hut they don’t 
have Negro pupils assigned or have only one or two 
Negro pupils assigned because of this excepted 
school policy.

—3 8 -
Court: Now, then, what was the next one you 

were going to take up?
Mr. Bell: We are going into situations within the 

city where Dr. Hawkins—this is a person knowledge­
able in the community but not an educational expert 
—and I am going to ask him whether there are 
schools where the Board has not assigned any Negro 
pupils but that where, based on his experience, he 
knows Negroes live within the school area.

Court: The same as Ashley Park, Bain and Bar­
ringer.

Mr. Bell: Except they would not be assigned be­
cause of the excepted school policy.

Court: I see. This relates really to the contention 
of gerrymandering.

Mr. Bell: That’s correct.

Q. Let’s look at the Eastover School situation, Dr. Haw­
kins. The exhibit indicates that in the Eastover School 
there are 543 whites and no Negroes assigned. Are you 
familiar with the Eastover School area? A. Yes, I am.

Q. Are there any Negroes living in the area of that 
school? A. All around it.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiff s—Dir ect



218a

Q. Are you yourself, or do you yourself know why no 
Negroes were assigned? Have you looked at the maps or

—3 9 -
are you otherwise able to indicate why that is? A. I ’ll give 
you my personal opinion. My personal opinion is that East- 
over is one of our high social economic areas in the city 
and that it is surrounded by one of our lowest social eco­
nomic communities, Negro, and I know that the people in 
this area complained about the kids using the playground 
and so forth and I feel they would have complained about 
Negroes attending the school. I believe that this is one of 
the reasons why no Negro children were assigned to East- 
over. They certainly live in the area of Eastover.

Court: What is the shape of the geographic thing 
around Eastover? Is it square or does it look like 
a monkey or something?

A. It looks like a monkey. It really makes some dips and 
so forth when you look at it. In one area it uses Randolph 
Road and then it skips over Randolph Road and it misses 
Billingsville altogether which is an all Negro community. 
It’s really shaped up.

Mr. Bell: It might be helpful, in one instance or 
another, if we could have permission to have the 
witness step down and go to the map and, based on 
his knowledge of where Negroes live, trace the bound­
ary line of the Eastover School.

(The witness goes to the map and discussion is 
had out of the hearing of the Court Reporter.)

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct

—40—
Q. Let’s look at one other example of this type, your 

opinion as to the type, the Selwyn School, which on the 
exhibit A indicates that there are 545 whites assigned to it 
and no Negroes. To your knowledge, Dr. Hawkins, are 
there any Negroes living in the immediate area of the 
Selwyn School? A. Yes, there are Negroes living in that 
area.

Q. Where are they going to school, if you know? A. I 
would say perhaps some of them are going to Morgan 
School and some of them might have been going out to the 
Sterling School.

Court: What is the shape of that district, square 
or like the old 10th District?

A. From that map, I don’t remember.
Q. Were some of the Negro pupils going perhaps to one 

of the excepted schools? A. Yes, Morgan Street.

Mr. Bell: That would perhaps be one of our earlier 
examples, Your Honor.

Mr. Barkley: He said there are Negroes in the 
Selwyn area?

Court: Yes, he said there were Negroes in the 
Selwyn area.

A. In the vicinity of Selwyn.
Q. Let me turn from that point now, Dr. Hawkins. Are 

you familiar with the inter-scholastic athletic setup within
—41—

the defendant Board’s school system? A. Yes, I am.



220a

Q. Are there interscholastic sporth between schools? 
A. Not between the public schools, no interscholastic activi­
ties between the public schools. There has been some activ­
ity between the church schools and perhaps some of the 
public schools.

Q. 1 mean on any basis. A. On any basis they are com­
pletely separate.

Q. Do the Negro teams from one school play the Negro 
teams from another school? A. That’s right. The whites 
play the white schools.

Q. Do they have separate leagues? A. Separate asso­
ciations.

Q. Has there been any change in that as far as you know? 
A. I was talking with the President of the Negro Associa­
tion, Dr. Armstrong, and there hasn’t been any change as 
of around June 14th. I couldn’t say whether there has 
been any change since June 14.

Q. Do you know whether a Negro team from a Negro 
school has played any team from a white school? A. To, 
my knowledge Second Ward High School did play the 
Catholic High School in basketball this past year, several 
games, but to my knowledge I know of no other game be­
tween a predominantly Negro school and a predominantly 
white school.

—42—
Q. Is this Catholic school a predominantly white school? 

A. Yes.
Q. Was that game accepted by the community? Were 

there any incidents? A. No incidents whatsoever. I un­
derstand the Negro school won but as far as racial inci­
dents, none whatsoever.

Mr. Bell: No further questions of this witness.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Direct



221a

Cross Examination by Mr. Barkley:

Q. Dr. Hawkins, you have been quite an active man 
in the Civil Rights movement in this area, haven’t you! 
A. In all areas, I hope.

Q. You have been to Washington quite a number of 
times to testify before committees! A. I have had the 
privilege to have been invited to Washington several times 
to appear before Congressional committees.

Q. You have been interviewed extensively by the news­
papers on various aspects of integration, have you not! 
A. That is correct.

Q. You have issued statements to the newspapers quite 
frequently on various problems connected with integra­
tion, have you not! A. I have issued statements, press 
releases to the press and television stations relative to 
integration problems.

Q. Now, do you know when the first Negroes were ad­
mitted in the old Charlotte school system? A. Yes, sir.

—43—
I led Dorothy Counts out of Harding High School and 
I got her application and my clothes were torn off of me 
trying to get away to keep her from being mobbed. That 
was in ’57.

Q. The Board voluntarily allowed the transfer of those 
three pupils? A. We had been fighting the Board from 
1954 to 1957 to get them to comply with the Supreme 
Court’s decision.

Q. I’m not going to engage in an argument with you 
now, I ’d like for you to just answer my questions. I’m 
asking you about, 1957. A. Yes, we appeared with the 
parents in 1957 and the Board admitted three Negro 
children, Roberts, Hunter and Counts, to Alexander 
Graham, Central and Harding High School.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Cross



222a

Q. Now, there have been Negro children in the Charlotte 
system at all times since then, is that right! A. Been 
a few.

Q. Now, when did you make your original application 
to enroll your children in a white school? A. When the 
first one was made, I think either ’56 or ’57. We filed 
petitions in ’55 and I think we filed petitions in ’56 and 
I made application in ’57 after the Pearsall Plan had 
been passed by the Legislature. The first school year 
following the Pearsall Plan I began to make application 
for mv children.

14
Q. Where were you living in 1957! A. Where I’m liv­

ing now, 1703 Madison Avenue.

Court: What part of town is that!

A. It’s in the northwest section.
Q. Generally up in this area, up here! A. I take your 

word for it, I can’t see it.
Q. It is a solidly Negro area! A. No, we have some 

white kids living in the Water Works there in my neigh­
borhood, white families living there.

Q. You live near the WTater Works out on the Betty’s 
Ford Road! A. That is correct.

Q. What school did you apply to in 1957 for your 
children, do you recall! A. Seversville and Harding 
High School. Harding High School was right at my back 
door at that time, right over the cemetery. I could throw 
a rock from my back yard to Harding.

Q. The cemetery was between you and Harding? A. 
That’s correct.

Q. When did you next apply? A. In ’58, every year.

Reginald A. Hawkins— for Plaintiffs—Cross



223a

Q. Did you apply for Seversville and Harding each 
time? A. The children that were in high school, I applied 
for the Harding High School. The children that were in 
the age of Seversville—I think the two boys were at that 
time—we applied for Seversville and the other child has 
just started school in the past two years.

—45—
Q. Seversville was an elementary school? A. Severs­

ville was an elementary and Harding was a high school.
Q. And Harding was a high school. A. That’s correct.
Q. And I believe that Biddleville Elementary School 

was located between your residence and Seversville 
School? A. Yes. I wanted my kids to go to the same 
place as those white kids were going.

Q. But Biddleville was located between your residence 
and Seversville. A. It was on the other side of Betty’s 
Ford Road.

Q. That was the nearest elementary school to you? 
A. It was the nearest elementary school, Biddleville was.

Q. Now, how many blocks did you live, or do you live 
now, for that matter, from the Northwest Junior High 
School?

Reginald A. Haivkins—for Plaintiffs—Cross

Court: Was that formerly Negro!

A. It’s still all Negro. I live about a mile from the North­
west School.

Q. The Northwest School, that’s the junior high? A. 
That’s the junior high school.

Q. And that was the school that your children regularly 
attended, the Northwest Junior, is that right? A. That is 
the one that my oldest boy was attending when he got 
of age but my daughter was attending West Charlotte 
which is about two miles from my home.



224a

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Cross

—46—
Q. Was West Charlotte there in 1957? A. Yes, sir, 

West Charlotte was built around ’51 or ’52.
Q. Dr. Hawkins, let’s get to the Eastover boundary. 

Did you examine this boundary line real carefully here? 
A. The one that is on the map there I did.

Q. Now, there is quite a large creek out in that vicinity, 
is there not, known as Sugar Creek? A. That is correct.

Q. And then there is Randolph Road out there, is there 
not? A. That is correct.

Q. And the Billingsville area you say is heavily Negro, 
that lies across the creek and across Randolph Road from 
the Eastover district, doesn’t it? A. Partly.

Q. In other words, doesn’t the boundary that you’re 
complaining of, doesn’t it run down Randolph Road to 
Sugar Creek and then run up Sugar Creek? A. As I 
remember the line from that map, when it gets up past 
Billingsville then the line leaves Randolph Road and goes 
around that white community and then comes back up 
Randolph Road.

Q. Have you examined that boundary real carefully? 
A. Well, I ’m not an architect.

Q. I ’m not either but you can ascertain whether it runs 
down Randolph Road. It doesn’t. Part of it runs down

—47—
Randolph Road and it leaves Randolph Road.

Q. And I ’ll ask you if Billingsville, the area you say is 
a Negro area in the vicinity, if it isn’t across Randolph 
Road and across Sugar Creek from the Eastover attend­
ance area. A. It’s a little ditch. Is that what you’re call­
ing a creek. This little foot bridge they got across Sugar 
Creek there, the highway runs across that little creek— 
that’s Sugar Creek—and then Billingsville area starts



225a

at the creek and it goes all the way over to Old Monroe 
Road.

Q. On the other side of Sugar Creek! A. It’s on the 
other side of Sugar Creek and encased by part of Sugar 
Creek and a part of Randolph Road.

Q. And Sugar Creek is actually one of the largest creeks 
we have in this county, isn’t it? A. I got one back of my 
house larger than that.

Q. You don’t concede Sugar Creek is one of the largest 
creeks we have in the county? A. I know that Ervin 
Creek is a lot larger, to my knowledge, than Sugar Creek 
is in that area.

Mr. Bell: It might be helpful—perhaps counsel 
for defendant is confusing Sugar Creek, which is 
a very small stream of water, with Briar Creek 
which is relatively adjacent and which is a larger 
body of water.

—48—
Q. Well, the line runs down the large body of water 

whether it’s Sugar Creek or Briar Creek, doesn’t it?

Court: It’s probably Briar Creek, isn’t it, look­
ing at this map?

Mr. Barkley: It may be.

A. Briar Creek is larger than Sugar Creek to my know­
ledge.

Q. Now, on the Selwyn School, you say there are Negroes 
in the vicinity of Selwyn School. I’ll ask you if there 
is a Negro residing in any part of the Selwyn School zone 
or in any immediately adjoining zones? A. My state­
ment was that if you drew a circle to get possibly 700

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Cross



226a

and some kids needed to populate Selwyn School, you 
would have to include some Negro families in that area. 
I say there are none living in that zone now.

Q. I ’d like to find where they are. A. They go to 
Morgan School. Selwyn School is on the other side of 
Queens Road, or in the Queens Road area where you’ve 
got this Negro community—the name slips me—out on 
Baldwin Avenue.

Q. You say the Selwyn School! A. I am going to give 
you the borders of the area around Selwyn Avenue. This 
is the Selwyn Avenue School and between there you’ve 
got the Little Rock Negro community section where those 
kids go and have been going out to Sterling School.

—49—
Q. Find the Selwyn School for me and show us where any 

Negro population is to be found near that area.
(The witness goes to the map.)

Court: Let’s not try to take his answers here by 
consent until he gets back on the stand.

(Discussion out of hearing of the Court Reporter. 
The witness returns to the witness stand.)

Q. Dive me the Negro communities that you say are lo­
cated within the Selwyn area or close to it. It that Cherry- 
twon! A. You have Cherry, you have the Little Rock, 
the Negro community off Little Rock Road where you have 
those Negro families living in that area. You have Negroes 
living around Park Road and then as you go further you 
get into the Pineville area and you have Negroes living on 
the fringe of that Pineville area and the Charlotte City 
limits.

Reginald A. Hawkins— for Plaintiffs—Cross



2 2 7 a

Q. When you get out into the country you get into the 
exceptions, don’t you? A. I ’m telling you where people 
live. You asked me where did the people live. They live 
in all these areas.

Q. I ’d like to tell you where Cherry is, for that matter.

Mr. Chambers: Objection, this is arguing.
Court: Overruled.

Q. Don’t you know that Cherry is located between Queens 
Road and Morehead Street, that street in there and the

- 5 0 -
center of the City of Charlotte? A. I say that Cherry ap­
proximates what we call the Queens Road area, the Myers 
Park area. Cherry is right on the fringe of the Myers 
Park area.

Q. On the fringe of the Myers Park area at the point near­
est the business section of Charlotte, isn’t it? A. I wouldn’t 
call that too near. Do you call the Charlottetown Mall the 
business section? I call the Square the business section of 
Charlotte.

Q. Isn’t Cherry right near the Charlottetown Mall? A. 
Yes, but that’s not the business section.

Q. Isn’t Charlottetown Mall three miles from Selwyn 
School? A. I would say that Cherry is as close to the main 
business section of Charlotte as it is close to Park Road 
Shopping Center.

Q. All of us know where Charlottetown Mall is. A. But 
I wouldn’t call Charlottetown Mall the business section of 
Charlotte.

Court: That’s just argument. Mr. Barkley hasn’t 
said that at all. He just asked you to relate it to 
the business section.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Cross



228a

Q. I will ask you again if Cherry is not three miles away 
from the Selwyn School. A. I don’t know the exact dis­
tance, how far away.

Court: What would be your estimate?

A. I ’d say a mile, mile and a half, Cherry area from the
—51—

Selwyn School vicinity, from Selwyn Avenue.
Q. I ’m talking about Selwyn School.

Court: How far from Selwyn School? A. I would 
estimate a mile, mile and a half.

Q. Doctor, going back to Eastover for just a minute. I 
believe it shows here that Eastover has acquired one Negro 
pupil by transfer, is that right? A. It shows here East- 
over, you say?

Q. Yes. A. It shows here Eastover said it didn’t have 
any Negroes there. It says, Number of transfers, Negroes, 
none; Transfer requests, none; Number of Negro pupils 
assigned, none.

Q. Pupils received by trasfer. Look over there and see 
if it doesn’t say one. A. One, that’s right.

Q. There must be some Negro father in the City of Char­
lotte who doesn’t think that his child is going to have all 
the ill treatment you think the others will have by going 
into a white school, a lone child. Do you know who the per­
son is? A. Yes, sir, I have an idea who he is. I think he is 
a plaintiff in this case.

Q. Did you talk to him and try to persuade him not to 
request transfer? A. I took a no-position on advising 
parents pro or con relative to these last assignments.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Cross



Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Cross

— 52—
Q. Now, you say that you did not yourself file a transfer 

request for your children because you didn’t believe the 
Board would grant it, is that right! A. I didn’t believe 
that the Board was sincere in bringing about adequate 
desegregation in the schools.

Court: You’ve told us that, I remember every 
word you said about it. Now he’s asking you . . . 
read the question back.

(The question on Line 1 above is read by the Court 
Reporter)

A. Right.
Q. In other words, you weren’t willing to try out the 

Board to see whether it was acting in good faith at this 
time, were you! A. I have been browbeaten so in the past 
that I didn’t feel like undergoing that harrassment this 
year.

Q. Didn’t you tell Dr. Phillips and I here in this court­
room back a couple of months ago that you were going to 
send your boy to Myers Park? A. I certainly mentioned 
that. My wife and I had a change of heart because of cer­
tain other things that happened to us in this community 
and we didn’t feel that we wanted to undergo any other 
harrassment in this community at this time.

Q. You didn’t see fit to even give the Board a chance to 
see whether it would act in good faith or not? A. The 
only reason I can determine the future is by what has

— 53—
happened in the past and I certainly didn’t want to at this 
time undergo any further harrassment in this community.



230a

Q. Did you know, Doctor, that all requests by Negro 
parents to transfer their children from all Negro schools 
to either integrated or predominantly white schools were 
allowed by the School Board except for five children who 
had applied to schools which were beyond the maximum 
capacity! A. I read that in the paper.

Q. Now about athletics, haven’t they got some right good 
Negro athletes on the South Mecklenburg High School 
which is one of the large predominantly white high schools ? 
A. I think they had three basketball players last year. I 
know to my knowledge, knowing the boys personally, that 
three went out for the team.

Q. Three on the South High basketball team. A. Three 
that went out for the team.

Q. South High played Myers Park and Garringer and 
the other schools, did they not? A. That’s correct.

Court: I didn’t understand. Is this three Negro 
players ?

A. Three Negro basketball players that attended the South 
Mecklenburg High School, a predominantly white school.

Court: They did play on the team?

A. I think one or two made the team. The other one prob­

ably didn’t make it. I don’t know, we encouraged them to 
stay out.

Q. One of them made the all-county team, didn’t he? A. 
I think so. He was mentioned.

Q. It was a mixed team of whites and Negroes? A. 
That’s right.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Cross



2 3 1 a

. Q. Haven’t we got another Negro star that finally decided 
to stay at Myers Park High! A. Kirkpatrick you’re talk­
ing about!

Q. Yes, Kirkpatrick. A. Yes, we heard that you raided 
our schools. I understand that he is.

Q. Nobody compelled him to go to Myers Park, did they! 
A. I haven’t talked to him in recent weeks but there was 
quite a bit of talk in the Negro community about Kirk­
patrick and what was going on at Myers Park concerning 
Kirkpatrick.

Court: Maybe he got a scholarship.

A. Something of that order.
Q. The white people didn’t use any force, did they! A. 

well, I wouldn’t want to say what the white people used. 
I hope that the many Kirkpatricks that we have in the 
Negro schools that they would be given the same opportun­
ity as Kirkpatrick was given. This is my concern. I think 
we have a lot of Kirkpatricks in the Negro schools.

Q. Did you know that 153 Negro pupils were initially
—55—

assigned to Myers Park High School by reason of resi­
dence! A. T don’t know the exact number. I know there 
were quite a few. I thought there were more than 150 
some actually. According to where they live there should 
be more than 150 because you have Griertown and surround­
ing areas near Myers Park High School where they have 
been going to Second Ward. We have many more kids 
than that attending Second Ward School and all of them 
should have been going to Myers Park School if they had 
done it on a geographical basis.

Reginald A. Hawkins—for Plaintiffs—Cross



232a

Q. In other words, Second Ward High School should 
have been a part of Myers Park High? A. Well, it should 
be because there’s a lot of students from Second Ward come 
from the surrounding areas of Myers Park School.

Q. Now I ’ll ask you, talking about surrounding areas, 
isn’t Cherry about the nearest Negro section to Myers 
Park High? A. It’s pretty close. Cherry and Billingsville 
are pretty close to Myers Park.

Q. Myers Park and Sehvyn are on the same land, for 
that matter. Isn’t that all one big tract of land that Selwyn 
and Myers Park are located on? A. In the same vicinity.

Q. It would be just about the same distance from Myers 
Park High to Cherry as it would be from Cherry to Selwyn,

—56—
wouldn’t it? A. Selwyn is an elementary school and Myers 
Park is a high school.

Q. You were talking about Cherry, that is the Negro sec­
tion that you described as nearer to Selwyn than any other. 
A. I say the same vicinity and that’s what concerns me be­
cause there were no Negro kids assigned to Selwyn Ele­
mentary and they were assigned to Myers Park High 
School.

Q. You don’t think it was three miles between those two 
schools?

Reginald A. Hawkins— for Plaintiffs—Cross

Court: He said that. He said his estimate was a 
mile and a half.

Mr. Barkley: I believe that’s all of this witness. 
Mr. Bell: No further questions.
Court: You may step down. Thank you, sir.
We will take a few minutes recess and then con­

tinue the session of court until 1 :00 o’clock. So we



2 3 3 a

are not quitting for lunch now, just a very short 
recess and then we’ll resume.

S hort R ecess

Court: All right, call your next witness.
Mr. Bell: Mr. Chambers is not here but with the 

permission of the Court and counsel for the other 
side I could perhaps handle the preliminaries. 

Court: Would you do that, yes, indeed.
Mr. Bell: Mr. Chambers is prepared with the main 

line of questioning.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct

- 5 7 -
L e w is  I .  K r a m e r , a  w it n e s s  f o r  th e  p la in t i f f s ,  h a v in g  

f i r s t  b e e n  duly s w o r n ,  w a s  e x a m in e d  a n d  t e s t i f ie d  a s  

follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. Would you state your full name and address, please, 
sir! A. Lewis I. Kramer, 42 Vassar Avenue, Providence, 
Rhode Island.

Q- What is your profession, please! A. I am Principal 
of a senior high school, Mount Pleasant Senior High 
School in Providence.

Q. Would you review briefly your professional ex­
perience in the field of education! A. I have—

Q. Begin with your educational background and bring 
it up through your professional job experience, the various 
studies you participated in in the educational field, your 
professional associations and things of that nature. A. I 
have a Bachelors Degree from the University of Rhode 
Island; a Masters Degree in Education from Rhode Island 
College; I began my teaching connection with the Provi-



234a

dence School System in 1932 which, with the exception 
of four years in the Navy during the war, has been 
continuous. I have been a classroom teacher; I have been 
a counsellor, head counsellor, Asst. Principal of the 
Senior High School; Principal of the Junior High School; 
Principal of the Senior High School; administrative ex-

—58—
perienee in that connection totalling about 12 years. I 
have been visiting instructor and lecturer at the University 
of Rhode Island Extension Program and am, and have 
been a visiting Professor on a parttime basis at the 
Graduate School at the Rhode Island College. I am a 
member of various educations organizations chiefly in­
volving principals associations such as the National 
Association, the Rhode Island Association, plus secondary 
school principals. I am Chairman of the Educational 
Policies Committee of the Rhode Island School Principals 
Association. I represent the Rhode Island School Princi­
pals Association at the New England Association of 
Colleges and Secondary Schools. I am a delegate to the 
College Entrance Examination Board from the Rhode 
Island Association of Principals. I have done some work 
studies and am now currently involved in teaching a 
course which includes, among its various other aspects, 
the effect of integration on education.

Q. Tell us how you came to be here today, at whose 
request and what preparations, what studies you have 
made for the testimony you are going to give today. 
A. Late Friday Dr. Martin Lieberman, who is Dean of 
Pi ofessional Studies at Rhode Island College and with 
whom I have done some work, asked me if I’d be willing 
to come down here today, to be here today to serve as a 
witness due to the fact that another witness who had

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



235a

previously accepted found a conflicting emergency arrange-
—59—

ment. I received late Friday night some documents in 
the case including the initial interrogatories and answers 
thereto and some of the initial tables based on the 1964- 
65 enrollments. I had Saturday in which to study the 
papers, left Sunday morning Providence, arrived here in 
the middle of the afternoon yesterday and was engaged 
in studying the maps furnished to me in connection with 
zoning distributions and other items connecting there­
with. I had the assistance at that time, because of the 
shortage of time and lack of knowledge of the community, 
from Mr. Hornbeck in connection with the location of 
schools and zone lines and others who were able to tell 
me something about the location of the Negro and white 
families in various areas.

Court: Let the record show that without objec­
tion the examination is resumed now by Mr. 
Chambers.

Direct Examination by Mr. Chambers (Continues:)

Q. Are there general factors which school administra­
tors would look for in determining whether school zone 
lines are gerrymandered or drawn improperly with no 
educational value? A. Yes. Generally speaking con­
sidering the nature of the community and capacity of the 
school serving these communities and the census figures 
indicating future growth or city planning figures indicat­
ing urban renewal and physical changes related to the

—6 0 -
changes in the structure and including logical boundaries 
such as rivers or large heavily traveled streets and similar

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



236a

types of natural obstacles, ordinarily one would be able 
to see where the logical path of these zone boundaries 
should occur.

Q. Have you had the opportunity to consider the maps 
that have been drawn by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
School System in relation to the criteria you stated that 
a school administrator would consider? A. I did yester­
day insofar as the completion of the community and the 
location of the boundary lines were concerned and the 
manner in which they appeared to travel.

Q. Do you feel that the amount of time that you have 
spent in preparation for your testimony today was suffi­
cient to enable you to testify with a fair degree of 
certainty about the lines! A. In terms of the manner 
in which the lines appear to be drawn in certain cases, 
yes. If I had to recommend a new pattern, it would re­
quire much more detailed study and a much better map.

Q. You think that more time would just allow you to 
suggest in more detail how the lines should be drawn 
rather than change your opinion about the lines presently? 
A. It’s probable that I would be able to devote more 
study and find additional instances to which I would refer 
later but basically I didn’t feel that that was necessary.

—61—
Q. Are you generally familiar with the allegations of 

the parties in this proceeding? A. I am.
Q. Are you familiar with the contentions of the plain­

tiffs and the contentions of the defendant? A. I am.
Q. Would you tell us in some detail your observations 

of the lines as they presently appear in the maps drawn 
by the School Board as to their being gerrymandered or 
drawn without considerations of the factors you refer to

Lewis 1. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



237a

as proper criteria for drawing! A. There appear to me 
to be a number of cases where—

Mr. Barkley: Objection.
Court: Objection of the defendant to this line 

of questioning overruled.
Mr. Barkley: Would Your Honor let the record 

show a continuing objection?
Court: Let the record show a continuing objec­

tion to this type of testimony. Objection overruled.

A. There appear to be a number of cases where lines are 
drawn in such a manner as to avoid what appeared to be 
logical boundaries and would appear to me to show, 
although I cannot guarantee as to the reasons for their 
doing it, in several of these cases the obvious results 
appear to be the inclusion or exclusion of certain white

—62—
or Negro students from schools which they would ordi­
narily attend and which, if they did attend, would integrate 
the school more so than they are now.

Q. Would they have any other educational advantage 
if they were drawn as you feel they should have been 
drawn! A. Well, in some cases insofar as certain schools 
are concerned, where they may be perhaps eliminated, it 
would be economically feasible and desirable to do this 
since a biracial system is invariably more expensive than 
a uniracial system, and from the standpoint of the 
educational program in certain cases, the numbers of 
students enrolled in some of the Negro schools or the 
predominantly Negro schools would indicate that the kind 
of program offered would, without actually seeing the 
curriculum or program offered, would inevitably lead to

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



238a

a reduced program and therefore an inferior program, 
and I would say that the benefits derived by the students 
themselves, insofar as superior educational program and 
facilities and insofar as their own personal development 
was concerned, would be improved.

Q. Did you have occasion to consider whether drawing 
the lines differently would also have enabled the School 
Board to make more utilization of the schools then they 
are now? A. There are a number of cases where, if the 
lines had been drawn in what appeared to be, to me at 
least, a logical direction, it would have irtilized better

—6 3 -
certain schools which are now under-utilized to a con­
siderable degree.

Court: Does this relate to, say, a school that is 
a hundred students under capacity?

A. No. I am referring, in one case, at least, to a school 
which is a little over 50% filled, something like 448 as 
compared to a capacity of 925.

Q. Mr. Kramer, would you point more specifically, then, 
to some of the instances you have discussed? A. Well, 
looking at the map, from what information I can get 
from this map—

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Mr. Chambers: Your Honor, we’d like for Mr. 
Hornbeck to follow the lines as he testifies.

Court: First of all, how many instances is he 
going to testify abount? Can you give me the names 
of the schools or the zones?

A. Well, Lakeview Elementary-



239a

Court: How many are there, roughly?

A. About 10 elementary and about four or five junior 
high, one senior high.

Court: Anybody got a list of them?

A. I have no separate list, Your Honor.

Court: Suppose he testifies now and then comes 
down later, perhaps, to illustrate the testimony on 
the map. Would that not work all right?

—64—
A. If Mr. Hornbeck at that time could use the pointer 
because he’s more familiar with the districts.

Court: Any objection to Mr. Hornbeck using the 
pointer?

Mr. Barkley: I don’t have any particular objec­
tion.

Court: Well, let’s let him do that. If he makes 
an error about it, please interrupt and point it out.

Mr. Barkley: I’d like for him to give his explana­
tion in the use of language rather than illustration.

Court: We have a practical problem. If he comes 
down over here the Court Reporter simply can’t 
get it down and inevitably all of us get to talking 
at one time. Let’s get his testimony and then let 
him come and point it out.

A. Your Honor, I was going to ask if, while I gave the 
testimony which could be recorded at the same time, for 
Your Honor’s benefit Mr. Hornbeck could be pointing out 
the areas so it migh save time.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



240a

Court: I ’ll let him do that. Objection by the 
School Board, objection overruled. Come around, 
Mr. Hornbeck. Gentlemen, if he makes a mistake, 
you point that out, please.

(Mr. Hornbeck goes to the maps displayed.)

Mr. Barkley: Hoes the Court have an objection 
to Dr. Phillips going over there?

—65—
Court: Not in the least.

A. The Lakeview Elementary School which has, I believe, 
three Negro students, the northeast line starts at Rozzels 
Ferry Road and ordinarily I would think it should con­
tinue down on this rather substantial highway to Stewart 
Creek Road. Now, this is not done and whatever other 
reasons or effects it might have, if it were done it would 
throw white pupils into the all Negro Biddleville Ele­
mentary School which has room for about 150 students.

Court: Is this in the northeast section, do you 
know?

A. This is the northwest section.

Court: Northwest, I mean.

A. The Thomasboro Elementary School—

Court: Your main criticism, then, is Lakeview 
line does not follow what?

A. Does not follow the Rozzels Ferry Road. It starts 
on Rozzels Ferry Road and goes off whereas it would 
seem logical to stay on this substantial highway.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



241a

Q. Mr. Kramer, in each instance explain what the 
educational principle is or the standard that is violated 
by departure from the main highway. A. Unless there 
are reasons not available to me, it would not ordinarily 
be appropriate to leave a heavily traveled road which 
you have begun to use as a boundary and go off in another

- 66-

direction on a less heavily traveled road and include this 
heavily traveled road as part of the school district.

Court: Wait a minute now. Lakeview, what’s 
its population, mostly white or mostly Negro!

A. Three Negroes.

Court: And if you followed Rozzels Ferry Road 
it would throw another 150 into it?

A. I don’t know how many white pupils it would throw 
in there but there is room for 150 in the Biddleville 
Elementary.

Mr. Barkley: I wonder if it would help to clarify 
this in the Court’s mind if Dr. Phillips were given 
an opportunity to explain the line.

Court: I think it would help unless there’s objec­
tion. It’s a little unusual. You will have an op­
portunity to cross-examine later, of course.

Mr. Bell: I think it would tend to break down 
into a general argument. It would probably be 
best to follow the usual procedure and let us make 
our direct statements and they can take notes and 
cross-examine later.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



242a

Court: I expect you’re right. Objection sustained. 
Mr. Kramer, in this school 3 Negroes?

A. Yes, sir.

Court: If you changed the line and followed 
Rozzels Ferry Road you say you don’t know how 
many Negroes?

—67—
A. No, I have no way of knowing how many white students 
live in the area that would thus be included.

Court: But you do say that your examination 
of the school’s records shows that Lakeview is 
under-capacity by how much?

A. Lakeview at the present time is under-capacity by 
about 115.

Court: All right, go ahead.

A. Thomasboro School, just west of the center—
Q. Mr. Kramer, just one thing, with that line leaving 

Rozzels Ferry Road, which you criticized, does it follow 
a natural boundary or anything? A. It follows a smaller 
street along there for a while. I don’t know the name 
of that street. Thomasboro Elementary School, which is 
just west of center there, an all white elementary school. 
Now, there are Negro students living near this school 
who I understand are transported to the Amay James 
School for the first four grades or the Plato Price School 
for the second four grades, 5 to 9, and it would seem 
to me to be a measure of economy as well as a simple 
way of avoiding segregation if these students who lived

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



243a

near the Thomasboro Elementary School were allowed 
to attend there instead of having them travel long distances 
by foot or by bus.

Court: They are transported where?
— 68—

A. To the Amay James School for the first four grades, 
according to my understanding, and the Plato Price 
School, grades 5 to 9.

Court: Are those 2 of the 10 excepted ones ?

A. Yes, sir.

Court: Well, as we go along I want to learn 
something from all the witnesses, if I can. You 
understand that the School Board plans to take 
in Amay James and Plato, I mean geographically, 
later on.

A. I read what their proposals are. In my examination 
of the map I felt that I could go only by the geographic 
atmosphere of the map, Your Honor, without taking into 
account any proposals which have been made.

Court: You are not prepared to testify what 
the effect would be a year or two years from now 
when the 10 excepted are brought in?

A. No, sir, except that there seems to be no reason why, 
in some of these cases, these changes could not be made 
now without waiting for such new construction as may 
come up. In certain cases, it seems to me with regard 
to numbers that this could be effected at this time without

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



244a

waiting for the proposed new construction. The Paw 
Creek Elementary School, which is all white in the north­
west section, in the same geographic area as the Woodland 
Elementary School, which is Negro. An examination of 
this area shows that these two schools are separated by

- 6 9 -
Mount Holly Road but children of both races live on both 
sides of this road. Yet the two schools are each segregated. 
Now, the south border of this zone, it seems to me, instead 
of going where it is should go along Paw Creek. The 
effect of this would be to put white students in the Negro 
Woodland School area. The Paw Creek seems to be a 
natural boundary in that case.

Q. Mr. Kramer, would you indicate why the school zone 
lines should go along Paw Creek Road, as you suggested, 
or Paw Creek! A. What is the name of the southern 
boundary at the present time?

Mr. Hornbeck: It goes along Paw Creek and then 
skips upwards north for—

A. Following along Paw Creek would be a fairly straight 
line without ups and downs and it is a natural boundary, 
more so than the present one being used. Now, in Ashley 
Park, which was mentioned in previous testimony, there 
are Negro children who live in Ashley Park, according 
to my understanding, but there are no Negroes grades 
1 to 4 assigned to the Ashley Park School.

Court: Is Ashley Park all white?

A. Ashley Park is an all white school. In attempting to 
to find out where these children go to school, I under­

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



245a

stand that they go quite a distance to the Amay James 
School, at least some of them, where they must he partially

— 70—
bussed because you have to cross two boulevards in order 
to get to the Amay James School, which appears to me to 
be an expensive procedure and, aside from other factors—

Court: And that’s one of the 10 excepted.

A. Yes, sir. According to the record I have of the Ashley 
Park School there is room for about 75 children. The 
Barringer Elementary School, which is all white, in the 
sort of west-southwest part of the district, has a south­
west line—

Court: I’m sorry, I ’m trying to write this down 
because if I don’t I ’m going to have to wait on the 
record to be transcribed and delay this case ten 
days. That’s the reason for it. Give me the name 
of that.

A. Barringer, an all white elementary school, has a south­
west line which I would think should be extended down 
to the city line where the railroad is, which is a natural 
boundary much more so than the present boundary being 
used.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Court: And this is an all white school!

A. The Barringer School is all white, Your Honor.

Court: And the boundary you object to is what! 

A. The southwest boundary. What street is that on?



246a

Dr. Phillips: It is contiguous with the Amay 
James and Plato Price, the two exceptions.

