Davis v. Mobile County Board of School Commissioners Record on Appeal

    In the

In ti? !} §>lat?j3 (Eim rt nf A p p e a ls
Foe t h e  F if t h  C ircu it  

No. 22759

B irdie M ae D avis , et al., 

versus
Appellants,

B oard of S chool  C o m m issioners  of M obile C o u n t y , et al.,
Appellees.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

RECORD ON APPEAL

J ack  Greenberg 
D errick  A. B e ll , Jr.

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York

V ern on  Z. C rawford 
578 Davis Avenue 
Mobile, Alabama

Clarence  E. M oses
1050% Davis Avenue 
Mobile, Alabama

Attorneys for Appellants

JAMBS. M. NAiBRSIT, lit



I N D E X

PAGE

Board Plan as Amended Filed August 19, 1963 ........... 1

Board Plan as Amended Filed July 21, 1964 ..............  10

Plaintiffs’ Objections to Plan Filed July 27, 1964 ....... 13

Order Approving Plan as Modified Filed July 31, 1964 15

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Further Relief Filed December 
31, 1964 ....................................................................... . 17

Board’s Answer to Motion Filed February 23, 1965 .... 21

Exhibit “A ” Annexed to Board’s Answer to Motion 24

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Filed March 
31, 1965 ....................................................... .................... 27

Decree Entered March 31, 1965 — ......— .... ...... ........  45

Appendix A Annexed to Decree—Information to 
Parents .................................. ....... ...... ........... ..... -  47

Notice of Appeal Filed April 14, 1965 ______ _______  48

This Designation and Statement of Points on Appeal 
Filed April 23, 1965 ...... ..... ....... ...... ............. ............. 50

Certificate of Service of Designation ............................  54

Order Extending Time for Docketing Appeal ....... .......  55



11
PAGE

Trial Transcripts:
Transcript of Hearing—November 14, 15, 1963 ~~ 56

Transcript of Hearing—February 26 and March 5,
1965 .............. -.......... -....... -......................... -...........  87

T estim o n y

Plaintiffs’ Witnesses
Supt. Cranford H. Burns— 

Direct ------  ---- ----------
Cross ..........—-.......... -........
Redirect .........-.................

Algea Bolton—
Direct ...............................
Cross -------- ---- -.... -..........

John L. LeFlore—
Direct ............ -.................
Cross .............................. —
Redirect ................. .........
Recross ........     -

Rosetta Gamble—
Direct ________________
Cross ............. ..................

Birdie Mae Davis—
Direct ......................-......
Cross .................... -.... -....

Defendants’ Witness

James A. McPherson—
Direct ............... ...... ......
Cross - __   —
Redirect ........... -...... -.....
Recross ......  —

56,136 
.74,184 
.80, 206

.... 90

.... 99

101
112
117
120

121
125

127
134

213
227
246
249



Ill

Offered Printed 
Page Page

Exhibits
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 1 (Map) ....................  67 253

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2 (Map) ....................  67

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3 (Map) ......... ..... ....  67

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 4 (Feeder Chart) -....  68 254

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 5 (Feeder Chart) .....  69 256

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 6 (Feeder Chart) .....  69 258

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 7 (Feeder Chart) .....  69 260

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8 (Feeder Chart) .....  69 262

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9 (Interrogatories
and Answers and Exhibits) .... 137.180 264

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10 (5 letters to Board) 181 313

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 11 (Sample Transfer 
Request Form) ................ -.................... 181 319

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 12 (Pupil Transfer 
Form) ................. -........... -................-....  182 320

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 13 for Identification
(Survey of Special Courses) ------   182 322

Omitted



In the

Ittitefc S>tutzb ifstrirt ©mirt
Fob t h e  S o uth ern  D istrict  of A labam a  

S ou th ern  D ivision  

C ivil  A ction 

No. 3003-68

B irdie M ae D avis , et al.,

vs.
Plaintiffs,

B oard op S chool C omm issioners op M obile C o u n t y , et al.,

Defendants.

Plan Submitted by the Board of School Commissioners 
of Mobile County Pursuant to Order Dated July 11, 

1963, as Amended July 26, 1963

[Filed August 19, 1963]

This plan for the beginning of desegregation of the 
schools of Mobile County is submitted pursuant to the 
order of the court entered July 11, 1963 as amended July 
26, 1963. Said order contains a preliminary injunction 
requiring the beginning of desegregation by order of the 
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit pend­
ing trial of the case and final decree.

The plan is presented after full consideration by the 
Board and in the light of the following facts, among 
others:

A. The Board is in the midst of an accelerated building 
program designed to remove the necessity of half day 
sessions and provide adequate housing for more than 
75,000 pupils of grades 1-12 and to cope with a continuing 
annual pupil load increase of approximately 3,000 pupils.



2

B. The residential pattern is continually being reshaped, 
causing major changes in neighborhood patterns. These 
patterns are being further altered by the construction of 
new thoroughfares, 1-65 and 1-10, through the community, 
displacing between 1200 and 2000 residences; and

C. These changes have brought about the transfer of 
students within the system, the admission of new students, 
and the withdrawal of old students, and have created a 
major problem for the Mobile School System both within 
the central office of the Superintendent’s staff and at the 
offices of the respective principals of the 89 local schools; 
and

1). The Board considers that any general or arbitrary 
reassignment of pupils presently in attendance at the 89 
existing schools, according to any rigid rule of proximity 
to school or solely by request on the part of the parents 
of pupils, would be impractical and a disservice to the 
system, to the local schools, and to the pupils being trans­
ferred ; such transfers would tend to overload some schools 
and leave other facilities in less than full use and at the 
same time result in an unbalanced teacher-pupil ratio 
throughout the system; and

E. The estimated enrollments for September, 1963 
were developed last February and building and classroom 
capacity has been adjusted thereto; school supplies, text­
books, and other materials and equipment have been 
allocated accordingly; schools have been staffed and 
teachers assigned on the same estimated enrollments; and

Plan Submitted by the Board of School Commissioners
of Mobile County Pursuant to Order Dated July 11,

1963, as Amended July 26, 1963



3

F. Portable classrooms, half day sessions, makeshift 
rooms, and other emergency measures have been utilized 
as means of coping with the current pupil overload in 
the Mobile Public Schools, toward the end of providing 
seating space for the 75,000 pupils of 1962-63 and an 
estimated additional 3,000 pupils for September of 1963-64. 
These facts lead to the conclusion that great caution in 
continuous, system-wide study of facilities available, as 
well as other factors relating to educational policies 
governing admissions, transfers, and placement of pupils 
as are set forth in this document; is vitally essential to 
orderly procedures; and

G. The problems in connection with any desegregation 
of the schools outside the corporate limits of the City 
of Mobile are substantially different from the problems 
involved for desegregation within the City of Mobile and 
this plan is confined in its first year of operation to schools 
within the corporate limits of Mobile.

H. The number of pupils both white and negro in the 
first grade of schools in the City of Mobile for the year 
beginning in September 1963 will be approximately 8025 
and the number in the 12th grade in the city schools will 
be 3836.

I. The school year 1963-64 begins on September 4, 1963.

J. In the judgment of the Board it is not practicable, 
on account of the short space of time remaining, to consider 
individual applications in behalf of negro pupils for as­
signment or transfer to schools which have been attended

Plan Sxibmitted by the Board of School Commissioners
of Mobile County Pursuant to Order Dated July 11,

1963, as Amended July 26, 1963



4

only by pupils of the white race except applications per­
taining to one grade only, for the school year commencing 
September 4, 1963; and

It is the judgment of the School Board that it is for 
the best interests of the pupils of all grades and the orderly 
and efficient operation of the Mobile School system that 
the 12th grade be selected as the grade for the processing 
of such tranfers for the school year 1963-64 and that 
transfers and assignments pertaining to any other grade 
cannot as a practical matter be granted for the term com­
mencing in September, 1963.

The Board, therefore, proposes the following plan, pur­
suant to the said order of the Court:

(1) Assignments: All existing school assignments shall 
continue without change except when transfers are au­
thorized by the Assistant Superintendent in Charge of 
Pupil Personnel under the provisions of this plan. Pupils 
entering the first grade, when the plan shall have become 
applicable thereto, and pupils otherwise entering the 
school system for the first time, when the plan shall have 
become applicable to the grade entered, shall be assigned 
without regard to race, as is provided hereinafter.