Court: Is there a street boundary or what, any­
thing you can designate!

—7 1 -
Dr. Phillips: It is contiguous with the other side 

of the creek. The creek line, Erwin Creek, conies 
down through here on this side. (Pointing to map.)

Court: Which boundary are we talking about!

A. The southwest boundary.

Court: The southwest boundary is what!
Dr. Phillips : This is the sewer plant, Your Honor.
Court: The sewer plant is the southwest boundary 

and you say it should be what!

A. The city line where the railroad tracks are. But this 
would have the effect of adding Negro pupils to the Bar­
ringer School. The line goes off. I couldn’t determine 
from that Map exactly the street or line it was on.

Court: This again, Pm guessing, but the Negroes 
probably go to one of the excepted schools!

A. Yes, sir, I believe that’s correct.

Mr. Hornbeck: It’s possible also they can go to
Marie Davis School, which is not an excepted 

school.

A. In the northeast section the Newell Elementary, all 
white, where Negro pupils who live near the school and 
to the north of Newell, in the so-called Harrisburg area,

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs-—Direct



247a

where there is a great deal of room, approximately 250 
students short of capacity, but the Negro students who 
live in this area are bussed, as near as I can make out, 
quite a distance, as much as 8, perhaps even 10 or more

—7 2 -
miles, to the J. H. Gunn School, which is an excepted 
school. Here again, from the standpoint of school adminis­
tration, it is quite an expensive procedure both from the 
standpoint of the cost of bussing, from the standpoint 
of taking the children away from the neighborhood in 
which they live, and from the standpoint of the under­
utilization of a school currently in use. Now, the East- 
over Elementary School was mentioned earlier. It’s an 
all white school. As I looked at the map the eastern part 
of that zone starts down Randolph Road where I would 
think it would continue, but it suddenly cuts off and I 
could see no apparent reason and then it goes back in 
again. Now, whatever other reasons there are behind that, 
one of the effects would be to remove a small white com­
munity, including Durham Drive and streets nearby, from 
the largely Negro Billingsville School, or perhaps the 
Elizabeth School which is mixed and could take 250 more 
students. The Randolph Road seems to be a very logical 
line although there are other things to be considered in 
zoning a school system, but if you are using Randolph 
Road as a dividing line it would seem that you ought 
to keep on using it.

Court: How many under-capacity is Eastover
Elementary School! You said it a moment ago.

A. I didn’t mention the capacity of the Eastover but I 
can give you the figure. Maximum capacity 756 and the

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



248a

June 30 summary shows 651. Perhaps that’s not the one
—73—

you want.

Court: Eastover Elementary.

A. Yes, this one. The anticipated enrollment is 651 and 
the capacity is 756.

Court: Under-capacity 105!

A. That’s right, Your Honor. Whatever other reason 
there may be, as I say, the effect is to remove this small 
white community from the area serving the Billingsville 
School which is largely Negro or the Elizabeth School 
which is mixed.

Court: Is Billingsville School one of the excepted 
schools!

Dr. Phillips: Not the elementary, Your Honor, 
the junior high is.

Court: What’s Billingsville, all Negro!
Dr. Phillips: Yes, sir.

A. Moving to the Berryhill Elementary School, which is 
in the western part. They have two Negro students there. 
This is a very large area geographically.

Court: Is this elementary!

A. This is elementary, Your Honor. It is a very large 
area geographically of an attendance zone and it includes 
therein the Amay James School, which has the Negro 
children who live near Berryhill. Amay James is one of

Lewis 1. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



249a

the excepted schools and it would seem that those students 
who live that close to the Berryhill School should be al-

—74—
lowed to go there. There is room there now for about 
a hundred students. There are ony two Negro students 
there now and the effect of allowing these students to go 
there would be to further integrate the school. The Ashley 
Park School, which is west of center, an all white school, 
the western line of this school zone, it would seem to me, 
should go straight down Ashley Eoad instead of weaving 
in and out the way it does. Ashley Road, so far as its 
prominance is concerned, from that standpoint alone, 
viewing nothing else, would be a satisfactory zone line, 
but the effect of this would be to throw some white children 
into an area which would be served by the Plato Price or 
Amay James Schools, both of which are Negro and are 
excepted schools. Of course, I really should say that I 
haven’t considered the viewpoint of the fact that these 
schools are excepted because, in looking at the geographical 
area, I haven’t excepted them. I have considered them 
as part of a geographical area near the schools. The 
Billingsville Elementary School—

Court: That’s not excepted, is it!
Dr. Phillips: It is not excepted, no, sir.

A. Now, the southern line, dividing line of this school 
district, it seems to me to be cutting across no particular 
line of demarkation, whereas if this line were lowered to 
MacAlway Road, which is a good size thoroughfare, it 
would seem to me to be a more logical zoning line.

—75—
Mr. Barkley: You mean you could run the

Billingsville line down McAlway Road?

Letvis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



250a

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

A. Yes, sir.

Court: Drop it down to McAlway.

A. The effect of this is to keep Negroes out of the white 
Cotswold School district in the manner in which the line 
is now drawn. The white children just north of McAlway 
Road could go to Billingsville where there is room for 
about 145 children and there would be more room, if you 
were to remove the junior high school group, which is 
one of the items which I will refer to later on.

Q. Mr. Kramer, would you explain more about the road 
that you were considering regarding the Billingsville 
Elementary district line? A. Well, from the map the 
road, the southern border of the Billingsville Elementary 
School area seems to cut across nowhere. I don’t seem 
to see on that map any natural boundary which would 
be a logical choice for an attendance zone if you were 
creating one. Whereas, if you moved it down a bit to the 
next logical line, which would be McAlway Road, it would 
seem to be a sensible procedure. Whatever was had in 
mind about this, I don’t know, but it’s observable effect 
to me as I look at it would be to throw some white children 
into a school now serving Negro children. Then this school,

—76—
which would be the receiving school, has room and would 
have even more if the junior high school were removed, 
which seems to me could be done.

Court: I don’t understand. You’re suggesting
enlarging the boundary by dropping down to Mc­
Alway Road. That would simply embrace more 
people in Billingsville Elementary and they would 
be white. Is that what you’re saying?



251a

A. That’s right. I have noticed on several occasions and 
I cannot account for this and I think perhaps I should 
make this statement, that there are a number of cases of 
students who are assigned presumably because of geo­
graphic residence on a basis of one or two Negro children 
to an otherwise all white school. According to the table 
there are 7 schools which have had assigned 1 Negro by 
geographic designation and 8 schools which have been 
assigned 2 Negroes, making a total of 15 schools which 
would be all right except for the fact that each contain 
only 1 or 2 Negroes. By the same token, according to the 
figures I have read, there are 4 schools where 1 white has 
been assigned to an otherwise all Negro school, making 
a total of 19 schools which would be segregated 100% 
if it were not for 1 or 2 of minority students. Now, the 
average person involved in this work, reading this, would 
use the phrase commonly invoked called “token integra­
tion” , and I have no reason to know how or why these

- 7 7 -
students were assigned but it’s my feeling that if you 
have an area where one Negro family lives and there is 
one child in that area that can go to a school, it is most 
unusual to find only one family. I have no basis for 
investigating at this time but it would seem to me that 
if you have 15 school districts, and these are relatively 
large areas, it would be most unusual to find one or two 
families having children of a certain grade age would 
be living there. I’m not talking now about transfers, I’m 
talking about assignments on a geographic basis. This 
puzzles me very much. I have no answer for it except 
to say that one of the results of this procedure is to in­
crease by 19 the number of schools which are said to be 
integrated.

Q. Your statements with regards to initial assignments,

Letvis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



252a

that is, that you have 19 schools with initial assignments 
of 1 or 2 white or Negro students would otherwise be 
entirely white or Negro? A. That’s correct. As I say, 
I have no answer for it. I can only answer as to the 
effect. The effect is to increase substantially the number 
of schools that might be listed as integrated schools.

Court: Incidentally, have you added it up?
What is the number that might be listed! Count 
them with these 19. Do you know that?

A. No, Your Honor, I received this only late yesterday.
—78—

There are a number of other schools that have very small 
numbers assigned but I ’m limiting myself to what I 
thought were the most unusual cases such as 1 or 2. The 
Barringer School, which is white, starts down on Remount 
Road, which is a substantial thoroughfare. Now, again 
this pattern that I have noticed in other areas, it jogs 
off somewhere leaving a very substantial road and follow­
ing either no boundary at all or a less ostentatious 
boundary. Now, the effect this has is that it keeps white 
children in the Barringer School district where otherwise 
they would be in the Wilmore district which is mixed 
and which has room for another 180 students. So it would 
seem to me that if that line were—

Court: Otherwise they would be in which one?

A. They would be in the Wilmore district, which is a 
mixed district, which has room for about 180 students. 
It would seem to me that since the Barringer School is 
practically full, almost up to capacity, that in addition 
to the effect on the desegregation that the operation of

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



253a

the school would be changed from an under-utilized school 
and a school almost to maximum to two schools where 
there would be room to move around.

Court: Wilmore is under-capacity!

A. By 180, Your Honor, 184 to be exact. I can turn now 
to the Derita school line up to the north. Now, that school 
line cuts across Interstate 85.

- 7 9 - -
Court: Is this elementary!

A. Elementary, Your Honor. Now, cutting across a large 
highway like that is rather unusual and if the line were 
stopped, the southern line were made the city line, Inter­
state 85, the effect this would have would be to throw 
white pupils into the Negro Druid Hills School or the 
mixed Tryon Hills School and, unless there are compelling 
reasons to the contrary as you would have in any case 
of this nature, it would seem that Interstate 85 would 
be a good place for the boundary.

Court: If the boundary were 1-85 it would do 
what!

A. Throw white pupils into the Druid Hills area, which 
is a Negro area, or the mixed Tryon Hills area. The 
Crestdale School, which is I believe one of the excepted 
schools, in the south-southeast part, grades 1 to 6, has all 
Negro students for a total of 87. Now right nearby is 
the Matthews School, 1 to 9, all white.

Court: What do you mean nearby!

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



254a

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

A. Very close to it.
Q. How dose to it, a mile, a hundred yards! Perhaps 

Dr. Phillips would know.

Dr. Phillips: About half a mile. It’s in the
Matthews community. That’s one of the excepted 
schools, Your Honor.

Court: Which one is excepted!
—80—

A. Crestdale. Although I understand that future plans 
are made for the future to remove the children from the 
Crestdale School, there seems to be no apparent reason why 
the Matthews School, which is under-capacity by about 270 
approximately, couldn’t easily take this 87 at this time, 
but the effect of this would be to integrate the Matthews 
School.

Court: 87 Negroes in Crestdale Elementary?

A. Yes, Your Honor.

Court: And Matthews is how much under capac­
ity!

A. 267, I think. In the north-northeast section, the Hickory 
Grove School, and there is a group of schools near there, 
Idlewild, Lansdowne, and Windsor Park. These are all 
elementary and all white.

Court: Including Hickory Grove ?

A. Yes, Your Honor. Now, the Negro children who live 
in these areas would go right by the Hickory Grove School



255a

to go to the, I believe it’s the J. H. Gunn School, which is 
an excepted school.

Court: Give me the names of the other three.

A. Hickory Grove, Lansdowne, Idlewild and Windsor Park. 
The Negroes in this area go right by some of these schools.

Court: They are all white ?

A. All white. But there are Negroes in the area and they 
will go by one or more of these schools to go to the J. H. 
Gunn School. I don’t knouT whether they are transported 
or not.

—8 1 -
Court: Is the Gunn School one of the excepted 

schools ?

A. Yes, Your Honor.

Court: We better stop now and resume after 
lunch.

Adjourn Court until 2 :30 P.M.

R e c e s s  f o b  L u n c h

(Mr. Kramer resumes the stand for further direct exami­
nation by Mr. Chambers.)

Q. Mr. Kramer, I think that at the time of the lunch 
recess you were giving us some of your specific observa­
tions about various districts that you felt were gerryman­
dered. Would you like to continue with those? A. I have 
only one item further on the elementary school section, two 
items which actually involve one point. I noted that two

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



256a

Negro students were assigned to the Rama Road School 
which is virtually surrounded by all white schools and I 
tried to imagine the situation that would exist that would 
make this happen under proper auspices and I was unable 
to guess what it might be.

Court: Wait a minute. Two Negroes assigned to 
Rama Road School.

A. Yes, sir.

Court: Virtually surrounded by all white. Rama 
Road is also all white?

A. Yes, sir, there are just two Negroes assigned to that 
school.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Court: Well, I don’t get the connection of the
—82—

surrounded by other white schools. In other words, 
all of them are white.

A. The geographic area served is apparently heavily popu­
lated by white and, as I mentioned earlier, the aspect of 
having two Negro children who were assigned by virtue 
of geographic location to the Rama Road School would 
seem unusual. It would seem that there would be more 
Negro students there.

Court: And there are more Negro students in an 
area right around that school?

A. I would guess this should be the case.

Court: Let’s don’t guess. Do you know?



257a

A. No, sir, I do not. There were two Negroes assigned to 
the Bevonshire Elementary and to the Briarwood Elemen­
tary which are at the same address and, here again, I was 
puzzled as to the residential setup which would allow merely 
two Negro students to be assigned to two otherwise white 
schools. I ’d like to turn now to the junior high school part 
of the map. Referring now to the junior high school aspect 
of the Billingsville School, which has fewer than 200 students 
in the junior high school and which has, as I understand 
it, no suitable gymnasium and is lacking in some other 
facilities which one would expect to find at a proper junior 
high school. It would seem to me that these students could 
be sent at this time to other junior high schools which are 
not too distant such as Alexander Graham or McClintock or 
the Hawthorne or the Piedmont, and remove the junior

—8 3 -
high school facility completely from that school. By so 
doing, the students concerned would obviously receive a 
much more effective education with general benefit for all 
concerned. It would no doubt make more effective use of the 
Billingsville School with the older students removed. In 
general, schools which have such a wide age range in the 
same facility are not as desirable as schools where the age 
range is much closer to common interests and activities. 
Billingsville High School, which is a Negro School, the 
district line runs right next to the west side of the school, 
right near the west side of the school, Randolph Road. 
Now, ordinarily the only cae where you’d expect to find a 
district line running immediately next to one side of the 
school would be where a school happened to have been 
built at the edge of the town and you were forced to draw 
your students from a half-circle, so to speak, and, since

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



258a

Billingsville is situated not in such an area, it would 
seem that a geographical line for attendance purposes 
drawn in this manner is very unusual. Now, Alexander 
Graham Junior High School, mostly white, has a wander­
ing line.

Q. Mr. Kramer, are you leaving the Billingsville Junior 
High School? A. I was going to indicate where other 
students could be assigned to Billingsville from Alexander 
Graham. This line, which is on the boundary of the Alex­
ander Graham Junior High School, which is mostly white,

—84—
has a wandering line which, it seems to me, should 
logically go along Providence Road, a highway, all the 
way to Wendover Road. But instead it branches off be­
tween Andover Road and Vernon Drive and examination 
of that map indicates no particular reason why it should 
go off between those two streets. Now, if this line were 
drawn as I have indicated, the effect would he to throw 
white students from the Alexander Graham School area 
into Negro Billingsville. The Eastway Junior High 
School in the southeast part, a white school with one 
Negro student who transferred into it, it seems to me 
that this line ought to follow the County Club line which 
is in the same area and which is a natural line of demarka- 
tion, or else it should cut through Eastway Drive from 
north to south to exclude the Country Club, or follow 
Shamrock Drive, which is a natural boundary line. Any 
of these would have the effect of putting more white 
students in the Hawthorne Junior High School area which 
is mixed, although the Hawthorne Junior High School 
area has room for over 250 students. The line as it follows 
now starts out at the County Club and cuts in through

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



259a

a couple of streets which do not seem to me to be a logical 
point of departure.

Q. Mr. Kramer, one question about the Eastway School. 
Eastway is predominantly white or— f A. It was zoned 
as a white school—I shouldn’t say that. There were no

- 8 5 -
students assigned to the Eastway Junior High School. 
One Negro students transferred into it according to this 
figure. If the line were drawn in any one of what appear 
to me to be three logical choices superior to that which is 
shown now, any one of one them would have put more white 
students in the Hawthorne Junior High School which 
has plenty of room but which is a mixed school.

Q. You stated earlier, you referred to Billingsville 
School as Billingsville High School, isn’t it a junior high! 
A. It has a junior high school group. The Second Ward 
is a Negro Junior High and Senior High. I believe, and 
the Piedmont Junior High School is mixed. I mention 
these two because there is a relationship. Second Ward 
is oversubscribed and the Piedmont School has 448 out 
of a capacity of 924, slightly more than 50%.

Court: Second Ward is located to capacity and a 
little over?

A. Yes, sir, it’s over. If a line were drawn down Trade 
Street, which is certainly a thoroughfare substantial 
enough to be considered as a separating line, this would 
reduce the Second Ward population in favor of Piedmont, 
but this would also have the effect of increasing the Negro 
percentage at the mixed Piedmont Junior High School, 
but it would remove the over-subscription, over-populatiqn 
at the Second Ward and bring the Piedmont School up 
above what is obviously a point just a little over 50%,

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



260a

— 86—

so that not only would the interests of the plan for 
desegregation be served but it would make for better- 
utilization of an under-utilized school and better utilization 
of an over-utilized school.

Q. Does the line as presently drawn running down and 
branching off Trade Street, as you have described, follow 
a natural boundary? A. Well, it starts down on Trade 
Street, which seems to be logical, but then, as happened 
in other cases, instead of going down Trade Street all the 
way, it jogs in and out again on to North Tryon and then 
down to Sugar Creek. I don’t know why it jogged out and 
in again like that. As I say, if it followed Trade Street all 
the way down, which is a simple and fairly straight line 
and a large street, it would have had not only the effect I 
mentioned but the effect of further desegregation and I 
think it would save money and efficiency as far as the school 
is concerned and make for better education for all the stu­
dents in both schools. Spaugh Junior High, which is mostly 
white, and Plato Price, which is an excepted school, Negro, 
grades 5 to 9. Now, the line goes down Ashley Road but 
cuts off to include an area which contains some white and 
is held within Spaugh Junior High School. Ordinarily, if 
the line were drawn all the way down Ashley Road, they 
would be in an area which could be assigned to Plato Price. 
Although Plato Price is an excepted school, this doesn’t

—87—
alter the fact that it would be convenient for white children 
to go there. The question of the excepted schools, which 
bothers me for several reasons, but the fact that Negro 
children who live within a zoned geographical area have 
been assigned to excepted schools out of the area and, as 
I see it, in some circumstances so far away as to be trans­

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



261a

ported by bus. Now, there seems to be no apparent reason 
for the cutoff I mentioned. It goes to Wilson and then cuts 
off again, finally hitting Donald Boss Road through the 
golf course. In addition, the southern line, which I would 
think should go on West Blvd., goes off. I don’t know 
exactly what is there but on the map it seemed to be nothing, 
no reason at all for it going off there until it hits Erwin 
Creek. Now, one effect of this is that the Barringer Ele­
mentary School, which is white, sends its pupils to the 
Spaugh Junior High School, which is mostly white, instead 
of Sedgefield which is mixed. And looking at Sedgefield, 
the west line for Sedgefield Junior High School, it would 
seem to me, should reasonably follow Clanton and thereby 
cut off a Negro section which would then go to the Smith 
Junior High School where only one Negro was assigned.

Mr. Barkley: I didn’t catch the name of the last 
school you mentioned.

A. Would go to the Smith Junior High School where 
only one Negro was assigned. Ranson Junior High 
School seems to be drawn in a somewhat arbitrary

— 88-

manner in that the logical place for it to go would be 
Beattys Ford Road, or perhaps Bellhaven Road to Oak­
dale to Sunset Road.

Q. Mr. Kramer, which line are you suggesting should 
follow Beattys Ford Road? A. The line on the west of 
the Ranson Junior High zone.

Q. And which line the other road? A. Well, I ’m talking 
about the same line now.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Court: What does it follow?



262a

Lewis /. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

A. You are pointing—
Q. You say it should follow Beattys Ford Road? A. 

What is the name of that street! Is there anything there 
at all!

Mr. Hornbeck: There is no street.

A. There doesn’t seem to be any name there at all that 
I saw. There didn’t appear to be any natural boundary 
which that line should follow and there were two alter­
natives which might be logically used. If you went down 
Beattys Ford Road it would have the effect of putting 
Negroes in the Coulwood Junior High School which is 
white. And if the second alternative were used it would 
have the effect of putting white students into mixed Ranson 
Junior High School.

Court: If you followed Beattys Ford Road it 
would do what to the students in Coulwood?

A. If you follow Beattys Ford Road it would have the 
effect of putting Negro students into the Coulwood Junior

- 8 9 -
High School which is white.

Mr. Barkley: That’s Ranson School?

A. The Ranson Junior High School line.

Court: Ranson is Negro or white?

A. Ranson Junior High School, that’s a mixed school, is 
it not!



263a

Court: Well, if you did what you said you’d just 
change Ranson from a mixed school to Coulwood 
as a mixed school, wouldn’t you?

A. This would have the effect of taking some Negroes-— 
it would integrate the Coulwood School.

Court: And maybe unintegrated Ranson, or you’re 
not sure of that?

A. I don’t know the precise effect it would have. I don’t 
think it would take out all the Negro students.

Q. Mr. Kramer, do you have the figures for Coulwood 
Junior High School, the racial composition? A. The 
Coulwood Junior High School had initially assigned to it 
610 white students and 3 Negroes.

Q. And the racial figures for Ranson? A. Ranson Junior 
High School originally had assigned to it 749 whites and 
33 Negroes. The east boundary of the Ranson Junior 
High School, it seems to me, should go down Concord 
Road into North Tryon. It now appears to come down 
on no special road that I could determine. It would move 
some whites from the almost white Cochrane, where only

—90—
1 Negro was assigned, to mixed Ranson. Now, Cochrane 
Junior High School, which is white, has a western line 
which should, I would think, be moved from its present 
position to follow North Tryon into Eastway Drive. The 
effect of this would be to throw white pupils, more white 
pupils into the mixed Ranson School.

Mr. Barkley: Throw moi’e Negroes into Ranson?

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



264a

Court: No, more white. That wouldn’t help any, 
would it? Ranson is already terribly unbalanced, 
if I may use such a controversial word, 749 white.

A. But they would be leaving a junior high school, which 
is a white school.

Court: Is Cochrane all white?

A. Cochrane is a white school. There was 1 Negro as­
signed to it. To go back for a moment to the mixed Ranson 
School, junior high school, I would cut off the southern 
zone line at Interstate 85. Ordinarily a heavily traveled 
wide road like this is not considered to be a suitable 
boundary for a school if there are other schools available. 
This would throw some Negroes as well as whites into 
the Cochrane Junior High School which is now virtually 
white and under-utilized, or to the Hawthorne School, 
which is mixed and also under-utilized. The York Road 
Junior High School, which is all Negro—it is an excepted 
school—and is another case of a school used for Negroes

—91—
who live near to another school, in this case the Sedgefield 
School, which is mixed. I think I have one more school 
that I ’d like to mention. The Harding High School, which 
is mostly white, and West Mecklenburg, which is mostly 
white. I don’t know why the Harding zone line doesn’t 
follow the city limits on the west and include Negro 
children in that area. To identify the area, it is the area 
that serves the Amay James School. I know it’s elemen­
tary but just to point out where the children are. I don’t 
know why it doesn’t follow the city limits on the west and 
include Negro children instead of leaving Interstate 85 
and just going off somewhere.

Lewis 1. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



265a

Q. Do you know presently where those students in the 
Amay James area that you referred to are going to school? 
A. No, I don’t know where they are going hut it would 
be logical for them to be included in that area where the 
Harding School is now. In general, from examination 
of these schools in the cases where I have indicated certain 
suggested changes in the zone lines and also even the 
closing of certain schools at this time, I can see no useful 
purpose in postponing the removal of students from 
schools which are obviously, from their numbers and lack 
of facilities in some cases, giving a sub-standard educa­
tion when, in some cases, these children could be moved 
and in one case a school closed immediately without doing 
anything else. Improved education results would accrue

— 92—
both as to achievement, both as to personality, both as to 
citizenship. I would think in years to come this would 
pay dividends to the community. I would say children 
who live in zoned areas who are taken out and bussed 
to distant schools, or schools with only one or two of a 
minority group in them to be registered as an integrated 
school, at least from my point of view, is not a fair ap­
praisal of the situation.

Q. To refer back once to the school at York Road, you 
indicated that students there could be assigned to some 
other school without very much difficulty or you recom­
mended they be assigned to another school? A. York 
Road Junior High School, which is an all Negro excepted 
school, is being used for Negroes who live near Sedge- 
field, which is a mixed school, and those students could 
attend the Sedgefield School.

Q. Do you have the figures there before you of the 
enrollment and maximum capacity of York Road? A.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



266a

Yes, I have it. York Road School is just over maximum. 
There are 1127 enrolled with a capacity of 1122 but the 
Sedgefield Junior High School has room for over 200, 
so that in many cases a double purpose would be served.

Q. From your observations have you formed any con­
clusions regarding the similarities of departures from 
accepted standards in drawing school zone areas that you 
could state to the Court here would apply to the schools

—93—
you have discussed just a moment ago! A. From my 
observation of the map there are a number of cases where 
school zone lines begin at what seems to be logical divid­
ing lines, heavily traffic thoroughfares and things like that, 
where they suddenly jog off, sometimes off into nowhere 
where, according to the map, there is no particular 
obstruction or point of departure, sometimes into a much 
smaller demarkation line, sometimes they come right back 
in again to that same heavily traffic thoroughfare. Now, 
this has the effect of either excluding or including pockets. 
This is the effect, one effect.

Q. You refer to pockets, you are meaning racial com­
positions! A. Yes. If these zone lines stayed on these 
heavily trafficked areas, which are natural boundaries, it 
would have the effect in many cases of including white 
students in a mixed or Negro School or including Negro 
students in a white school.

Q. Mr. Kramer, from your studies and experiences, 
have you formed any opinion regarding the educational 
value to the students that would be served by redrawing 
or drafting the lines as you have proposed and promoting 
the integration in the school system here! A. If in the 
redrawing of the lines minority groups now in segregated 
schools were brought into integrated schools, there is

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



267a

a considerable body of literature to show that in most cases
—94—

the results as to school achievement, as to behavior would 
be definitely improved without any lessening of achieve­
ment or behavior on the part of the majority group in 
the other schools.

Q. Have you had any personal experiences in advancing 
or studying the educational advancement that would be 
obtained by students in the integration of schools? A. I 
have read, I have studied and, included in some of the work 
I am now doing, are some of the references in this con­
nection. There has been within the last two or three years, 
or even longer than that, a continuing study made in areas 
where integration has taken place with a view of just this 
kind and while in some cases, as a result of the extreme 
variation between the cultural levels of the minority groups 
as compared to the high socio-economic level of the white 
children where it has been to very extreme, in some of those 
cases the results have not been as favorable or as marked 
as they have been in the other areas. But the body of 
literature, by and large, in the majority of the cases and 
in the long run, indicates definite and substantial improve­
ment, particularly where efforts are made to bolster these 
minority children in their new environment.

Q. Have you any recommendations regarding the ex­
cepted schools that were included in the plan of the School 
Board? A. Well, the truth of the matter is that I am very

- 9 5 -
much puzzled by their existence because their very existence 
mitigates against certain standards which the Office of 
Health, Education and Welfare has proposed. It seems 
to me, unless I have my information wrong, that certain

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



268a

Federal funds under these conditions could conceivably 
be withheld. And so, from an economic standpoint alone, 
they are a very important aspect of this whole affair. More­
over, the fact that some new construction is being built at 
which time in the future sometime some of these or all of 
these, for that matter, may be discontinued, brings up the 
question as to whether or not all the construction that is 
planned is necessary. It would take more investigation 
than I have had time for to show that, but if you could 
close—and certainly in one or two occasions schools could 
be closed—at the present time. The one with 87 students 
could be closed and those youngsters go to Matthews. It 
is possible that an examination of this whole affair might 
show that it might not be necessary—if the schools that 
are being used or will be used are in good condition, I ’m 
not talking now about replacing sub-standard schools— 
there is a possibility that some of the new construction may 
not be as necessary as appears on the face of it. In addition 
to this, besides the possible economic value, in some cases 
even if they were to be replaced in the future, in some 
cases there appears to be no reason why some of them

— 9 6 —

couldn’t be changed now. In short, it seems to me that the 
areas of the excepted schools should just be another geo­
graphic area. I see no reason for maintaining these excep­
tions. The fact that some replacements may be made in 
the future, to me is not a good and sufficient reason at this 
time.

Q. The School Board has proposed a plan for imposing 
on the geographical assignment as well as these 10 excepted 
schools, freedom of choice by which they permit those 
students initially assigned to the school, whether they are

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



269a

attending the excepted schools or schools included in the 
geographical areas, have yon an opinion regarding this 
matter as a means toward desegregating the school system? 
A. In most cases freedom of choice is a myth. It’s a fic­
tion insofar as desegregation is concerned. What has hap­
pened in some school areas throughout the country is that 
you have had segregation followed by integration and then, 
because of freedom of choice, resegregation. Particularly 
where the rules allow a minority child to transfer from a 
school where he is a minority into a segregated school, 
this takes place very rapidly.

Court: That’s hypothetical here. As I understand 
it, the plan here, any child can transfer. Isn’t that 
correct?

A. That’s correct, Your Honor, and it is just this pro­
cedure which will inevitably create segregation or resegre-

—97—
gation even if there is a momentary change. This has been 
shown to happen in several communities where they had 
open transfer. One plan that has been advanced, which 
seems to have a great deal of merit, is to permit transfer 
under certain conditions while promoting integration, 
whereby you would establish maximums and minimums in 
percentages within schools from which or to which a child 
could transfer. In other words, for example, if you were 
to arbitrarily establish a 10% minimum for a minority 
group, you would not allow a child to transfer out of a 
school in which he was a minority member up to 10%. Up 
to 10% and until 10% was reached, they could transfer 
out. And by the same token you could use a maximum 
figure in another school to prevent segregation from occur­

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



270a

ring again during a process of integration. The ultimate 
result will be, in most cases where you have the free trans­
fer privilege under conditions which have in other com­
munities involved coercion, subtle or otherwise, and other 
aspects, will in time bring about a situation where you will 
have virtually segregated schools for the most part.

Q. lias your review of the interrogatories and deposi­
tions here shown that what you are presently stating is true 
here with the freedom of choice in existence here? A. 
Well, from what I can see of the tables, from a brief study 
of them, number 1, it would seem that not too many . . .  in 
many systems this is so . . . not as many Negro children

- 9 8 -
have requested transfer to white schools for any one of 
a number of reasons and in a system whereby, if I read 
it correctly, where when these new schools are built and 
if they are built in areas predominantly Negro, and if you 
have a policy which I understand to be the stated policy 
for the future, if children are not allowed to transfer 
back out of those schools into the school from whence they 
came, this may have the effect of perpetuating segregation 
in the new school.

Q. I call your attention to Exhibit A attached to the 
answers.

Lewis l. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Court: Before you go on to that, I listened very 
closely to the answer but I really didn’t get the point 
of it.

A. There is a policy, I believe, which was stated by the 
Board—and correct me if I’m wrong—where, when these 
new schools are built, no children will be allowed to trans­
fer out of them until a number is reached whereby the



271a

school will have enough children to operate properly. In 
other words, if we were to establish that X  school needed 
500 students to operate efficiently, students who were as­
signed to this new school would not be permitted to trans­
fer out until at least 500 children had been assigned there 
to stay.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Court: And what’s your point?

A. If these schools are built in a Negro district, it may be 
that some of these new schools will automatically become 
segregated schools since the children in them wouldn’t be

—99—
allowed to transfer out if they so desire to a white school.

Q. Mr. Kramer, let me call your attention to Exhibit A 
attached to the answers of defendants to the interrogatories 
filed by the plaintiff. This exhibit shows the pupil assign­
ment for 1965-66. Look at the first column there showing 
the number of pupils initially assigned for 1965-66 at the 
Alexander Street School and tell the Court the number of 
students initially assigned there by race, and look at the 
last column showing the anticipated enrollment. A. The 
number of students initially assigned to the Alexander 
Street School were 15 white and 287 Negroes. Now, because 
there was freedom of transfer, in this case all the white 
students appeared to have transferred out, leaving a school 
which is entirely Negro.

Q. Look at the Billingsville column. A. The same situa­
tion exists there where there were six white children as­
signed to the Billingsville School together with 741 Negroes. 
The transfer effect has been to remove all the white children 
from the school leaving it entirely Negro, which is the sort 
of thing I was trying to explain before when I said that



272a

when you have the free transfer privilege, although it 
sounds all right on paper, it very often will work out to 
promote segregation.

Q. Look at the third page of that exhibit, at Irwin Ave­
nue School, and tell the Court the figures you have there.

— 100—

A. The Irwin Avenue School had 47 white students as­
signed and 816 Negroes. The net result of the transfers 
has been to remove all the white students making the Irwin 
Avenue School an all Negro segregated school.

Q. On the next page look at the Morgan column and tell 
the Court the figures you have there. A. We have identical 
situation of 65 white students and 313 Negro students but 
the net result of transfers has been to remove all 65 whites 
leaving Morgan an entirely segregated Negro school.

Q. Down the list at the Northwest Junior High School, 
would you tell the Court the figures that you have there! 
A. At the Northwest Junior High School 36 white students 
and 808 Negro students were assigned. The net result of 
the transfer has been to remove all the white students leav­
ing the Northwest Junior High an entirely segregated 
Negro school.

Q. Turn to Second Ward School and tell the Court the 
figures you have there. A. This is a classic example and 
Points up more vividly this aspect. There were 125 white 
students and 1528 Negro students assigned to the Second 
Ward School. 124 of the white students transferred out 
which leaves Second Ward with 1 white student, all the 
rest Negro, 1529.

Q. Take one other example and look at the Wesley 
Heights School column on the following page. A. Wesley

— 101-

Heights School had 38 whites assigned and 203 Negroes.

Lewis 1. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



273a

The net result of transfers has been to remove the 38 whites 
leaving a completely segregated school.

Q. Would you say, Mr. Kramer, that these figures sub­
stantiate your statements that the effect of this freedom 
of choice plan has been to maintain segregation in the 
schools rather than to. . . . ? A. I would say so. Any rule, 
no matter how fast it appears to be on paper, which, in its 
administration, tends to promote a segregated situation, 
is not a suitable rule.

Q. Mr. Kramer, calling your attention to the depositions 
that were taken and filed in this case and the answers to 
interrogatories regarding teachers in the Charlotte-Meck- 
lenburg School System, it is stated in the exhibit attached 
to the first set of interrogatories, anwsers to the interroga­
tories, that the school system has approximately all Negro 
teachers assigned to Negro schools and all white teachers 
assigned to white schools, and in the depositions that the 
School Board has considered race in the assignment of 
teachers in the past. Have you any opinion regarding the 
education advantages in making assignments of teachers 
and school personnel on a non-racial basis? A. The assign­
ment of teachers on a racial basis will tend to slow up de­
segregation and the assignment of teachers on a non-racial 
basis, generally speaking, will make for improvements of

- 102-

instruction insofar as you have different models to be 
shown to the students. Negro children who have white 
teachers as models and white children who have Negro 
teachers as models will have a better understanding and 
will work out generally. It’s a picture of a more democratic 
organization and should work out better. Those systems 
which have tried out the shift of teachers from a racial

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Direct



274a

discriminatory basis to an integrated basis have reported 
that the results have been good.

Mr. Chambers: Thank you, Mr. Kramer, your 
witness.

Cross Examination by Mr. Barkley:

Q. Mr. Kramer, going back to the history that you gave 
us of your career, what school are you principal of in 
Providence! A. The Mount Pleasant High School.

Q. How long have you been in that school? A. As prin­
cipal five and a half years.

Q. Now, then, you were also assistant principal? A. 
Prior to that time I was Principal of the Gilbert Stewart 
Junior High School for three and a half years.

Q. That is in Providence? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Assistant Principal? A. I was Asst. Principal for 

three years prior to that time at the Mount Pleasant 
Senior High School.

—103—
Q. Should we say, therefore, that your school experience 

has been largely in the City of Providence? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is the population of the City of Providence? 

A. About 240,000, 250,000.
Q. Same size city as Charlotte?

Court: More or less.

Q. What is the total school enrollment at Mount Pleasant 
School at this time? A. In September we expect about 
2,150 to 2,200 students.

Q. How many Negroes do you have enrolled in that 
school? A. Approximately 20 to 25.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



275a

Q. How many Negro teachers do you have in that school? 
A. One.

Q. That is an integrated teacher, I would take it. Since 
you have one Negro teacher in a white school I would 
say that would be an integrated teacher, wouldn’t it?

Mr. Chambers: Objection.
Court: Sustained.

Q. Has your experience, insofar as actual experiences 
concerned in the matter of promoting integrated schools, 
confined to Providence? A. Yes, sir, my experience has 
been confined to Providence.

Q. And what you have been giving us here by way of 
your opinion has been largely what you have read, what

—10 4 -
other people have written? A. Insofar as the opinions 
are concerned, much of it comes from what I have studied, 
insofar as integration is concerned.

Q. You studied out of books that other people have 
written? A. That’s correct.

Q. Now, have you testified before in a school integration 
suit? A. No, sir, 1 have not.

Court: Before you leave Providence, I’m in­
terested—not in any improper way, it’s interesting 
to compare. Is there much Negro population in 
Providence? Are the 25 in your high school repre­
sentative of the relationship?

A. No, Your Honor, it is not.

Court: You’ve got other schools with much more 
Negro population?

Leivis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



276a

A. That’s correct. More recently, as part of a staff, we 
have drawn zone lines for a new elementary school which 
is replacing two Negro elementary schools—that is, largely 
Negro—the proposition being to draw the lines in such 
a way as to insure the integration of the new school. There 
are sections of the city where there is a much higher per­
centage of Negro students in the school.

Court: Because of the housing patterns.

A. That’s correct, Your Honor.

Court: I assume you’ve got straight geography in
—1 0 5 -

Providence ?

A. We have concentrated areas.

Court: I mean your plan of assignment is probably 
straight geography, no freedom of choice.

A. We allow students to transfer from schools that are 
largely Negro into schools that are largely white and we 
allow students to transfer from one elementary school to 
another where there are pressing reasons, desirable rea­
sons, but there is not freedom of choice in this connection, 
not complete freedom of choice.

Court: And some of your schools, because of the 
housing patterns, then, are very heavily Negro or 
even all Negro?

A. No, sir, but a few are heavily Negro.
Q. Did you say a few schools didn’t have any Negroes at 

all? A. No, sir, I did not say that and I doubt that there

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



277a

is such a school. Conceivably there could be, but I would 
doubt it.

Q. Now, Mr. Kramer, if there were six white children 
initially assigned to Billingsville School, you would at­
tribute that to geography, would you not! A. I don’t 
know what I would attribute it to. I have to know actually 
the circumstances of the case.

Q. You don’t know yourself whether that results from 
the Board’s geographical reorganization of the school sys­
tem or not! A. I wouldn’t like to say that was the case.

—106—
Q. In Northwest Junior High School, if it shows that 

there were 36 white pupils initially assigned to Northwest 
Junior High School you couldn’t say that that wasn’t the 
result of a new geographical area created by the Board, 
could you! A. I would have to take the word of the Board 
for such an assignment. I would be unable to make a state­
ment on my own.

Mr. Bell: For the benefit of counsel, I don’t under­
stand the question and I don’t know whether the 
witness does either.

Mr. Barkley: I ’m simply asking if the 36 or 45 or 
200 white children initially assigned to an all Negro 
school as to whether that could or could not have 
been a result of the new geographical plan adopted 
by the Board.

Court: I would expect that you would stipulate 
that it is, would you not!

Mr. Bell: Is he saying the 36 he listed there are 
they the people who were assigned initially!

Court: No. He’s referring, as I understand Mr. 
Barkley’s question, to the most recent testimony of

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



278a

Mr. Kramer with respect to Irwin Avenue, Morgan 
School, Northwest Junior High and Second Ward 
where 47, 65, 36 and 124 white children did elect to 
transfer out. The question is as far as putting 
white children in those dominantly Negro schools

—107—
weren’t they put there by reason of geography and 
I take it the answer is yes. Won’t you stipulate 
to that? They undoubtedly got there by reason of 
geographical zoning.

Mr. Bell: Yes.

A. The reason I have difficulty answering the question—•

Court: I think we have agreed to it.

Q. If it should appear from the evidence in this case 
that for the school year 1964-65 there were a total of about 
780 Negro pupils in all of the integrated or predominantly 
white schools in Mecklenburg County and for the school 
year 1965-66 there are about 2,250 Negroes in integrated 
or predominantly white schools and it appears that the 
Board had established geographical attendance areas for 
the 1965-66 season, would you conclude that increase in 
Negro enrollment was the result of the establishment of 
new attendance areas?

Mr. Chambers: Objection.
Court: Overruled.
Mr. Chambers: I gather that the defendant is 

asking whether the witness here is able to form an 
opinion from what he feels will be the evidence here. 
He hasn’t recited everything sufficient to form a 
basis.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



279a

Court: Objection overruled. Let me ask you while 
you are on your feet, surely this is so, isn’t it?

Mr. Chambers: He has used evidence here which
—108—

we would challenge, first the 780 and second the 
2200 and some.

Court: I understand that but the question in its 
ultimate thrust is simply why has it increased. Isn’t 
it because of the new geographical assignment situa­
tion?

Mr. Chambers: It might be because of transfers. 
There were transfers imposed. This is another rea­
son why we objected.

Court: Well, if he doesn’t know the best answer 
sometimes is just I don’t know. Maybe he doesn’t, 
I don’t know.

Q. Is that your situation, you just don’t know? A. I 
wouldn’t like to make a positive statement on it.

Q. In other words, you don’t have as positive an opinion 
about that as you have on these other subjects you dis­
cussed here, the opinions based upon what you have read 
in other publications? A. That is correct.

Court: In your high school in Providence where 
you have just a few Negro students—you’ve got 22 
or 25 I believe you said—if one of these Negro 
students wants to transfer out to another high 
school where maybe the balance is half and half 
or a lot more Negroes, will you permit him to do it?

A. Yes, sir.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross

—109—



280a

Court: How is that different from a white child in 
a school here being permitted to transfer!

A. The question of integration in the City of Providence, 
or segregation, is apparently not a factor. The general 
regulations in the community, in the school, occupations, 
are not so discriminatory, apparently, as to make the 
situation develop to the point where the Negro community 
or the white community wants to change either one or the 
other.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross

Court: Does it not happen! I mean, take your 
high school, you just don’t have one of the 22 or 25 
Negro students asking to transfer out!

A. No. Actually, there are no Negro students living any­
where near the area that our high school ordinarily serves. 
These students come to us from more distant schools.

Court: They are there, in other words, because 
they want to be.

A. That’s correct, sir.
Q. Mr. Kramer, you know nothing, I take it, of the 

building program that this defendant has on the drawing 
boards in the City of Charlotte! A. What I have read 
in the material which I received, sir.

Q. Have you read about the Southwest Senior High 
School that the Board expects to let contracts for very 
shortly with the idea of being ready a year from now!

— 110—

A. If that’s in the transcript of this material then I ’ve 
seen it. Is that part of Exhibit A you’re referring to! 

Q. No. A. In your answer to the interrogatories!



281a

Q. It is referred to in the assignment plan we have 
adopted.

Court: Apparently his answer is he may have 
seen it but doesn’t recall particularly.

A. That’s right, Your Honor. I read about a number of 
schools which are supposed to be available at some time 
in the future, which schools will be used to effectuate new 
geographical zones and reassignment of students.

Q. You are not in a position to know whether it’s the 
purpose of the Board that that school is being constructed 
with the idea of absorbing all of the senior high school 
Negro population which would include York Road and any 
other Negro high schools in the southern part of the county, 
as well as white population? A. I would be unable to 
state that.

Q. You don’t know that the Board has plans on the 
drawing board to construct a junior high school, East 
Central, located just east of Billingsville and a couple of 
blocks from McAlway Road to which you referred a while 
ago, which the Board proposes to use not only for the 
accommodation of all white people in that particular area 
but the junior high school students at Billingsville? A. I

—I l l —
was forced, Mr. Barkley, to confine myself to the informa­
tion that was available to me and the facts at hand and 
didn’t feel I could predicate upon future possibilities.

Q. Was that information not communicated to you along 
with the rest of the information they gave you under which 
you might base your opinion? A. No because, although 
these statements of new schools being built were included 
in material that was given to me which I read, in an effort 
to look at geographic lines now and to discuss what is

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



282a

happening at the present time and for the coming school 
year, I felt I should confine myself to the things I could 
see and look at and not speculate as to what might happen 
in a year from now or two years from now or three years 
from now.

Q. You haven’t had an opportunity to make a physical 
examination of the areas themselves? A. Not all of them. 
I took a ride through part of the town but I confined 
myself largely to the zone lines on the map.

Q. Did you by any chance go out through what is gen­
erally known as the Johnson C. Smith area? A. I drove 
by the Johnson C. Smith School.

Q. Did you know that perhaps one-half of the Negro 
population of this county resides in an area of some three 
or four miles centering around Johnson C. Smith Uni­
versity? A. No, sir, I don’t know that.

— 112—

Q. Do you have any plans to suggest by which Biddle- 
ville might be integrated other than to bus pupils from 
Biddleville over into the eastern parts of the city or 
county? A. No, I am not prepared to give positive recom­
mendations so far as any changing any more than I have 
indicated in my report to you based on the time I had. 
It would take a much more intensive study. These zone 
lines were drawn, I am sure, by people with a great deal 
of study and over a great deal of time. It would be pre- 
sumptious of me to say I could redraw those to serve 
another purpose without equal time. It is not so difficult 
to make a judgment of individual situations.

Q. You are not going to suggest in any way that the 
Board of Education drew these lines in bad faith with the 
idea of excluding Negroes and preventing integration, 
are you? A. I am not suggesting anything, Mr. Barkley,

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



283a

but I will say that if a Board of Education had planned 
to draw lines in such a way as to circumvent the segrega­
tion law and have it appear on paper that there was 
compliance, there are resemblances between the situation 
as I see it and it would appear in such a case.

Q. That’s your judgment about the matter? A. Yes, 
sir. -

Q. And that judgment is based not on your personal 
experience as a teacher and administrator but on what 
you have read somewhere? A. That is correct.

—113—
Q. You speak here of your different proposals for re­

drawing lines that you say would promote integration 
and you say that in the long run would pay off. How long 
a run have you in mind? A. Most of the studies that I 
have seen show that within a year definite improvements, 
academically and otherwise, have been made without any 
negative change in the results of the population of the 
majority group already there.

Q. What authorities did you get that conclusion from? 
A. In a book, “Research on School Desegregation” , pub­
lished in 1964, among the sections herein—

Q. Where is that published and by whom? A. This is 
published by Integrated Education Associates, 343 S. Dear­
born St., Chicago, Illinois.

Q. Do you know anything about that organization? I 
have never heard of that. A. This organization published 
research material and other material on progress in inte­
gration in the schools. It covers the various court cases 
and keeps you up to date on the literature. Every two 
months a pamphlet comes out which summarizes various 
court cases and reports from other cities, various cities, 
concerning integration of the schools.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



284a

Q. Do you know who heads the company? A. I don’t 
know the name of the editor except that I do know the

—1 1 4 -
individual who wrote this particular book.

Q. Who is he? A. His name is Meyer Weinberg.
Q. Is he from Chicago? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Well, now, if they would permit you, if they would 

he willing to take advantage of your judgment in the field 
of integration, do you feel like you might be able to im­
prove the integration situation in Chicago somewhat?

Mr. Chambers: Objection.
Court: Objection sustained.

Q. Mr. Kramer, a number of times I believe you said 
there were some 15 schools with only 1 or 2-— A. 19 
schools.

Q. With only 1 or 2 Negro students in it and you couldn’t 
understand how that would come about. Assuming, which 
is a fact, that prior to this year the Board has permitted 
transfers on the freedom of choice of the student, you 
would not say that those 1 or 2 children may not have 
gotten into those schools last year by the exercise of their 
own free choice in which event they would be initially 
assigned this year. You don’t know that, do you?

Court: In the interest of shortening this matter, 
he doesn’t know. He said he doesn’t know how those 
children got in so there’s no use pursuing it. I

—115—
am sure you have witnesses who can and will at the 
proper time tell us.

Mr. Barkley: I wanted to see if he had a reason.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



285a

Court: He suggested that if it’s geography it’s 
a little strange hut he doesn’t know if it is geography. 
Is that right?

A. That’s correct, Your Honor.
Q. Most of these changes in boundaries which you have 

suggested I believe will have the effect of putting whites 
into Negro schools rather than Negroes into white schools, 
would they not? A. I didn’t compare them, Mr. Barkley, 
it may be so. I didn’t consider the one aspect as against 
the other.

Q. You would change the Lakeview Elementary School 
boundary which would permit some white students into 
Biddleville.

Court: This wouldn’t make a difference, would it ?
Mr. Barkley: I don’t think it would but he seemed 

to lay great stress on that and I wanted to point 
that out to him.

Q. The greater number of these schools that you find 
some dissatisfaction with the boundaries are the 10 schools 
that are excepted from the assignment plan, are they not? 
You have included all of those, as I understand your argu­
ment, and you say that they ought to be desegregated now 
rather than one or two years from now. A. Yes, sir.

—-116-
Court: Let me pursue that a moment. Speaking 

hypothetically—and I realize that you have said 
you haven’t really studied the future—but to the 
extent that you have been able to think about it, 
hypothetically, if the 10 excepted schools had not

Lewis I. Kramer—-for Plaintiffs—Cross



286a

been excepted, what do you think about the overall 
plan, would that make a big difference?

A. It would make a substantial difference, Your Honor.

Court: I want to be sure you meant what you said 
to Mr. Barkley just a moment ago as I understood 
you. All the instances that you referred to, each 
school that you took up and mentioned, do you mean 
to say that all of them relate to an excepted school?

A. No, sir.

Court: Simply most of them?

A. A large number of them do, Your Honor.

Court: I want to make sure I have got it in my 
notes. Could you tell me without taking too much 
time which ones don’t relate to the excepted schools? 
That is, your criticisms that are not related to the 
exceptions left out of the plan.

A. I think Eastway Junior High School, which involves
Hawthorne. I don’t think either one of them is an excepted
school.

Lewis l. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross

Court: This is criticized schools not related to
—117—

the excepted schools, that is to say, even if the 
plan had not had any exceptions you would still be 
making these criticisms?

A. That is correct. Eastway Junior High and Hawthorne 
Junior High are involved in one. Now, do I understand



287a

that part of the Billingsville School is not excepted? May 
I ask the question?

Mr. Barkley: The elementary part is not excepted.

A. Then that portion which refers to the Billingsville 
Junior High School would he included in the list that 
Your Honor has referred to. Neither the Derita School 
or Druid Hills or Tryon Hills are involved in the excepted 
schools, are they, sir?

Mr. Barkley: Yes, sir, all three of them are.

A. Barringer Elementary and Wilmore.

Court: Later on if you think of any others call it 
to my attention but for the present what you remem­
ber that we may say are not related to the excepted 
schools but still criticized are Eastway, Hawthorne, 
Billingsville Junior High, Barringer Elementary and 
Biddleville Junior High.

Mr. Chambers: Your Honor, may I inquire if it 
would be permissable for us to submit to you a list 
of the schools not included?

Court: Yes, please, with a copy to opposing coun-
—118—

sel. Excuse my having interrupted you so much in 
your cross examination.

Q. Now, Mr. Kramer, as to Eastway, for instance, which 
is the first school you mentioned here in reply to His 
Honor’s inquiry, the only effect of any change in boundary 
in Eastway School would be to move some children from 
Eastway, which has only about 1 Negro, over to the Haw­
thorne School which has—

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



288a

Court: You’re talking about Bastway now!
Mr. Barkley: Yes, sir.

Q. I believe it’s 729 whites and 102 Negroes. The only 
effect of redrawing that boundary would be to put more 
white children from Eastway into the mixed school where 
there are about 109 Negroes, isn’t that right! A. It would 
have two effects, Mr. Barkley. Not only would you more 
completely integrate the Hawthorne School but you would 
move children from a school which is practically at maxi­
mum to a school which is, as I see it, under-populated.

Q. Well, you’re not concerned with the efficiency of our 
school operation except as it pertains to race, are you! 
A. It would be very desirable from my point of view, if 
any changes I were to recommend not only were to promote 
desegregation but would also make for better education 
from any angle.

Q. You weren’t brought down here for the purpose of
—119—

assisting the Board in making the facilities more efficient, 
were you! A. No, sir, I was not.

Court: We can’t separate the two and, of course, 
shouldn’t try to.

Q. Now, the only effect of redrawing the boundaries 
of Eastway would be to transform Hawthorne from a 
school where there are 729 white and 102 Negroes into a 
school in which there might be 8 or 900 whites and 102 
Negroes, isn’t that right! A. It would increase the white 
population.

Q. It would not increase the Negro enrollment at all! 
A. That’s correct, sir.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



289a

Q. In Billingsville, the only effect in the elementary 
schools, the only effect of changing the Billingsville line 
would he to move it back up the old Sardis Road, Randolph 
Road to McAlway Road and have the effect of putting 
some whites into Billingsville, isn’t that right? A. Well, 
doesn’t this also keep Negroes out of the Cotswold School 
as it is now if the southern line is left where it is? Are 
you talking about my comment concerning the line going 
to McAlway Road?

Q. I ’m talking about the junior high school. Cotswold 
is not a junior high school.

Court: Billingsville Junior High, less than 200 
Negroes in that high school and nobody else.

A. Are you talking about the 200 junior high school
— 120-

students in Billingsville?

Court: Yes.

A. My comment was that they could go elsewhere, Pied­
mont, Hawthorne.

Court: Or Alexander Graham.

Q. Now, would it not be also a good school operation to 
build a junior high school about McAlway Road and take 
in all of that area including Billingsville? A. It might 
well be.

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross

Court: Including Billingsville and what else? 

A. A. G. and McClintock. (Answer by Mr. Barkley.)



290a

Mr. Chambers: May I ask counsel to repeat that 
question? I didn’t understand it.

Court: He asked if it would be a good idea to 
build a new school and combine Billingsville, in 
effect, and what else?

Mr. Barkley: A. G. and McClintock.

A. I should perhaps say in that connection that this as­
sumes that the schools presently there are not suitable 
or would not be suitable for use. Are you suggesting that 
if the schools there are suitable for use you would build 
another school?

Q. I am not making any inquiry at all as to whether the 
school is suitable for use, I ’m just making inquiry as to 
whether to build a junior high school about McAlway Road

— 121—

that would be sufficiently large to accommodate from 
Billingsville, McClintock and A. G. wouldn’t be a good 
operation from the standpoint of integration and not effi­
ciency? A. If you wanted to limit it to integration, I 
think any such structure yes, if you wish to remove all 
other relatives.

Q. Now, Mr. Kramer, have you been informed that this 
Board of Education, over a long period of years and in­
cluding schools now on the drawing boards, have been 
locating certainly with and largely upon the advice of the 
Inglehardt Firm? Are you acquainted with them! A. In- 
glehardt and Inglehardt?

Q. Yes, Inglehardt and Inglehardt and Leggett. A. 
Yes, I know the firm.

Q. That is a competent firm of school advisors, is it not, 
from the standpoint of construction and sites? A. Yes,

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross

sir.



291a

Q. And if it should appear that the location selected 
by the Board of Education for sites for schools which have 
been constructed and which are now on the drawing board, 
would you feel this Board has taken very good advice in 
locating their schools? A. I would say that Inglehardt 
and Inglehardt is a good firm to take advice from.

Court: Well, I knew they had advising companies 
in every business but I didn’t know they did in the

- 122-

school business.
Mr. Barkley: Yes, sir, they have a big operation. 
Court: Management consultants.
Mr. Barkley: Yes, sir.
Court: It’s an age of specialization, it really is. 
Mr. Barkley: I think they have planned all of the 

San Francisco schools, for example, over the years.
Mr. Chambers: Your Honor, may I request a five 

minute recess?
Court: Yes, sir. We’ll do better than that. We 

will take 10 or 15 minutes.

S hort R ecess

Mr. Barkley: We have no further questions. 
Court: Any redirect of Mr. Kramer?
Mr. Bell: No redirect.
Court: Counsel have agreed that he may be ex­

cused, is that correct?
Mr. Chambers: Yes, sir.
Mr. Barkley: Yes, sir.
Mr. Bell: The plaintiffs will rest, Your Honor. 
Court: Is there evidence for the defendant School 

Board?

Lewis I. Kramer—for Plaintiffs—Cross



292a

Mr. Barkley: Yes, sir.

(Witnesses for the defendant are sworn.)
— 123-

Dr. A. C b a ig  P h i l l i p s , a witness for the defendant, 
having first been duly sworn, was examined and testified 
as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Barkley:

Q. Give us your full name, please. A. Andrew Craig 
Phillips.

Q. What position do you hold with the Charlotte-Meck- 
lenburg Board of Education? A. Superintendent of 
Schools.

Q. How long have you held that position, Dr. Phillips? 
A. Completing my third year as Superintendent.

Q. Can you tell us what was the status of the integra­
tion situation, if we can call it that, when you came here 
as superintendent ? A. Very briefly, Mr. Barkley, the pro­
gram that began in 1957 had progressed to the point where 
there were some beginnings being made in geographic 
assignment in 1962. Following the consolidation of the 
two systems two years prior to that the first steps were 
made in the concept of geographic assignment in the year 
1962 and this was increased each year following, 1962-63, 
1963-64 and 1964-65. My only knowledge of the past has 
come through my having had experience in this state work­
ing in another school system and having a close associa­
tion in the total statewide movement in the implementation

— 124—
of the Supreme Court decision. This was about the status 
when I arrived.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



293a

Q. Do you know what schools you set up on a geograph­
ical basis for the school year 1952-63? A. I would have 
to have my information in front of me to be specific. The 
first school was the Bethune School on North Graham 
Street and then this was followed with the Wesley Heights 
School and then, I believe, there were 12 all together the 
second year. They are in the minutes of the Board of 
Education and recorded there.

Q. Now, do you recall approximately how many schools 
were set up on a geographically zoned system in the school 
year 1964-65? A. Approximately 64, I believe, was the 
number, Mr. Barkley.

Q. Now, Dr. Phillips, beginning in the Fall of 1964, state 
whether or not any movement was undertaken by the Board 
looking to a reorganization of the assignment system with 
the idea of eliminating discrimination. A. Well, the in­
tent of the Board had been established prior to that, in 
simplest terms, to reach full geographic assignment for 
the entire system, and a good bit of the planning relating 
to the elimination eventually of the union school programs 
that did still exist at that time. Probably the first major 
step of significance related to the elimination or plans for 
elimination of the Sterling Senior High School and then 
following this the plans for elimination of one grade at the

—125—
Torrence-Lytle High School with a number of steps spelled 
out as plans for the elimination eventually of the union 
school there and at the Gunn School. These plans were 
made early in that year.

Q. Now, the schools that you have referred to, were they 
what is commonly known as the rural schools back in the 
days when the city and county schools were separate? 
A. Yes, sir. They were the rural Negro schools, grades 1

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—-Direct



294a

to 12, in the far northern area and the far eastern area and 
the southern areas.

Court: Is that what you mean by a union school ?

A. Yes, sir, grades 1 to 12.

Court: They are eliminated now!

A. They are in the process of being eliminated now. The 
Sterling Senior High School has already been closed up, 
grades 1 to 9 still exist under the exception plan. Grades 
1 to 9 and grades 11 and 12 still exist at the Torrence- 
Lytle School. Grade 10 was eliminated in this plan and the 
youngsters were assigned to the North Mecklenburg Senior 
High and grades 1 to 12 at Gunn.

Q. That assignment is for this coming 1965-66 school 
term! A. Yes, sir.

Q. When were the grades eliminated at Sterling! A. 
Last year the youngsters were given the option of attend­
ing South Mecklenburg Senior High School, which was the

—1 2 6 -
school identified serving that southern area.

Q. What was the complexion of that school! A. South 
Mecklenburg is predominantly white and approximately 
31 to 40 of these youngsters chose to go ahead to South 
Mecklenburg. 55 or 60 stayed at the Sterling School and 
about 19 attended the York Road Senior High School. 
This was under the old option plan where, prior to initial 
assignment, they were given the option of attending school. 
The notice said, your residence is in the South Mecklen­
burg attendance area. You have the option of attending 
South Mecklenburg, returning to Sterling or going to

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



295a

York Road, and then the notice said and the information 
was that the Board did intend to close the Sterling Senior 
High School within the next year or two. That has taken 
place now. The Sterling School has been closed, the senior 
high school.

Q. I believe that it was closed as of this year, beginning 
with next year. A. Yes, sir. All of these youngsters have 
been assigned to the school serving the area in which they 
live and the vast majority of them are now assigned to 
South Mecklenburg. I believe there are about 125 Negro 
youngsters at the South Mecklenburg school.

Q. Now, Doctor, I believe it’s in evidence by reason of 
the introduction of the interrogatories, if the Court please, 
the assignment rules and regulations for the forthcoming

- 1 2 7 -
school term. A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Barkley: Would the Court mind if I read the 
material parts of this?

Court: No, sir.

Q. Do you know what date this was adopted? A. March 
11. This is the assignment plan? Yes, March 11.

Q. I will just read the material parts of it : “Attendance 
areas are hereby established for all schools within the 
Mecklenburg County Administrative School Unit (with the 
temporary exceptions hereinafter noted under the article 
entitled “Exceptions” ) and the boundaries thereof are 
hereby established as shown on these three certain maps 
this day exhibited to the Board and approved by the 
Board.” Then the provisions for the signatures by the 
presiding officer.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



296a

“All pupils within any attendance area shall be as­
signed to the school of his or her grade within such 
attendance area. Assignment for any forthcoming 
school term shall be made not later than the last 
school day of the preceding school term. In the case 
of children enrolled during such term, notice of as­
signment may be given by noting the same on the 
report card of the pupil. Except for beginners, pupils 
not then enrolled shall be assigned at the time of their 
application for enrollment.”

“Beginners (children entitled to enrollment under
—128—

G.S. 115-162) may attend any pre-school clinic but 
shall be assigned to the first grade of the school in the 
attendance area where the parent resides. Written 
notice of each assignment shall be given by mail to 
the parent at the same time as the report card notice 
to pupils already enrolled.”

“Free Choice of Transfer: After original assign­
ment, the parent of any pupil may apply to the Board 
for reassignment of such pupil to any school serving 
his or her grade and located in any other attendance 
area. Any such request for transfer shall be allowed 
as of course to the extent that the facilities and ac­
commodations of the chosen school will permit. Ap­
plication may be made for Choice I, Choice II and 
Choice III and transfer will be permitted, in the 
order of Choice, to the school having the facilities and 
accommodations to admit such child or children. Re­
quests for transfer shall be on a printed form available 
at the office of the Superintendent or at any school 
office. When signed, the form may be delivered or

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—-Direct



297a

mailed to the principal of the school of original as­
signment or to the office of the Superintendent. No 
reason need be given therefor. Application for trans­
fer or reassignment shall be made not later than 
June 30 in the case of original assignments made on or 
before June 20. Pupils originally assigned thereafter 
shall make application for transfer within ten days 
after receipt of the notice of the assignment. If there

—129—
should be requests for transfer to a particular school 
by more pupils from other attendance areas than the 
transferee school can accommodate, proximity to the 
school shall be the controlling factor.”

“Transfers Limited in Case of New Schools: In the 
case of mass assignments of pupils to newly opened 
schools in newly created attendance areas, the Board 
may deny the request for the transfer of any pupil 
back to the school in which he was previously enrolled, 
if, in the judgment of the Board, it appears that the 
number of transfer requests is of such volume as to 
unduly reduce the enrollment in such new school or 
interfere with the orderly administration thereof.”

I am omitting one paragraph here. It has no racial 
purpose except to prevent varsity players from switching 
from one school to another.

Mr. Bell: We would be willing to stipulate all 
this.

Mr. Barkley: I thought the Court would like to 
hear it. It’s in the record.

Mr. Bell: We don’t doubt that is the plan. Our 
only contention is that the zones under which the

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



298a

persons are assigned are open to question; that the 
excepted schools are open to question and that the 
teachers should be desegregated. We don’t doubt 
that there are zone lines or that the people had the 
freedom of choice. We think the freedom of choice 
is not effective.

—130—
Mr. Barkley: We centered on the geography and 

the excepted schools. I take it transportation is not 
concerned any more.

Mr. Chambers: Transportation is involved in the 
10 excepted schools.

Mr. Bell: Let me say this, it is in the insufficiency 
of the plan, not the fact of the plan. We don’t doubt 
the plan exists. We are arguing it is insufficient in 
three or four ways.

Court: Three is what you said to begin with. Your 
allegation is gerrymandering, to begin with, with 
respect to certain school areas, and the excepted 
schools. Of course you say that’s wrong because 
there is no reason to postpone what ought to be done 
now. And then thirdly, teachers.

Mr. Bell: That’s right.
Mr. Barkley: Let me read the exceptions to see 

what provisions the plan makes with respect to the 
excepted schools.

“There exist attendance areas, serving certain 
schools in Mecklenburg County, which now overlap 
and embrace territories which include the attendance 
areas of other schools. The schools with attendance 
areas which overlap other attendance areas are Ster­
ling School, Torrence-Lytle School and J. H. Gunn,

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



299a

which are known as union schools providing instruction
— 131—

at the elementary, junior high and senior high school 
level in grades one through twelve, the York Road 
Junior-Senior High School, the Plato Price and Bil- 
lingsville Schools which combine elementary and junior 
high school courses of instruction, Crestdale Elemen­
tary School, Ada Jenkins Elementary School, Amay 
James Elementary School and Woodland Elementary 
School. The revision of the attendance areas from 
which these schools draw pupils so as to eliminate 
overlapping and to permit the children in these schools 
to be assigned according to geographically drawn at­
tendance areas will be undertaken as soon as a building 
construction program, planned with that end in view 
and now underway, may be completed; not later, ac­
cording to existing plans, than the beginning of the 
school term 1967-68. In the meanwhile: (a) The
senior high school program at Sterling School shall 
be discontinued as of the close of the current school 
term, 1964-65, and the pupils in those grades assigned 
to the school or schools serving the attendance area 
or areas in which they reside, (b) The 10th grade 
program at Torrence-Lytel School shall be discontinued 
at the close of the present school term. The entire 
senior high program at this school shall be discontinued 
by the close of the 1966-67 term, depending upon the 
ability of the Board to complete its building program 
in that area by the close of that term. Rising 10th 
grade pupils at Torrence-Lytle School shall be assigned

— 132—
to the senior high school serving the area in which they

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



300a

reside. Rising 11th and 12th grade pupils shall be 
assigned to the Torrence-Lytle School for the 1965-66 
term. Upon the discontinuation of the senior high 
school program by the end of the 1966-67 term the re­
maining students shall be assigned to the senior high 
school serving the area in which they reside.

(c) upon the completion of the Northeast Senior High 
School, the J. H. Gunn Senior High School program 
will be discontinued. At that time the rising 10th, 11th 
and 12th grade students at J. H. Gunn Senior High 
School shall be assigned to the school or schools serving 
the area or areas in which they reside.

(d) The rising 7th, 8th and 9th grades at Torrence- 
Lytle Junior High School will be discontinued by the 
end of the 1966-67 term. At that time these students 
shall be assigned to the school or schools serving the 
area or areas in which they reside.

(e) The rising 7th, 8th and 9th grades at Sterling- 
Junior High School vdll be discontinued by the end 
of the 1966-67 term. At that time these students shall 
be assigned to the school or schools serving the area 
or areas in which they reside.

(f) Upon the completion of the Albemarle Road 
Junior High School, the rising 7th, 8th and 9th grades 
at J. 11. Gunn Junior High School will be discontinued.

—133—
At that time these students shall be assigned to the 
school or schools serving the area or areas in which 
they reside.

(g) Upon the completion of the Albemarle Road 
Junior High School, the Crestdale Elementary School

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



301a

will be discontinued. At that time the children (grades 
1-6) attending that school shall be assigned to the school 
or schools serving the area or areas in which they 
reside.

(h) By the end of the 1966-67 school term, new 
attendance areas, based on good faith consideration of 
geographical factors only, shall be established for the 
Sterling Elementary School, the Torrence-Lytle Ele­
mentary School, the J. H. Gunn Elementary School, 
and the Ada Jenkins Elementary School. These at­
tendance boundaries shall be contiguous with other 
elementary school attendance areas adjacent to these 
areas. The children attending these schools at the 
time the attendance areas are established shall then 
he assigned to the school or schools serving the area 
or areas in which they reside; or

By the end of the 1966-67 school term the Sterling 
Elementary School, the Torrence-Lytle Elementary 
School, the J. H. Gunn Elementary School, and the 
Ada Jenkins Elementary School shall be discontinued 
and the children attending these schools shall be as­
signed to the school or schools serving the area or 
areas in which they reside.

(i) Upon the completion of the Southwest Senior
—134—

High School, the Plato Price Junior High School 
(grades 7-9) shall be discontinued and the children 
attending that school in those grades shall be assigned 
to the school or schools serving the area or areas in 
which they reside. At this time, also, new attendance 
areas (or a new attendance area) shall be established,

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



302a

based on good faith consideration of geographical fac­
tors only, for the Amay James and Plato Price Ele­
mentary Schools. The boundaries of these new areas 
(or this new area) shall be contiguous with other 
elementary school attendance areas adjacent to these 
areas (or this area).

(j) Upon the completion of the Southwest Senior 
High School, a new attendance area, based on good 
faith, consideration of geographical factors only, shall 
be established for the Woodland Elementary School. 
The boundaries of this attendance area shall be con­
tiguous with the boundaries of the adjacent attendance 
areas and children attending the Woodland Elementary 
School at that time shall he assigned to the school or 
schools serving the area or areas in which the children 
reside.

(k) Upon the completion of the Southwest Senior 
High School, the York Road Senior High School pro­
gram will be discontinued. At that time the rising 
10th, 11th, and 12th grade students at York Road 
Senior High School shall be assigned to the school or 
schools serving the area or areas in which they reside.

—135—
(l) Upon the completion of the Southwest Senior 

High School, a new attendance area, based on good 
faith consideration of geographical factors only, shall 
be established for the York Road Junior High School. 
The boundaries of this attendance area shall be con­
tiguous with the boundaries of adjacent attendance 
areas and children attending the York Road Junior 
High School at that time shall he assigned to the

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



303a

school or schools serving the area or areas in which 
the children reside.

(m) Upon the completion of the East Central 
Junior High School, the Billingsville Junior High 
School shall be discontinued and the children attend­
ing that school shall be assigned to the school serving 
the area in which the children reside.”

Q. Dr. Phillips, has the school system undertaken the 
assignment of pupils under this plan for the forthcoming 
1965-66 school term? A. Yes, sir, it has.
A. Yes, sir, it has.