(2) Transfers:

(A) Parents or guardians of pupils in grades to 
which this plan shall have become applicable, wishing 
school assignment for the pupils other than as pre­
viously assigned or as pre-registered, may make ap­
plication to that end between April 1 and April 15 
of each year for transfer for the next succeeding

Plan Submitted by the Board of School Commissioners
of Mobile County Pursuant to Order Dated July 11,

1963, as Amended July 26, 1963



5

school year. After 1963, such period shall replace the 
normal July 31st cut-off date for transfer applications; 
of former years.

(B) Designation of Assistant Superintendent: In the 
assignment, transfer or continuance of pupils to 
specific schools, subject to the supervision and review 
by the Superintendent and Board, the Assistant Super­
intendent in charge of Pupil Personnel shall be 
charged with the responsibility for arid the assignment 
of pupil admission by transfer and by original enroll­
ment.

(C) Transfer Bequests: Applications for transfer or 
initial assignment shall be in writing on forms pre­
scribed and supplied by the Board. The proper forms 
will be furnished to parents of pupils on request. 
Separate Applications must be filed for each pupil 
for whom an assignment or transfer is requested.

(D) Pupil Placement Act Criteria Used: For the 
grade or grades as to which this plan is effective, race 
or color of the pupil shall not be a factor in assign­
ment or the granting of transfer, but the following 
criteria shall be considered in making the assignment 
or granting the requested transfer, along with other 
relevant factors: (a) available room at the school to 
which transfer or assignment is requested; (b) The 
availability of transportation facilities; (c) suitability 
of established curricula for particular pupils; (d) the 
choice and interests of the pupil; (e) the request or 
consent of parents or guardians and the reasons as­
signed therefor; (f) the effect of the admission of

Plan Submitted by the Board of School Commissioners
of Mobile County Pursuant to Order Dated July 11,

1963, as Amended July 26, 1963



6

new pupils upon established or proposed academic 
programs; (g) the adequacy of the pupil’s academic 
preparation for admission to a particular school and 
curriculum; (h) the scholastic aptitude and relative 
intelligence, or mental energy or ability of the pupil; 
(i) the psychological qualification of the pupil for the 
type of teaching and associations involved; (j) the 
effect of admission of the pupil upon the academic 
progress of other students in a particular school or 
facility thereof; (k) the effect of admission upon 
prevailing academic standards at a particular school; 
(1) the possibility or threat of friction or disorder 
among pupils or others; (m) the psychological effect 
upon the pupils in attendance at a particular school; 
(n) the possibility of breaches of the peace or ill will 
or economic retaliation within the community; (o) the 
home environment of the pupil; (p) the maintenance 
or severance of established social and psychological 
relationships with other pupils and with teachers, 
(q) the morals, conduct, health and personal standards 
of the pupil.
(E) Tests and Interviews: The Assistant Superin­
tendent in Charge of Pupil Personnel may require 
interviews with the parents or guardian and the pupil, 
with the parents or guardian, or with other persons. 
He may conduct or authorize such examinations or 
tests and other investigations as he deems appropriate. 
In the absence of excuses satisfactory to the Pupil 
Personnel Office, failure to appear for any requested 
examination, test, or interview by the pupil or parents

Plan Submitted by the Board of School Commissioners
of Mobile County Pursuant to Order Dated July 11,

1963, as Amended July 26, 1963



7

or guardian, will be deemed a withdrawal of the 
application.
(F) Notice of Action Taken-. Notice of the action 
taken by the Assistant Superintendent in Charge of 
Pupil Personnel on each application will be made on 
or before June 15. For the school year 1963-64 the 
notice of action taken by the Assistant Superintendent 
will be made on or before September 3. Siich action 
shall be final, unless a Board hearing is requested in 
writing within ten days from the date when the notice 
of action taken on the transfer request is mailed.

(G) Revieiv: If a hearing is requested by the parents 
or guardian or the Board feels a need for a hearing, 
such a hearing shall allow for a minimum of ten days 
notice, but will be held within twenty days. Failure of 
parents or guardians to appear, with the pupil, at the 
hearing will be deemed a withdrawal of the application. 
Hearings may be conducted by the Board as a whole, 
or the Board may designate not less than three Board 
members to conduct the hearing. In either case, the 
majority decision of the Board or the committee of 
the Board will be deemed a final decision. The Board 
may designate a Board member or other competent 
representative to conduct such a hearing, take testi­
mony, and report evidence with his recommendation 
to the Board within fifteen days following the hearing. 
The Board’s decision after a hearing, report of evi­
dence, and recommendation will be deemed final. The 
Board shall be authorized to investigate objections 
or problems relating to the decision at hand, including

Plan Submitted by the Board of School Commissioners
of Mobile County Pursuant to Order Dated July 11,

1963, as Amended July 26, 1963



8

an examination of the pupil involved, or the Board 
may authorize its administrative staff or other com­
petent person to perform this investigation for them. 
If the Board determines that a pupil is physically or 
mentally incapacitated to benefit from further normal 
schooling, the Board may assign the pupil to an excep­
tional class or to some available special school, or 
terminate the enrollment of said pupil.

(3) Initial Assignments: When this plan shall have be­
come applicable to the first grade, pupils registering for 
the first grade may apply for attendance at the school in 
the district of their residence or the nearest school for­
merly attended exclusively by their race, at their option.

Pupils entering the Mobile County school system for the 
first time, in grades to which the plan has become appli­
cable, may apply for attendance at the school in the district 
of their residence, or the nearest school formerly attended 
exclusively by their race, at their option.

Upon the submission of this plan, schools shall no longer 
be designated by race.

(4) Applicability of Plan: This plan shall have applica­
tion in the school year 1963-64 to the 12th grade, in the 
City of Mobile schools only. In the school year 1964-65 
it shall have application to the 11th and 12 grades in all 
schools of Mobile County. It shall have application to 
grades already included and to one additional lower grade 
each school year thereafter until all 12 grades are affected.

(5) Special Provisions for 1963-64: The normal July 
31 cut-off date for making applications for transfer for

Plan Submitted by the Board of School Commissioners
of Mobile County Pursuant, to Order Dated July 11,

1963, as Amended July 26, 1963



9

the 1963-64 school term shall be observed. For 12th grade 
pupils in the City of Mobile schools requesting transfer 
on or before July 31, the transfer provisions of this plan 
shall apply and race or color shall not be considered as 
a factor in acting upon such application. Public notice 
of the deadline was given by publication in a daily news­
paper of general circulation in Mobile County one week 
prior to the closing of the period for receiving transfer 
applications, as a conscious reminder to the parents and 
guardians.

Plan Submitted by the Board of School Commissioners
of Mobile County Pursuant to Order Dated July 11,

1963, as Amended July 26, 1963

B oard of S chool C om m issioners 
of M obile C o u n ty

[Signatures Omitted]



10

[ caption  om itted ]

Filed July 21, 1964

This Amendment to the Plan heretofore submitted under 
order of this Court dated July 11, 1963, as amended July 
26, 1963, is submitted pursuant to the order of this court 
entered June 29, 1964. Said order requires the submission 
of a plan to conform to the opinion and mandate of the 
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, ren­
dered and issued June 18, 1964.

The plan heretofore submitted is amended as follows:
1. By deleting Paragraph E. thereof and substituting in 

lieu thereof the following:

“E. Pupils entering the first grade for the school year 
1964-65 were pre-registered near the end of last term 
and estimated enrollments for September, 1964, were 
developed last February as to all grades except the 
first, eleventh and twelfth; following pre-registra­
tion, the estimated enrollments were developed for 
the first grade; and, following the close of the April 
1-15 transfer request period, for the 11th and 12th 
grades; building and classroom capacity have been 
adjusted thereto; school supplies, textbooks, and 
other materials and equipment have been allocated 
accordingly; schools have been staffed and teachers 
assigned on the same estimated enrollments; and”

Amendment to Plan Submitted by the Board of School
Commissioners of Mobile County, Pursuant to

Order Dated June 29, 1964



11

2. By deleting Paragraph G. thereof and substituting in 
lieu thereof the following:

“ G. The problems in connection with any desegregation 
of the schools outside the corporate limits of the City 
of Mobile are substantially different from the prob­
lems involved for desegregation within the City of 
Mobile including the assignment of the components 
of an intricate transportation system and it is not 
administratively feasible to expand this plan beyond 
the 11th and 12th grades for those schools outside 
the corporate limits of Mobile during the term 1964- 
65.”