Q. Tell us just what was done with regard to the assign­
ment, how it was done and to what areas, what schools 
they were assigned. A. First, prior to the June 2 assign­
ment, Mr. Barkley, the capacities were set as directed in 
the plan for the school system and then the mechanics 
were set up for the official assignment for the some 75,000 
youngsters who were anticipated for the coming year.

—1 3 6 -
Maps—this map as is seen here, three of them, one ele­
mentary, one junior high and one senior high—copies were 
made of the master map which was signed by the Board 
Chairman and the Superintendent and hangs in the Board 
of Education Office, copies were made and sent to each of 
the 109 schools. The principals were, both through written 
instructions and verbal instructions, very carefully set 
up for the assignment of the pupils in accordance with 
the assignment plan and these simple instructions were 
to assign in the 99 schools, with the 10 exceptions, to as­
sign the children who resided in the specific school areas

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



304a

to the school which served that area and this was gone 
over in right lengthy detail and copies of these instruc­
tions have been a part of the record.

Q. Do you have a copy of the instructions here? A. 
Yes, sir, I do. That’s it right there, yes, sir.

Q. That paper, does it contain the instructions that went 
out to all principals? A. Yes, sir, that were presented to 
them in a meeting of all the general staff and these were 
given to each of the principals and then discussed.

Court: Let the Clerk mark it and give it an ex­
hibit number.

(Defendant’s Exhibit A marked for identifica­
tion.)

A. Then, Mr. Barkley, the principals met with their teach-
— 137—

ers and with their maps, with their emphasis on their own 
areas but having to be cognizant of all the areas because 
most of the schools had youngsters who had moved and 
prior to this time had lived in other areas. They made 
the actual assignment that went on report cards on June 
2. We had prepared a letter to all parents, some 75 to 
78,000 copies in total, and gave each of the principals the 
number needed to attach to each report card of each child. 
We actually instructed the principals to staple these to the 
report cards because of our general experience with young­
sters that if you don’t put it all together it doesn’t get 
home some of the time and we made extra effort to make 
sure that every parent had this instruction and that letter 
is in the file. Along with this, a special letter was drawn for 
each of the 10 exception areas which, in rather careful

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



305a

detail, spelled out what the Board of Education’s plan 
did and what it set up for each of the 10 areas and that is 
also a matter of record.

Q. That also is in the answers to the interrogatories? 
A. I think that’s correct.

Q. Can you tell His Honor just briefly what those letters 
contained? A. The letter which went to all of the parents 
of the 75,000 boys and girls said that the Board of Educa­
tion had adopted a new policy on assignment for the Char- 
lotte-Mecklenburg Schools as of March 11 and actually

—138—
took a quote from the plan which you just read which 
indicated that attendance areas had been set for all of 
the schools with the 10 exceptions and these 10 exceptions 
were listed at the bottom of that letter, and with a state­
ment which said that an accompanying letter would be 
attached to the 10 schools. And the parent was told, 
again quoting from the plan, that following initial as­
signment every parent would have the right of free choice 
of transfer and this was spelled out in the letter. The 
letter also stated there would be no implication of no 
pressures whatsoever as far as the child or parent would 
be concerned from school personnel in any way as to 
whatever decision was made about choice. The letters 
that were sent to the 10 excepted schools spelled out 
in detail what would happen at each of these schools. I 
shall take the Sterling letter as an example. It was 
addressed to parents of children at Sterling School grades 
1 to 9. It was not sent to grades 10, 11 and 12 because 
these children had been initially assigned in the main to 
South Mecklenburg because this was the area in which 
they lived. It then spelled out, quoting from the plan 
again, the factors involved in the plans for Sterling,

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



306a

that Sterling would be closed, the senior high school, 
as of the end of this year; that the junior high school 
would be closed upon the completion of the Southwest 
Senior High School and that new lines, based on good 
faith consideration, would be set for the Sterling School.

—139—
And again it was spelled out to these parents that they 
had the right of choice of transfer following this initial 
assignment. The letter did state, in pointblank terms, 
that the Board still carried the overlapping school areas. 
This came out of the plan itself. And the letter really 
carried all of the information we could possibly present 
for the parents benefit and on the back of each of these 
was the form for request of transfer and they were told 
that was on the back and could be used if they requested 
a change.

Q. Doctor, in addition to the notice to the parents on 
the report cards by the letter, was anything else done 
to advertise or give public notice of the text of the as­
signment plan? A. Yes, sir, very much was done. In 
accordance with the stipulation of the plan, the total 
plan was carried in the morning and afternoon press in 
two consecutive weeks as spelled out in the actual plan 
itself. In addition, close to a thousand copies of this 
plan were spread out all over Mecklenburg County. We 
have 545 school committeemen—five for each of the schools 
—and copies were given to each of the principals so 
that each school committeeman could have a full copy 
of this plan in addition to that one in the school itself, 
plus the 109 copies of this map put out in the schools. 
The news media, newspapers, radio and television, did

—140—
what I felt was a very capable job of expressing the

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



3 0 7 a

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct

intent of the plan and specific provisions. So it was widely 
spread right after the adoption on March 11.

Q. Can you give us the date that postcards, letters and 
request forms were sent to the parents! A. You mean 
the report cards!

Q. Yes. A. June 2.
Q. Were letters mailed to those pre-schoolers at the 

same time! A. A notice of assignment plus the letter 
explaining the Board’s action went to each of the pre­
school children who had been registered for first grade 
attendance for the coming fall, and actually our best 
figures showed us that we had all hut about 700 or less 
of those who were anticipated actually assigned on June 
2 through a notice of assignment which is also in the 
record.

Q. I believe the assignment plan provided that trans­
fer requests should be submitted by June 30! A. June 
30, yes, sir.

Q. Which gave about 28 days that the parents had in 
which to request transfer change! A. Yes, sir.

Court: The transfer permission did apply to
students in the excepted schools!

A. Yes, sir.
—141 -

Court: And that was plain in the letter!

A. Yes, sir. Actually they had two letters. They had 
the letter that went to all 75,000 plus the special letter 
that applied to their school.

Court: Both said that they had the right to
request transfer and it would be done as a matter 
of course!



308a

A. Yes, sir, and both had copies of the form on the back.
Q. Now, Doctor, this is after June 30, have you been 

able to get in sufficient reports showing the initial as­
signment of Negro children and white children as a result 
of this new assignment plan! A. Yes, sir. Following 
the June 30 deadline date for receipt of these requests 
for transfer, our staff has spent many an hour in the 
analysis of these choice of transfers and the figures re­
lating to assignment. Our most difficult problem has come 
about by the actual requests of the Court for a break­
down by race and the request from the Department of 
Health, Education and Welfare for a breakdown by race 
because we do not keep records now on the basis of race 
itself, and our only means of anticipating the youngsters 
who were Negro and who were white was to go to the 
schools which they had been attending the past, schools 
that had been identified in our overlapping system as 
we have come along as schools serving Negro children, and 
these figures have been compiled and are available for 
analysis.

—142—
Q. You said that the Court asked for these. Let’s 

blame it on Mr. Chambers. A. In the interrogatories, 
yes, sir.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct

Court: I wasn’t aware I had asked.

Q. Now, Doctor, are you able to state to the Court 
what your report shows as to the number of Negro children 
who were initially assigned as a result of the geographical 
zoning of the school system to integrated or all white 
schools'? A. Yes, sir. I would need my sheet here to be 
specific. I can be general but if you will give me the



309a

black book there. (The book is handed to the witness.) 
In total, Mr. Barkley, the number of Negro pupils ini­
tially assigned to what would be called integrated schools 
was 1955 Negro youngsters. This included boys and girls 
who had been in attendance in a number of schools under 
the geographic plan that had existed prior to this and 
under the request for change of assignment. This figure 
was 1955.

Q. That was initial assignment! A. That was initial 
assignment.

Q. May I ask you, when you count the total number 
of initial assignments, do you first deduct the number 
of pupils who were assigned initially when these partic­
ular school grades were closed? A. No, it does not. I 
think this figure needs to be clarified. In total there were 
some 3200 requests for change of assignment made. This

—143—
is in the initial assignment. This is less the boys and 
girls, there were 345 youngsters in total who returned 
to the school of initial assignment because there was 
not room in the school to which they had asked entrance. 
These were not necessarily racial patterns. Let’s take 
the Second Ward, West Charlotte. Both of these are all 
Negro senior high schools. In the changing of the lines 
between West Charlotte and Second Ward on a geographic 
basis, there was a sizable number of youngsters assigned 
to West Charlotte for the first time who had been at 
Second Ward. These youngsters asked, under the free 
choice plan, to return to Second Ward and gave only one 
choice. Second Ward could not accommodate any of the 
first choices so these youngsters were assigned back to 
the West Charlotte which was their initial assignment. 
This worked both ways and it worked the same way be­

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



310a

tween Garringer and Second Ward, between Myers Park 
and Second Ward and actually a number of Negro young­
sters who were in the new Myers Park area and assigned 
to Myers Park—26 altogether—who asked to go back to 
Second Ward but only gave one choice, Second Ward, and 
because of the limitation of space they were assigned 
and show in this figure assigned to Myers Park.

Q. Myers Park is a white high school! A. Yes, sir, 
predominantly white and with these 26 would be 150 or 
160 Negro youngsters.

—144—
Q. Of those assigned back to the original schools, they 

would represent children who had requested the transfer 
from one Negro school to another Negro school or one 
white school to another white school! A. Yes, sir.

Q. And there were about 345 of these! A. 345 of these.
Q. Do you know how many Negro children requested 

transfer to a white school after the initial assignment! 
A. Mr. Barkley, I believe that the figure of 200—let me 
find the right sheet here, excuse me a minute—there were 
262 requests of Negro youngsters to enter integrated 
schools or predominantly white schools. To the best of 
my knowledge this figure is correct. Again the problem, 
for example, the Piedmont Junior High School, which 
has a sizable number of both Negro and white, it was 
difficult to determine always which were Negro youngsters 
and which were white. But there were 262 requests to 
enter and to the best of my knowledge there were only 
5 boys and girls who had requested by first choice and 
only choice to a white school who were denied. I have 
the names of these 5. There were 3 who were assigned 
to Second Ward who requested assignment to Garringer. 
There was not room at Garringer. They had no other

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



311a

choice on the form so they were assigned back to Second 
Ward. There were two West Charlotte children, living- 
in the West Charlotte area by the geographic areas who

—145—
requested Garringer and were denied because Garringer 
didn’t have room for any first choices.

Q. Doctor, I believe that thing that you have shows there 
were a great many more requests to transfer by pupils 
enrolled in white schools than those enrolled in Negro 
schools, is that correct! A. Yes, sir.

Q. Can you explain why there were more among the 
children in white schools than those among the children 
in Negro schools! A. It’s important to take a look at 
the actual distribution as per the requests made through 
the interrogatories and H.E.W. The basic lists were 
made of Negro youngsters requesting or initially assigned 
to predominantly white schools. We do have a distribu­
tion of pupils who were returned to initial assignment. 
For example, East Mecklenburg had 13 students who 
were returned, white students who were returned to East 
Mecklenburg who wanted to go to Garringer like the 
youngers I just mentioned but who could not get into 
Garringer. They had been in Garringer and the line 
had changed them away from that school. They wanted 
to go back but could not go back because there wasn’t 
room. There were 10 youngsters returned to Eastwav 
Junior High School who probably requested McClintock 
Junior High School, again to fit the geographic concept 
because of the change of the lines. They had been in

—146—
McClintock, they were assigned anew to Eastway, they 
wanted to go back to McClintock, there wasn’t room and 
this was their only choice and they were sent back to

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



312a

Eastway. There were 8 at Matthews who applied for 
McClintock who couldn’t get in and they were sent back.

Q. Those are all white students? A. Yes, sir, these 
are all white. The majority of the returnees were Negro 
youngsters returned to their initial assignment from other 
Negro schools rather than from the white schools.

Q. I believe there is a great preference among the 
pupils as between Second Ward and Irwin Avenue and 
West Charlotte, is that right? A. Yes, sir.

Q. All of them are in solidly Negro areas? A. That’s 
correct.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct

Court: Initially there were 1955 Negro students 
assigned to mixed or previously white schools?

A. Yes, sir.

Court: And then, after the initial assignment, 
262 Negro students asked to go into integrated 
schools and all were granted permission except the 
5 you mentioned?

A. Yes, sir?

Court: Now then, how many Negroes, if any, 
asked to go back to what we might call for con­
venience a Negro school?

—147—
A. 91 requests to leave that made the balance of the 2126 
total Negro students in integrated schools.

Court: Those 91 asked to go back to an all Negro 
school ?

A. Yes, sir.



313a

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct

Court: If you start with your 1955 and add 
257—

A. 262.

Court: No, 262 except for 5.

A. The 5 were in addition to the 262.

Court: 1955 plus 262 minus 91.

A. That’s right, yes, sir. These are, by the way, in 43 
schools altogether. The 2126 students are in the 43 schools. 
In addition, there were 15 schools that were predominantly 
Negro to which white children were initially assigned.

Q. As a result of this geographical zoning! A. Yes, 
sir.

Court: I ended up with 2126.

A. Yes, sir, that’s right.

Court: In 43 schools.

A. Yes, sir.

Court: And the 43, what’s your term for it, 
integrated!

A. Integrated, yes, sir.
Q. Doctor, before we get to the matter of the map of 

these excepted schools, can you give us the general trend
—148—

of the school population in Mecklenburg County from the 
standpoint of annual growth!—in recent years. A. Yes,



314a

sir. On the average we would hit around 3000 new children 
each year. We reached our peak two years ago, I believe 
it was, when we hit 3700 new pupils. This was the heavy 
rise at the upper level in senior high school. We’re expect­
ing 2100 this year, approximately 21 to 2500 for the next 
two or three years and then an abrupt new growth again 
that will run on back up to 3000, 3500.

Q. How long has that been going on! A. To the best 
of my knowledge, for the three year period of time the 
first year I was here it was 3300 or 3400 and it went up 
to 3700 and then has come back down. The growth has 
bene historically rather- large in this community.

Q. I take it that is the increase in the net! A. Yes, sir.'
Q. What do 2100 additional pupils make necessary in 

the way of additional classroom space! A. Well, in 
simplest terms this is about 70 to 75 new classrooms each 
year. It’s not quite that easy because the distribution 
pattern is not equal throughout the county because there 
are more rapidly growing areas in some sections of the 
county. So the problem is compounded by this concentra­
tion of growth and where a classroom in one area of the 
county might not be of help in the other, there is a need 
for more than 70 to 75 classrooms throughout the system.

—149—
This has all been a part of the total building program 
started back in December, 1962, with a report which called 
for approximatey thirty-five million dollars for the six 
year period up to 1970.

Q. Do you know approximatey how much money you 
have invested in new building since ’62! A. Roughly we 
have thirty million dollars that will have been completed 
by September of 1967. We hope to finish most of it by

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



315a

September, 1966, which is just the one year away. Ap- 
proximatey thirty million dollars.

Court: How long a period!

A. There was a vote of eight million four in 1961, then a 
vote of fifteen million six in 1963, then a five million six 
hundred thousand dollar allocation from the hundred 
million dollar bond program this past November, and 
then the remnants of about a five million dollar issue that 
was in 1960, ’59 or ’60, one of the two. We are completing 
expenditure of approximately thirty million dollars by 
next September and in total by September of 1967.

Court: Approximately a five year period?

A. Yes, sir. About five million dollars average per yeai> 
in expenditure in capital investment and new facilities.

Q. Can you state whether this huge construction pro­
gram has been directed in any manner towards the 
development of the new assignment plan? A. Yes, sir,

— 150—
I think this has been real clear and clearly laid out in 
the plan itself. When the Board made its last clearcut 
decision to not build any facilities that would overlap 
or continue the concept of dual facilities, this plan was 
set up to produce school buildings where the children 
are and will be and all of the plan has been geared to 
this very idea and this can be documented by going right 
around the horn and talking about the new schools that 
are now being planned and will be ready, we hope, by 
September of ’66. Actually, we are just about a year and 
a half away from the completion of most of these facilities.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



316a

Q. Doctor, can yon, without having to use the map 
again—I’m afraid that confuses the Court, it confuses 
me—if you could just locate these different projects. A. 
Yes, sir. Start down in the southwest comer, if we may, and 
we can go right around the map.

Mr. Chambers: Your Honor, may I inquire if 
he is talking about new projects now planned or— ? 

Mr. Barkley: On the drawing board, I’d say.

A. And I can identify where it is at this particular moment, 
if you want. The Southwest Senior High School is down 
in the lower lefthand corner and this is a protect for 
which about a million seven hundred fifty thousand dollars 
has been allocated. The architectural firm of Cameron & 
Associates is doing this job. It is in the final working

—1 5 1 -
drawing stages now and will be bid, we hope, in the next 
several weeks or at least the next month and a half.

Court: What’s it near that I might know about!

A. It’s on the Sandy Porter Road, down towards the river.

Court: I’ve always been sorry that Charlotte is 
built on a bias.

A. May I come over there and point to it!

Mr. Barkley: It would help if you would point it 
out there.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct

(The witness goes to the map.)



317a

A. It’s right here, Your Honor. (Pointing.) Here’s the 
York Road Senior High School that we’ve mentioned 
several times. Here’s Pineville. Our South Mecklenburg 
High School is over here. West Mecklenburg Senior High 
School is here. This will be Southwest, this will be South. 
This will take in this whole area right here between West 
and South and will eliminate York Road Senior High 
School. This one is underway, the property has been bought, 
a 60-acre site, right here where my finger is. We move 
around this way, and an addition is being built right now 
and it’s about at the end of the preliminary drawings, 
for the West Mecklenburg Senior High School. This is to 
expand the facilities at West Mecklenburg to tie in with 
the growth for senior high school facilities when the York 
Road is eliminated here. And new lines must be drawn

—152—
when this school is completed to redistribute the children 
in this area, both white and Negro. But the York Road 
Senior High School, which is now Negro, would be 
eliminated and the youngsters assigned there will be basic­
ally distributed between Harding—those in the Harding 
area—those out in the West Mecklenburg area that we’ve 
heard something about today, those down in this area 
and some from the south area.

Court: Will both of them serve mostly students 
outside the city limits?

A. We have really ceased to be much aware of where 
the city limits are because we are a county-wide system 
but it will serve both. This has not been drawn specifically 
yet but the area for Southwest will be something like this,

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



318a

a pieshaped area. Most of the other areas will be this same 
way. The West Mecklenburg area is here.

Court: To get me oriented, where is uptown
on that map!

A. Right here.

Court: Where is the Myers Park area!

A. Myers Park is down in here. Here is the Myers Park 
High School, the Alexander Graham Junior High School 
and the Selwyn Elementary Schoo, right in this area. 
That’s southwest and it may he easier to come this way, 
southwest is here. We come around to the eastern area 
and a new school is being planned out in what is called 
the northeastern area on Wilson Grove Road and this

—153—
is the same size school as Southwest. The firm of Marsh 
and Hawkins are the architects, the property has been 
bought and the plans are probably a week or two ahead 
of Southwest. This is a new senior high school which will 
make it possible to eliminate the Gunn Senior High School 
and those youngsters will be assigned to the Northeast 
Senior High School, to the East Mecklenburg Senior High 
School and to Garringer because Gunn right now serves 
this whole area. This is the exception school, but the 
Northeast Senior High will make it possible to eliminate 
the Gunn Senior High and all these youngsters redis­
tributed. The Albemarle Road Junior High School is 
planned at the intersection of Delta Road and Lawyers 
Road out towards Albemarle. A 40-acre site has been 
purchased here and the firm of A. G. Odell has been con­
tracted for the plans here and the budget items have been

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



319a

set up for this school. When that is completed in Sep­
tember of ’66, which is the anticipated date, the Matthews 
Junior High School, which we discussed a little while ago, 
will be discontinued. That will become a full elementary- 
school and the Crestdale elementary children would then 
become a part of the Matthews and Crestdale will then 
be discontinued, and these youngsters distributed between 
them.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct

Court: Matthews, that’s the little town of Mat­
thews ?

—154—
A. Yes, sir. The coming inward, talking about Billingsville, 
right here, the Billingsville Junior High School, one of 
the excepted schools, is being taken care of with a new 
East Central Junior High School which is planned for 
right in here. It is in the hands of the Charles Connelly 
and Associates, architects, and they have the preliminary 
drawings going on this. The site is under condemnation 
right now and I haven’t heard the latest on it. It’s still 
in the courts, I think, under condemnation. This school 
will relieve the crowded conditions at McClintock, at 
Alexander Graham, and will eliminate the Billingsville 
Junior High School. This is anticipated to be ready in 
September of 1966. We have an elementary school, the 
Allenbrook Elementary School, which was just bid the 
other day and is under study now for the acceptance of 
the bid and will clear up the Woodland area and make it 
possible to rezone the Woodland area and make it con­
tiguous in the new area for Allenbrook and also will help 
to clear up the problem at Plato Price and Amay James. 
You see, when you come both ways and southwest, here, 
it will relate to the clearing up of these two areas. As



320a

the plan lays it out, these will he redrawn to be contiguous 
on the basis of good faith considerations only with the 
Barringer and Ashley Park, which you have heard men­
tioned so many times. Hidden Valley is an elementary 
school and it’s about two weeks away from being bid for 
construction and it relates to the Derita School, we have

—155—
heard mentioned, it relates to the Druid Hills School, and 
one of the lines that I ’m sure that the consultant who 
was here questioned was off Interstate 85 which is an area 
that will be resolved when Hidden Valley is opened up 
in September of ’66. North Mecklenburg is slated for the 
other addition. North Mecklenburg Senior High School 
is right in here and this will make it possible to complete 
the transition that is taking place at Torrence-Lytle now. 
It’s already started, the 10th graders have already been 
assigned out of Torrence-Lytle, and the 11th and 12th 
graders will be assigned into North, and the junior high 
youngsters, with two junior highs serving the area, Ranson 
and Alexander, splitting these up would eliminate the 
Torrence-Lytle Junior and Senior High Schools completely. 
This would leave a decision for the Board to make in terms 
of eliminating the Torrence-Lytle facility completely, 
drawing a new line for it, and also drawing a new line 
for the xLda Jenkins or eliminating it completely.

Mr. Barkley: I believe we gave the Court and we 
want to offer in evidence the Charlotte Planning- 
Commissions map showing the strictly solidly Negro 
areas.

Mr. Chambers: Are you offering it now?
Mr. Barkley: Yes.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



321a

Mr. Chambers: Objection.
Court: Overruled. Are you requesting authen­

ticity of it?
Mr. Chambers: We are questioning whether the 

lines actually show the present racial patterns, 
housing patterns in the City of Charlotte, as I gather 
is the purpose of the offering.

Court: I expect you better offer some testimony 
about it. If he’s questioning authenticity, it may 
not be admissable.

Q. Can you point out generally the area of Mecklenburg 
County, which I believe would be mostly in Charlotte, 
which comprises the solidly Negro residential area?

Court: This is the one that objection has been 
made to.

Mr. Barkley: Yes, sir.

A. Mr. Barkley, this is a map obtained from the Planning 
Office of non-white housing in 1960 and it basically follows 
the pattern of the map that was submitted to the Health, 
Education and Welfare as an indication of the racial 
pattern of residences.

Q. Are you familiar with the residential racial patterns 
of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County? A. In 
general, yes, sir.

Q. Have you examined this map? A. Yes, sir.
—157—

Q. Can you state whether this map fairly represents 
the racial pattern of residence of the city and county? 
A. Yes, sir.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct

—156—



322a

Mr. Chambers: Objection.
Court: Overruled.
Mr. Barkley: We offer it for the purpose of 

illustrating the testimony.
Mr. Chambers: Objection.
Court: Let it be received for that limited pur­

pose.
(Defendant’s Exhibit B received in evidence.)

Q. Doctor, can you put the location there generally! 
A. Generally the heavy Negro residential area falls in this 
area right through here, Your Honor, which runs down 
into the center city. As you know, the great transition 
taking place in the center city itself with urban renewal 
and there is a great deal of moving of Negro families and 
most of this movement is in this direction. In addition 
to this, the fairly heavy single pocket relates to the 
Billingsville area.

Court: Could you hold that up at the same time! 
Are both maps in the same relative position to 
each other!

A. Yes, sir. Here’s the heavy green in the northwest. 
Here’s Interstate 85—this is Interstate 85 that runs across 
the top.

—158—
Court: Is that Johnson C. Smith area at the 

top!

A. Yes, sir.

Court: Then it drops down a bit and hits the 
McDowell Street area.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



323a

A. Yes, sir. This is all downtown where there are no 
residences. This is the urban renewal area. And this is 
over in the Dilworth area, and then out towards Wilmore 
and then into the York Road area, and out into the Plato 
Price, Amay James area, and then over here to the 
Billingsville area.

Court: That’s the only one I can’t orient myself 
about.

A. Do you know where Chantilly is, the Merchandise Mart, 
the Coliseum?

Court: Yes, sir.

A. This is behind the Coliseum, across Monroe Road.

Court: Behind the Coliseum?

A. Yes, sir, south, behind it directly and then it covers 
an area between Monroe Road, or at least the railroad 
tracks and Randolph Road and goes out to where the 
belt road—this is one of the factors that the gentleman 
who was studying our lines was not aware of, the proposed 
belt road about which you’ve heard a great deal, I’m 
sure—it comes right across this back edge of this residen­
tial area. These areas of the real light green represent 
a small percentage and the only thing I know about this 
is this is the Methodist Home, a major recreation park

- 1 5 9 -
area through here and this represents a small group of 
Negro families in the Windwor Park area who were as­
signed to the Windsor Park Elementary School this year.

Q. What kind of school is that? A. That is predomi­
nantly white. These children were assigned there on the

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



324a

basis of geographic assignment. There are very few 
children in there. There is a movement of this residential 
pattern, and I ’m sure you’ve heard of this in recent days, 
and there is some complaint and controversy over the 
development of new residential areas on the other side.

Court: Erwin Village f

A. Yes, sir. Northwood and the development of Hyde 
Park and some of the others that relate to these schools, 
Longcreek and Oakdale is in here and some of the others. 
These children are all now going, except those right on 
the walking distance edge on this side, to Torrence-Lytle 
by bus. They would be reassigned to the schools serving 
their areas with this transition that is proposed in the 
plan and the ones in the Long Creek area would go to 
Long Creek and so forth on around. Now, there are 
spots—Torrence-Lytle has a little Negro development 
around it, and there are others, they are fairly small 
concentrations but they do exist in these areas in small 
quantities. This was prepared by our staff and very 
general.

—160—
Q. Are you familiar with the location of the small 

Negro settlements in the county? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does that drawing fairly represent the location of 

these settlements?

Mr. Chambers: We’d like to object.
Court: Overruled.

A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Barkley: We offer this for the purpose of 
illustrating the testimony.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



325a

Mr. Chambers: Objection.
Court: Overruled, let it be received.

(Defendant’s Exhibit C received in evidence.)

Q. Doctor, in this area you have described as being 
highly segregated Negro residential property, are there 
a number of schools located within that area! A. Yes, 
sir, large numbers because the population is high.

Q. Is there any geographical way, other than bussing, 
that you could avoid a segregated school system in that 
area in the absence of the exercise of free choice?

Mr. Chambers: Objection.
Court: Overruled.

A. No, sir, this would be the only way with the few ex­
ceptions of the youngsters near the water works. These 
youngsters have been assigned to the school serving the

- 1 6 1 -
area but there are not any white residential areas there.

Q. Assuming that that area is as you represented by 
your testimony with reference to the map, upon the com­
pletion of this building program and the establishment 
of these new zones and the abandonment of these old 
schools, will there be any schools in the entire county that 
will not be integrated except possibly those schools in 
the solidly Negro area around Brooklyn and Johnson C. 
Smith?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct

Mr. Chambers: Objection.
Court: Overruled.

A. That is basically correct, Mr. Barkley. To the best 
of my knowledge, when the youngsters at Gunn and



326a

Torrence-Lytle and Sterling where Woodland and the 
other are involved are redistributed under the plan, it’s 
highly unlikely that there would he any school that would 
not be integrated except those in this high concentration 
of Negro residences there.

Q. Do you have any plans to build any schools in that 
area that will be a segregated school! A. Within any 
of the area in this section!

Q. Yes, sir. A. No, sir.
Q. Doctor, we have had considerable testimony with 

Mr. Kramer here about the location of boundary lines. 
Are you in a position to explain or locate the lines of any 
of these schools! A. Yes, sir.

—162—
Q. On the Lakeview School, which I believe was the 

first one, he said that the northeast line starts at Rozzels 
Perry Road, that it should continue to Steel Creek Road. 
Now, can you explain to us how the Lakeview line hap­
pened to he drawn! A. Yes, sir. If I could give a general 
statement of how this was done, I think it might help be­
cause the same thing would relate to all of the areas. When 
the decision was made to proceed with the complete as­
signment by attendance areas and the plan called for the 
Board to adopt attendance area lines, the staff went to 
work on the complete analysis of the system and the lines 
that would be needed for geographical assignment on 
the basis of good faith consideration only. Our business 
services department, which has an assistant superin­
tendent in charge of it and has a full time person in the 
planning side of it, along with every principal in the 
system and with every resource we could tap, went to 
work to develop the lines for the system on this basis 
of good faith consideration. I happened to have taken

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



327a

the time myself to work directly with Mr. Morgan, our, 
Assistant Superintendent, so that I could be familiar with 
the development of these lines and I take direct responsi­
bility for the development of those that were recommended

—163—
to the Board of Education for adoption with the March 
11th plan. The Lakeview line, as an example, was drawn 
with the basic distribution pattern of the area tied in with 
the natural boundaries, the railroad track, which is the 
line on that side in question by Mr. Kramer, with a 
major creek line that was also in question by Mr. Kramer, 
the movement of children toward a street and toward a 
school and a general concept of the capacity of the school 
and an understanding through experience and judgment 
of the size of the normal school area. All of these factors 
went into the establishment of the lines at Lakeview and 
all of the other 99 lines.

Q. Will you state whether or not racial considerations 
were taken in the drawing of any of the lines?

Mr. Chambers: Objection.
Court: Overruled.

A. No, sir, they were not, with the exception of the 10 
schools that were outlined in the plan.

Court: Mr. Kramer was especially critical that 
you had not followed Rozzels Ferry Road, do you 
have a comment about that? You started down 
Rozzels Ferry Road and then left it.

A. Yes, sir. May I step down?

Court: Yes, sir. (The witness goes to the map.) 
Anybody got a map of these questioned zones?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



328a

A. We’ve got the master original maps from which this 
one was done which are much easier to see.

—164 -
Court: All right.

A. Your Honor, the Lakeview lines are right in here and 
the question Mr. Kramer raised was on the basis of 
Rozzels Ferry Road, Highway 16, which comes out this 
way. This is the railroad track that comes down here 
and branches off of it. Rozzels Ferry Road crosses the 
railroad right here and there is an open area through 
there and the railroad track goes right down this line and 
moves away from Rozzels Ferry Road at this point. And 
so this line, you see, instead of coming straight out here 
moved in here because all of these children, the only 
movement they could have is in this direction.

Court: Without crossing the railroad!

A. Yes, sir. To show the intent of the Board of Educa­
tion, originally the Seversville line, which is the school 
contiguous with Lakeview, this line ran up in here and 
picked out, gerrymandered, a little white development in 
here that had been built several years ago and the original 
lines, which the Board has admitted were set on racial 
basis a number of years ago, this original line went up 
in here and came back, and the Board has adopted this, 
clear-out line which goes down this creek and then out 
that road. This is a very typical example of the lines 
that we have run.

Court: We are going down each one of them.
It would help me to take the next according to

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



329a

Dr. A. Craig Phillips— for Defendant—Direct

—165—
my notes. That’s Thomasboro Elementary. I don’t 
know there was any attack made on the lines. Paw 
Creek, Mr. Kramer testified that Mount Holly Eoad 
lies between Paw Creek and Woodland School and 
the south border of Paw Creek should follow Paw 
Creek but it does not.

A. The Woodland School is right in here. You will note 
that the exception schools are not drawn. Woodland 
overlaps this area. The Paw Creek area is contiguous 
with the Tuckaseegee area. Both of these are predomi­
nantly white schools and the children have been reas­
signed to Woodland pending the completion of Southwest 
and the reorganization of all of this and a new line will 
be drawn in here between Paw Creek and Woodland so 
that Paw Creek, Woodland and Tuckaseegee and possibly 
Allenbrook, which conies out somewhere in here a new 
school, then there will be new school lines drawn for all 
of these areas, and Woodland will be redrawn.

Court: You’re saying in effect that Mr. Kramer 
is right and that you’re just going to do it later.

A. This is basically correct, yes, sir. I don’t know if 
the Mount Holly Road is right or not. There’s been no 
line drawn for the new Allenbrook School.

Q. The new line will effect Amay James and Plato Price, 
is that right? A. Yes, sir, and then all of these schools

- 1 6 6 -
in here. Berryhill will be effected by it and a new set 
of lines will need to be drawn all the way through, but 
there will not be a Negro elementary school in the context 
of the exceptions as it is now declared.



330a

Court: The next one that I have is Barringer 
where the boundary was questioned. Mr. Kramer 
said the sewer plant is the southwest boundary 
and it should be the railroad tracks.

A. I ’m not sure that I know what Mr. Kramer is talking 
about and I don’t believe he does either.

Court: He said that the boundary left Remount 
Road.

Mr. Chambers: Your Honor, we move to strike 
the last statement.

Court: Motion denied.

A. Your Honor, this line is contiguous with Berryhill and 
the Amay James School. It’s a new primary Negro ele­
mentary school right now and the Plato Price School is 
right here. When these changes are made, in connection 
with this whole massive change in the western area with 
Allenbrook coming in, then new lines will be drawn for 
either both of these schools or, as outlined in the plan, 
for one, either eliminating the whole one or making an 
area right in here that would serve.

Court: So the Barringer boundary will be
changed!

A. Yes, sir.
—167—

Q. Have you pointed out the Barringer boundary yet? 
A. Yes, sir. I think Mr. Kramer questioned one other 
point in it, if I may, this little area back in here. I think 
he mentioned this line ought to have come down in be-,

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



331a

tween Wilmore and Barringer. There is a long history, 
this has nothing to do with racial patterns whatsoever. 
There is a small group of children right in here on that 
side of Remount Road where a rather sizable industrial 
development has taken place. These children had been 
moved hack and forth between Barringer and Wilmore 
two, three or four times in the last several years when 
this new construction took place and the school got 
crowded and they were moved hack. After a great deal 
of debate this line was left as it was between Wilmore 
and Barringer. It had nothing to do with the racial make­
up of the two because these were in the main white 
children in this area.

Court: Mr. Kramer mentioned Eastover elemen­
tary saying that one line starts down Randolph 
Road and then swings out to include Durham Drive 
in order to take in some white children. Do you 
have any comment about that?

A. This is the Eastover School right here. This is the 
Billingsville Elementary School on the western edge of 
its district. This is Randolph Road. The old line, be­
fore these were changed, brought Eastover over into here 
to pick up a group of children and put them into Eastover.

—168—
Historically the Eastover area has grown and grown out 
this way to make use of the facilities because the number 
of children had declined. The line between Billingsville 
and Eastover is a natural boundary of Randolph Road 
and a large creek bed and the Mint Museum, you might 
know, is down through here. This line moved over when 
it reached the creek and went over to a line which is a

Dr. A. Craig Philli-ps—for Defendant—Direct



332a

valley, a gap, right down through. From that side every­
thing moves this way and this line was drawn between 
Elizabeth School and Eastover. It had nothing to do with 
Billingsville. The line between Billingsville and Eizabeth 
and between Billingsville and Eastover was this creek 
line and it goes straight across to the edge of Chantilly.