3. By deleting Paragraph (4) thereof and substituting 
in lieu thereof the following:

“ (4) Applicability of Plan: This plan had application 
in the school year 1963-64 to the 12th grade, in the City 
of Mobile schools only. In the school year 1964-65 it 
shall have application to the 11th and 12th grades in 
all schools of Mobile County; and to the 1st and 10th 
grades in City of Mobile schools. In 1965-66 it shall 
have application to Grades 1, 2, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of all 
schools of Mobile County; in 1966-67 to grades above 
listed and in addition, to grades 3 and 8; in 1967-68 to 
grades above listed and in addition to grades 4 and 7; 
in 1968-69 to grades above listed and, in addition, to 
grade 5; and in 1969-70 to grades above listed and, in 

addition, to grade 6.”

Amendment to Plan Submitted by the Board of School
Commissioners of Mobile County, Pursuant to

Order Dated June 29, 1964



12

4. By deleting Paragraph (5) thereof and substituting 
in lieu thereof the following:

“ (5) Special Provisions for 1964- 65 : The period of Au­
gust 4 through 6 is hereby established wherein 1st and 
10th grade pupils in the City of Mobile may request 
transfers from schools to which they are assigned for 
1964-65 or at which they are pre-registered. The trans­
fer provisions of this plan shall apply and race or color 
will not be considered in acting upon these applications. 
Notice of action taken by the Assistant Superintendent 
on such requests will be given on or before August 22nd. 
Such action shall be final unless a Board hearing is re­
quested in writing to reach the offices of the Board on or 
before 5:00 P.M., August 28th. Public notice of this 
special transfer request period shall be given in a daily 

newspaper of general circulation in Mobile County, as 
a conscious reminder to parents and guardians.”

B oard o r  S chool C omm issioners 
of M obile C o u n ty

[Signatures and Certificate Omitted]

Amendment to Plan Submitted by the Board of School
Commissioners of Mobile County, Pursuant to

Order Dated June 29, 1964



13

Plaintiffs’ Objections to Desegregation Plan Submitted 
by the Defendant Board of School Commissioners 
of Mobile County and Motion for a Revised Plan

[ caption  om itted ]

Filed July 27, 1964

Plaintiffs in the above case having reviewed the de­
fendant Board’s desegregation plan submitted pursuant to 
this Court’s order of June 29, 1964, which plan fails to ac­
cord with the directions and terms of the opinion and 
mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the 
Fifth Circuit (in case No. 20657, Birdie Mae Davis, et al. 
v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County, et al.) 
rendered and issued June 18, 1964, move the Court to re­
quire the defendant Board to prepare and file a revised 
plan correcting the failures set forth below:

1. The Board’s plan fails to provide for desegregation 
of the 1st, 10th, 11th and 12th grades in all defendant’s 
schools as a minimum in September 1964, which desegrega­
tion should be accomplished not by permitting Negro par­
ents to request transfers from segregated schools, but 
through the assignment of all students in a manner that 
effectively disestablishes the policies, patterns and prac­
tices of racial segregation.

2. Moreover, the Board’s plan fails to indicate with 
factors not already rejected by the Court of Appeals why 
no more than the minimum desegregation of grades can be 
accomplished in September 1964.

3. The Board’s plan fails to include a specific provision 
for all students entering the system for the first time to 
be assigned on a non-racial basis, and further fails to pro-



14

Plaintiffs’ Objections to Desegregation Plan Submitted by 
the Defendant Board of School Commissioners of 
Mobile County and Motion for a Revised Plan

vide a procedure by which students presently attending the 
school system, but not eligible for attendance at a grade 
being entirely desegregated, may apply for desegregated 
transfers and have such transfers reviewed and determined 
according to nonracial standards no different than are ap­
plied to students admitted to the schools where transfers 
are sought.

4. The Board’s plan, which is essentially the same plan 
submitted on appeal to the Fifth Circuit and rejected by 
that Court, remains so vague and indefinite as to permit 
arbitrary action by Board personnel.

5. The Board’s plan provides insufficient notice to par­
ents, and the period of time in which transfer applications 
must be filed (3 days) is unreasonable, even as to those 
students not entitled to be initially assigned by the Board 
to desegregated schools.

Plaintiffs’ omission of other aspects of the relief re­
quested in their complaint, including desegregation of 
faculties, and additional objections to the Board’s plan 
as filed August 19,1963, is not intended by plaintiffs to con­
stitute a waiver of such relief or of such objections.

Plaintiffs pray that following hearing on these objec­
tions, this Court will order defendants to promptly pre­
pare and file a revised plan that accords with the order 
of this Court dated June 29, 1964.

[Signatures and Certificate Omitted]



15

Order Approving Plan as Modified

[ caption  o m itted ]

Filed July 31, 1964

This cause coming on to be considered by the Court pur­
suant to notice, with counsel for the respective parties 
being present, on a proposed Plan as heretofore filed on 
July 21, 1964, by the Board of School Commissioners of 
Mobile County, Alabama, and objections to particulars 
thereto filed by plaintiffs, it is, upon consideration, hereby

O rdered :

The proposed Plan as submitted by the Board of School 
Commissioners of Mobile County, Alabama, and filed 
herein on July 21, 1964, pursuant to the prior order of 
this Court, be and it hereby is A pproved with the following 
amendments and modifications:

(1) The period established in said Plan wherein first 
and tenth grade pupils in the City of Mobile may 
request transfers, as set out in Paragraph (5) 
thereof, shall be changed from August 4 through 
6, to August 3 through 10. Tenth grade pupils out­
side the corporate limits of the City of Mobile may 
also request transfers during said period.

(2) The public notice of the special transfer request 
period as called for in Paragraph (5) of said Plan 
shall consist of the publication for three consecutive 
days, commencing Saturday, August 1, 1964, in a 
daily newspaper of general circulation in Mobile 
County, of a notice setting out the period wherein 
transfer requests may be made; the grades affected



16

Order Approving Plan as Modified

thereby; and the procedures for requesting such 
transfer.

(3) The application of said Plan for the school year 
1964-65, as set out in Paragraph (4) thereof, shall 
be changed so that the Plan shall have application 
in school year 1964-65 to the 10th, 11th and 12t,h 
grades in all schools of Mobile County and to the 
first grade in City of Mobile schools.

This Court retains jurisdiction for the purpose of mak­
ing and entering such further orders as may be necessary 
to accomplish the essential purposes of the Plan as herein 
modified and approved.

Done and entered at Mobile, Alabama, this the 31st day 
of July, 1964.

D an iel  H . T homas 
District Judge



IT

[ caption  om itted ]

Filed December 31, 1964

Plaintiffs, by their counsel, move the Court for an order 
enjoining the defendant Board of School Commissioners 
of Mobile County from continuing present policies de­
signed, intended and having the effect of minimizing school 
desegregation, and requiring said defendant Board to 
promptly prepare and submit a plan of desegregation for 
the 1965-66 school year that meets standards set for such 
plans by recent decisions of the United States Supreme 
Court and the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. 
In support of their motion, plaintiffs show the Court:

1. On June 18, 1964, the Fifth Circuit, in a unanimous 
opinion, 333 F.2d 53 (5th Cir. 1964), disapproved the 
desegregation plan prepared by the Board and approved 
by this Court, and directed the preparation and adoption 
of a plan which would entirely eliminate state imposed 
segregation in the defendant schools at the earliest pos­
sible time.

2. Subsequently, defendants filed on July 21, 1964, 
amendments to their desegregation plan to which plaintiffs 
filed objections on July 25, 1964. This Court on July 31, 
1964, entered an order approving defendants’ plan, as 
modified.

3. Plaintiffs contend that the desegregation plan 
presently in effect was not intended and cannot possibly 
bring about the desegregation of Mobile’s public schools 
with the completeness and speed required by law, and 
support this contention by pointing out that as of the

Motion for Further Relief



18

opening of schools for the 1964-65 school year, only 15 
Negro children were able to apply for admission to white 
schools, and only about seven were admitted. During the 
1963-64 school year, approximately 20 Negro children had 
sought admission to white schools, and two were admitted. 
Thus, in a school system with more than 75,000 school 
pupils, a substantial percentage of whom are Negroes, 
only nine Negro children have experienced a desegregated 
education.

4. In addition to rejecting the majority of those Negroes 
who seek desegregated education for reasons which are 
arbitrary and capricious, thus condemning such students 
to attending Negro schools which are inferior to white 
schools, plaintiffs contend that the Board has taken no 
affirmative action reasonably calculated to adequately ad­
vise Negro parents of their right to obtain desegregated 
educations for their children, and has taken no steps to 
allay the fears and concerns of Negro parents that their 
children will not be welcomed or given equal treatment 
by teachers and other faculty persons in the white schools.

Motion for Further Relief



19

5. For the above reasons, and because the Fifth Circuit 
in reviewing this case has expressly affirmed “ . . . the 
responsibility and duty resting on school boards to provide 
a constitutional plan of desegregation;” 333 F.2d at 55, 
the defendant Board should be required to submit a new 
plan of desegregation providing that beginning with the 
1965-66 school year:

(a) each child attending the Mobile County public 
schools, or if the defendant Board based on factors not 
connected with fear of violence or community acceptance, 
is able to justify further delay, then, at least, each child 
attending the first, second, ninth, tenth, eleventh, and 
twelfth grades shall have the choice of initially enrolling 
in and attending either the nearest formerly Negro school 
or the nearest formerly white school, provided that if 
there is insufficient space in any school as a result of the 
making of such choice, preference in granting such choice 
shall be solely on the basis of proximity of the child to 
such school and further provided that where a Negro 
child seeking a desegregated education is legitimately ex­
cluded from the school of his choice by virtue of space 
and proximity, that child, at his option, may enroll in the 
nearest available formerly white school; see, Gaines v. 
Dougherty County Board of Education, 334 F.2d 983 (5th 
Cir. 1964);

(b) as to all Negro children in the school system seeking 
a desegregated education who are not entering grades 
not immediately included in (a) above, such students shall 
be permitted to apply for transfer from the Negro schools 
where they are attending, to the nearest available white 
schools, and such transfers shall be granted unless reason­
able, specific and previously published rules based on real

Motion for Further Relief



20

and pressing administrative problems necessitate rejec­
tion, see Armstrong v. City of Birmingham, 333 F.2d 45 
(5th Cir. 1964).

(c) the Board shall give individual written notice to each 
parent in the school system of the rights set forth in (a) 
and (b) above, which notice shall also indicate affirma­
tively that children exercising rights under the plan will be 
treated in every respect as children who are initially as­
signed to such schools by the defendant Board. Such 
notice shall be mailed to each parent in time to provide 
a reasonable period (at least two weeks) for the parent 
to indicate his choice or otherwise take action permitted 
under the plan, see Gaines v. Dougherty County Board of 
Education, supra-,

(d) as an alternative to the above, the defendants may 
abolish all choices, provided the defendants initially assign 
all pupils to the schools nearest their residence without 
reference to race or color, Gaines v. Dougherty County 
Board of Education, supra;

(e) the Board shall submit a plan making a reasonable 
start toward termination of the present policy of assign­
ing all teachers and other faculty personnel on the basis 
of race and color, which plan should provide for initial 
implementation no later than the beginning of the 1965- 
66 school year.

Motion for Further Relief

[Signatures and Certificate Omitted]



21

[ caption  o m itted ]

Filed February 23, 1965

Defendants recognize that ordinarily no answer need be 
directed to a “motion” ; however, the pleading herein de­
nominated “Motion for Further Relief” does require re­
sponsive pleading. The motion herein seeks the issuance 
of a new injunction; contains allegations not in accord 
with the facts; and seeks a complete departure, by court 
order, from a plan based upon the mandate of the Court 
of Appeals and the order of the District Court. Appended 
to and made a part of this answer, as Exhibit A, is an 
affidavit in support of the averments made herein.

1. Defendants deny that the Court of Appeals ordered 
the elimination of segregation in the schools operated by 
the defendants at the earliest “possible” time but shows 
that the order would more properly be classified as earliest 
“practicable” time. The opinion disapproved of defen­
dants’ plan only as to speed, requiring two grades a year 
instead of one grade.

2. Defendants admit the allegations of paragraph 2 of 
the motion.

3. Defendants deny that as to the school year 1964-65 
only 15 children “were able to apply” for enrollment in 
formerly white schools but instead show that there were 
hundreds of negro children who were able to apply. The 
parents or guardians of only 16 negro students made such 
application; these were considered on the basis of the plan; 
7 were permitted to transfer and 9 were denied, all without 
regard to racial factors.

Answer to Motion



22

For the school year 1963-64, the parents or guardians 
of only 4 negro children made application for transfer 
to formerly white schools; two of these voluntarily with­
drew their applications and the other two were enrolled 
in Murphy High School.

Defendants move to strike the allegation that only “9 
negro children have experienced a desegregated education” . 
The constitutional prohibitions as pronounced by the 
United States Supreme Court forbids discrimination; it 
does not affirm any “ right” to a desegregated education 
to the exculsion of all other proper factors.

4. Defendants deny that any negro children within the 
plan have been denied transfers for reasons which are 
“arbitrary and capricious” and demand strict proof 
thereof. Defendants further deny that schools presently 
attended solely by negroes are inferior to schools presently 
attended solely by wiiite children and demand strict proof 
thereof.

Defendants further deny that any negro parents who 
read the newspapers or listen to radio or television can 
be in ignorance of their right not to be discriminated 
against. This Honorable Court will take judicial notice 
that every pleading, hearing and court order at the Dis­
trict Court or Appellate level in this cause has had front 
page and widespread publicity. Those news stories have 
uniformly contained details as to the grades affected by 
the various court orders and the plan and as to the time 
elements involved. In addition, formal notice of rights 
under the plan has been given by legal advertising pub­
lished pursuant to court order.

No assurance has been given by these defendants to any 
individual student or parent, white or negro, that any

Answer to Motion



23

particular child will be “welcomed” at a particular school. 
Defendants aver that they make continuing efforts to in­
sure that all children in all schools of the system receive 
fair and equal treatment.

5. Defendants aver that the plan now in effect, pursuant 
to and in accordance with the mandate of the Court of 
Appeals and the orders of this Honorable Court, is a 
constitutional plan; is in accord with proper and accepted 
administrative procedures; will affect half the grades in 
the school system in 1965-66 and is projected to comple­
tion in the year 1969-70 and should not be altered at the 
whim of the plaintiffs’ counsel. The plan is being adminis­
tered fairly. No negro parent has charged any specific 
arbitrary action by these defendants to this Honorable 
Court. The defendants herein should be freed from the 
constant harrassment of annual motions to completely re­
vamp and radically alter the constitutional administra­
tion of a large and complex school system.

Defendants pray that the motion be denied.

[Signatures and Certificate Omitted]

Answer to Motion



24

S tate of A labam a ,
C o u n ty  of M obile, ss. :

Personally appeared before me, the undersigned au­
thority in and for said county in said state, J ames A. 
M cP herson , who, being by me first duly sworn, on oath 
deposes and says:

I am the Assistant Superintendent in Charge of Pupil 
Personnel, of the Mobile County School System, charged 
with the responsibility of administering the policies of the 
Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County relative 
to the admission, classification, attendance, transfer, dis­
cipline, and health of pupils. As such I am familiar with 
the facts set out hereinafter.

The parents of all negro students eligible to attend 
grades 1, 10, 11 and 12 in the City of Mobile and grades 
10, 11 and 12 in the County (approximately 7,400) were 
able, at their discretion, to apply for transfer or enroll­
ment of such students, in or to formerly all or predomi­
nantly white schools for the 1964-65 school term. There 
were no limitations placed on such requests, and all such 
requests were received and processed solely under the 
terms of the desegregation Plan.

All applications for change in enrollment were acted 
upon in accordance with the Plan. Denials of requests 
were based on the pupil not living in one of the attendance 
areas served by a school, extremely overcrowded condi­
tions at school requested, or the fact that the request was 
filed after the expiration of transfer request period. None 
were denied arbitrarily or capriciously.

For the year 1963-64 the parents or guardians of only 
four negro students applied for transfers to schools for­

Exhibit “A” Annexed to Board’s Answer to Motion



25

merly attended solely by white students. Two of these 
withdrew their applications and the two remaining requests 
were granted upon the application of terms of the Plan 
at that time.

Everjr effort has been made to insure fair considera­
tion of every application. A standard application form 
was furnished each parent, on request, at the Pupil 
Personnel Office. The application form included thereon 
notations that the form must be returned within the period 
specified in the Plan; when action would be taken; and 
the time and means of appeal of the action if the parent 
were dissatisfied. Information relative to the period for 
making transfer requests appeared as a front-page story 
and by published legal advertising in the Mobile Register, 
a local daily newspaper available to all residents; and the 
Pupil Personnel Office advised all parents requesting in­
formation (as many did) regarding transfer procedures. 
After all requests were received, they were reviewed by 
the Assistant Superintendent in Charge of Pupil Personnel, 
action was taken in accordance with the Plan, and notice 
of the action was given to parents or guardians by mail, 
using a standard form. The same procedures have been 
used in the transfer and initial enrollment of pupils, re­
gardless of race of pupil or identity of school requested.

The Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County 
considers the neighborhood elementary school, area junior 
high school, and the regional senior high school to be the 
desirable organizational pattern where it is practicable 
to achieve. The younger pupils appear to be happier, 
better adjusted, more emotionally stable, and, therefore, 
able to achieve more, in a learning situation that is familiar 
to them, and at the same time be associated with other 
children whom they know and accept as friends. The

Exhibit “A ” Annexed to Board’s Answer to Motion



26

neighborhood school should not be misconstrued to neces- 
sarily mean the school nearest a pupil’s residence. There 
are many factors that determine a natural neighborhood. 
These include natural and physical barriers, for example, 
traffic thoroughfares, railroads and drainage canals; hous­
ing developments; and neighborhood agencies and insti­
tutions such as churches, playgrounds, etc.; all of which 
tend to promote cohesiveness between and among families.

/ s /  J am bs A. M cP herson  
James A. McPherson

[Notary’s Certificate Omitted]

Exhibit “ A” Annexed to Board’s Answer to Motion



27

[ caption  om itted ]

Filed March 31, 1965

1. Reduced to its basic terms the desegregation plan 
under which the defendant Board is operating the schools 
is as follows:

a. Each elementary school has a single attendance area. 
Each Junior High School serves a combination of 
attendance areas.
Each Senior High School serves a larger combination 
of elementary attendance areas.

b. It divides students, for administrative purposes, into 
3 categories: (1) Those now attending a particular 
school, by race, because of their residence in what 
was formerly a dual zone; (2)) those now in atten­
dance at schools where dual racial zones have never 
been involved; and (3) those entering the school 
system for the first time (either as 1st graders, 
newcomers to the system in other grades, or those 
who have moved from one attendance area to an­
other).

c. Students remain where enrolled unless a transfer is 
granted. Those in category (1) are granted trans­
fers unless some compelling non-racial consideration 
dictates otherwise; those in category (2) are con­
sidered for transfer without regard to race but 
applying other proper factors alike to all.

d. Newcomers, 1st graders and persons moving to a 
different attendance area have the absolute right to 
enroll in the school of the attendance area of their

Findings of Fact



Findings of Fact

residence or the option to enroll at the nearest school 
formerly serving their race.

e. The plan has application to grades 1, 2, 9, 10, 11 and 
12 in the school year 1965-66; to two additional 
grades per year for the next two years; and to one 
additional grade per year for the last two years.

2. A fifteen day transfer request period is prescribed 
for April 1-15 of each year, and prospective first grade 
pupils are pre-registered later in April for the following 
year. The practice of designating a period for transfer 
requests prior to the school year wherein they will be 
effective and the practice of preregistering first graders 
are administrative procedures long followed by the defen­
dant Board, their inception having been before the know­
ledge of the present Superintendent who entered upon 
his duties with the Board in 1948.

3. The defendant Board makes no initial assignments 
of individual pupils, but permits the free exercise of op­
tions provided without regard to present racial make-up 
of the shool or to the race of the pupil.

Initial enrollment involves no transfer nor other special 
action of the Board. The exercise of the option is accom­
plished simply by the pupil presenting himself at the school 
he selects and enrolling. This is the case whether the 
student is entering the 1st grade, is a newcomer, or has 
moved from one district to another. It is also true regard­
less of the race of the pupil or the racial composition of 
the school.

4. The dual attendance areas based upon race, have been 
abolished and a new single attendance area system estab-



29

lished. A map setting out the boundaries of the new at­
tendance areas has been furnished the court, considered 
by it and forms a part of the record in this cause. The 
practice of granting transfers to those enrolled in a 
particular school because of the old dual attendance areas 
has overcome the discrimination existing because of these.

5. The newly adopted single attendance areas were not 
racially devised but arranged by giving due weight to 
proper factors, e.g., natural and man-made barriers; safety 
factors, such as major thorough-fares; maximum use of 
facilities; transportation facilities and patterns, and other 
like considerations. The majority of these attendance 
areas have both races residing therein.

6. The neighborhood school organization is a longstand­
ing practice in the administration of the school system in 
Mobile County. It is founded on a sound educational basis 
and the defendant Board is amply justified in its use.

7. The defendant Board has historically permitted 
parents some flexibility in selecting a school. A rigid 
system that requires all children of an area, without excep­
tion, to attend a particular school fails to take into account 
that school patrons and pupils are individuals with choices, 
likes and dislikes. Such rigidity is a major handicap to 
proper educational processes. However, such flexibility 
is limited by good administrative practices which require 
a reasonable amount of specificity to permit adequate 
planning.

8. There are more than 79,000 pupils in the Mobile 
County School System. There are 94 schools presently 
in the system with 8 additional schools in planning or

Findings of Fact



30

construction. Half-day sessions have been eliminated but 
39,000 students are in overcrowded conditions. The schools 
in the system have not been designated by race since the 
adoption of the plan.

9. In the administration of its plan, there is no evidence 
of any discrimination by virtue of race. The evidence 
supports equal application of the policies and provisions 
of the plan to both races and the Court so finds as a 
matter of fact.

10. No special tests are administered to pupils of either 
race requesting transfer. No denial of transfer is based on 
any test result. No transfer has been denied arbitrarily or 
unevenly as between the races. Approximately 500 pupils 
filed requests for transfer for the school year 1964-65 and 
less than half were granted. None was denied on the basis 
of race. This is a normal proportion of denials based 
upon past years’ experiences of the Board.

11. Sixteen Negro pupils requested transfers for the 
term 1964-65 to formerly white schools or schools with 
predominantly white student bodies. Seven were granted 
and nine denied. Each denial was based upon a non- 
discriminatory factor and transfer requests for many white 
pupils were denied on the same grounds.

12. The plan of the defendant Board contains criteria 
for use in the consideration of transfers, some of which 
have been discredited by the Courts. The Board did not 
use any of such discredited criteria in the weighing of 
transfer applications for the year 1964-65. These criteria 
should be stricken from the plan.

Findings of Fact



31

13. This Court has retained jurisdiction of this cause 
for further proceedings and to hear any complaints or 
charges of discriminatory application of the defendant 
Board’s plan. No complaint has been lodged or filed with 
this court by any individual as to any discriminatory 
actions of the Board in the administration of the plan.

14. Normally all pupils enrolled in a particular school 
do not commence attendance at the school for several days, 
even up to two to three weeks after school opens. The 
average daily attendance at any school in the Mobile 
County system from students already enrolled there will 
normally increase during the first month of school.

15. It is not practicable nor desirable for the Board 
to attempt to advise parents as to what school a child 
should apply for transfer to. Parental desire is a factor 
in granting transfers. Further it is not feasible for the 
defendant Board to act on transfer requests individually 
as received, since the effect of the total transfer requests 
must be appraised before any may fairly be granted. The 
defendant Board has, as a matter of practice over the 
years, deferred action on any request until all are received 
and the end of the transfer request period reached.

16. From 1,000 to 3,000 pupils change schools annually 
in the Mobile County school system because their parents 
move from one attendance area to another. These changes 
are in addition to the normal transfers for other valid 
reasons. Those pupils so moving are permitted simply 
to report to the school of their attendance area or the 
optional school without the necessity of transfer.

Findings of Fact-



32

17. The teachers and adininisti’ators of those schools 
where Negro pupils attend with a pre-dominantly white 
student body have been fair and have treated the Negro 
students as any other pupil. While two of the student 
witnesses testified to minor harrassment by some students, 
it is clear from their testimony that the teachers treated 
them in a normal relationship. Breach of good conduct 
by white pupils was promptly dealt with by administrative 
personnel when reported or observed.

18. It was the opinion of the student witnesses that the 
course of studies at Murphy High School was more difficult 
than their prior school, Williamson; that they were learn­
ing more and the facilities were better at Murphy. The 
Court accepts this as findings of fact. Facilities vary from 
school to school as do teaching quality and standards. The 
Court takes judicial knowledge that Murphy High School 
is the largest school in the Mobile system and one of the 
largest in the State of Alabama. A large number of 
schools in the Mobile County system are overcrowded and 
the defendant Board has been building new schools at a 
rapid rate. The actual physical plants in those schools 
attended predominantly by Negro pupils are essentially 
equivalent to those attended predominantly by white 
students; the teacher qualifications are the same; the salary 
schedules are the same; and the per capita expenditure 
is the same.