Court: With respect to Ashley Park, Mr. Kramer 
testified that the west line should go straight down 
Ashley Road, that instead it weaves in and out. 
Would you point that line out?

A. Here’s Ashley Park School right here. The line is be­
tween Ashley Park and Berryhill. It has nothing to do 
with Plato Price because Plato Price is one of the excep­
tion schools. This line he’s talking about, I assume, is 
this line right here. The distribution between Berryhill 
and Ashley Park has been a constantly changing one be­
cause of the transportation pattern prior to consolidation. 
Berryhill was a former county school. Ashley Park was

—169—
on the edge of the city. Under the annexation laws in 1955 
General Assembly, the General Assembly said that the 
Board of Education could not take away from those 
children that had transportation because of annexation.

Court: Is Berryhill an excepted school I

A. No, sir, Berryhill is a white school. The excepted 
school is Plato Price and when that is rezoned this line 
will be redrawn completely in here.

Court: Have we mentioned Billingsville Elemen­
tary?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



333a

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct 

A. No, sir.

Court: Mr. Kramer’s testimony is that the
southern line should be lowered to McAlway Road, 
that the effect of the present line is to keep Negroes 
out of the white Cotswold School district. Do you 
have a comment about that?

A. Yes, sir. Here is the Billingsville School. This line 
is drawn to follow the proposed belt road that is a four- 
lane road that comes through here. There is a wide area 
of nonresidential in there right now.

Court: Where is McAlway!

A. McAlway is on this side about down in here, sir. This 
is the belt road line in here. Could I take liberty of point­
ing out one other thing? This is the location of the 
proposed new junior high school and it is on this side 
of this and there will be movement of children both ways

—170—
and we are proposing to work with the people.

Court: As I recall, Mr. Kramer’s testimony
tended to show that in Derita Elementary School 
the line cuts across 1-85 and that if 1-85 was used 
it would throw out some white children that are 
in Druid Hills or into the Tryon Hills School.

A. This is Derita and here’s Interstate 85. There’s a new 
school, Hidden Valley, the one I mentioned a little while 
ago, that will be bid in the next two or three weeks and 
it’s right in the middle of a large growing development. 
Already the line for the junior high school which is



334a

located right in here has gone up Graham Street. The 
decision the Board made was to leave this for one more 
year because the reshuffling of all these elementary school 
children will have to be done when Hidden Valley is 
completed, but the white children in this area are already 
assigned to the Williams Negro Junior High School.

Court: In other words, you’re saying Mr. Kramer 
might be right and you’re going to change that 
line!

A. Yes, sir, that’s correct.

Court: Gentlemen, those are the only notes that I 
see scanning mind about lines. Go ahead, Mr. 
Barkley, and then I think I’ll let you do an unusual 
thing. If you have some lines in question, suppose 
you cross examine on this subject.

—171—
Mr. Barkley: He had a few more lines down here 

that I had on mine. Billingsville, the line runs 
right near the left side of the school, I believe.

Court: He said he had one school, the school 
was right over the line.

Mr. Barkley: That was probably the Billingsville.
Court: What comment have you about that? I 

remember the testimony, that it’s unusual for a 
school to be right on the line.

A. It’s not really unusual, Your Honor in the pattern 
of distribution of children in an area for it to be closer 
to the line than the center. We were talking in the busi­
ness of circles. It’s impossible geometrically to draw a

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



335a

circular line around the school district. Lines have to be 
drawn on these natural boundaries. Billingsville School 
is right off of Randolph Road, yet there is a major natural 
boundary through here where that wide space is where 
the Mint Museum and all that is located and there is no 
road movement, no road, no walkways of any sort either 
way. Even though it’s on the edge of the territory it makes 
a logical boundary between the two because there isn’t 
any movement both ways.

Court: Mr. Chambers, Mr. Bell, do you have any 
questions about these boundary lines! If so, cross 
examine at this time since it’s hard to do it with

—172—
the maps and without restriction to your right for 
further cross examination later.

Cross Examination by Mr. Chambers:

Q. Dr. Phillips, on the Lakeview Elementary School 
line you said the reason you didn’t follow Rozzels Ferry 
Road is that you were following the railroad tracks 
straight down across Beattys Ford Road! A. No, to 
the creek. There was a housing development in here.

Q. Do you know whether this housing development be­
tween this railroad track and this line is white or Negro! 
A. I understand it’s basically white.

Q. And the Biddleville School is an all Negro School! 
A. I am not sure. Was this where the water works 
children were! It’s basically all Negro, yes. The number 
of children in here were assigned, I’m not sure how many 
remained, I don’t have that record. There is a fairly 
sizable white development right in here, Mr. Chambers.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



336a

You know this development right off of Rozzels Ferry 
Road, this was into Biddleville.

Q. You used this boundary here, the railroad track, as 
a natural boundary that you would normally follow in 
drawing a school zone line but is it not a fact that the 
students here normally cross this line here? A. That 
is not correct, not at the railroad track at this point. They 
cross up here where the railroad track has Beattys Ford

- 1 7 3 -
Road.

Q. Interstate 85, is that a normal boundary line? A. 
Depending on whether there is an access.

Q. Is there an access across here? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you not go up here, across Interstate 85, and 

draw students out of this area here baek to University 
Park School? A. Yes, we do and this is because of the 
walking access across here for this group of youngsters. 
This will be changed with the creation of the Hidden 
Valley School when Derita can be relieved, when States­
ville Road can be relieved and this whole area can be 
rezoned back into Statesville Road. Right now Long Creek 
comes down into here because of bus transportation. There 
was a choice here that had nothing to do with pro or con 
as far as race was concerned whether these children would 
be zoned into Long Creek along with the other Long 
Creek children and bussed all the way up here or con­
tinue for another year in the University Park. There 
are some white children, I believe, that live over in this 
area right here also.

Q. This here is predominantly Negro? A. Yes, sir.-
Q. And University Park is entirely Negro? A. That’s 

correct.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



337a

Q. Is Hoskins white or Negro! A. Hoskins is white.
—174—

Q. Is Oakdale white or Negro? A. Oakdale is white 
basically. There are two or three youngsters, maybe five 
or six Negro youngsters.

Q. Do you have an explanation for the line here not 
being used for these schools, to draw the schools up here 
on the other side of 1-85? A. Which one are you talking 
about?

Q. The students in this section. You have a school the 
same distance away from the students in this section. A. 
This area right in here, Mr. Chambers, is separated— 
I don’t know whether you know this area or not but I 
have driven all over it—this area is separated by a deep 
ravine through where there is no movement across here 
at all. This is both Negro and white children in this area 
and they were zoned into Hoskins because of the move­
ment that goes this way rather than across University 
Park. This is not a racial pattern at all because these 
are both white and Negro.

Q. In the Hoskins area? A. Yes, sir, Pennsylvania 
Avenue and all the rest.

Q. How do you explain, Dr. Phillips, that you have 357 
white students in Hoskins and no Negroes? A. They 
have either all asked to get our or something.

Q. According to initial assignment for this year you 
have 357 white and no Negroes. A. Remember the initial

—17 5 -
assignment are less the children who asked to get out 
of here.

Q. What do you mean less the students who asked to 
get out? I thought your initial assignments were made 
and then requests for assignment out. A. Whatever

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



338a

Negro children are in this area—this is Hoskins—either 
have been assigned here or are in this Woodland-Plato 
Price complex and assigned back to these schools. They 
haven’t been in University Park at all.

Court: The Negroes in that area may be in the 
excepted schools.

A. They could be, yes, sir.

Court: Mr. Chambers and I have the same under­
standing, initial assignment does not mean after 
transfer out.

A. That’s correct.
Q. What excepted school is in this area here, Doctor? 

A. These youngsters have been traditionally bussed, is it 
the Plato Price or Woodland? They have been coming 
in and then going back to West Charlotte.

Q. Where is Plato Price located on the map? A. Right 
here. (Pointing.)

Q. Now, you presently bus these students across the 
Hoskins line, the Lakeview line, the Thomasboro line or 
the Enderly Park line into— ? A. That’s correct, yes.

—176—
Q. What’s the name of that school? A. Plato Price. 

It could be that some of them are in Woodland, I ’m not 
sure.

Q. Is there any space in any of those schools that they 
pass that would accommodate them? A. Yes. If they 
exercised the free choice, they could have gone.

Q. Is there space for you to presently assign them 
initially in either of these schools or all of these schools

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



339a

to which you can assign the students in the Hoskins 
area! A. The Board’s plan didn’t call for this, it called 
for the 10 exceptions.

Q. I recognize that, Doctor, I’m asking now is it pos­
sible now to accommodate these students rather than 
transport them across the areas here into the Plato Price 
School! A. I think the record shows that all of the schools 
have space under the maximum capacity set by the Board, 
yes. May I describe one!

Court: Yes, sir.

A. Mr. Chambers, to follow through on the question, this 
shows the junior high that clear it up. Here’s Interstate 
85 and the 5 through 9 concept at Plato Price involves 
some junior high school youngsters also. The Board, in 
adopting these geographic lines for the junior high school 
area, cleared up this line so that it comes right down 
Interstate 85. It was easier to relate this to the complex

—177—
of the elementary schools.

Q. Dr. Phillips, you were talking about a ditch or some 
natural boundary that you considered in relation to the 
elementary schools over here. A. I was explaining to you 
the reason they have not traditionally gone to the Univer­
sity Park School.

Q. How do you account for the students now crossing 
that line! A. For one thing, they are older students and 
the next thing, this eventually will come down that line.

Q. Presently the junior high school students do cross 
that line. A. That’s correct, yes, sir.

Q. Dr. Phillips, would you consider the line that you 
refer to with the Eastover School as not following the

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



340a

Randolph Road, you stated that the line didn’t follow 
the Randolph Road because you were following a natural 
boundary? A. That’s correct.

Court: Which school is this?
Mr. Chambers: Eastover.

Q. Where is that natural boundary, Doctor? A. The 
creek line here and a break, a ravine that goes down 
through here and the movement is out here. If anything, 
this line would have reflected back into Elizabeth School. 
This is one of those fringe area judgments that relates 
to the number of children there and the actual movement 
of children. It could go either way.

—178—
Q- Is Elizabeth presently Negro or white? A. Elizabeth 

is integrated.
Q. Is Eastover presently Negro or white? A. It’s 

integrated.
Q. Would the drawing of the line as proposed by Mr. 

Kramer increase the number of students in integrated 
schools? A. What kind of students?

Q. Whether Negro or white? A. If the line were drawn 
this way and down Randolph Road, it would put this very 
small number—I don’t know the exact number, I expect 
it’s in the teens—into Elizabeth. It would not significantly 
make any difference. There is no way to run it back this 
way into Billingsville.

Court: Are those white or Negro children?

A. I think these are mostly in the main white in there 
as far as I know.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



341a

Q. Do you have Negro children living in that area, 
Doctor? A. Which area?

Q, In here. A. I don’t know. I assume they are all 
white.

Q. Dr. Phillips, with the Billingsville School you stated 
the reason for drawing the line here where we see no 
apparent natural boundary is that you were anticipating 
the proposed new beltway? A. That’s correct.

—179—
Q. When is that beltway to he built? A. The projec­

tion is on the beginning of it within the next year to be 
completed within the next two or three years. We have 
that record in our office.

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge whether this 
area here really includes only Negroes? A. There are 
some white children in here.

Q. How many white children were initially assigned to 
the Billingsville School? A. I don’t know.

Q. Your records show that 6 students out of a total 
of 741 were white and were initially assigned to the 
Billingsville School. A. That’s how many were there.

Q. This line, then, follows a predominantly what we 
might say almost entirely Negro residential area? A. 
That depends on the interpretation. It follows natural 
boundary lines around the school.

Q. These natural boundary lines that you refer to en­
closes a Negro neighborhood?

Court: With the exception of 6 children.

Q. You say it’s normal for a school to he sitting on a 
line as the Billingsville school is presently situated? A. 
I did not say it was normal. I said it was not abnormal.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



342a

Q. Is it not a fact that all of the schools here surround­
ing Billingsville School are entirely predominantly white?

—180—
A. They are predominantly white, yes.

Q. Is there any natural boundary that you have fol­
lowed here that you have overlooked like the road running 
through here which would permit you to redraw the line 
and increase the number of white or Negro students in 
Chantilly or Billingsville that would bring the Billings­
ville School off the line here as presently situated? A. In 
my judgment the line is in the right place to serve the 
school without regard to race.

Court: We might move faster in the morning.
Adjourn court until 9:00 A.M.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

O vernight R ecess 

Tuesday, July 13, 1965

Court: All right. I think when we quit it was 
direct examination of Dr. Phillips.

Mr. Bell: You had permitted us to interrupt for 
cross examination about the lines.

Court: Do you want to continue that?
Mr. Bell: Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Chambers, who 

has another case before you at 2:00 o’clock had to 
go out to the countryside and with your permission 
I ’ll carry on.

Court: All right. Give me the name of the
school, please, as you begin each series of questions.

(Dr. Phillips returns to the witness stand for 
further cross examination.)



343a

By Mr. Bell:

Q. I direct your attention again to the Billingsville 
School, which is a Negro elementary school, and ask you 
to explain again how the zone lines came to he drawn in 
their present position. A. First you have to look at the 
relationship of the three schools that are serving the area 
in this area, Chantilly, Billingsville and Eastover.

Q. The Chantilly School is a school where 432 white 
pupils and 2 Negroes were assigned, is that correct! A. 
That is correct.

Q. The Eastover School is a school where 543 white 
children were assigned and no Negroes, is that correct? 
A. That is correct.

Q. And the other one, the Oakhurst School, is that the 
other one. A. The Oakhurst School is off on this side.

Q. The Oakhurst School is where there were 578 white 
children assigned and no Negroes assigned, is that correct? 
A. I don’t have the figures in my hand but whatever the 
figures are is correct.

Q. In Exhibit A to the second set of interrogatories it 
indicates that the Billingsville School is a school where 
741 Negroes and some 6 whites were initially assigned.

—182—
A. That is correct.

Q. Now, would you carry on with your explanation!

Court: He mentioned those that surround Bil­
lingsville, on the south what is that school?

Mr. Bell: This is the Cotswold School.
Court: How many white and how many Negro?
Mr. Bell: According to Exhibit A there are 673 

whites assigned there and no Negroes.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

— 181—



344a

Court: And Elizabeth, how many whites and 
Negroes there!

Mr. Bell: In Elizabeth Exhibit A shows that there 
are 312 whites and 89 Negroes assigned.

A. Your question was how the lines were drawn at Billings- 
ville. This line at Randolph Road bounded on a bridge 
across the creek by a wide boundary of open land on this 
side. This is a creek line, a major creek, and a wide open 
space where there is no movement from here into that area 
at all. This is a railroad track straight out to where the 
belt road is proposed to come across. Those are the 
boundary lines for Billingsville School.

Q. It’s your position, and correct me if I ’m wrong, that 
all of the zone lines on Billingsville for the Billingsville 
School follow what in educational terms would be con­
sidered natural boundaries! A. That is correct.

—183—
Q. Would you also agree that while they may be natural 

boundaries they also tend to be and are boundaries for 
racial neighborhoods! A. I think the figures show this 
is a Negro neighborhood with the exception of this small 
pocket on this corner, yes.

Q. You say as to the southern boundary, rather than 
following what the witness Kramer suggested yesterday 
you followed a proposed road that is going to be built in 
the next couple of years, is that correct! A. Followed 
the proposed line of the belt road which is also a major 
open space between residential areas which has developed 
over a long period of time. Evidently Mr. Kramer didn’t 
drive in this area at all. The streets are all dead end 
from this area down into this particular large area where 
the belt road is going through.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



345a

Court: I recall reading about that in the papers 
but it’s been changed once or twice, some contro­
versy about it. Is it settled now for that point?

A. To the best of our knowledge, yes, sir, it is.
Q. What is the basis for your knowledge on that? A. 

The news accounts and the decision made by the Highway 
Commission on this.

Court: Was this particular section of the belt road 
the one in controversy that I read so much about ?

A. No, sir. The major controversy was over here in the
- 1 8 4 -

country club area whether it was going straight down or 
swing back in.

Court: Has this particular section ever swung 
back and forth?

A. No, sir, not to my knowledge. This was the proposed 
plan. The contention has been whether it was coming 
across the golf course or around the golf course or through 
the proposed school site in here.

Court: But as far as you know your testimony is 
that this particular section of the belt road was 
initially proposed and still is proposed?

A. That’s correct, sir.

Court: Do you know of anybody protesting it 
now?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

A. No, sir.



346a

Court: Any hearing scheduled!

A. Not to my knowledge, no, sir. I might make the point 
that even if the belt road were not in this area, one of 
the decisions as a part of the belt road development was 
the open land that does exist through here. Whether this 
open land has been caused by racial patterns of residence 
is beyond my judgment but we assume this open land is 
here as a normal boundary for residential areas.

Q. You don’t disagree with Mr. Kramer that his sugges­
tion that this southern zone line be the McAlway Road, 
which is an existing artery, would be bad from an educa-

—185—
tional standpoint, do you! A. Yes, 1 would disagree with 
him because there’s no way through here. McAlway Road 
runs through here and all the arteries are terminated as 
dead ends. This is a normal barrier to the movement of 
any traffic here.

Q. What do you refer to as this! A. This line as drawn 
right there. I think you would have to drive through 
it to understand it and to see what’s there. The McAlway 
street up here above it does not open into this area at all.

Court: You say up here above it, you mean be­
low it.

A. Below it, yes, sir.
Q. What consideration did the Board give in this par­

ticular line, in drawing this line, that the effect of it would 
be to maintain Cotswold and Billingsville as practically 
all segregated schools! A. I think this is clear, that the 
Board’s planning is built around the establishment of geo­
graphic areas without regard to race and this works both

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



347a

ways. The lines were not drawn to bring race in or keep 
race out. The lines were drawn on the basis of good faith 
consideration and the Board did not take into account 
any desire or lack of desire to incorporate Negro and 
white simply because they were Negro or white. We 
really don’t have the records of which are Negro and which 
are white.

—186—
Q. You use this word good faith consideration today 

and yesterday. I want you to listen to my question and if 
you don’t understand ask me again because I think this 
is crucial. Did the Board in drawing the Billingsville line, 
in drawing any of these other lines, get together at any 
time officially or unofficially to your knowledge and pre­
pare these lines in a way so as to minimize the amount 
of desegregation that would take place? A. No, sir, they 
did not.

Q. Is that your answer! A. That’s what I said, yes.
Q. I don’t think it’s very funny, I think it’s a serious 

matter.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

Mr. Barkley: Objection to the statement.
Court: Objection sustained.

Q. Up on the Derita School zone line you indicated that 
the line now crosses Interstate Route 85 and you agreed 
with Mr. Kramer that the more traditional way in terms 
of school zone criteria would be to follow that but indi­
cated that you drew the line as you did because of the 
new school building, the Hidden Valley School, which you 
are planning to build next year, am I correct on that! 
A. I am not sure about the agreement with Mr. Kramer. 
I’m not sure what he said about the Derita area. There



348a

is a school being planned right here in the Hidden Valley 
development which will change the lines of the whole

—187—
Derita line, it will change the Statesville Road line and 
it will also change the Druid Hills line.

Q. But the effect, whatever your reasons, the effect of 
drawing the lines as they are now drawn prevents any 
amount of integration taking place in Piedmont, in the 
Cochrane junior schools, is that correct? A. I don’t know 
what you’re talking about there, Mr. Bell. I think you 
need to get hack in the right school. These are the junior 
high schools in this area here.

Mr. Bell: I ’m sorry. We used this line and you 
had gotten on the other map. I might just save 
this until we get to the regular cross examination. 
I think most of this goes better with the regular 
cross examination.

Court: All right.

Direct Examination by Mr. Barkley (Cont’d .) :

Q. Is this Randolph Road here? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I’ll ask yoir can you give us your estimate of the dis­

tance along here in which there are no residences or build­
ings of any kind and how far back, according to the best 
of your recollection, this would extend this way and this 
way. A. Mr. Barkley, there are no homes on either side 
of Randolph Road all the way except one old home right

—188—
here on this corner of the property and one old home 
right here. All of this is open land, all of this is open 
land and nothing is fronting on Randolph Road. There

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



349a

is about a block distance in here between the creek and 
the first residences that open back in this area. There is 
a rather wide breach in here.

Q. I ’ll ask you if you know whether along here if this 
isn’t all vacant land in here!

Court: He said so.

Q. Then I’ll ask you if there isn’t a ravine that runs 
along here. A. Yes, sir, there is a ravine that runs through 
and this is where the highway people have chosen that 
area for the highway to go through.

Q. Take the stand, please, Doctor. (The witness returns 
to the witness stand.) Dr. Phillips, this is more generally 
on these zoning lines. In the first place, let’s refer to the 
Thomasboro School, one of those that were mentioned. 
Now, is there any way that the Board could gerrymander 
Thomasboro School against any Negro school in that area 
or are the only schools effected the excepted schools? A. 
The only schools effected would be the excepted schools, 
the Woodland and possibly Plato Price, yes, sir.

Q. Now, to go to Paw Creek, that’s out in the county, 
is it not! A. Yes, sir.

Court: Is Woodland the same as Amay James?
—189—

A. No, sir, Woodland is the exception school above Amay 
James out in the middle western section.

Court: Amay James is affected by Thomasboro 
as well as Woodland?

A. Yes, sir, and Plato Price would be also because they 
overlap grades.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



350a

Q. The Paw Creek School, is there any Negro School 
against which the Board could gerrymander the Paw Creek 
zone lines in that area? A. None except the Woodland 
School which is in that area and one of the exceptions.

Q. Now, the Ashley Park School, is there any way that 
. . . is there any Negro school against which the Board 
might gerrymander Ashley Park? A. None other than 
the Plato Price-Amay James School, no, sir.

Court: I think I understand but I want to be 
sure. What do you mean by no possibility of gerry­
mandering? Take Ashley Park, for example. You 
say there is no possibility of gerrymandering, just 
explain it to me in more detail.

A. The only way to assure that there would be Negro 
children in the Ashley Park area would be to revise the 
lines to include parts of the Plato-Price-Amay James area. 
In other words, there would be no Negro children in schools 
now completely set up geographically serving Negro chil-

—190—
dren unless a line were drawn across other school lines to 
bring Negro children into the area.

Court: But isn’t that always true of gerryman­
dering?

A. Any gerrymandering would require a line which, in 
my opinion, would go beyond what would be normally 
considered the natural boundaries of an area, yes, sir, but 
the natural boundaries of Ashley Park are subject to 
change when the Plato Price-Amay James area is cleared 
up as an exception.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



351a

Court: Three times here with respect to Thomas- 
boro, Paw Creek and Ashley Park you used the 
phrase no possibility of gerrymandering. That’s 
not true, is it? You could do it.

A. You’d have to draw it across another school line.

Court: You always do with gerrymandering.

A. But I mean across one to get to the Negro people. 
Thomasboro is adjacent to Hoskins, for example, and to 
get Negro children into Thomasboro you’d have to go 
across another school line.

Court: Is it fair to say that Thomasboro, Paw 
Creek and Ashley Park, all of which are white?

A. Yes, sir.

Court: Are surrounded by other white zones?

A. With the exception being the only Negro school serving 
the Negro children related to these schools.

Court: Say that again.
— 191—

A. Can I go to the map again!

Court: Yes, sir. (The witness goes to the map.)
Mr. Bell: I think the testimony is that Ashley 

Park and some of the other schools have Negroes 
living near the schools.

Court: Paw Creek is all white ?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



352a

A. Yes, sir, with the exception of the school right in the 
center. Woodland is in the center of the Paw Creek area. 
The point is that in order to incorporate other Negro chil­
dren other than the ones that are in this area, here’s 
Oakdale which is predominantly white which has a scat­
tering of Negro children who are going up this way 
and coming and coming back this way.

Court: Is it your testimony then, take the south 
border of Paw Creek, if you straightened it out 
and take, for example, half of Tuckaseeegee you say 
you wouldn’t get any more Negroes probably into 
the Paw Creek area.

A. No, sir, until the Woodland School is cleared up. Wood­
land is right in the center and it has children coming from 
this whole area.

Court: So your testimony is that if you make 
Paw Creek zone bigger in any direction you still 
don’t pick up any Negroes until you abandon Amay 
James and Woodland and so on?

A. That’s right.
—192—

Q. Doctor, is it also true that you would have to cross 
other attendance areas to possibly reach any Negro area? 
A. Yes, sir, with the exception of the exception schools.

Q. Dr. Phillips, the Newell School, is there any attend­
ance area of a Negro school bounding the Newell where 
the line might be gerrymandered with a result that Negro 
children could be brought in? A. No, sir, the same situa­
tion would exist and the Gunn School, which serves the

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



353a

entire eastern segment of the county, would be involved 
and Gunn is one of the exception schools.

Q. The Berryhill School was mentioned, is there any 
attendance area for the Negro school or an integrated 
school. . . . I ’ll leave out integrated, to keep Negroes out! 
A. It would be the same situation.

Q. Now, is there any Negro community within any rea­
sonable distance that could be kept out by gerrymandering 
Ranson Junior High! A. No, sir, the same situation 
would exist. The Torrence-Lytle Junior High School 
serves the entire Negro population for the northern area 
from roughly the Interstate 85 from 49 upwards. It’s one 
of the exceptions and planned for assimilation into Ranson 
and Alexander.

Q. I believe you testified yesterday that aside from Bil- 
lingsville and York Road, which are excepted schools, and 
the schools in the heavily concentrated Negro population

—193—
on the west, that there are no so-called Negro schools 
against which the gerrymander in the remainder of the 
area except for the excepted schools, is that right! A. 
That’s correct. I ’d like to qualify one point, Mr. Barkley, 
on the Ranson Junior High School line and in the readjust­
ment of the children from Torrence-Lytle. It’s conceivable 
that the one Negro residential area, which was identified 
yesterday north of Interstate 85, will be in the Ranson 
School area. This is that Northwood area, the Ervin de­
velopment, Hyde Park and this sort of thing, and this is 
basically a Negro residential area but has both white and 
Negro residences there.

Court: I ’m sorry, I’m not sure I get the drift of 
that. If you change the Ranson line you might pick 
up more Negroes, right!

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—-Direct



354a

A. If the line were brought back to Interstate 85, which is 
probably the logical line between Ranson and Northwest, 
which is in the center of the northwest Negro area, then it 
would incorporate more Negro youngsters who are now 
at Torrence-Lytle or might be at Northwest under free 
choice.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct

Court: Torrence-Lytle is going to be abandoned?

A. Yes, sir, the 10th grade has already been abandoned.

Court: What do you think you will do with Ranson, 
probably change that line?

A. Yes, sir, this is contemplated. May I go back to the
- 1 9 4 -

map one more time ?

Court: Yes, sir. (The witness goes to the map.)

A. Here’s Interstate 85 and the Ranson Junior High School 
is somewhere right in here and the Alexander Junior High 
School is up here. Both are new junior high schools and 
have plans for additions. These two junior high schools 
would serve junior high school students from roughly this 
area through here and there is some fairly growing Negro 
residential area right in here that has traditionally gone 
down to Northwest across Interstate 85 or gone all the 
way to Torrence-Lytle up in the northern area.

Court: So you will drop the boundary of Ranson 
to pick them up?

A. Yes, sir. (The witness goes back to the witness stand.)



355a

Court: Is that the community I call the Erwin 
Village ?

A. Yes, sir, it’s called Northwood actually.
Q. I believe they built it very rapidly in that area? A. 

Yes, sir. May I add that it will probably become a part of 
the Statesville Avenue Elementary School. This relates 
back to the Hidden Valley new school that we were dis­
cussing a moment ago so that Interstate 85 will become 
the line between them.

Q. Doctor, it was suggested yesterday the boundary of 
the Eastway School might he changed which would result

—195-
in more whites being transferred to Hawthorne which is 
a mixed school. Can you give us the present enrollment 
by race in Hawthorne! A. Yes, sir. Hawthorne at this 
point has 102 Negro youngsters and about 700, I believe, 
whites.

Q. What would be the effect of transferring more whites 
into the Hawthorne School! A. It would simply make the 
ratio larger, more whites to less Negroes from that stand­
point. It would just move whites from Eastway to Haw­
thorne.

Q. I believe it was also suggested yesterday that by 
change of boundary that more whites could be transferred 
from Cochrane to Ranson which is a mixed school. Do 
you have your figures there showing the number of pupils 
white and Negro in Ranson! A. Ranson had about 33 
Negro youngsters. 33 were originally assigned and 4 asked 
to enter by choice and 4 asked to leave by choice which 
left 33. Ranson has been integrated since its beginning.

Q. Would the effect be the same at Ranson as it would 
have been at Hawthorne? A. Yes, sir, it would simply 
increase the ratio larger.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



356a

Court: If you changed the Cochrane boundary 
you just put more whites into Ranson!

A. Yes, sir.
Q. I believe it was also suggested yesterday that the 

boundaries between Barringer and Wilmore might be
— 1 9 6 —

changed to transfer more whites from Barringer into 
Wilmore which is, I believe, a mixed school. A. Yes, sir.

Court: This is a junior high school?
Mr. Barkley: No, sir, an elementary school.

A. Wilmore has 22 Negro youngsters, Mr. Barkley, and 
this would serve to only add more whites to the present 
Wilmore number. I think I might say, Mr. Barkley, in 
answer to that question also that in each of the instances 
the Board, through the staff, gave no indication it wanted 
a specific number of white children or a specific number of 
Negro children in any school. This was not the intent 
of the Board, to reach any particular ratio of white and 
negroes in any assignment line.

Q. Doctor, I believe the opinion was expressed yester­
day by . . .

Court: Before we leave Barringer, if you did 
what Mr. Kramer suggested—he said the boundary 
should be the railroad track—

A. That was down on the other end of the attendance area 
and this related to the Amay James-Plato Price. This 
line will be revised.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



357a

Court: He also testified that the boundary leaves 
Remount Road to take in whites into the Barringer 
zone who would otherwise be in Wilmore.

A. Yes, sir. There are about 13 children in there and these
children had been moved back and forth and it was simply

—197—
a matter of not moving them again. It’s a very small
residential area.

Court: If you did what Mr. Kramer said it would 
put 13 white children into Wilmore.

A. Yes, sir.

Court: What’s its setup numerically!

A. Wilmore has about 400 youngsters, I think.

Court: Is it all white or all Negro!

A. No, sir, it has about 22 Negro youngsters in it.

Court: Doing what he said would add about 13 
white children to Wilmore.

A. Yes, sir.

Court: Which has how many white?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct

A. 22.

Court: 22 white?

A. I ’m sorry, 22 Negro.



358a

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct 

Court: How many white!

A. 333.
Q. Doctor, let’s go to another school district that I don’t 

believe Mr. Kramer mentioned yesterday, the Morgan 
Street School. Can you come over to the map and point 
out for us the former boundary of the Morgan Street 
School and the new boundary?

Court: This is one you say he did not mention?
Mr. Barkley: No, sir.

—198-
Court: Sure you want to go into it?
Mr. Barkley: Yes, sir.

A. Mr. Barkley, the Morgan Street School is down in 
the part of the center city right behind the Charlottetown 
Mall area.

Q. Near Cherry? A. Near Cherry. There is a Negro 
residential area right in around the school and it’s ad­
jacent to a sizable white residential area.

Q. Is that what is known as the Myers Park area? A. 
It’s known as the city edge of the Myers Park residential 
area.

Court: Not McDowell Street?

A. No, sir. This is our Meyers Street Elementary. Mor­
gan Street is one step over from this. Queens Road West 
runs right through here and traditionally this line had 
come across and cut off a small section of white residen­
tial area. The back yards of the white residences were 
separated from the Negro residences with a ravine through 
the back and traditionally, with the lines drawn on the



359a

basis of race in the past, this line came across this corner. 
This is a white residential area, Henry and Bromley right 
here. Also traditionally this line that comes now up More- 
head veered off in a little area called Greenwood Cliffs 
and Harding Place which was another white residential 
area, and the Dilworth line turned around this way, and 
the Myers Park Elementary line came in this way and 
moved over and picked that white area up. In the estab-

—199—
lishing of the geographic lines on good faith considera­
tion the Board of Education drew this line straight down 
Queens Road right to the extension of Morehead, which 
is Kings Drive, and came straight up Morehead and came 
across the wide ravine between the Meyers Street and 
Morgan Street and included some 65 white children who 
were initially assigned to the Morgan School based on 
these good faith consideration. I think it’s significant this 
is an example of what has been done.

Court: Morgan Elementary?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. I want to ask you my special question. Do you know 

an attorney named Brock Barkley? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know what his connection with the Board has 

been for some years? A. He has been the attorney for 
the former Charlotte City Board for some years, a former 
board member and is now attorney for the Charlotte- 
Mecklenburg Schools.

Q. Do you know where he lives with reference to that 
area? A. Mr. Barkley lives in this area on Bromley, 
right in that area.

Q. Doctor, the opinion was expressed here yesterday by

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



360a

the witness Mr. Kramer that the zoning lines appeared to 
him to have been drawn with the idea of preserving or

— 200—

promoting segregation. Do you have an opinion satis­
factory to yourself as to the purpose of the Board to 
preserve or promote segregation in the drawing of these 
lines that appear on the map? A. It is my firm opinion, 
Mr. Barkley, that this was not taken into consideration 
in any way in the setting of these lines by the Board.

Q. Who did you have to draw the lines for you? A. Mr. 
Barkley, there were a number of us involved in the basic 
legwork done on the maps. Mr. J. D. Morgan, Asst. Supt., 
and myself carried the major load of actually ending up 
with the decisions on the maps that were recommended to 
the Board, but a number of staff people were involved and 
we depended a great deal on the 109 principals in the vari­
ous schools and their experiences over a number of years 
relating to transportation, movement of youngsters and all 
of the factors that come into play on the actual drawing 
of lines.

Q. Can you give us an estimate of how long it took you 
to complete the maps ? A. I don’t know howT I would count 
the hours, Mr. Barkley, but many, many hours were spent 
by staff members and l would imagine it -would run into 
the hundreds of hours that were spent in study street by 
street and line by line in each of the attendance areas.

Q. Did you receive any special instructions from the
— 201-

Board as to how the lines should be drawn? A. The Board 
simply instructed the staff to draw the lines in accordance 
with the assignment plan developed by the Board and that 
they were to be drawn on good faith consideration only.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



361a

Q. And did you give similar instructions to those that 
were under you? A. Yes, sir, I did.

Q. You mentioned bus service, Dr. Phillips. What pro­
vision is being made for hauling or transporting Negro 
children on busses serving the attendance area in which 
they are located where white children may be also! A. 
With the exception of the 10 schools that are listed, the 
children attending a school area that is served by bus 
transportation under state law will all ride on the same 
busses, the same routes, the same locations, without regard 
to race whatsoever. There will be no dual system in the 
areas set up under the attendance plans, 99 areas. Under 
the 10 exceptions the dual system will necessarily continue 
until these are completed, the exceptions eliminated, be­
cause of the difference in routes.

Court: Do you have generally school bus trans­
portation in the city?

A. About 30 to 32,000 of our 75,000 youngsters, yes, sir. 
That is in the former county area and in line with the

- 202-

legislation in 1955.

Court: That is not in the city limits ?

A. No, sir, not in the city limits.
Q. Let’s touch upon the matter of capacity. When and 

how do you establish the maximum capacities controlling 
the transfer of students or the assignment of students ? A. 
Mr. Barkley, in Section 7 of the plan entitled “School Ca­
pacity to be Determined” the Board wrote into the plan 
this statement: “A rated capacity shall be established and

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



362a

adopted by the Board for each school facility in the Meck­
lenburg County School Administrative Unit prior to the 
date of initial assignments for any ensuing school term.” 
And it went on to say: “Under normal circumstances, addi­
tional assignments of students from outside the official 
attendance area of each specific school will be limited to 
a total anticipated enrollment to be established as of July 
1 in each year not to exceed the rated capacity of the school 
plus five per cent of such capacity in elementary schools 
and ten per cent of such capacity in secondary schools.” 
Now, the staff took this guideline from the plan and with 
some general directions from the Board which involved 
No. 1, a clearcut desire on the part of the Board to adopt 
what it called maximum capacities where possible and 
practicable so that the vast majority of free choice requests 
could be honored after June 2. This was the basic element,

—203—
simply saying let’s give the maximum capacity we can 
stand, the arm bursting room, if this is a good description 
of it, so that the bast majority of free choices, whether 
they are Negro or white, it didn’t make any difference, 
so that the vast majority of free choices could be honored. 
This was without knowledge of how many requests were 
going to be made and not having had the experience of 
open free choice, the Board of Education was in the dark 
as to the number of free choices that would come in, whether 
it was going to be a hundred or ten thousand. But they 
did instruct us to develop a list of capacities which was at 
the largest side rather than tight capacities, and this is 
the reason that our capacities that have been set are on 
the outside of really ideal limitations for a school. We 
have counted in every teaching space we can set up in each 
of tlie schools. This is mobile units, this is partitioned

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



363a

classrooms, it’s every space we have. The Matthews School 
was mentioned yesterday in the discussion about having 
more room. Actually the Matthews School has been counted 
in terms of every temporary space we can have there so 
the maximum capacity is really beyond the ideal or satis­
factory level. We took these school by school, working with 
our key staff people, again working with our principals. 
We asked each to give us a listing of every space available 
in the school. We used an average of 30 pupils per teach­
ing station and then in the senior high school only we

—204—
applied a 90% utilization figure to this because the senior 
high school has more difficulty using every space every 
hour of the day. We applied what we call the rated capacity 
based upon the number of stations and the 30 students per 
and at the senior high the 90% and the elementary and 
junior high 100%, and then added 5% to the elementary 
schools for overage and 10% to the secondary schools for 
overage. Through this the Board adopted a list at its May 
27 meeting of the maximum capacities against which the 
free choices, initial assignments would be applied, and it 
was out of this that the decisions were made on the schools 
that were closed to any additional free choice and I think 
there were only 12 of the 109 schools in the end result. 
Because the maximum capacities had been set on the high 
side there were only 12 that had any limitations for young­
sters to attend under free choice.

Q. Doctor, with reference to curricular activities and 
extracurricular activities in the schools, what has the 
Board done in an effort to prepare white children and 
Negro children for integration and to promote a spirit of 
cooperation among them in preparation for the integration 
as it comes? A. Mr. Barkley, if I may express an opinion,

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



364a

I think this is probably the most vital element of this 
Board’s basic concept of its responsibility as far as the

—20 5 -
initial Supreme Court decision was concerned, responsi­
bility to the boys and girls of Charlotte-Mecklenburg and 
its later responsibilities under the Civil Bights Act. In 
my opinion, it has granted to its staff—and when I say 
staff I’m talking all the way from the Superintendent down 
through the teaching faculty—it has granted, with some 
emphasis, the privilege and the opportunity of moving 
into a number of areas of using youngsters in various types 
of activities jointly, and teachers and all of our activities, 
in an effort to move toward this business of mutual under­
standing and being able to work together and working 
toward the eventual complete geographic assignment and 
complete integration of the school system. There are a 
number of instances that I might point up. I think you 
might have a few pictures we have taken from our very 
large library of shots of classrooms and this sort of thing 
and which our Director of Public Relations maintains, 
such things as at the student level our recently created 
festival officers, our Charlotte-Mecklenburg Voices, a 110 
voice group of Negro and white youngsters from all of 
our senior high schools, bringing together from time to 
time student body officers. An example of real good evi­
dence of this last year the cheerleaders from all the vari­
ous junior and senior high schools were brought together 
for a half-day workshop on the conduct of youngsters at 
athletic events and that type of activity. This was com-

—206—
pletely integrated as all of these type of activities have 
been for the last three years. In the teacher groups all of

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



365a

our professional activities are carried on in an integrated 
manner without even any thought of any other process. 
The only groups which have not been working on an inte­
grated basis formally are the professional teacher organi­
zations and we even have trouble getting two of the white 
groups together and I don’t know how we can get the 
other. These are professional organizations that are com­
pletely separate from the administration of the school 
system.

Q. Does the Board have any control of them? A. No, 
sir, the Board has no control over the professional organi­
zations whatsoever. These are the Negro classroom teachers 
association, two white classroom teachers associations, one 
serving what was predominantly the city group and one 
the former county group. There are two A.C.E.—this is 
Association for Childhood Education—a white branch and 
a Negro branch and they are very close now to joining 
together. But these are the only groups, the N.C.E.A. and 
the N.C.T.A.—the N.C.T.A. is one of the organizations 
mentioned in this suit—are still separate, but other than 
that the operation of the Board of Education, the profes­
sional work, is all carried on on a completely integrated 
basis. I could spend another hour talking about all the 
different kinds of activities, our Advisory Council, our

—207 -
Salary Study Committee, our Curriculum Study Committee, 
our School Committee groups, we have a Theatre Arts 
Workship which you mentioned just yesterday that again 
today will be on from 12:30 to 1 :00, which is an integrated 
group from the standpoint of pupils and teachers working 
in the area of the performing arts, and just on and on this 
kind of thing.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



366a

Q. Would you like to invite His Honor to attend that 
show at 12:30? A. I sure would, yes, sir, and if it’s legal 
I’ll pay his quarter to get in.

Q. Doctor, I want to show you a picture here and ask 
you if you can tell me what that is a picture of. A. This 
is a shot among, I guess, 25 or 30 that the staff took of 
our kickoff dinner for new school committees September 
a year ago which was representative of the 545 school com­
mitteemen who served the entire system.

Mr. Bell: I am cognizant of the Court’s philosophy 
but T think we should register our objection to the 
material and testimony now being introduced as ir­
relevant to the specific issues in this case.

Mr. Barkley: I haven’t offered it yet.
Mr. Bell: I presume you didn’t bring it here just 

to show it to me. In addition, it’s a self-serving 
declaration.

Mr. Barkley: We offer this for the purpose of
— 208—

illustrating the testimony of Dr. Phillips.
Court: Objection overruled. Let it be received.

(Defendant’s Exhibit D received in evidence.)

Q. Dr. Phillips, I show you another photograph and ask 
you what that is.

Court: In the interest of time are all these photo­
graphs somewhat similar or offered somewhat for 
the same purpose?

Mr. Barkley: All for the same purpose, if the 
Court please.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Direct



367a

Court: Exhibit them to counsel and if they do 
fairly depict what they purport to depict they may 
be received in evidence for the purpose of illustrat­
ing the testimony, but exhibit them first to counsel. 
She can mark them later while we go on to something 
else. Let them be received in evidence for the pur­
pose of illustrating the testimony.

(Defendant’s Exhibits E through Q received in 
evidence.)

Q. Dr. Phillips, I show you these several sheets of paper 
here—I don’t believe these are in evidence, I just want to 
offer them in evidence—and ask you to state what they are. 
A. These are copies of the letters which were sent out to 
the 75,000 children, the first letter, the rest of them are the 
individual letters sent to the individual exception schools.

Mr. Barkley: We would like to offer these into
—209-

evidence. I do that because this is attached to the 
answer of the motion for preliminary injunction.

Court: Let them be received in evidence. Give 
them an exhibit number.

(Defendant’s Exhibit T received in evidence.)

Mr. Barkley: That’s all that we have of Dr. 
Phillips.

Cross Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. In regards to the testimony you were just giving I 
understand that up until this year the Board maintained 
segregated baccalaureate and commencements, is that cor­

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



368a

rect? A. There is a history of Baccalaureate services. 
Initially, baccalaureate was carried on in the individual 
schools by the individual high schools. Three years ago 
the pattern of baccalaureate was one large baccalaureate 
service for all of the white graduates of the predominantly 
white schools. There were one or two Negro graduates that 
year and they were in that baccalaureate. The three former 
city predominantly Negro high schools carried on a joint 
baccalaureate in the Ovens Auditorium. The three union 
schools, which are being eliminated, carried on their own 
baccalaureate in their own schools. Two years ago the 
Negro schools were joined together at their request in a 
joint Baccalaureate in the Coliseum and the predominantly 
white schools had a joint baccalaureate so there were two 
baccalaureate services on a particular Sunday. This past

— 210-

year, under a working arrangement with the ministerial 
association in the community and through a great deal of 
deliberation over the responsibility level of carrying on 
baccalaureate service, a joint baccalaureate service was held 
this year under the sponsorship of the ministerial associa­
tion and under the general agreement of the Board of Edu­
cation and actually for the first time a complete baccalaure­
ate service for all graduates in the community was held in 
the Coliseum.

Q. Then, all of this history aside, until this suit was filed 
there was no joint baccalaureate service, is that right? A. 
The suit had nothing to do with it.

Q. The suit was filed before that time?

Court: The suit was filed in January.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

A. Yes.



3 6 9 a

Q. Is the same thing true about the joint commencement? 
A. There is no such thing as a joint commencement. Each 
school has its own commencement exercise. I sat through 
12 of them so I know.

Q. How about the faculty meetings? I gather some pro­
gress has been made on general teachers meetings so they 
are no longer held on a segregated basis. A. Mr. Bell, I 
have been here for three years and all faculty meetings of 
all sorts have been integrated the three years I have been 
here. To my knowledge the first full convocation of all

— 211-

faculty was held in the spring prior to my coming under 
the direction of Dr. Elmer Garringer and the Governor 
came and spoke to the joint faculties of the Charlotte- 
Mecklenburg Schools. Since 1962 all faculty meetings of 
all sorts, both small and large, have been held on a com­
pletely integrated basis.

Q. On a city-wide basis that would be true, is that cor­
rect? A. On a county-wide basis.

Q. As far as your weekly or bi-weekly meetings in the 
schools because of the way the Board has continued to 
assign teachers, except for one or two instances they are 
still all Negro meetings or all white meetings, isn’t that 
correct? A. Each school has its own faculty meetings 
without regard to what the makeup of the faculty is. What­
ever the faculty makeup in the particular school, this 
faculty participates in the normal weekly or bi-weekly 
meetings of faculty. On many occasions both Negro and 
white staff members meet with these individual groups 
and have met with them. The kinds of meetings I’m talk­
ing about are the system-wide or area-wide meetings and 
they are all on a completely integrated basis.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



370a

Q. You told us that there was last year the assignment 
of a few white teachers to a Negro school, is that correct? 
A. It hasn’t been mentioned yet. You mean in the interroga­
tories?

Q. I think there was some mention in the interrogatories
— 212—

about it. A. There were 8 white teachers teaching in pre­
dominantly Negro schools this past year.

Q. 8 fulltime teachers? A. Yes, sir. I ’ll have to get 
the figures, they are in the interrogatories. There were 2 
or 3 of them working in two schools, the bible teacher and 
distributive education teacher. There was an English 
teacher at West Charlotte, a Science teacher at Second 
Ward, two at Wesley Heights Elementary School, a Negro 
Driver Education teacher teaching at both Second Ward 
and West Mecklenburg, which is predominantly white, 
bible teachers teaching at East and West Charlotte, I be­
lieve, and North and Torrence-Lytle.

Q. Let’s limit it for the moment to the number of teachers 
who were fulltime teachers, not specialized teachers, who 
were assigned to schools. There were first of all no Negro 
fulltime teachers assigned to predominantly white schools, 
is that correct? A. That is correct.

Q. There were how many white teachers assigned on a 
fulltime basis to Negro schools? A. These are the ones 
I just went through. An English teacher at West Char­
lotte. . . .

Court: If you know was it 8 or 7 or 6?

A. 4 full time teachers, Negro teachers teaching in white 
schools.

Q. Tell us, if you know, in line with the type response

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



371a

—213—
you were making to the last questions by defense counsel 
how many teachers are you currently planning to assign 
on a desegregated basis for this fall, on a fulltime basis? 
A. These plans have not been made specifically by the 
Board of Education.

Q. You mean teachers haven’t been assigned for the 
fall term? A. The teachers who have returned have been 
generally reassigned to the schools they have been serving. 
The new teachers have not been assigned with the excep­
tion of two or three.

Q. I understand there are some 375 or close to 400 new 
teachers hired for this year, is that right? A. Up to this 
point to the best of my knowledge 348 white teachers and 
14 Negro teachers have been employed for the 1965-66 
term. These are new teachers. We have reemployed the 
vast majority of the teachers who indicated they wanted 
to return to employment.

Q. How about the assignment of these new teachers? 
A. They have not been assigned yet.

Q. Is there any reason for not assigning those teachers 
as yet? A. Several reasons. One right now is the very 
serious question in this community about the budget limi­
tations and the employment and assignment has been held 
up for the last several weeks pending decisions on the 
numbers of teachers to be available to the system for next 
year. The other basic decision will relate to the very

—214 -
specific area where these teachers are to be assigned. The 
Board has not made this decision yet.

Q. I had gotten the impression some place that the 
Board was awaiting the outcome of this litigation before 
they assigned these new teachers. Am I correct in that ?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



3 12a

A. No. I don’t know where you got that impression. That’s 
not correct in my opinion.

Q. Let me just ask you, based on your knowledge of the 
school system, if this Court were to order the new teachers 
to be assigned on a basis of qualifications and where their 
skills could best be used and without regard to race, 
would you find administrative difficulty in so assigning 
them!

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

Mr. Barkley: Objection.
Court: Overruled.

A. The Board has adopted in the words that are in the 
April 13 decision the statement in recognition of the re­
quirements of law the development of a policy be under­
taken looking to the ultimate employment and assignment 
of all staff and professional personnel without regard to 
race or to factors other than training, competency and 
fitness. The teachers who have been employed, new teachers 
who have been employed for the 1965-66 term have been 
employed solely on this basis, on terms of qualification and 
without regard to race or to factors other than training, 
competency and fitness. Any decisions on actual assign­
ment of these teachers will follow in this line with this

- 2 1 5 -
policy, and it is contemplated, although no specific num­
bers have been established or no specific patterns that 
teachers will be assigned on the basis of qualifications with­
out regard to race.

Q. I was following about half-way through that but I 
don’t know if I got all of it. . . .

Mr. Barkley: Let her read the answer to him.



373a

Q. I ’d like to ask him another question. It is my under­
standing in line with your resolution that for the first time 
this year have been hired on a basis of qualifications and 
without regard to race, is that correct? A. This was my 
statement, yes.

Q. Now, the second part of it is, and here I got a little 
fuzzy, that you are also, without regard to what the Court 
does, going to assign these teachers to the schools on the 
same consideration, that is without regard to race, just on 
the basis of qualifications. A. No. I think you misquoted. 
I didn’t say without regard to what the Court does.

Q. Well, the Court is certainly not going to tell you to 
not assign them on a non-segregated basis. The issue be­
fore the Court is whether the Court shall order you to 
assign them on a non-segregated basis this year. My ques­
tion is whether the Court orders it for this year or not 
whether it is your response that you are going to assign

—216—
them on a non-raeial basis. A. The Board made no com­
mittment about what it’s going to do at this point about 
how many or what it’s going to do about the assignment. 
It has no specific policy on this at this point.

Q. I ’m going to ask you again the question I asked you 
before the objection to which was overruled. If the Court 
were to order you to assign the new teachers that you have 
hired for this year on a basis of qualifications and with­
out regard to race, would you find any administrative or 
other difficulty in so assigning those teachers?

Court: If you can answer yes or not and then 
you may explain.

A. I think the answer is no clearly but I would say that in 
my understanding of the Board’s general responsibility

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



374a

for the employment and assignment of personnel, it must 
maintain the responsibility of judgment in terms of where 
teachers are assigned and which teachers are employed 
and this doesn’t have anything to do with race as much 
as it does the judgment on the particular qualifications 
of an individual and their particular age and experience 
and the particular needs of an individual school. Our 
experience, Your Honor, so far, outside' of the regular 
school program, has been a very satisfactory one in the 
use of key Negro teachers teaching predominantly or 
all white youngsters in summer school program and special

- 2 1 7 -
programs. Our experience has been a good one and we 
don’t anticipate any specific heavy problems within the 
judgment of numbers and locations of teachers with the 
using of Negro teachers with white children or white 
teachers with Negro children.

Q. I am not sure I understood your first answer. Let me 
ask you this way, of the 14 or 15 new Negro teachers that 
you have hired, do you now contemplate or is there any 
likelihood any of the new teachers will be assigned to 
predominantly white schools on a fulltime basis!

Mr. Barkley: I object to that on the ground that 
he has answered that fully.

Court: Overruled.

A. I think it’s conceivable that all 14 or 1 of the 14 or 4 
of the 14 or 10 of the 14 or any of the 348 white might be 
assigned to Negro, white or integrated school situations.

Q. Wouldn’t there have to be a policy change on this 
before you could assign the first Negro teachers to the 
predominantly white school! A. The Board already, in

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



375a

its summer school program which is under its direct juris­
diction, assigned Negro teachers to teach predominantly 
and all white groups. This started three years ago.

Q. But the Board has not yet on a fulltime basis as­
signed even the first Negro teachers to a predominantly

- 2 1 8 -
white school on a fulltime basis during the regular school 
year, is that right? A. It did the first one this past year, 
teaching in both Negro and white schools, the Driver Ed­
ucation teacher.

Q. I was speaking of classroom teachers assigned to one 
school on a fulltime basis. Now, the Board hasn’t done 
that yet, has it? A. If I may correct one statement that 
I made, Your Honor. There are 6 of the white . . .

Q. Dr. Phillips, please answer the question that I asked.

Court: Please do come back to Mr. Bell’s ques­
tion. Has the School Board yet assigned a Negro 
teacher to a predominantly white school on a full­
time basis?

A. No, sir, it has not.
Q. My second question is, and I don’t want to cut you 

off but I would like to get the answers to my questions, 
is there any possibility that this is going to be done this 
year? A. I have already answered that, I believe.

Q. You have said yes and no.

Court: Mr. Bell, I believe you have forgotten his 
answer, he did say yes, there is definitely a pos­
sibility, as I understood him.

Q. Is there a probability that this is going to occur? 
A. How do you define that?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



376a

Court: That’s for you to define. If you don’t
- 2 1 9 -

know, just say you don’t know.

A. I think the best word is that there is a possibility, yes. 
The Board has not adopted a specific policy and said that 
it will assign a specific Negro teachers to a white school 
yet it is a possibility.

Q. Will some further action by the Board be required 
before this can be done? A. I think it could be either way. 
I am not sure there is specific policy statement that is 
going to be required to initially assign a Negro teacher 
to an all white school.

Q. Does that mean that as of right now you, as Super­
intendent, lack that authority! Could you assign? A. No, 
sir. I think that under the liberal policy, the general 
policy of the Board of Education in allowing the move­
ment in the summer program and the movement this past 
year, it is conceivable this could be done. We have not 
explored this in terms of actual authority.

Court: Is it fair to say that you think you have 
the authority but as a matter of wisdom you might 
consult them?

A. Yes, sir, you said it extremely well.
Q. You indicated clearly no in response to my question 

about having any administrative or other difficulties. Did 
you mean that there will be administrative difficulties in 
doing this or there will not be? A. Not be is the answer

— 220—

to your question.
Q. Based on the experience you have had thus far in 

the summer school program and in your experience last

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



377a

year, you foresee no difficulties in assigning, if the Court 
so orders you to assign, all of the teachers you have hired 
this year on a basis that does not include race! A. I 
added this, within the good judgment of the staff and the 
Board of Education in the placement of these people, 
which is basic to the placement of any teachers. The fac­
tor of good judgment has to come into it.

Q. Does good judgment include race! A. No.
Q. Then there is no administrative problem based on 

race that would prevent you from assignment of these . . .

Court: He answered that no, as I understood him.

Q. You talked about this matter of rated capacity, in 
determining rated capacity because you wanted to be able 
to grant all of the transfer requests that you possibly 
could. How many white pupils requested transfer from 
initial assignment to Negro schools! A. I don’t have that 
figure right at hand. I think it’s in here.

Q. I think it isn’t. I think we skipped over it yesterday.

Court: What is your contention! It might refresh 
your memory. Do you have one!

— 221—

Mr. Bell: There is sort of a gap in that informa­
tion. I think we have the . . .

Court: Well, somebody’s got it. Who has it!
Mr. Bell: We have the total number of white 

pupils who obtained transfers but there isn’t a show­
ing of how many of these were white assigned to 
Negro schools.

Q. Do you have that information! A. To the best of 
my knowledge, Your Honor, I don’t have the statistics . . .

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



378a

unless you do have them there . . .  of the white to move. 
We assume from a general observation of the requests for 
transfer, and I did work personally with these all the way 
through, we assume that the vast majority of the white 
youngsters who were assigned to Negro schools or pre­
dominantly Negro schools requested a change from that 
assignment.

Court: But it’s not unfair to say that virtually 
all of the requested white transfers were from 
predominantly Negro schools.

A. That’s correct.

Court: So what’s that total!
Mr. Bell: The total, I believe, is 2222.

A. This is all of the transfers of white children. Most of 
the transfers would have been from white to white. The 
point I ’m making is whatever number . . .

— 222-

Court: Inadvertently you said just the opposite a 
moment ago. Perhaps you misunderstood.

A. I did because the listing of the 2222 white transfers 
requests includes in the main requests from one white to 
another white or predominantly white. It also includes . . .

Court: Well, we’re going to have to get it exact. 
The total requested white transfers is 2222.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

A. Yes, sir, that’s correct.



379a

Court: Somebody perhaps knows how many repre­
sent white transfers out of predominantly Negro 
schools. Do you have a contention about it!

Mr. Bell: Yes, sir. It is my contention that in 
the general figures, although I haven’t been able to 
total them up as to which white children were trans­
ferring out of Negro schools, that the major benefit 
of this transfer plan that they worked so had to 
make available to everybody by increasing the 
school capacities, worked in favor of permitting 
white children to get out of Negro schools.

Court: I meant in terms of number. Do you con­
tent that most of the 2000 fall in that catagory?

Mr. Bell: I think that virtually all of them do. 
I don’t doubt, as testimony was yesterday, that 
some wanted to go back to Barringer or had been 
changed from East Mecklenburg to Barringer or 
Eastway to McClintock . . .

—223-
Court: Is the figure available?

A. Yes, sir, I think it could be tied up. If I can get one of 
our school people to take the figures that are listed on 
this pupil assignment sheet, Exhibit A, that are pre­
dominantly Negro, starting with Alexander Street, we 
can assume that 15 white transfer requests who are not 
there in the anticipated enrollment would be the 15 white 
children who were initially assigned to the Alexander 
Street School, and it is assumed from this figure that 
all 15 asked to go to another school. I wonder, Mr. Bai kley, 
if it would be appropriate for Mr. Anderson to take this 
and to roughly run through. These would be the pre­
dominantly Negro schools.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



380a

Court: Do that please. You’ve got a total of 2222 
white requested transfers. How many Negro re­
quested transfer were there!

A. 697 Negro transfers. Now, these would not necessarily 
all be Negro youngsters asking to move from white schools.

Court: I understand. In fact, we got that yester­
day. There were 267 Negroes that asked to go to 
integrated schools and all of them were granted 
except 5.

A. May I cite one other example of the reason this is 
complicated and must be tallied this way. At the Cotswold 
Elementary School, which we mentioned several times and 
which is totally white, there were 72 requests for transfers.

—224—
They were requested to go from Cotswold to another 
school.

Q. On the matter of the 3 to 5, maybe a few more, I 
think 5 all told, who sought to go to Garringer and their 
requests were denied because Garringer was crowded and 
they did not make a second or Third choice. Do you know 
if any member of the staff or you called these parents 
and informed them they should have made a second or 
third choice! A. No, sir. The Board of Education in­
structed me and I, in turn, instructed the staff that they 
were not to be involved in any way in advising the parents 
in the expression of free choice, either pro or con, and 
this has been inherent in all of the Civil Rights legisla­
tion, no compulsion, pressures whatsoever would be pressed 
in any direction. The staff did not make any direct con­
tact with the parents of children who sent in free choice

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—-Cross



381a

transfer requests to make any changes. It took them as 
they came in and handled them in this way. If there was 
a request that came in, either Negro or white, and there 
were plenty of both, that were incomplete in terms of 
not even stating a choice or having stated the same choice 
having already been assigned, and there were a number 
of these, our personnel office which handled this has in 
its files the correspondence it sent back to these parents, 
and this was both to Negro and white parents. It has 
nothing to do with the telling of hte parents, you have 
not requested a second or third choice. lit simply cor-

—225—
rected any inadequacies in the form other than the choices.

Q. You just turned down the requests. Now, was there 
any knowledge these parents were given prior to making 
the request that Gar ringer would be full! Was there any 
way they could have known that Garringer would be 
overcrowded when they made their requests! A. These 
parents, Thomas, Kimbrell, Sloan, Huntley and Counsel, 
I assume, had their copies of the same letter that went 
to all 75,000 students in the system which specifically 
stated the steps that the Board had taken and the steps 
they could take and the fact that a form was on the back 
of that letter which gave three choices and the only limi­
tation that, the Board was placing on any student was the 
limitation of the capacity of the school.

Court: You didn’t answer his question. His ques­
tion was was there any way the parents could know 
that Garringer would be overcrowded?

A. No, sir.
Q. So, as a matter of fact, here was an instance where 

you were able to send 5 more kids back to the Negro school

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



382a

and in line with the policy on which you drew the zone 
lines and everything else yon promptly took the oppor­
tunity to not assign these kids to a desegregated school. 
A. You’ll have to ask your question because I can’t accept 
your assumptions in your question. You used the words 
able to.

—226—
Q. Yon didn’t call these parents and say do you want 

to make a second and third choice? A. We did not.
Q. You considered that coercion? A. No, sir, I did not. 

If I had called it would have been coercion.
Q. Now, you said that the Board, in drawing up these 

zone lines used only good faith consideration and you didn’t 
look to try to keep Negroes in Negro schools or whites in 
white schools. Now, you admit, of course, that the effect 
of excepting the 10 excepted schools from the operation 
of the zoning plan is in each instance resulting in the 
maintenance for this coming year of a great deal of 
segregation, isn’t that correct? A. No, sir, I do not. It 
amounts to about 4000 children in the 10 excepted schools 
which is about one-fifth of our total Negro pupil popu­
lation. It is a very small percentage of the total of 75,000 
so I would not admit to the great deal. I ’ll admit, as it 
is spelled out in the plan, that the 10 excepted schools 
that exist in territories that now overlap and in areas 
that serve other schools.

Q. If all of the school had been zoned using regular 
zoning criteria, isn’t it correct that the number of Negroes 
in formerly white schools and the number of whites in 
formerly Negro schools would have been doubled or tripled? 
A. I think Mr. Barkley brought this out yesterday, that

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



383a

—227—
once the exceptions are all cleared there will be very 
few schools in the total area that will not have a sizable 
number of Negro youngsters in them.

Court: I appreciate that viewpoint but that is 
not in answer to the question. Read the question 
again.

(The Court Reporter reads the question on Page 
226, Line 21.)

A. About doubled, Your Honor. This is an estimate but 
I expect about 2000, 2500 of the 4000 youngsters would 
be in predominantly white or integrated schools.

Q. Isn’t it also true, Dr. Phillips, that the major con­
sideration the Board had in excepting these schools was 
the fact that if they had been included you would have 
had large numbers of white children assigned initially to 
these 10 excepted Negro schools? A. No, sir, that is not 
correct.

Q. Is it true that whatever the Board’s reasons were 
had the 10 excepted schools been included you would have 
been required to assign large numbers of white children 
to those 10 excepted schools? A. No, sir, that is not neces­
sarily correct.

Q. Not necessarily correct? A. No, sir.
Q. Well, maybe we are differing on what large is. Ap­

proximately how many white pupils would have been as- 
siged to these 10 excepted schools had they not been ex­
cepted?

—228—
Mr. Barkley: I object on the grounds that it is 

purely speculative.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips■—for Defendant—Cross



384a

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross 

Court: Overruled.

Q. Can you give us any idea how many white pupils 
would have been assigned to the 10 excepted schools had 
they been included in the zoning scheme? A. Your Honor, 
I have to make one statement to qualify this before I 
answer the question. You have missed the point that a 
number of these schools are projected in the exception 
lor elimination and the Board at no time had contemplated 
the continuation of the schools so the figure would be ir­
relevant because the Torrence-Lytle and Sterling Schools 
are slated for elimination and it’s a possibility in the other 
schools that have been discussed so there is no way to give 
that kind of figure.

Q. They are not eliminated this year, are they? A. No, 
they are not. The Sterling Senior High School is.

Q. If you can, can you answer the question that I posed 
as to how many approximately white pupils would have 
been assigned to those schools? A. I can’t answer be­
cause I don’t know.

Q. There would have been large number, would there 
not • A. No, sir, there would not have been large numbers 
to my knowledge.

Q. Aren t many of these schools located near or in the
—229—

county areas? A. Yes, they are.
Q. And do you disagree with the testimony to the effect 

that while there are identifiable concentrations of Negroes 
within the city in the northwestern section that there is 
a gieat deal of integration in the more sparsely popu­
lated rural areas? A. This is the basis of my answer to 
your question that it would not be large because it is 
sparsely populated.



385a

Q. Yes, but the Negroes and whites don’t live in iden­
tifiable sections, they are fairly well integrated, isn’t that 
right! A. That’s what sparse means, yes, sir.

Q. Had all of the 10 excepted schools been included in 
the zoning scheme there would have been goodly numbers 
of whites assigned to those 10 excepted schools. A. My 
answer would still be no, in my judgment.

Q. How many would have been assigned! Would any 
of them have been assigned? A. I don’t know.

Q. You have no idea at all? A. No.
Q. Now, you say that all of the 10 excepted schools are 

due for elimination? A. No, I did not say that, no, sir.
Q. I thought that was the testimony, that was why we

—230—
weren’t including them this year. A. If you will read 
the exceptions there are alternatives expressed on a num­
ber of exceptions. There are certain numbers of them 
that are slated actually to be closed or discontinued. There 
are others that have two alternatives, either discontinua­
tion or a rezoning of the area. This is spelled out in item 
10 on page 6.

Q. Let’s take Torrence-Lytle School. I gather from read­
ing newspaper clippings and talking to the people in the 
community that during the past school year there has been 
a great deal of commotion about the poor physical con­
ditions, the overcrowdedness, the inadequate facilities that 
exist at the Torrence-Lytle School. Have you received a 
lot of complaints and everything during the last year 
about Torrence-Lytle? A. We have had the problem of 
crowded conditions there as we have had at a number of 
schools, not in terms of poor facilities, no, sir.

Q. Torrence-Lytle is not accredited, is it? A. No, sir, 
it is not.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



386a

Q. And at lease last year it was overcrowded to the 
point where gymnasiums and auditoriums had to be used 
as classrooms, is that correct? A. That is correct.

Q. And I note that notwithstanding this coming year
—231—

the 10th grade is going to be removed. A. Has been al­
ready.

Q. When pupils start to school there will not be a 10th 
grade but nevertheless Torrence-Lytle is within 30 or 
40 pupils of maximum capacity as far as assignments are 
concerned. A. I think that is correct, yes, sir. The maxi­
mum capacity is based, remember, on temporary spaces as 
well as normal spaces.

Q. Which other of the excepted schools are not accred­
ited? A. Sterling Senior High School, Gunn Senior High 
School are not accredited by the Southern Association.

Court: Torrence, Sterling and Gunn?

A. Yes, sir. Sterling has been eliminated.

Court: Already eliminated!

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Sterling is still a school as far as grades 1 to 9, 

isn’t it? A. Grades 1 to 9, yes.
Q. What are the conditions out there 1 to 9, is that 

accredited? A. All of our elementary schools are accred­
ited by the state accrediting agency. None of our elemen­
tary schools in the system are accredited by the Southern 
Association.

Q. How do you designate the conditions at the Sterling
—23 2 -

School as it now exists? A. Conditions that are there?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



387a

Q. That’s right. A. By eliminating the senior high 
school students we have relieved the overcrowded factor 
there. We still have the problem that we have in Matthews 
and in Bain and at Billingsville and Plato Price of con­
tinuing a junior high school which does not have enough 
youngsters to justify a full program. This has been in 
existence and is the background for the basic plan that 
the Board has set up for eliminating this.

Q. Getting back to the implications of the first question, 
do you deny that the Board excepted these schools for 
reasons having to do with racial integration ? A. Yes, sir, 
Ido.

Q. Now, you told the Court about the hundreds of hours 
that the Board and staff spent in drawing up these school 
zone lines. When did the Board give consideration to the 
school zone lines, was it at regular Board meetings? A. 
Yes. Its final consideration, its action was taken at reg­
ular Board meetings.

Q. Were there minutes kept of the discussions and de­
cisions? A. Minutes of the action that was taken were 
kept, yes, sir, in line with the normal process of the Board.

Q. You mean the final decision as to the lines? A. Yes, 
sir.

—233—
Q. Were there any minutes kept of the various prelim­

inary decisions that were made or discussions concerning 
where the zone lines should be? A. No, sir. It is not a 
practice of the Board of Education or any Board of Edu­
cation that I have known to keep minutes of deliberations 
and study groups.

Q. Not all of these meetings were public meetings by 
any means, were they? A. The action meeting of tin 
Board was a public meeting, yes, sir.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



388a

Q. I mean the meetings in which these matters were dis­
cussed and decisions made as to where these zone lines 
were to be drawn. A. The Board of Education—it is my 
understanding of the legal opportunities and responsibility 
—can meet in executive session at any time it wants to do 
so and any sessions that might have been held to discuss 
the maps or plan or any other problem with personnel, as 
I understand it, are within the legal rights of the Board 
of Education to hold executive sessions.

Q. Well, then, is it correct that the Board did have ex­
ecutive sessions! A. They did have executive sessions on 
this and a number of other matters and continues to have 
them, yes.

Q. Did the Board have executive sessions on this matter, 
sir? A. Which matter?

— 234—
Q. The decisions on the zone lines. A. Yes, it did have 

executive sessions.
Q. Approximately how many of these sessions were held? 

A. To the best of my knowledge there were probably two 
work sessions by the Board, executive sessions, relating 
to the maps. I would say, Mr. Barkley, if it’s correct to 
say so, that the Board actually adopted pretty clearly 
the recommendations of the staff that were presented on 
the basis of the study that had been done by the staff. The 
action taken by the Board was not as a result, as you put 
it, of long hours by the Board of Education itself. The 
hours were put in by the staff and the Board recognizes 
the problems of individual block lines and this sort of 
thing.

Q. Was it correct that the suggestions and the tentative 
plans prepared by the staff and principals were presented

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



389a

to the Board for consideration at these executive sessions! 
A. That is correct, yes.

Q. How many executive sessions did you say were held! 
A. I think I answered that. To the best of my knowledge, 
two.

Q. Am I correct in assuming that these executive sessions 
were held prior to the adoption or announcement of the 
new plan and zone lines about March 9 or 10, early in 
March! A.Prior to the adoption of the plan!

Court: In the interest of time, why does it matter!
—235—

Mr. Bell: Well, Your Honor, I have serious diffi­
culty, and that’s why I’m taking time, based on what 
I feel is fairly reliable information that there were 
several meetings, executive meetings, that Dr. Phil­
lips refers to. . . .

Court: What’s wrong with that! You’ll have an 
ally in the Charlotte Observer, perhaps, on this sub­
ject but I don’t know of any rule of law that requires 
all meetings to be public.

Mr. Bell: I would like to establish the fact there 
were meetings and now I’m trying to get at what 
took place in the meetings.