19. A larger variety of special courses is offered at 
those schools attended predominantly by white pupils, 
although in many instances the number of schools offering 
a particular course is only one more in the case of white 
pupils. There are about 50% more white pupils in the

Findings of Fact



33

system than Negro pupils, making it reasonable that more 
schools attended predominantly by white pupils would 
offer a particular special subject. Many factors enter into 
a determination of courses offered in a particular school, 
and the course offerings vary from school to school with­
out necessary regard to the race of the pupils. Facilities, 
pupil interest, location, and socio-economic factors all affect 
course offerings. There is no evidence that any applica­
tion for transfer for the current year was predicated on 
a desire for a special course not offered by the school the 
pupil had been attending. The Assistant Superintendent 
in charge of pupil personnel could not recall a single such 
request.

20. The procedures for requesting a transfer have been 
administered without discrimination. It is required that 
a parent or guardian obtain the form from the School 
Board office. This is to prevent immature actions by pupils, 
who might abuse the transfer process. The requests must 
be signed by both parents, if reasonably possible; or when 
not practicable to do so, such circumstance must be noted. 
Not infrequently parents are divided over the choice of 
school, and a transfer should be granted only where the 
family is united in the request. The Court finds no good 
purpose to be served by the requirement that the executed 
form must be returned by the parent in person.

21. The proceedings in this cause have had wide pub­
licity in Mobile County. Details of the plan, orders of 
the Court, and periods designated by the plan and the 
Court have been disseminated through front page stories 
in the local press. In addition, a legal advertisement ap­
proved by this Court, was published. Some 500 pupils 
actually requested transfer within the designated period.

Findings of Fact



34

22. The assignment of teachers and administrative per­
sonnel without regard to race raises different and even 
more delicate problems than are encountered in pupil 
desegregation. The close personal relationship that must 
exist between teacher, pupil and parents for maximum 
educational effect would be adversely affected by any 
efforts toward teacher and staff desegregation at this time. 
Local school officials testify that the supply of qualified 
teachers, while increasing, is still inadequate and that any 
desegregation of teachers or staff at this time would result 
in the loss of some qualified teachers now employed. The 
Court finds this to he a probable result.

23. It is not necessary or desirable to desegregate 
teachers and administrative personnel in the desegregation 
process as to pupils in the schools of Mobile County. It is 
the finding of the Court that such a step would render 
the desegregation of pupils more difficult and add a pre­
mature burden to the defendant Board, which is in good 
faith proceeding with the administration of its plan.

C onclusions of L aw

1. The selection of the desegregation plan is the func­
tion of the School Board, rather than the Court. Once 
formulated by the Board, the Courts are charged with 
scrutinizing it for any discriminatory features.

It is elementary that the courts cannot plan, administer 
and operate the public school system. The selection and 
activation of the particular method or plan of desegregat­
ing a school system is the responsibility and function of 
the School Board in the first instance. These two principles 
have been enunciated in most of the school desegregation 
suits. The Board, with its knowledge of local conditions,

Conclusions of Law



35

its experience with established administrative procedures, 
and having at its disposal persons possessed of profes­
sional training and skills, is the only entity fully qualified 
to carry out the “duty and reponsibility to formulate a 
desegregation plan” . The case of Briggs v. Elliott, 132 
F.Supp. 776, adopted as to reasoning by the Court of 
Appeals for this Circuit in Avery v. Wichita Falls, 241 
F.2d 230 and in Boson v. Rippy, 285 F.2d 48, summarizes 
the philosophy underlying these principles, as well as the 
judicial function:

“The Supreme Court has pointed out that the solution 
of the problem in accord with its decisions is the 
primary responsibility of school authorities and that, 
the function of the courts is to determine whether 
action of the school authorities constitutes ‘good faith 
implementation of the governing constitutional prin­
ciples’ .”

The basis for these established principles is expressed 
somewhat differently in Kelley v. Board of Education of 
Nashville, 270 F.2d 209:

“Because of the nature of the problems and the local 
conditions, the school authorities often find that action 
taken by other school districts is inapplicable to the 
facts with which they are dealing . . .  the public in­
terest must be considered, along with all the facts 
and conditions prevalent in the school district. Educa­
tional standards should not be lowered.”

Following directly after this reasoning, the court goes 
on to point out the judicial function:

“If the school authorities have acted and are proceeding 
in good faith, their actions should not be set aside

Conclusions of Law



36

by a court so long as their action is consistent with 
the ultimate establishment of a non-discriminatory 
school system at the earliest practicable dates.”

The Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County 
has selected and prescribed a plan founded in administra­
tive procedures applicable to local conditions and estab­
lished by many years’ use. It is soundly conceived and 
developed from an educational standpoint. So long as the 
plan is non-discriminatory, the basic elements should not 
be disturbed by the Court. This is the only test the Court 
should apply.

2. The desegregation plan in use in Mobile County is 
a constitutional plan.

The plan in use for the past two years in the Mobile 
school system is non-discriminatory. This Court, on two 
prior occasions, and the Court of Appeals for this Circuit, 
on one occasion, have considered the Mobile County plan 
and found it to meet constitutional standards in all par­
ticulars save speed of application and minor time provi­
sions. It is a plan founded upon educational concepts and 
administrative procedures in use in Mobile County for 
many years. It is, and has been, an attendance area system, 
utilizing the concepts of the neighborhood school, limited 
administrative control of enrollment but without utter 
rigidity, and provisions for a transfer request period for 
upper grades and a pre-registration time for 1st graders. 
These concepts and procedures are efficient and non-dis­
criminatory bases for the administration of a school 
system.

The use of school attendance areas, if not devised on 
racial lines, is non-discriminatory and is a proper provi­

Conclusions of Law



37

sion in a desegregation plan. Downs v. School Board, 336
F.2d 988, cert. den. ---------------  U.S. —------ -----  (March
1, 1965). This Court has considered the newly defined 
single zone attendance areas and the testimony of those 
who re-defined these areas and has found as a matter of 
fact that the attendance areas were not racially devised 
but were laid out in accordance with proper factors and 
are, therefore, constitutional.

The plan makes use of the Alabama Pupil Placement 
Law as a proper vehicle of administration. That portion 
of the plan founded upon the Alabama Pupil Placement 
Law continues all pupils at the schools where they are in 
attendance unless a transfer is granted. The plan provides 
for the consideration of transfer requests without regard 
to race. As a part of the transfer provisions, the Board 
has so interpreted the plan as actually to discriminate in 
favor of Negro students who, because they formerly lived 
in an old dual district, are attending a school predominantly 
of their own race. Under those circumstances transfers 
are permitted without the application of any of the criteria 
under the Pupil Placement Act. This has the effect of 
curing a discriminatory situation pre-existing the incep­
tion of the plan, for those pupils vdiose parents desire 
that result. The Alabama Pupil Placement Act is, on its 
face, constitutional, and the fact that the defendant School 
Board affords an opportunity to cure past inequities merely 
accentuates the propriety of the Board’s use of the Place­
ment Act.

Engrafted to the basic pupil placement law plan, the 
Board has made further provision to permit the initial 
enrollment, as a matter of absolute right, of first graders, 
newcomers, and people moving from one attendance area 
to another, in the school of the attendance area of the

Conclusions of Law



38

residence of the pupil. The option is granted to any pupil, 
for any reason, to enroll initially at the nearest school 
formerly serving his race. The absolute right to attend 
a school within the attendance area of the residence, 
coupled with the option, is proper in the local situation, 
since it affords some flexibility but has a limiting effect 
desirable for planning purposes. Since the present attend­
ance areas are not racially designed and a majority of the 
attendance areas have persons of both races living within 
them, the tendency of these provisions would be to promote 
desegregation but not to require integration. The Court 
is of the opinion that the option granted to initial enrolees 
does not violate the prohibition against “minority trans­
fers” . The option is granted without regard to the race 
of the pupil, the reason for the exercise of the option, 
present racial makeup of the school within the attendance 
area, or the present racial makeup of the optional school. 
The “minority transfer” rule, enunciated in Goss v. Board 
of Education, 373 U.S. 683, deals, of course, with transfers 
as opposed to initial enrollment. The same principles 
would govern. There the court said:

“Our task then is to decide whether these transfer pro­
visions are likewise unconstitutional. In doing so, we 
note that if the transfer provisions were made avail­
able to all students regardless of their race and re­
gardless as well of racial composition of the school 
to which he requested transfer we would have an en­
tirely different case. Pupils could then, at their option 
(or that of their parents), choose, entirely free of any 
imposed racial considerations, to remain in the school 
of their zone or to transfer to another.”

Conclusions of Law



39

In addition, the case distinguished situations such as 
here presented, by saying:

“Likewise, we would have a different case here if the 
transfer provisions were unrestricted, allowing trans­
fers to or from any school regardless of the race of 
the majority therein.”

This plan meets the test prescribed in Northcross v. 
Board of Education, 302 F,2d 818, wherein the Court said:

“Minimal requirements for lion-racial schools are geo­
graphic zoning, according to the capacity and facilities 
of the buildings and admission to a school according 
to residence as a matter of right.”

Except as to speed of application, the particular plan 
now before the court is the same plan as was before the 
Court of Appeals in 1964, Davis v. Board of School Com- 
missioners, 333 F.2d 53. At that time, the Court approved 
it as to all elements except speed. Seven criteria were set 
out in that opinion, all of which have been met by the pres­
ent plan. All of these criteria, except speed of application, 
were present in the plan as considered at that time. It is 
a constitutional plan and if it be constitutionally admin­
istered, any effort to effect a change therein must fail.

Conclusions of Law

3. The desegregation plan has been administered with­
out discrimination by the defendant Board.

The burden of much of plaintiff’s argument was that 
only a limited number of Negro students “have experienced 
desegregated education” under the desegregation plan as 
administered in Mobile County.

The Supreme Court has declared that Brown v. Board of 
Education, 347 U.S. 483, “decided that enforced racial seg­



40

regation in the public schools of a State is a denial of the 
equal protection of the laws enjoined by the Fourteenth 
Amendment” . Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1.

As was said in Briggs v. Elliott, supra:
“The constitution, in other words, does not require 
integration, it merely forbids discrimination. It does 
not forbid such segregation as occurs as the result of 
voluntary action.”

Again, in Downs v. School Board, supra, as to which the 
Supreme Court denied certiorari on March 1, 1965:

“ . . . The better rule is that although the Fourteenth 
Amendment prohibits segregation, it does not com­
mand integration of the races in public schools and 
Negro children have no constitutional right to have 
white children attend school with them.”

The Downs case is in accord with decisions from the 
Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Circuits, cited as supporting this 
basic rule.

The Court of Appeals for this Circuit in Boson v. Rippy, 
285 F.2d, 43, 48 points out:

“Indeed, this Court has adopted the reasoning in Briggs 
v. Elliott . . . and has further said: ‘The equal pro­
tection and due process clauses of the Fourteenth 
Amendment do not affirmatively command integration, 
but they do forbid any state action requiring segrega­
tion on account of their race or color of children in 
the public schools. Avery v. Wichita Falls, etc. 241 
F.2d 230, 233’ ” .

Those transfer' requests that were denied by the defen­
dant Board for the current school term, were denied with­

Conclusions of Law



41

out regard to race. Some requests for transfer were filed 
after the termination of the transfer request period and 
were properly denied for this reason. It is reasonable 
that there be a deadline for making transfer requests since 
the Board makes no determination as to granting transfer 
requests until after all are received in order that the effect 
of such transfers on particular schools may be measured. 
This is a reasonable requirement and the Board has denied 
transfer requests by pupils of both races if they were 
filed after the end of the transfer request period. Other 
transfer requests were denied because they requested trans­
fers outside the attendance area of the residence of the 
pupil and no valid reason for making an exception to the 
rule appeared. These involved pupils who never resided 
in one of the old dual school zones and the denials were 
proper. Again, the Board acted in the same manner in the 
case of Negro and white pupils. Other transfer requests 
were denied because they sought transfer to a school which 
was so overcrowded that as many as 100 students were 
then being transported away from the school to which the 
transfer was requested. These were denied for proper and 
reasonable reasons without regard to race.

Criteria set out in the plan from the Alabama Placement 
Act such as those lettered (1) and (n), have to do with 
public hostility; and, such as (i) and (m), have to do with 
psychological effects upon the transferee or the pupils in 
attendance at the school to which the transfer is requested. 
As a matter of law, these criteria are not properly retained 
in the plan and must be deleted. The Board does not give 
any special tests in considering transfers and test results 
have not formed the basis, and do not, for the granting 
or denial of transfers. While this Court will not require 
that the provisions for testing be stricken, it does require

Conclusions of Law



42

that if tests are used, they be used without regard to race. 
The Court finds no practice nor intention on the part of 
the Board to use any special testing procedure in acting 
upon transfer requests.

Earlier in this opinion, while considering the plan itself, 
the Court concludes that the redrawing of school attend­
ance area lines to eliminate the last vestiges of the dual 
zone system, has been done without regard to racial factors 
but upon proper educational considerations. In the admin­
istration of the plan the Court recognizes the right of the 
Board to make use of school attendance areas, and finds 
as a matter of law that the school attendance areas are 
prepared without discrimination.

For the reasons set out in the Findings of Fact, the 
Court finds the requirement that a parent pick up a trans­
fer request at the School Board office, and that it be signed 
by both parents unless such be impracticable of accomplish­
ment, are reasonable and proper safeguards in and about 
the administration of the public school system, so long as 
these procedures are administered alike to both races. The 
Court has found that the requirement was so administered. 
The requirement that the completed form be returned in 
person by the parent is unreasonable and said forms may 
be returned by mail. With this change, the transfer pro­
cedure is reasonable and not unduly burdensome.

The Court is convinced that the notice given of the terms 
of the plan and of the deadlines involved in prior years 
has been reasonable in view of the limited time available 
to give such notice. However, with the time now available 
to defendant Board before the transfer request period and 
the beginning of the ensuing school year, the Court is of 
the opinion that some additional information should be 
furnished to school patrons with regard to the terms of the

Conclusions of Law



43

desegregation plan and the various deadlines involved. 
The decree entered pursuant to these findings and conclu­
sions will direct the defendant Board to give such addi­
tional notice through ordinary school channels, to school 
patrons as will afford them a reasonable and conscious 
opportunity to apply for transfer or admission of pupils 
to any school they would otherwise be eligible to attend 
without regard to race. This notice has been approved by 
the Court and is a part of the record in this cause. (See 
Appendix A.)

4. In 1964-65 the speed of application for the plan was 
doubled. It is now applicable to grades projected by the 
Court of Appeals to completion in 1969. One-half the 
grades will be affected in 1965-66 in the third year of 
the administration of the plan. Circumstances, as adduced 
from the testimony and the answers to interrogatories, 
demonstrate the desirability of continuing with a rate of 
speed as set out in the plan. The schools are still crowded, 
the system continues to grow, the pace of building new 
schools and adding to existing facilities to catch up con­
tinues without abatement. The maintenance of educational 
standards and provision of time to solve problems created 
by desegregation and crowded conditions dictate adherence 
to the schedule prescribed. As a matter of law, the defen­
dant Board has borne its burden of demonstrating justi­
fication for no additional increase of speed.

5. There is no right, enforceable by these plaintiffs, to 
a desegregation of the teachers and administrative per­
sonnel unless such be a necessary or desirable factor in 
the desegregation of students. Such a move at this time

Conclusions of Law



44

would be harmful to the general relief originally sought 
by the plaintiffs and should not now be ordered.

The plaintiffs here are pupils in the public school system 
of Mobile County. The constitutional right which plaintiffs 
are entitled to have vindicated is the right not to be dis­
criminated against in the school system because of their 
race or color. Unless there be shown that the assignment 
of teachers and other personnel without regard to race is 
a necessary or indispensable factor in the vindication of 
plaintiffs’ rights, they are not entitled to this relief.

Dated this the 31st day of March 1965.

D an iel  H. T homas 
United States District Judge

Conclusions of Law



45

Decree

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

F ob t h e  S ou th ern  D istrict  of A labama 

S outhern  D ivision 

C ivil  A ction 

No. 3003-63

B irdie M ae D avis, et al.,

v .

Plaintiffs,

B oard of S chool C ommissioners of M obile C o u n ty , et al.,

Defendants.

D ecree

This cause having come on to be heard on February 26 
and continued to March 5, 1965, on plaintiffs’ Motion for 
Further Relief and on defendants’ answer thereto; oral 
testimony, answers to interrogatories, exhibits and an affi­
davit having been considered, and the Court having heard 
and considered arguments of counsel; and Findings of 
Fact and Conclusions of Law having been made by the 
Court;

It is, therefore, Ordered, A djudged and D ecreed as f o l ­
low s :

1. The provision in the procedure for requesting trans­
fers in the Plan that requires the return of the completed 
form by the requesting parents, in person, is stricken, and



46

Decree

said forms may be returned to the School Board offices by 
United States mail or any other convenient method.

2. Those criteria for transfer in the Plan designated (i), 
(1), (m), and (n) are improper criteria and hereby stricken 
from the Plan.