Court: All right. I think you don’t want to pursue 
it too far. To me it’s irrelevant. We’re having a 
public meeting now but there’s nothing to prevent 
your requesting me to meet back here in chambers 
and lawyers often do that. I don’t see anything 
wrong with it.

Q. Am I correct in saying, Dr. Phillips, that there were 
closer to eight meetings during the months preceding the

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



390a

announcement of the new zone lines rather than two at 
which the Board met in executive sessions? A. No. I have 
answered to the best of my knowledge. There were two 
basic executive sessions by the Board itself.

Q. Did the Board meet in the Board Room in the Admin-
—236—

istration Building? A. In the Administration Offices, in 
the Board Room and what we call the map room.

Q. The Board met in the evening for these sessions? A. 
I don’t recall. We meet right often.

Q. I’m talking about the two meetings that you can 
remember. When were they, in the evening? A. I don’t 
recall, Mr. Bell.

Q. You don’t recall whether they were in the afternoon 
or evening? A. No, sir, I don’t.

Q. How long were these meetings, Dr. Phillips? A. I 
don’t recall that either. Usually when the Board gets to­
gether to work and when the staff gets together to work 
they are several hours. I imagine they were several hours 
long but I don’t have a recollection.

Q. Were they three, four hours in length? A. I doubt 
it, no.

Q. Now, in these meetings, Dr. Phillips, isn’t it correct 
that the Board reviewed districts and indicated danger 
zones where you had to give special study because the pos­
sibility if you didn’t draw the line one way there would be 
desegregation in greater amounts than if you drew the line 
another way? A. No, sir, that is not correct.

Q. It’s not correct, Dr. Phillips? A. I said it was not
—237—

correct, yes.
Q. You don’t recall the designation of danger zones at 

all? A. Danger zones?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant■—Cross



391a

Q. That’s right. I don’t know what you’re talking about, 
danger zones. Would you define what you’re talking about!

Q. Referring to areas that had to be given special at­
tention in order to prevent sizable number of Negroes 
being assigned to white schools and vice versa. A. No, 
sir. I have answered that and that is not correct.

Q. Do you recall of placing of symbols to point up these 
areas where special attention had to be given! A. No, I 
don’t know what your source of information is.

Q. Pins or maps! A. We used a number of pins to point 
up where the major changes in areas were made. They 
weren’t concerned to race by themselves. We had maps. 
Just as you have pins on your map, we had maps and pins 
that depicted where the major changes in the geographic 
lines were. It did not relate to race alone.

Q. Was it pins that you were using, Dr. Phillips! A. 
We used little flag pins, yes.

Q. Were they red flags? A. I don’t recall what color 
they were.

Q. Were they multicolored, were they several colors! A. 
I’m not sure what colors they were.

—238—
Q. But you did use some flags on pins? A. Yes.
Q. And how did you use those flags, Dr. Phillips? A. 

The same way they are used here, to depict. I assume your 
different colors depict different areas.

Q. You were showing the locations of the schools on the 
map that you gave us that wasn’t nearly as clear and pre­
cise as the map you were using. How did you use the little 
pins on your map at executive sessions? A. What I an­
swered a minute ago. We used the pins to depict the areas 
where major changes were taking place in geographic 
lines.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



392a

Q. What do you mean by major changes! A. Major 
changes.

Q. Where there was a possibility of more desegregation 
or less desegregation! A. No, sir . . . no, sir.

Q. I don’t understand what you mean by major changes, 
could you give us an illustration of it! A. Take the East 
Mecklenburg and Garringer lines. There was a major 
change proposed in the line between East and Garringer. 
The pr*oblem there was whether to make it this year or 
make it nest year when the Northeast Senior High School 
was to be completed. This is down in the eastern area. It’s 
not on this map, it would be on the senior high school map.

—239—
The whole southwest area was contemplated in this. This 
was red flagged in terms of the area to be studied for the 
new Southwest Senior High School and its relation to all 
the other schools.

Q. This was sort of a determination about which schools 
should be excepted schools, isn’t that correct! A. No, sir, 
this didn’t have anything to do with the exceptions except 
that the new schools being constructed are related to the 
eventual assignment of those children in those areas which 
are in the excepted schools or being served by the excepted 
schools.

Q. Then some of these major changes had to do with the 
excepted schools. A. Any change in line, with very few 
exceptions, in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg system, with the 
exception of the lower eastern area, would necessarily in­
volve some numbers of Negro and white children because 
as you have pointed out they are spread sparsely all over 
the county. So I don’t think I could make a statement that 
an area did not involve Negro and white children both. 
But they weren’t flagged this way in any way.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



393a

Q. In your discussions when you were discussing where 
to make the major changes, is it your testimony that there 
was not consideration, no discussion about what the effect 
as far as integration or segregation would be from drawing

—240—
the line in one place or drawing the line in another place! 
A. Not specifically on that. I don’t think the Board of 
Education or anybody else could look at the map or draw 
lines without being aware of the basic areas That are being 
served, but the Board did not deliberate or whether this 
line here would eliminate or increase the numbers of Negro 
children.

Q. You say not specifically centered on that. To what 
extent was this type of discussion ? A. To the same extent 
that everything else was considered in the total setting of 
the line.

Q. Would you say that it was one factor that was dis­
cussed! A. What was one factor!

Q. The factor of whether there was going to be more 
integration or more segregation. A. Not a factor in the 
decision, no, sir.

Q. What do you mean, then, by not specifically!

Court: We are about to run this thing into the 
ground. He says that they considered, coudn’t, un­
less they were stupid, ignore where residential pat­
terns are because they know where they are. Even 
I learned that in one day. So they considered that, 
had it in their minds and there was some discussion 
about it. Then he insists that that was not a factor 
in drawing the lines. That may not be so. You insist

—241—

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

it was.



394a

Mr. Bell: I should like to make a statement at 
this time both as representative counsel and as an 
officer of this court that I have been pursuing this 
line of questioning based on what I feel is fairly 
reliable information from persons who were present 
at these meetings to the effect that the discussions 
involving these special areas and marked with these 
little pin flags centered on the attempt to draw the 
lines in such a fashion so as to maintain as much 
segregation as possible and it may be necessary for 
us to call a few more witnesses on redirect.

Mr. Barkley: I object to that statement and move 
that it be stricken from the record. He can subpoena 
the court to bring in anyone he wants.

Court: Objection overruled.
Mr. Barkley: I don’t want that in the record.
Court: Not a thing improper with that. That’s 

simply one of the plaintiff’s contentions. Objection 
overruled.

Mr. Bell: Could I just go over and get some things 
together?

Court: Would you like to take a short recess?
Mr. Bell: I think so.
Court: All right. A few minutes recess and then

- 2 4 2 -
resume.

S hort E ecess

(Dr. Phillips returns to the -witness stand and further 
cross examination by Mr. Bell.)

Q. On the matter of how many whites were initially as­
signed to Negro schools, my aids have figured 383 white

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



395a

children were initially assigned to 16 Negro schools. What 
are your figures? A. 396.

Court: Let me get this down, say it again.
Mr. Bell: 396, I’ll accept that figure.

A. White children assigned initially to predominantly 
Negro schools and requested transfers out of those schools 
and were allowed.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

Court: You had 2222 white transfer requests.

A. Yes, sir.

Court: You had 396 white children initially as­
signed to schools that were integrated or heavily 
Negro who requested to get out and did get out.

A. Yes, sir.

Court: Do you know how many white children 
initially assigned to so-called Negro schools who 
stayed in, if any?

A. No, sir, I don’t know.

Court: It wouldn’t be many.
—243—

A. No, sir, it would be very few or none.

Court: Just a handful or none?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. So that the operational effect of the freedom of choice 

provision has prevented any actual desegregation with the



396a

few exceptions you have mentioned of formerly Negro 
schools? A. I think the only conclusions we could draw 
is that under the free choice plan the vast majority or 
possibly all of the white children asked to go hack to 
predominantly white schools or integrated schools, no way 
to tell which way,

Q. Now, as I understand it, from your figures there 
were some 52,826 white children initially assigned to 
schools this fall. A. That’s correct.

Q. And of that figure— and I can’t do my percentages 
that fast but it seems fairly small—of that figure only 
396 white children were initially assigned to Negro schools. 
A. That’s correct.

Q. I mean under your zoning system. But you maintain 
your position that the zones were drawn without regard 
to gerrymandering? A. Yes.

Q. I was asking you a little bit about your perhaps 
tentative plans on teacher desegregation. Turning to 
another issue in this case to see whether it might he

—244—
mooted by subsequent action of the Board, it is my under­
standing that the Department of Health, Education and 
Welfare, Office of Education, approves desegregation plans 
for compliance with Title 6 of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 
that they have thus far refused to approve your plan and 
have indicated their particular concern about the 10 ex­
cepted schools, and I was wondering whether during the 
last few weeks or at any time recently the Board has 
made any decision or discussed the possibility of eliminat­
ing the excepted schools or any of them in an effort to 
comply with the H.E.W. standards.

Mr. Barkley: Objection.
Court: Overruled.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



397a

A. No, it has not. The current status of the application 
with the Health, Education and Welfare Office is that 
the office notified our office that the plan was unacceptable 
at this time for reasons relating to the exceptions, ques­
tions about the boundaries and the statement concerning 
employment and assignment of personnel. But the person 
in charge of the North Carolina region has taken under 
advisement a complete review of the plan without asking 
for any changes in it at this point and the status of it 
right now is that it’s being reveiwed by Health, Educa­
tion and Welfare.

Q. Just for the record, the newspapers speak in terms 
of the Board’s eligibility for the approximately five hun­
dred thousand dollars in Federal assistance. Is this figure

—245—
at all accurate or roughly accurate? A. That figure has 
been bandied around right much. The actual figures in­
volved with Federal dollars is much larger, actually a 
million three hundred thousand alone covering Mecklen­
burg County.

Q. Would this exclude aid to which you would be en­
titled under the recently passed Federal Aid to Educa­
tion Act or including the Federal Aid to Education Act? 
There were several Federal statutes under which school 
boards were entitled to assistance prior to the recently 
passed legislation.

Court: Again in the interest of time, this is 
certainly collateral to the issues. Perhaps we can 
end with a conclusion. Do you feel like you can 
get along without Federal money or feel that you 
must have it?

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



398a

A. The Federal money that has been coming into the 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools for a good while is a vital 
part of the financial program of the school system. It is 
important, yes, sir.

Court: Is it fair to say that the Board does in­
tend to satisfy H.E.W.?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Just to tie up some loose ends, while still on the 

excepted schools. I gather you just didn’t pull some names 
out of the hat, that there was some reason each of the

- 2 4 6 -
schools that was excepted was excepted, is that correct! 
A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. OK. now just doing dow n very briefly, the Plato Price 
School I understand is in substandard condition, there 
are some old buildings which are utilized that don’t even 
have toilet facilities, is that correct?

Court: Excuse me. don't want to interrupt too 
much but I do want to finish this lawsuit. If you 
can do so can you give us any general statement 
of general application to all 10 and tell us why 
were these schools picked out to be excepted and 
then Mr. Beil may come back for further details.

A. I'll try to do it briefly. Your Honor. The number one
proU m  related to space available for the redistribution 
•>: tuese children. This was not the total factor. Number 
— tuere were seme serious yuestioiis about the educational 
tregrun :emg ottered in a number of these schools, as 
n i- ~esu relatei to tae senior oogh school program, a

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



399a

small number of children. Number 3, tying in with the 
space available was the timing of a complete change of 
organization in these schools and that is why in some 
cases the elementary shift needs to come with the shift 
of the junior and senior high so that the whole area can 
be rezoned. These were the three major factors in these 
10 exceptions. And all of the 10 exceptions were schools 
that were serving Negro children in the former county

- 2 4 7 -
system and are basically rural areas. Plato Price and 
Amay James are the closest schools to the inner city itself. 
They were all serving these areas.

Court: Enumerate for me again those three rea­
sons.

A. Space available for the redistribution particularly at 
the junior and senior high leval. May I add this to that, 
the construction program that was outlined yesterday is 
related to this, the new schools. The second is the educa­
tion program either being offered or attempted to be 
offered.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

Court; A t these 10?

A. Yet, sir.

C'mrt A:t being poor?

A. T iwitifiwii m mam msismtm, ym, nr. The iterd mm 
the iryjme h i immr at wMtMbttian mA m-
e n v i z s  A  i '  • v . :  , ;v ' v  a .v t  r . j t :  ■'
ycrcisrster . • • - m vet sat '-ue vec. < ..v?. pe-.v-.r s 
V. vinrji*** « »*»aiw v  - •» *v»..»- ' •« u‘*v son*



400a

for the school contiguous with the other areas that have 
been drawn.

Court: Say that again.

A. The elementary school involved, Your Honor, have to 
alternatives still hanging as proposed in the plan, one of 
either complete discontinuation and the distribution of the 
children now in these elementary schools in other schools 
throughout the area or the creation of a new zone line 
for the elementary schools continguous with the other zones 
around it.

- 2 4 8 -
Court : Are you saying you just need a reasonable 

time to work out whether to abandon, whether to 
renew and restore and where to place schools'? A.

Yes, sir.
Q. Now, back to Plato Price, this is one of the schools 

that I gather you are definitely going to abolish? A. It 
has not been set definitely, no, sir. It’s a strong possibility.

Q. I see. Now, isn’t it correct that the students in the 
Plato Price could have been accommodated this year, 
grades 7 to 9, in the Spaugh School which many of the 
pupils pass in order to get to Plato Price and the balance 
of the pupil population accommodated in other schools in 
the vicinity where there is available space? A. I think 
the record shows, Mr. Bell, that under the maximum capac­
ities set by the Board there is space in all the junior high 
schools serving that area, yes.

Q. So this would have been possible? A. It would have 
been possible, yes.

Q. Then which of the three factors was it, or explain

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



4 0 1 a

your action with regard to Plato Price in line with your 
standards for making excepted schools. A. This was the 
timing and the construction, two factors that were given.

Court: Plato Price is a junior high school?
—249—

A. Yes, grades 5 to 9. It combines with Amay James in 
that area. With the completion of the Southwest Senior 
High School the York Road Senior High School, which 
would normally serve the major number of these children, 
would become a full junior high school contiguous with 
Spaugh and Sedgefield, and a new attendance area set 
for the York Road Junior High School. It was felt ad­
visable at this time that the 7th, 8th and 9th graders in 
the Plato Price area, the majority of which would be in 
the York Road Junior High School area, would better 
be moved then than at the present time. Some would be 
in the Spaugh area, some would be in Coulwood, some 
would be in Wilson. In fact, 30 youngsters, I believe, 
exercised free choice and selected Coulwood Junior High 
School which is far out and are being assigned there.

Court: So Plato Price is going to be abandoned?

A. This decision has not been made completely. The only 
problem in the abandonment of Plato Price is that there 
is one new section of the school and it could be that one 
of the alternatives here is that an elementary school could 
be developed there or a combination primary, elementary 
grammar school.

Court: It looks like the junior high school at 
Plato Price is probably going to be abandoned.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



402a

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross 

A. That’s for sure.

Court: Then these junior high school students
— 2 5 0 -

will then go to . . .  ?

A. The new York Road area or Spaugh or Coulwood or 
Wilson.

Court: Next year or the year after?

A. Conceivably next year and probably the fall a year 
from now.

Q. Which grades go to the building I ’m talking about 
that is rundown and with no toilet facilities? A. I ’m not 
sure, Mr. Bell. The no toilet facilities is a little bit of 
distortion. The facilities are available in the main build­
ing. This is a former agriculture building. I ’m not sure 
but I can find out.

Q. There is one of the junior high schools, isn’t that 
correct? A. I think this is correct.

Q. I notice in some of the other situations that you 
knocked off the high school grades. At Sterling, in view 
of the availability of space in other schools and the condi­
tion of the facilities at least as to a grade or so at Plato 
Price, would it not have been possible to assign the students 
who otherwise would have to be assigned to this substand­
ard facility to some of the other schools? A. This could 
have been done. It was the judgment of the Board at 
this time that this was not a practical move in terms of. 
the total movement that will take place when the senior 
high school is built.

Q. Why wasn’t it going to be practical in view of the 
conditions under which these children will have to endure



Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—-Cross

—251—
their education for the next year or so! A. I think the 
best answer to the question is the third point of timing 
in terms of the movement of these children at the time 
when the whole junior high school is abandoned. This 
is a debatable question.

Q. In the interest of time go on to the G-unn School. 
What were the factors in excepting the Gunn Scheool? 
A. Space, as far as the senior high school, space as far 
as the junior high school and the normal movement of 
all the youngsters at one time. The new Northeast Senior 
High that is to be ready September of 1966 would make 
it possible to redistribute all the children between Gar- 
ringer and East, and the new Northeast would serve that 
total eastern area, and the Gunn Senior High school 
children would be reassigned to all three of those senior 
highs because they come from that total area. The junior 
high is the same way with the new Albemarle Road Junior 
High School being built and then these children would 
be redistributed between Albemarle Road and McClintock 
Junior High Schools and possibly a few in the Cochrane 
area.

Q. Isn’t the Bain Junior High School in that area! A. 
Bain is a very temporary place. It has the 7th grades 
there right now at the Bain School.

Q. Wasn’t there space for the junior high at Gunn which 
I understand is another one of the older schools! A. The

- 2 5 2 -
junior high at Gunn has a better program than the 7th 
grade at Bain. If there were any priority, the 7th grade 
at Bain should be moved before the 7th grade at Gunn.

Q. At Sterling you knocked off the high school but ex­
cepted grades 1 to 9. Couldn’t you get most of these pupils



404a

into the Quail Hollow School or Davidson or Cornelius! 
A. Davidson is up at the other end of the county, about 36 
miles and Cornelius is up the other end of the county.

Q. I ’m sorry, let’s take the Quail Hollow. A. Yes, they 
could have been taken into Quail Hollow this fall.

Q. What were the reasons why you didn’t do that? 
A. Timing with the movement into the elementary and 
the junior high school, but this is a possibility.

Q. Now, Torrence-Lytle, we already talked about it being 
overcrowded and the poor facilities. Were these other fac­
tors involved as far as Torrence-Lytle was concerned? 
A. Space was the first involvement and timing the second, 
yes.

Q. You talked about Crestdale as being a school out in 
the general vicinity of the Matthews School in which all 
of the Crestdale pupils would have fit, assuming Crestdale 
being a school in poor condition. Why was Crestdale an 
excepted school? A. Time and space with the movement 
of the junior high school children from the Matthews 
School it was felt this would be a better move at that 
time when it’s a full elementary at Matthews. Again this

—253—
is a matter of judgment.

Q. Well, this element of judgment always seems to take 
place with the Negro schools. A. There are not but 10 
exceptions involved in the system.

Q. They are all Negro schools? A. That’s correct.
Q. And each time you exercise your judgment in one 

of these things it prevents a degree of desegregation 
assignment from taking place although you indicate not 
for those reasons. A. Is that a question or a statement?

Q. Now, how about the Ada Jenkins School? That, I 
gather, is a relatively new facility or has a new addition.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



4 0 5 a

Why was that excepted? A. Ada Jenkins is a school 
serving Negro children in Davidson, the very top end of 
the county. It has both new and old facilities—all of them 
have old and new facilities—and this was excepted on 
the timing factor alone.

Q. I ’m sorry, I don’t understand timing coming in on 
each one of these. I don’t understand where the timing 
comes in. You were doing all of the zoning back during 
the months preceeding March and why wasn’t there time 
to draw zone lines and assign these kids to the schools? 
A. It was simply the judgment of the Board that the 
timing was more correct to do it this way.

Q. Is there time in your estimation between now and
—254—

the time school opens to go ahead and assign the pupils 
on a zoned basis? A. It is my judgment that the plan 
that the Board has set up is the best one for these 
decisions.

Q. I am asking you whether there is now time in your 
estimation to go ahead and zone the schools and assign 
everyone the way you have assigned to the other 99. A. 
No, I don’t think there is adequate time to make the change 
appropriately and in the best judgment of the staff and the 
Board of Education.

Q. You always give me these little extra words such 
as appropriate time. Let me ask you as I did the teachers, 
if the Court should order you to include the 10 excepted 
schools, could the Board do the job? A. If the Court 
ordered the Board to do the job, I assume the Board 
would have to do what the Court ordered it to do.

Q. Now, the Woodland School, I understand, is a pretty 
nice looking school. A. Woodland School is a very fine 
elementary school, yes, sir.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



4 0 6 a

Q. Why was it excepted! A. Timing again to tie in 
with the rezoning of the Plato Price and Amay James 
and the total area because the Woodland covers most of 
that same area. It’s an overlapping area.

Court: Let me ask Mr. Bell this; right now are 
there Negro students in these 10 excepted schools 
who now wish they had exercised their freedom of

- 2 5 5 -
choice and want to do it!

Mr. Bell: I can’t really answer the question. Of 
course, I can say this, that we tried to put our 
contentions in the record through the plaintiff 
Hawkins that the freedom of choice plan works to 
help the whites go hack to white schools for a lot 
of outside reasons . . .

Court: I don’t want to cut you off but I under­
stand your contentions, that freedom of choice is a 
myth is your contention, of course, but you’re not 
able to answer my question, you just don’t know.

Mr. Bell: I don’t know but I would think there 
would be a minimum of value in giving them another 
chance to exercise freedom of choice. I think the 
thing is the leadership hears all the time that the 
Board is really sincere and why don’t they assign, 
why do I have to risk this or that by asking for a 
transfer.

Court: Is it fair to say that the plaintiffs do not 
ask the Court for that type of interim relief, 
namely, to order further freedom of choice for the 
students in the 10 excepted schools!

Mr. Bell: I would think that in view of all of the 
testimony that that would be fair for the Court to

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



4 0 7 a

conclude. We are more interested in having the 
schools included within the general zoning.

- 2 5 6 -
Court : Thank you, sir.

Q. We are talking about the York Eoad School which 
tends to be fairly crowded and although there is space 
in some of the schools surrounding it—I think Sedgefield 
could take some of the junior high and Harding some of 
the senior high in that area-—in view of that, why was 
York Road not included within the zoning scheme? A. 
York Road Senior High School is to be eliminated at the 
end of this next year assuming the construction of South­
west is completed. York Road Junior High School, which 
was built originally for a junior high school in relationship 
to Sedgefield and Spaugh, would become the junior high 
school serving that geographic area in there. This would 
mean move back and forth for one year’s period of time 
and in the judgment of the Board this was not a wise thing 
to do.

Q. Even when you build the new school a lot of students 
now assigned to York Road are going to be assigned to 
existing schools, isn’t that right? A. They are not all 
going to be assigned to the new school. A. The majority 
of them will be in the York Road area, yes, but there will 
be some in other areas.

Q. But, nevertheless, you hold off reassigning any of 
them and leave them all at York Road School because of 
the reasons you gave? A. That is correct. They all had 
free choice.

—2 5 7 -
Court: Dr. Phillips, in your judgment is there 

any compelling reason why the Board should not be

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



4 0 8 a

ordered to take these 10 excepted schools into the 
geographic zoning plan by September, 1966!

A. Your Honor, in my judgment and, I think, in the plan­
ning it has been conceived September 1966 would see the 
completion of the thing and it would be correct to assume 
this, yes, sir.

Court: Then is your answer that there is no 
compelling reason why that should not be ordered, 
that is, complete the zoning plan, and I say paren­
thetically, one way or the other, either with the new 
schools or putting some people in various schools 
mentioned like where there are vacancies, not filled 
to capacity. As I understand it, then, there is no 
compelling reason why the Board should not com­
plete its zoning plan in one more year.

A. I think that’s correct.

Court: You can do it one way or the other, either 
new construction or redefining of the lines!

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, on the Billingsville School we saw there that 

there are less than 200 students in Billingsville Junior 
High and this is supposed to be a pretty poor school, a 
lot of inadequacies as far as facilities are concerned. 
A. That is not correct. It’s a brand new facility that has

—258—
been built there and adapted for temporary junior high 
school use.

Q. In terms of facilities you would expect to find in a 
junior high such as business courses and gymnasium and

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross



4 0 9 a

things of that nature. A. There are limitations, yes. It’s 
better than some of the others.

Q. I gather, and this was the testimony yesterday, that 
there are less than 200 pupils there and they could all go, 
he assigned to the Piedmont School, which is operated at 
half capacity with about 400 pupils, or perhaps to the 
Hawthorne School. Now, why would this school be ex­
cepted, why would you want to hold off on that in view 
of the conditions there and in view of the availability of 
space in schools where we would assume all facilities are 
available! A. It is my judgment, and the Board accepted 
this judgment, that educationally the move of one year 
and then into the new East Central Junior High School 
would not be of value to these youngsters and they are 
better off staying where they are. It’s a matter of timing, 
Mr. Bell, is the basic reason.

Q. This matter of timing each time. Here’s a situation 
where you indicate that the facilities for junior high are 
somewhat less than adequate, that there is another school, 
the Piedmont, a white school, which is operating at about

—2 5 9 -
half capacity, and that there are other schools if you 
wanted to use them also and yet you say that timing and 
a matter of judgment cause you to make this an excepted 
school where Negroes are assigned back the way they 
were back through the years because of race. I can’t un­
derstand why this couldn’t have been done this year rather 
than next year as you now indicate to the Court you 
would be able to do it.

Court: Do you have any comment!

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant—Cross

A. No, sir.



4 1 0 a

Q. You just can’t do it, you just feel you shouldn’t do it, 
it’s just your judgment? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, the Amay James School is a relatively recently 
constructed school, is that correct? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And what were your reasons for excepting that? A. 
The same basic reasons as the others. Amay James covers 
a rather large area and it must be built back into the 
geographic plan relating to the Plato Price and this is a 
decision that is still hanging as to whether new areas are 
to be drawn or the Plato Price abandoned completely. It’s 
a matter of timing.

Q. Just to repeat as to the Crestdale which has a popula­
tion of grades 1 to 6 and only 87 students this year, your 
answer is that it is just a matter of judgment and you’d

—260—
rather wait until next year to take the action? A. It was 
the judgment of the Board that this would be the best 
decision, yes.

Q. You talked about athletics yesterday and today and 
just to get it straight, as I understand it at the present 
time there are interscholastic athletics at the high school 
level and they are operated in two leagues, one league 
made up of the Negro schools, one league made up of 
the white schools, and they play each other and there is a 
Negro school champion and a white school champion, is 
that correct? A. There are two athletic associations in 
this state and up to this point our predominantly Negro 
schools have operated under the athletic association that 
controls their activities and the white have done likewise. 
We have begun some steps to eliminate this. It is a state­
wide problem.

Q. Do you have an estimate as to when this would be

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant— Cross



411a

eliminated? A. No, I can’t predict on it. I think in a 
fairly short time.

Q. You indicated it was difficult for you to get the rec­
ords together that we have requested because all the 
records having to do with race as far as students are 
concerned have been abandoned. Is that so? Is it your 
contention in drawing these zone lines that you had no idea 
of the racial makeup of the communities ? A. Only general 
ideas ?

Q General ideas? A. Yes.
—261—

Q. Your principals and your staff people had a little 
better than a general idea, right? A. Yes.

Q. Did you say yes? A. The principals in the individual 
schools would be more knowledgeable than we would be 
at the central office.

Q. I understand that traditionally each teacher has sort 
of a teacher roll or teacher register for the pupils as­
signed to her that has general information about the pupil 
and, at least in times past, indicated the race of the pupil. 
A. That’s correct.

Q. Is it my understanding that this has been done away 
with, the racial designation? A. The State Board of Edu­
cation has just recently dropped its requirements for the 
maintenance of separate records of Negro and white.

Q. And the Board now is going to follow through on 
that, is that right? A. That’s right. The Board of Edu­
cation has made every effort in past years to remove this 
as a problem.

Dr. A. Craig Phillips—for Defendant-—Cross

Mr. Bell: No further question.



4 1 2 a

Redirect Examination by Mr. Barkley:

Q. Doctor, he asked about athletics between the schools.
- 2 6 2 -

Will you state whether or not in Myers Park High School 
last term there were any Negro pupils participating in 
athletic events with white pupils? A. Yes, sir, there were 
five or six youngsters at the 10th grade level who partic­
ipated at the junior varsity program at Myers Park, 10th 
graders who were assigned there last year.

Q. Do you know anything about basketball, baseball? 
A. They participated all the way through in all the athletic 
programs and were on a completely eligible basis.

Q. Was any distinction drawn at all on a racial basis 
as far as athletics? A. No, sir.

Q. Do you know of any distinction drawn at any of the 
high schools as to the racial composition as to pupils in 
the schools as to athletic participation? A. No, sir, they 
were not.

Q. Well, now, Doctor, do you know whether or not there 
is any event such as track meets between Negro schools 
and white schools? A. This spring, Mr. Barkley, the girls 
athletic association throughout the system in all the schools 
set up our first system-wide track and field events. This 
was the first effort as to bringing together the schools and 
this was an event held this spring and very successfully 
done.

Q. Let me just ask you one further question to clear
- 2 6 3 -

up the matter brought out in evidence here yesterday. 
Have you had occasion to measure the distance from Mor­
gan School, described as being a mile and a half from

Dr. A. Craig Phillips— for Defendant—Redirect



413a

Selwyn, out to the Selwyn School! Have you had occasion 
to check the distance! A. Yes, sir, I have measured that. 
It’s exactly 4 miles from the entrance of Selwyn School to 
the entrance of Morgan School.

Q. Reference was also made to Little Rock as being 
in the close vicinity of Selwyn School. Do you know how 
far the Little Rock Road is from Selwyn School! A. I 
haven’t measured it, Mr. Barkley, but it’s all the way on 
the other side of the county, over in the western section of 
the county, out near the West Mecklenburg-Tuckaseegee- 
Paw Creek area.

Q. Do you have an estimate of miles on that! A. I’d 
say 15, 18 miles from Selwyn School roughly, yes, sir.

Mr. Barkley: That’s all.
Court: Thank you, Dr. Phillips. You may step 

down.

Robert Carpenter Hanes—for Defendant—Direct

Court: Call your next witness for the School 
Board.

R o b e r t  C a r p e n t e r  H a k e s , a  w i t n e s s  f o r  t h e  d e f e n d a n t ,  

h a v i n g  f i r s t  b e e n  d u l y  s w o r n ,  w a s  e x a m in e d  a n d  t e s t i f i e d  

a s  f o l l o w s :

Direct Examination by Mr. Barkley:
—264—

Q. What is your full name! A. Robert Carpenter 
Hanes.

Q. What position do you hold with the Charlotte-Meck- 
lenburg School Board! A. I am assistant Superintendent 
for the secondary schools.

Q. In other words, the operation of all of the high 
schools, junior high schools are under your control and



414a

supervision? A. Yes, sir, the junior and senior high 
schools.

Q. Doctor, do you have a record on Don Griggs who, 
I believe, was the first Negro student admitted to Myers 
Park High School and he was there alone, is that right? 
A. Yes, sir. I am familiar with Don Griggs record.

Q. Do you know what Donald Griggs achieved while a 
student at Meyers Park insofar as National Honor Society 
is concerned? A. Well, he was a very good student. He 
was elected into the National Honor Society Chapter at 
Myers Park High School. This represents approximately 
the upper 10% of the student body.

Q. Was he elected an officer of any clubs? A. Yes, 
sir. He was elected President, or an officer of the En­
gineers Club, which is an interest club at Myers Park.

Q. Did he have any other activity out there in connec­
tion with the school? A. Yes, sir. He served as a photo­
grapher for the school annual at Myers Park High School. 
He also represented his home room in student activities.

—265—
Q. Find any evidence of being browbeaten out at Myers 

Park High School? A. No, sir.
Q. Now, the Piedmont Junior High School, that’s also 

under your jurisdiction, is that right? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know the status of the elective officers of 

the P.T.A. at that school for next year? A. I know who 
the officers are, yes, sir.

Q. Is there a Negro mother who has been elected to 
one of the officers in the P.T.A. ? A. Yes, sir, there is. 
to one of the officers in the P.T.A.? A. Yes, sir, there is. 
I recall that she is a Vice-president for the P.T.A. for 
next year.

Q. How about the 7th and 9th grades, whether there 
was any participation by Negroes from the standpoint

Robert Carpenter Hanes—for Defendant—Direct



415a

of being elected class officers? A. Negro students were 
elected to class officers for this past year in both the 7th 
and 9th grades at Piedmont Junior High.

Q. What kind of a basketball team did Piedmont have 
last year? A. On the starting team 3 of the 5 starting- 
players on the team were Negroes. They played a very 
good season. They won the Sportsmanship Award, as 
a matter of fact, for their league of 10 junior high schools, 
not only for the conduct of the team but the conduct of 
the student body when games were played there.

—266—
Mr. Barkley: That’s all.

Cross Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. Do you consider this Mr. Griggs was a better than 
average student? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you think that all Negro students are better 
than average or on a level with Mr. Giggs? A. No, sir.

Q. Have you ever gone into the Negro community or 
gone to Negro homes and talked to the parents about why 
they aren’t taking advantage of the transfer provision 
to send their children to Myers School or any of the other 
predominantly white high schools?

Mr. Barkley: I object to that.
Court: Overruled.

A. No, sir, I have not.
Q. Do you know anything about some of the fears and 

reservations that some of the parents had as to what might 
or might not happen to their children if they send them 
to integrated schools?

Court: Or if they have such fears.

Robert Carpenter Hanes—for Defendant—Cross



416a

A. I do not know. I would imagine that perhaps they 
would. I do not know for a fact they have fears but I 
would imagine they would have the same kind of fears

- 2 6 7 -
anyone else would have going a new school situation.

Q. What has the Board done in terms of a program 
that would show these parents what I am fairly sure 
the facts are, that most teachers are going to receive the 
pupil well, that they are going to treat them as they are 
going to treat the white pupils, that there is nothing that 
they need to be afraid o f! Has the Board undertaken 
any kind of program or have you undertaken any kind 
of program! A. Not any organized kind of program 
except for the fact that certainly the principals of all of 
our schools would be aware of the treatment of Negro 
students in integrated school situations, of their acception 
and of the way they have been performing and the re­
lationship with teachers.

Q. This is in the main after they get there! A. Yes, 
sir. It would certainly be a view to students who come 
after them as to how they might expect to be treated.

Q.Is there anything that you or your staff is doing 
to break down the understandable reservations Negro 
parents who have not sent their children to white schools 
would have about taking such action after all of these 
years! A. No, sir, I am not involved in such a plan.

Q. You mentioned the Piedmont School. I gather that 
Piedmont School is a place where you have roughly as­
signed this year 256 white pupils and 274 Negroes, is 
that correct! A. Yes, sir.

—268—
Q. And that’s the only school that has that kind of a 

balance in the whole system, isn’t that right! A. Yes, sir.

Robert Carpenter Hanes—for Defendant—Cross



417a

Q. And it’s your testimony, I gather, that everything 
is working out fairly well, at least to this point as far as 
the Negroes becoming officers of the P.T.A. and Negro 
pupils elected to class officers? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Does that generally reflect everything is going very 
well? A. In my judgment, yes, the program seems to 
be operating fairly well.

Q. In your judgment, Dr. Hanes, would it also not be 
more likely that similar kinds of instances of successful 
integrated education or integrated schools would be ob­
tained in some of the other high schools if the percentages 
of Negroes and whites that were assigned there were 
more evenly balanced than they now are?

Mr. Barkley: I object to that. That’s going into 
racial inbalance. You don’t have to achieve racial 
balance.

Court: Overruled.

A. I think the Negro students at Myers Park High School 
and South Mecklenburg Senior High School this past 
year have adjusted normally and have been a normal 
part of the student body just as have the Negroes at

—2 6 9 -
Piedmont Junior High School and there is a considerable 
difference in the ratio between South Mecklenburg and 
Piedmont.

Court: In what respect, South Mecklenburg has 
just a very few Negroes?

A. Yes, sir, some 30 or 40.
Q. I was thinking of the situation where you have 

in many of the instances just 1 or 2 of the other race

Robert Carpenter Hanes—for Defendant—Cross



418a

being assigned to a particular school and generally that 
1 or 2 choosing to go back to the school where they were 
coming from. My question was wouldn’t this tendency 
be lessened if there were more of each race assigned to 
the school, if the percentages were more even? A. I 
think that ultimately it depends on the individual student 
Don Griggs got along very beautifully as a student at 
Myers Park High School but we must judge him not 
so much as a Negro but as a capable young person. I 
think that this is ultimately what happens.

Q. You are not indicating to me that we have over 200 
Don Griggs assigned to the Piedmont School, are you? 

A. No, but I think among those 200 students we have good 
students, we have average students and not so good 
students and they are still individuals.

Q. My question remains, based on your testimony, is 
there not better adjustment in terms of not only the Negroes 
but the white pupils in the Piedmont School than we have

—270—
had in some of the other schools where, having assigned 
just a few whites or a few Negroes, they tend to make 
applications for transfer back to the schools they came 
from or back to segregated schools? A. Well, I am 
not aware of any large numbers of Negro students who, 
once they have been in an integrated school, have re­
quested transfer back to a segregated school because of 
poor- treatment.

Court: Let me see if I can shorten this. I think 
Mr. Bell’s last several questions relate to the situa­
tion where there are just 1 or 2 of the minority 
group in a school. He’s asking if there were more 
isn’t there less likelihood of those transferring out.

Robert Carpenter Hanes—for Defendant—Cross



419a

Where yon have just 1, 2 or 3 Negroes, say, and 
700 white students, isn’t it more likely that the 
1, 2 or 3 will transfer out than otherwise!

A. I think that’s true.
Q. This is certainly true of the white students, isn’t it, 

where in every case where you assigned just a few white 
pupils to a Negro school they all transfer right out of it! 
A. This is the case, yes, except that at Bethune where we 
have had—

Q. A few who stayed there! A. Yes, sir.
—271—

Q. There were some newspaper clippings of comments 
by parents, white parents, some of whom indicated they 
were for integration but they were very reluctant to not 
choose transfer when they found their students were as­
signed to formerly Negro schools and they were only going 
to be a few white pupils there. I wonder if the Board 
is aware or the staff is aware of this kind of complaint 
and whether any action has been taken by the Board to 
correct this situation.

Mr. Barkley: Objection.
Court: Overruled.

A. It has been our instructions, as we understood them, 
not to involve ourselves in encouraging students either 
to go to a particular school or not to go to a particular 
school. This would apply both to white as well as Negro 
students.

Q. No, my question was not trying to get Negroes or 
the whites to go but whether, in the light of the fact of 
your apparent knowledge that white parents are not going

Robert Carpenter Hanes—for Defendant—Cross



420a

to leave their children in predominantly Negro schools 
when there are only a small percentage of whites assigned 
there, have you made recommendations as a staff member 
to the Board as to what can be done to alter that situation? 
A. No, sir.

Court: Is it the plaintiffs’ contention that zones 
ought to be drawn so as to achieve, insofar as pos­
sible, racial balance?

—272—
Mr. Bell: I think that we don’t get into the ques­

tion of racial balance. I think we have the problem 
of a Board here that has been assigning pupils on 
the basis of race, who have the obligation under 
Brown to desegregate, to disestablish the segregated 
system. In that regard, where you have an op­
portunity to draw a line one way and it’s going to 
bring about desegregation and draw it another way 
that’s going to maintain segregation, then the Board 
has the obligation to draw that line, assuming no 
other educational factors, so as to promote the 
desegregation process. Our contention in this case 
is that the Board has not done this, that they have 
clearly drawn the lines in order to maintain se­
gregation, it hasn’t been a back and forth thing.

Court: Is this a mostly yes or mostly no answer 
to my question?

Mr. Bell: I would say the answer to your ques­
tion is yes. I was trying to indicate that it’s not a 
prime issue in this case.

No further questions.

Robert Carpenter Hanes—for Defendant— Cross



421a

Frank Dowd, Jr., a witness for the defendant, having- 
first been duly sworn, was examined and testified as 
follows:

—273—
Direct Examination by Mr. Barkley:

Q. Mr. Dowd, your name is Frank Dowd? A. Frank 
Dowd, Jr.

Q. You are a member of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
Board of Education! A. Yes, sir.

Q. Mr. Dowd, the suggestion has been thrown out here 
on cross examination of Dr. Phillips that the Board in 
connection with the preparation of this new assignment 
plan had divisions made on maps according to race in­
dicated by flags and things like that. Did you attend meet­
ings of the Board at which this desegregation plan was 
drawn up? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you ever see any maps or other material that 
made any reference to racial consideration? A. No, sir.

Mr. Barkley: Examine him.

Cross Examination by Mr. Bell:

Mr. Bell: I don’t know what defendant’s counsel 
was asking but I didn’t ask that at all.

Court: Just ask questions. That’s not a fair com­
ment to this witness.

Mr. Bell: I ’m sorry, Your Honor.
—274—

Q. Mr. Dowd, how long have you been a member of the 
Board? A. Approximately seven years.

Q. What line of work are you in? A. I’m in the manu­
facturing business.

Frank Dowd, Jr.—for Defendant—Direct—Cross



422a

Q. You did attend, then, some meetings prior to the an­
nouncement of the Board’s new zoning plan, which meet­
ings were not publicized and which outsiders were ex­
cluded, is that correct? A. Some were and some weren’t.

Q. I ’m interested in the ones in which the press and pub­
lic generally were excluded. How many such meetings did 
you attend? A. I really don’t know, sir.

Q. Would it be as many as eight? A. No, sir.
Q. Four? A. Something in that area, probably three, 

four.
Q. These meetings were held in the evenings, weren’t 

they, Mr. Dowd? A. Counsel, I don’t recall. Some were 
in the evening and some were in the morning. Some were 
in full attendance with the press, which were in the morn­
ing.

Q. Mr. Dowd, I would like to limit your responses to the 
meetings, so-called executive sessions, where the press was 
excluded, where no outsiders were present except members 
of the Board and the School Board staff. I ask again, how

—275—
many such meetings did you attend ?

Mr. Barkley: Objection.

A. I tried to answer to the best of my ability.

Court: Sustained, he said three or four.

Q. All right, then we got back into the breakfast meet­
ings with the press again and I wanted to exclude that 
type of meeting.

Court: Of those three or four, how many were 
at night?

Frank Dowd, Jr.—for Defendant—Cross



423a

A. Your Honor, I don’t remember.
Q. Do you remember whether any of them were at night! 

A. Yes, I ’m sure we had an evening meeting.
Q. Were these meetings held in the regular meeting 

room in the Board! A. Regular Board Room.
Q. Now, at these meetings, as I understand it, the staff 

members showed you tentative arrangements for the new 
school zones, is that correct! A. That is correct.

Q. And there was discussion about the new school zones! 
A. That is correct.

Q. Do you remember any reference to areas that were 
designated roughly or unofficially as danger areas! A. As 
danger areas!

Q. That’s right. A. What do you mean by that, sir!
—276—

Q. I’m not sure, I ’m asking you.

Court: Just if you remember the use of that 
word.

A. No, sir, I do not.
Q. Do you remember whether there were areas on the 

map of the city that you were using to construct the zones 
that were marked with small red pins! A. I recall areas 
which represented major changes from previous attendance 
areas which were marked with, seemed like to me it was a 
ribbon. I ’m not sure if it was a pin or a ribbon.

Q. For the most part these designated the areas of major 
change, is that right, from the old sysem! A. Right.

Q. And your old system was for the most part a dual 
boundary line, with boundary lines for Negro schools and 
boundary lines for white schools, isn’t that correct!

Court: Certainly that used to be so.

Frank DoivcL, Jr.—for Defendant—Cross



424a

Q. So, if I am correct, you designated with some kind 
of marking the areas where there would be major changes 
from the old biracial system to the new single zone sys­
tem? A. Actually these changes represented natural 
boundaries and so forth of a new attendance area.

Q. Yes, but what you were designating were changes 
from the old attendance areas to the geographical bound­
aries for the new attendance areas, isn’t that right! A. 
Yes.

—277—
Q. I ask you, Mr. Dowd, whether or not you spent some­

times considerable periods of time in discussing back and 
forth where the line should be drawn in each of these areas 
of major change. A. No, sir, we did not spend considerable 
time. We had so many areas to consider that, quite frankly, 
we had instructed our people to draw these attendance lines 
with no regard whatsoever to race and they presented them 
to us, the elementary first, the junior high next and the 
senior high next, and basically we accepted what was 
presented to us.

Q. And this took place over three or four meetings, is 
that right? A. I think this took place at one meeting.

Q. It’s your recollection. . . .  A. I don’t recall seeing 
maps but at one meeting, attendance area maps.

Q. The decisions as to where the lines would be drawn 
took place. A. Right.

Q. Do you remember when the meeting was? A. No, I 
don’t.

Q. It was prior to March, is that right? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was it after January? A. I don’t remember.

—278—
Q. Was it before January? A. I don’t even remember

Frank Dowd, Jr.—for Defendant—Cross



425a

when we announced the areas but just shortly before the 
areas were.

Q. Was it one week prior to the announcement? Was 
there an executive meeting held one week prior? A. Short­
ly before. Honestly, I couldn’t say whether it was a week 
or two weeks or one day.

Q. What did you do concerning these lines at the prior 
closed meetings? A. I don’t recall seeing any lines at prior 
closed meetings.

Q. Did you discuss the zoning lines at all in your recol­
lection? A. We discussed general policy which, I think, I 
have already related to you.

Q. Was it with regard to the zone lines? A. Attendance 
areas were to be drawn up for each school irregardless 
of race.

Q. Did you have three meetings at which you did noth­
ing but instruct the staff they were to draw lines without 
regard to race! A. I don’t remember whether we had 
three meetings or two meetings.

Q. Would you like some time? You told us that you had 
three or four, that you remembered three or four meet­
ings. A. I have told you that I can recall one Board meet­
ing that we saw maps. I can definitely recall we outlined

—279—
the general policies in regard to the new attendance areas. 
I think I’d be telling you a misstatement if I actually pinned 
down we had another or another or another meeting be­
cause I do not remember.

Q. In these discussions with the Board at these meetings 
do you recall whether or not there was discussions as to 
Avhether the line was placed in one area there would be so 
much integration or if it were drawn in another area there

Frank Dowd, Jr.— for Defendant— Cross



426a

would be. . . .  ! A. No, sir, I can definitely remember that 
was not the case.

Q. Are you saying no such discussions took place? A. 
That is not the case.

Court: He says he can definitely remember that 
is not the case.

Mr. Bell: That’s all.

David W. Harris—for Defendant—Direct

D a v id  W .  H a r r is , a  w i t n e s s  f o r  t h e  d e f e n d a n t ,  h a v i n g  

f i r s t  b e e n  d u l y  s w o r n ,  w a s  e x a m in e d  a n d  t e s t i f i e d  a s  f o l ­

l o w s  :

Direct Examination by Mr. Barkley:

Q. Your full name, please. A. David W. Harris.
Q. In what official capacity are you connected with the

—280—
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education! A. Chair­
man of the Board.

Q. How long have you been Chairman of the Board? A. 
I ’d say three to four years.

Q. Mr. Harris, will you please go ahead in your own 
words and just state the policy of the Board with reference 
to pupil assignments resulting in the plan that is now here 
before the court. A. Without going into a great deal of 
history of former county and city and what has taken place 
up until now, this Board did inherit a segregated system. 
Along with that it inherited the placement of schools in 
many cases that were in certain residential areas. We 
found, as a Board, when we got into the real serious prob­
lem of integration that it was real difficult to move schools 
and so we had to use the schools that we had and never



427a

had enough schools. So we had to work with the schools 
that were presently built and were building and since we 
have started our plan of definite integration we have al­
ways placed schools where they would accommodate the 
students where they live and where it would not be in re­
gard to race. Now, the policy of this Board is to bring 
about integration as swiftly and as orderly as possible. 
The implication by the people who are bringing the charges 
is that we are trying to delay integration but I do know 
for a fact that we as individuals and as a Board believe that 
integration is the right policy, that is the just thing to do,

—281—
that we were involved in a plan to bring it about as soon 
as possible, and, regardless of Civil Bights or H. E. W. or 
whatever, we would still have had an integrated system as 
soon as we could. This has been our plan since way before 
civil rights action was taken and this is still our plan and 
we are still trying to do it as swiftly and as orderly as 
possbile. There are some that feel we are going too fast, 
there are some that feel we are going too slow but our 
basic decisions have been in regard to the welfare of the 
child. Much of the discussion has been why we have ex­
cepted schools. One of our most difficult problems in a fast­
growing community is transferring students from one 
school to another. This is not good education. It is diffi­
cult for a child to transfer from another school and we do 
this as seldom as possible. In these excepted schools in 
particular, we find that if we move a mass number of chil­
dren this year, knowing that next year we are going to 
have to move them again, we feel that this is detrimental 
to the child. This has basically been the reason we brought 
about these excepted schools and why we haven’t done it 
this year. Our excepted policy is that every one of these

David W . Harris—for Defendant—Direct



428a

excepted schools that can possibly be closed down and in­
tegrated by the end of next year will be done. We would 
have liked to have done it this year but we could not have 
done it and kept the educational advantages of the children 
because we thought it would be detrimental to the children

—282—
involved. This is our basic policy. I would like to answer 
any questions related to it but in the essence of time we 
believe in integration, we are for integration and we are 
trying to bring it about as swift as possible.

Q. Mr. Harris, something was said about the H.E.W. 
and its requirements to obtain Federal funds. I ’ll ask you 
if this assignment plan wasn’t adopted before H.E.W. ever 
imposed any requirements with regard to certain com­
pliance. A. Absolutely, and would have been carried out 
regardless of what requirements had ever been made. This 
was not a result of any requirements of H.E.W. or Civil 
Rights.

Q. And the suggestion here of our plan not complying 
with two grades being cut off at one time, our plan was 
adopted before that proposed by H.E.W. A. That’s true 
and I believe the majority of the community, both white 
and colored, know this and believe this.

Court: Do you agree with Dr. Phillips answer to 
my question that by September, 1966, you can take 
in these excepted schools one way or the other!

Q. I ’m sure, Your Honor, that we can. We plan to, if we 
possibly can. There may be one or two instances that still 
might conflict with the best interests of the child but we 
live year by year in the schools. It’s hard for us to antici­
pate exactly what our problems will be. But in the vast

David W. Harris—for Defendant—Direct



429a

majority of cases I’m sure we plan to do it anyhow. We’ll 
be ready.

—283—
Mr. Barkley: Examine him.

Cross Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. Mr. Harris, you said your plan was adopted prior 
to the filing of this lawsuit? A. The plan of geographic 
desegregation was adopted, I think, in 1963, or perhaps 
earlier, but we have been in the process. This has been 
our policy, our stated policy, and it has been in the news­
papers and in the public meetings since that time.

Q. You are not relying today on the plan you drew up 
in 1963, are you! A. Well, of course that has been im­
plemented as we went along. Our statement at the time 
was that we’d bring about orderly geographic desegrega­
tion of schools as soon as possible which was long’ before 
Civil Rights or H.E.W.

Q. You don’t deny that after this suit was filed in Janu­
ary and after interrogatories were filed in February that 
you obtained an extension of time until sometime in April 
so as to complete the work on this plan? A. This plan 
was already in effect. We have always been in the process 
of developing this plan.

Q. Why couldn’t you provide us with the plan when we 
asked for it in February? A. Because it wasn’t com­
plete. Of course, at that time the idea of the overall free-

—284—
dom of choice was a new item that had come in in light 
of H.E.W.

Q. There have been some changes? A. Oh, as I say, 
there have been changes and developments. The first time 
that we developed this plan we couldn’t have developed it 
in its entirety.

David W . Harris—for Defendant—Cross



430a

Q. In the process of formulating these changes and ad­
ditions to the plan you don’t deny, do you, Mr. Harris, 
that the Board held a number of meetings at which the 
press and members of the public were excluded? A. We 
hold a number of meetings. We have held as many as five 
meetings in a day. We hold many meetings on many sub­
jects at all times. Which particular meetings are you re­
ferring to?

Q. The question was whether or not you had held ex­
ecutive-type meetings prior to the announcement of the 
new plan at which the decisions were made as to where the 
zones were to be drawn. A. We did have meetings, yes.

Q. Do you, as Chairman, recall how many such meetings 
you had? A. Since I have been Chairman?

Q. No. How many meetings, executive in nature, at 
which decisions on the zoning were discussed and reviewed 
and finally finalized. A. This has been discussed. Some­
where in the vicinity of two or three perhaps, and when

—285—
we have a meeting we talk about many subjects, maybe 
four, five or ten subjects, relating to personnel and other­
wise. I would say perhaps at a couple of meetings ap­
proximately on this particular subject executive-type ses­
sions were held before our public meeting where it was 
discussed and adopted.

Q. Were there any records or minutes kept of the dis­
cussions in the executive meeting’s? A. I doubt it se­
riously. I don’t really know.

Q. At these meetings did the Board discuss the proposals 
as to where the zone lines should be placed as made, per­
haps, by your staff personnel? A. That’s right.

Q. And is it also correct that at these meetings there 
were maps on which there were areas designated as areas

David W. Harris—for Defendant—Cross



431a

of greatest change! A. Not as such. This, I ’m sure, en­
tered into our discussion but—

Q. I ’m sorry, what do you mean by not as such! A. 
Well, as I understand your question you meant that we 
designated certain areas of greatest change. We designated 
all areas of change.

Q. You designated all areas of change! A. That’s right, 
by lines.

Q. Were some given a lot more discussion than others! 
A. That’s true, some were.

—286—
Q. And were some of these areas marked with little red 

pins! A. Not that I recall. Schools were often marked 
with pins. We have junior high, senior high, elementary 
schools, new construction areas, we have various ways in 
which we mark maps but not any necessarily that I recall, 
I don’t recall whether these maps were actually marked 
with pins or flags or anything else.

Q. Was there discussion at these meetings concerning 
the significance, as far as segregation or desegregation 
was concerned, about the placing of a particular line! 
A. No. As a matter of fact, we asked the administration 
not to tell us whether they were white or colored children 
involved but to indicate the concentration of population, 
where the people were, the population of the schools, the 
capacity of the schools and how they recommended that 
the lines be drawn. We did not want to know the per­
centage or number of white or colored.

Q. We have had testimony during the last two days of 
several lines, a dozen or perhaps two dozen, where the 
lines were drawn in a fashion that seemed to depart from 
educational standards but which uniformly resulted in 
limiting the amount of desegregation that could take place. 
Now, the defense or the Board has—

David W. Harris—for Defendant—Cross



432a

Court: I f that is stated as a contention, it’s proper.
Ask the question.

—287—
Q. The Board has indicated that all lines were drawn in 

connection with geography. Is it your position that all 
of these instances that we have talked about where the 
line was drawn in one way that defeated a certain degree 
of desegregation that this was all accidental, that there 
was no plan or design or scheme by the Board? A. It 
was not premeditated. As a matter of fact, outside of 
this suit I ’d say almost 100% of our complaints have been 
from white people and not from colored. I say it happens 
both ways and we could have a group come in here to 
tell us that we are favoring the colored people. You have 
the Negroes come in and tell us we are favoring the white. 
We had it both ways but the vast majority of our com­
plaints related to the drawing of our lines have come 
from white children, white families.

Q. We had testimony a few moments ago of 52,800 white 
pupils assigned. Less than 400 of them, were initially as­
signed in Negro schools. Is it your contention this was 
all just a matter of accident, it was not the result of plan? 
A. It’s a matter of two things, the result of two situa­
tions. First of all, where the schools had been built, where 
they were and where the people lived and racial housing 
patterns are something that the School Board has no 
control over.

Q. And what else, what is the other factor? A. Where 
the schools were built. Where the schools were and where

—288—
the people lived.

Q. But there was no plan by the Board to take advan­
tage of where schools are built or where people live? A.

David W. Harris—for Defendant—Cross



433a

Absolutely not. As a matter of fact, if anything the Board 
would be inclined to lean over backwards to bring about 
integration faster rather than slower. It would be more 
favorable to the Negro child rather than less favorable.

Q. You didn’t lean over backwards to bring about deseg­
regation as to the excepted schools, did you? A. Well, 
we think the excepted schools should be integrated and 
it is our plan to integrate them as soon as possible but 
because of the effect on the education of the child we 
eliminated them for one year. We hope at the most two 
years at the most. We think they should be integrated, 
too.

Q. You said it was always for the good of the child and 
educational reasons that you excepted these schools. Ex­
plain how excepting the Crestdale School when there was 
a school completely adequate to take in the students was— ? 
A. I ’m glad you brought that up. We spent a full day al­
most with a group of Negro parents who came up here 
trying to talk us out of desegregating Crestdale. They 
wanted it to remain as a Negro school. The school com­
mittee, the principal and some of the parents came up 
to the Board of Education asking us to eliminate Crest­
dale from our integration plan. They wanted to maintain 
Crestdale as a Negro school and we sat there with them

—289—
and convinced them it was better for the education of the 
children if they went into an integrated school next year. 
They didn’t want to go in at all. The Negro parents 
wanted to maintain the school as a segregated school. 
We sat down, as a Board of Education and administra­
tion, and talked the Negro parents into agreeing and ac­
cepting our plan to desegregate the school, to close it out, 
because we told them the Negro children would get a better 
education in the Matthews School. This is actual fact.

David W. Harris—for Defendant—Cross



434a

Q. Bat you granted the request for one year, is that 
right? A. Granted the request? We had already told 
them it would he closed down at the end of the following 
year and they came in and objected and did not want 
it closed out then or ever. We talked them into accepting 
our desegregation plan, telling them it would continue as 
it was one year until we could get the junior high school 
out of Matthews. Incidentally, Matthews has about four 
mobile classrooms stationed there now indicating that it 
does not have enough permanent classroom space. We 
wanted to get the junior high out before we put the Crest- 
dale Elementary children in.

Q. But the answer to the question, you granted the 
request that they made at least as to one year? A. We 
had already made that decision. It wasn’t a request that 
we granted. We did not grant their request that it be 
continued as a segregated school indefinitely.

—290—
Q. If this wasn’t at their request, why do you mention 

it? A. I am answering your question.

Court: This is pure argument. He just said it 
was not at the request. They planned to do it a 
year from now and they are going to do it a year 
from now despite the objection to it.

Q. What is preventing closing Crestdale right this 
minute? A. The junior high is presently in Matthews 
School. At Matthews School we have used the neighbor­
ing church for classroom space, we have four mobile 
classrooms there now, it does not have adequate good 
space, permanent space, to house all of the Crestdale 
students and do a good job of teaching. We figured the

David W. Harris—for Defendant—Cross



435a

students were better off remaining in their present class­
room situation for one more year rather than move them 
in Matthews before we moved the junior high out.

Q. What is the space situation at Crestdale? A. I don’t 
recall exactly but there is adequate space for the children. 
I think there is some 87 students in four classes.

Q. What is the condition of the building! A. It’s not 
good. That’s why we plan to close it out. It has been 
improved in recent years to make it satisfactory but it’s 
not up to the standards that we’d like to see.

Q. Based on figures that the Board gave us there is 
adequate space— A. I think it’s been explained earlier 
that what we say is adequate space was greatly enlarged

—2 9 1 -
in order to accommodate any requests, Negro or white, 
on the free choice system. It was an attempt to help make 
the free choice work. Actually we have four mobile class­
rooms, is that not correct, at Matthews now which indicates 
that we do have a shortage of permanent classroom space 
at Matthews.

Q. The figures that we have indicate that there are 247 
spaces available that would be sufficient to take in the 
whole— A. They are substandard spaces. They are 
classrooms that weren’t intended to be classrooms.

Q. You are not maintaining they are any more sub­
standard than the situation in which the pupils find them­
selves in at Crestdale! A. But they are organized as a 
school now and we thought it was better for them to stay 
where they are now. These are permanent spaces at 
Crestdale.

Q. Are you aware of what kind of quality education 
you can provide in a school with 200 pupils? A. We are 
quite aware of it.

David W. Harris—for Defendant—Cross



436a

Q. It’s not very good, is it? A. Not very good.

Mr. Bell: No further questions.
Mr. Barkley: The defendant rests.
Mr. Bell: I notice the time is going away but I

—292—
wanted to know were there any other members of 
the Board presently here. Do you want to try to 
finish now or come back!

Court: Call your witnesses for rebuttal testimony 
of plaintiffs.

Mrs. Betsy McC. Kelly—for Plaintiffs—Direct

M b s . B e t s y  McC. K e l l y , a  w i t n e s s  f o r  p l a i n t i f f s ,  h a v i n g  

f i r s t  b e e n  duly s w o r n ,  w a s  e x a m in e d  a n d  t e s t i f i e d  a s  
f o l l o w s :

Direct Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. Would you state your full name, please! A. Betsy 
McCloud Kelly.

Q. And you are a member of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
Board of Education! A. Yes, sir.

Q. How long have you held membership on the Board! 
A. Since December, 1964.

Q. During the time since you have been a member of 
the Board, I gather, Mrs. Kelly, that the new plan of 
desegregation or the most recent addition of the plan of 
desegregation, which is here under attack, was devised 
and published, is that correct! A. Yes, sir.

Q. I think I am correct in recalling that the plan was 
finally made public about March 9 or 10, some place in 
that area! A. I believe that’s correct.



437a

—293—
Q. Now, we have had testimony here this morning that 

prior to the time that the plan was published that the 
Board spent a goodly amount of time considering that 
plan. Were you present at the meetings when considera­
tion was given to the various aspects of the plan? A. 
Yes, sir. most of the meetings.

Q. Now, I understand some of these meetings were 
public and some of the others were that we have been 
referring to as executive sessions and they took place with 
only the Board and staff members present without press 
or members of the public. Do you recall any such 
meetings! A. Yes, sir.

Q. I understand also that at least some of the meetings 
were held in the evening at the Board Room in the Board 
of Education Building.

Court: To help shorten it, I’m satisfied they
were, everybody said so so far, no doubt in my mind 
about it.

Q. Now, Mrs. Kelly, can you tell us, based on your 
recollection, how many such meetings you attended, these 
executive meetings, at which you discussed the new plan 
with particular emphasis on where the new zone lines were 
to be placed! A. As far as I recollect, I imagine there 
were about for or five.

Q. You remember about four or five such meetings. 
Now, at these meetings was there designation of areas

—294—
on maps as areas of greatest change, areas switching over 
from the biracial system to the uniracial system? A. 
There was discussion of the areas of change.

Mrs. Betsy McC. Kelly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



438a

Q. Now, do you also recall whether or not these areas 
were designated on the map with red pins or red flags 
or something of that nature! A. I don’t recall what 
method of designation.

Q. Do you remember whether they were designated at 
all? A. I don’t recall.

Q. Now, Mrs. Kelly, I ask you whether or not as a part 
of these discussions there was taken into consideration, 
or the persons discussing took into consideration whether 
drawing lines in a particular way were going to have a 
helpful effect on desegregation or an unhelpful effect on 
desegregation? A. Well, actually the administration was 
responsible for drawing the lines.

Q. The staff people? A. Yes, and it was hard for us 
as Board members to visualize some of the changed lines. 
In other words, it’s hard to understand these concepts 
unless you go out and see the various boundaries set up. 
What was your question, excuse me.

Q. The question is whether or not there was discussion 
at these executive meetings as to whether placing a line 
in one particular area would bring about more or less 
desegregation. A. Well, that’s rather hard to answer.

—295—
I know it was discussed that putting the lines here or 
there would provide changes in the racial balance. There 
were many areas that were changed, for instance, that 
would include a minimal number of white families in a 
predominantly Negro school area and this fact was made 
note of.

Q. In what way was it made note of? A. Well, it was 
just mentioned that this was the case, that in such and 
such a particular area there would now be a minimum 
number of white families now living who would there­
fore be assigned to a predominantly Negro school.

Mrs. Betsy McC. Kelly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



439a

Q. Isn’t it correct, Mrs. Kelly, that wherever it was 
possible a line was drawn so as to minimize the amount 
of desegregation assignments that would result! A. Well, 
I couldn’t render a judgment on that. Actually, as a 
Board member it’s very difficult to know whether the lines 
are drawn correctly or not. I would have to be honest and 
tell you that as a Board member it’s difficult for me to be 
in a position to judge whether a line has been honestly 
drawn, has been judiciously drawn. I would have to go out 
and view the physical boundaries myself, I ’m afraid.

Q. Well, would you say that your position, as far as not 
really being able to determine how the lines were being 
drawn with regard to race, is typical of the position that 
most Board members find themselves in? A. I would cer-

—296—
tainly have to say so. I would not consider myself an 
expert in geographic school line drawing.

Q. Well, now, is it correct or is it not correct, Mrs. 
Kelly, that the Board members understood these zone lines 
were going to be prepared by the staff in such a way so 
as to, let’s take this situation first, to limit as far as pos­
sible the number of white pupils who would he assigned 
to Negro schools? A. Well, I don’t know whether that 
was the understanding or not. I don’t remember that 
being the understanding. I think an attempt was made 
to draw the lines as honestly as possible to avoid gerry­
mandering, but whether or not, as I say, at this point I 
cannot honestly say that the lines we have drawn are not 
at this point open to some reconsideration. As I said, I ’m 
not an expert in line drawing.

Q. Was it your answer that you think that the lines were 
drawn honestly but you really don’t know enough about 
it to know! A. I would have to say that, yes.

Mrs. Betsy McC. Kelly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



440a

Q. There is a line that is part of the zone for the Ranson 
Junior High School and also for the Derita Elementary 
School that we have had a lot of discussion about that 
followed Interstate Route 85 for a while and dips down 
and then back up in a fashion that prevents a lot of deseg­
regation from occurring that would otherwise have oc­
curred. Taking this as an example, do you recall any dis­
cussions at these executive meetings concerning how this 
line should be drawn? A. I don’t recall any specific

—2 9 7 -
suggestions. It’s difficult to recall all the things that were 
discussed.

Q. Do you recall any similar situations with another zone 
line? . . . with any of the other school zones where there 
was specific discussion to the effect if we draw it this way 
it’s going to mean we have so much integration or segrega­
tion or if we draw it another way it will be a different result. 
A. No, Offhand I don’t. I know there was a lot of discus­
sion over the Eastover situation, Eastover and Billings- 
ville.

Q. That was the situation we discussed early this morn­
ing where Billingsville is primarily a Negro school, is it 
not? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And Eastover is one of the schools that adjoins it 
that is practically an all white school, and the zone line 
between them, as I understand it, pretty well marks the 
zone line. . . .

Mr. Barkley: Objection to him testifying.
Court: Objection sustained. We’re doing an awful 

lot of that. Just ask her the question.

Q. What was the nature of the discussion over the East- 
over and Billingsville zone?

Mrs. Betsy McC. Kelly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



441a

Mr. Barkley: I object to that.
Court: Objection overruled.

A. Well, I think there was just some discussion over the 
difficulty of the problem connected with this area. It seems 
to me it involved something concerning McAlway Road.

—298—
Q. Do you recall any more about the discussion, Mrs. 

Kelly? A. Well, . . .
Q. Isn’t it correct that the discussion involved that if 

the line were drawn at McAlway Road there would be a lot 
more integration of both of those schools than if it was 
drawn where the Board finally drew it? A. I guess that’s 
possible.

Mrs. Betsy McC. Kelly—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Court: It’s not a question of what’s possible, it’s 
a matter of what you remember.

A. Well, my recollection is so hazy that maybe I better say 
I don’t remember.

Q. Now, do you remember or don’t you remember, Mrs. 
Kelly?

Mr. Barkley: This is his witness, Your Honor. 
Court: Objection overruled. Go ahead.

Q. Do you remember, Mrs. Kelly, or not? A. Well, I 
do recall that throughout our discussions the problem of 
putting a small number of white pupils into a predomi­
nantly Negro school was discussed and the problems in­
volved with this were discussed.

Q. Well, isn’t it correct that this was a serious problem 
for the Board? A. Well, it is a problem any way you 
look at it.



442a

Q. You have received numerous complaints from white 
parents, isn’t that right, about where their children were 
going to be assigned? A. It’s an accepted sociological fact

—299—
that it is more difficult to place a minority of white stu­
dents in a predominantly Negro school than the other way 
around, and from the psychological factors involved this 
is a more difficult problem facing a Board of Education.

Q. And this is a problem that this Board faced up to, 
isn’t that right? A. Well, yes.

Q. And that they did have quite a bit of discussion as to 
whether in drawing the zone lines in such a way so that 
only a few whites or a small number were going to be as­
signed to Negro schools, the results in the community that 
this would have, isn’t that correct? A. This whole prob­
lem was discussed but yet at the same time we were trying 
to provide for more desegregation throughout the system 
in every way.

Q. But in this McAlway line controversy there was a 
decision to draw the line so as not to require the assign­
ment of a small group of white children to the Billingsville 
School, isn’t that right? A. I don’t recall.

Q. Well, that’s how the line was drawn, wasn’t it, Mrs. 
Kelly?

Mrs. Betsy McC. Kelly—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Court: No doubt about how it was drawn. It’s 
whether she remembers and she says she doesn’t re­
member.

—300—
Mr. Bell: No further questions of this witness, 

Your Honor.
Court: Any cross examination.



4 4 3 a

Colloquy

Mr. Barkley: I don’t think I want to cross exam­
ine a member of the School Board.

Court: That’s not in your contract.
Mr. Barkley: No, sir.

Mr. Bell: I think in the interest of time and 
overall consideration of the case, Your Honor, that 
we would not pursue our original intention to ques­
tion each school board person on the subject we 
have been pursuing this morning. I guess in the in­
terest of time I would just say a few words and 
hand you my brief and rest our case.

Court: It’s 7 minutes to 1:00 and I’m serious 
about my deadline. I have another case. I’ll be glad 
to adjourn and hear arguments as long as you wish 
to be heard at 2:30. You and Mr. Barkley can’t 
possibly say all you want to say in six minutes, 
that’s impossible. Adjourn court until 2:30.

B e c e s s  e o b  L u n c h

Court: Any further evidence for the plaintiffs?
Mr. Chambers: No further evidence.
Court: Any further evidence for the defendant

- 3 0 1 -
School Board?

Mr. Barkley: No, sir.
Court: The plaintiffs would be entitled under our 

practice to the opening argument and the concluding 
argument. You want to make one argument or two?

Mr. Chambers: Your Honor, both would be rather 
short. We don’t plan to say very much. We have a



4 4 4 a

Colloquy

brief we’d like to submit at this time. We served a 
copy on counsel for the defendant.

Court: You want to waive the opening?
Mr. Chambers: We waive the opening.
Court: The jury is with you, Mr. Barkley.

(Arguments are heard by the Court.)

Mr. Barkley: May the Court treat the proposed 
plan as being amended to include this resolution 
of April 13? As far as my authority to assure Your 
Honor, the Chairman says he is satisfied it will be 
agreeable to the Board and we will amend that reso­
lution at our next meeting or ratify what is done 
here today.

Court: I am not going to do this except with 
your consent. If you consent, I will treat the pro­
posed plan as being amended to include this resolu­
tion of April 13 beginning “Resolved by” and ending 
“competence and fitness”—the one you read.

Mr. Barkley: It was adopted for that purpose.
- 3 0 2 -

Court: It is an amendment to the proposed plan?
Mr. Barkley: Yes, sir.

(Further arguments are heard by the Court.)

Court: Adjourn court, please, sir.



MEILEN PRESS INC.

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.


Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Return to top