3. The defendant Board is directed to give such addi­
tional notice, through ordinary school channels, to school 
patrons of the terms and time limitations of the Plan as 
will afford them a reasonable and conscious opportunity 
to apply for transfer or admission of pupils to any school 
they would be eligible to attend without regard to race. 
(See notice listed as Appendix A)

4. In all other respects the desegregation plan of the 
defendant Board is approved as a constitutional plan and 
the administration thereof as non-discriminatory.

5. In all other respects except as ordered hereinabove, 
the motion of plaintiffs is denied.

6. Jurisdiction of this cause is retained to enter such 
further orders and to take such other proceedings as may 
be meet and just in the premises.

Entered this 31st day of March, 1965.

D an iel  H. T homas 
United States District Judge



47

Appendix A Annexed to Decree 
(Information to Parents)

Following are the terms of the Desegregation Plan 
adopted by the School Board pursuant to Court order:

If your child is presently in attendance in the Mobile 
County Public School System and will be in the 2nd, 9th, 
10th, 11th, or 12th grade next year and you wish him to 
attend a different school in September, 1965, for good 
reason, without regard to race, you may make application 
therefor on or before April 15, 1965 and such transfer 
request will be considered by the Board without regard to 
race.

Regulations require that a parent pick up a transfer 
request form in person and that both parents sign or the 
reason be stated why both parents cannot sign. The com­
pleted form may be returned in person on or before April 
15, 1965, or mailed back to the Board. If mailed, it must 
be postmarked prior to midnight, April 15, 1965, to be 
considered.

If your child is to enter the 1st grade of the Mobile 
County Schools for the term 1965-66, he must be pre­
registered on Thursday, April 22nd, at either of two schools, 
depending upon your preference. He has the right to 
enroll in the school serving the attendance area in which 
you reside or, at your option, you may enroll him in the 
nearest school formerly serving your race. This is your 
choice.

If your child is a newcomer to the System or if you have 
moved from one attendance area to another and your child 
is in the 2nd, 9th, 10th, 11th, or 12th grades, you have the 
same option for your child as if he were a first grader.

For the year 1966-67 two more grades will be added to 
the grades above set out; being the 3rd and 8th grades. 
Additional grades will be added year by year in accordance 
with the Plan.



48.

[ c a p t i o n  o m i t t e d ]

Filed April 14, 1965

Notice is hereby given that Birdie Mae Davis, Betty Ann 
Davis and James Allen Davis, minors, by Mrs. Ollie Mae 
Davis, their mother and next friend; Etta Maurine Pnrifoy, 
minor, by 0. B. Purifoy, their father and next friend; 
Juliette Elaine Daniels, Willie Lebaron Daniels, Wyman 
Emanuel Daniels and Carl Raymond Daniels, minors, by 
Sam Daniels, their father and next friend; Sharon Paulette 
Morrissette and Rhonda Jean Morrissette, minors, by Mrs. 
Earline W. Morrissette, their mother and next friend; 
Jerilyn Williams, Walter Daniel Rainey and Russell Lionel 
Rainey, minors, by Rev. W. D. Rainey, their father and 
next friend; Demond Gates, minor, by Mrs. Lee C. Roper, 
his mother and next friend; Mae Wornie Bolton, minor, 
by Mr. and Mrs. Algea Bolton, her parents and next 
friends; John Jones, minor, by Mr. and Mrs. Willie Jones, 
his parents and next friends; and Lloyd Morris, minor, by 
Mr. and Mrs. Clarence Morris, his parents and next friends, 
appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth 
Circuit from paragraphs 4 and 5 of this Court’s Order of 
March 31, 1965, denying plaintiffs’ motion for further in­
junctive relief, which motion generally requested amend­
ments to the Board’s plan necessary to guarantee plain­
tiffs, and the members of their class, rights to a desegre­
gated education in accordance with standards set by the 
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Note that plaintiffs Joseph Benjamin Purifoy and Etta 
Maurine Purifoy, minors, by 0. B. Purifoy, their father 
and next friend, Catherine Ruth Deer, minor, by J. W. 
Deer, her father and next friend, and Vernon Ruffin, minor,

Notice of Appeal



49

by Mr. and Mrs. Roscoe Henderson, his parents and next 
friends, are no longer eligible to attend the defendants’ 
public schools and, thus, do not join in this appeal.

(Signed) D errick  A. B ell , J r .
J ack  Greenberg

D errick  A. B ell , Jr.
N orman  C. A m aker

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019

V ernon  Z. Crawford 
578 Davis Avenue 
Mobile, Alabama

Clarence E. M oses

1050% Davis Avenue 
Mobile, Alabama

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Dated: April 12, 1965.
U. S. District Court 

Sou. Dist. Ala.
Filed in Clerk’s Office 

April 14, 1965

W illiam  J . O ’C onnor 
Clerk

Notice of Appeal



50

[ c a p t i o n  o m i t t e d ]

Filed April 23, 1965

Plaintiff s-appellants, pursuant to applicable rules of the 
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Rule 23 of the United 
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, hereby 
designate the following parts of the record in the subject 
case to be contained in the Record on Appeal:

1. Plan submitted by the Board of School Commissioners 
on August 19, 1963, pursuant to Order dated July 11, 1963 
as amended July 26, 1963.

2. Amendment to Plan submitted by the Board of School 
Commissioners on July 21, 1964 pursuant to Order dated 
June 29, 1964.

3. Plaintiffs’ Objections to Desegregation Plan and Mo­
tion for a Revised Plan, July 27, 1964.

4. Order of July 31, 1964 approving Plan as modified.

5. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Further Relief, December 21,
1964.

6. Defendants’ Answer to Motion, February 23, 1965.

7. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, March 31
1965.

8. Decree, March 31, 1965.

9. Notice of Appeal, April 13, 1965.

Designation of Contents of Record on Appeal



51

10. This designation.

11. Plaintiffs’ Interrogatories, December 23, 1964.

12. Defendants’ Answers to Interrogatories, January 26, 
1965.

13. Testimony of Superintendent Cranford H. Burns, 
Transcript of Hearing, November 14, 1963, pp. 28-76, to­
gether with plaintiffs’ exhibits introduced through Super­
intendent Burns.

14. Transcript of Hearing, February 25, 26, March 5, 
1965, together with all exhibits.

Please note that plaintiffs-appellants intend to print 
the Record on Appeal in accordance with Rule 23(a)(9) 
of the Rules of the United States Court of Appeals for the 
Fifth Circuit.

Designation of Contents of Record on Appeal

S tatem en t  of P oints

The points upon which plaintiffs-appellants intend to 
rely on this appeal are as follows:

1. The court erred in failing to find that defendants 
are continuing to make initial assignments, including as­
signments in those grades covered by the desegregation 
plan, in accordance with zone lines and other policies based 
primarily on race.

2. The court erred in failing to find that defendants 
have zoned elementary schools to enable the assignment of 
as many Negro pupils as possible to traditionally Negro 
schools and as many white pupils as possible to tradi­
tionally white schools with the result that school zone lines



52

closely adhere to racial communities and violate generally 
accepted criteria for school zones.

3. The court erred in failing to find that defendants 
assign pupils to junior and senior high schools in ac­
cordance with segregated feeder system, even when such 
assignment requires travel many miles beyond the school 
serving the other race.

4. The court erred in failing to find that the “ freedom 
of choice” provided pupils under defendants’ desegrega­
tion plan generally offers only a choice between two segre­
gated schools and places on plaintiffs, and the members of 
their class, the burden of ascertaining which schools are 
available.

5. The court erred in failing to rule that defendants’ 
limitation of the period during which transfers could be 
received from April 1-15, instead of a period ending July 
31, as in former years, is both unreasonable and places an 
undue burden on plaintiffs and the members of their class, 
particularly where parents are required to personally ob­
tain transfer applications from the office of the defendant 
Board of Education.

6. The court erred in failing to invalidate all provisions 
of defendants’ desegregation plan which have been inter­
preted so as to deny applications of pupils seeking deseg­
regated assignments.

7. The court erred in failing to find that defendants are 
continuing to grant transfers to segregated schools for 
pupils who have been initially assigned to desegregated 
schools.

Designation of Contents of Record on Appeal



53

8. The court erred in failing to find that Negro schools 
offer an inferior education to that provided in white schools.

9. The court erred in failing to find that, in view of the 
small number of Negro parents seeking assignment to 
desegregated schools, that there was no administrative 
justification for limiting the grades in which such desegre­
gated assignments can be obtained.

10. The court erred in ruling that plaintiffs failed to 
show that the assignment of teachers and other personnel 
without regard to race, is a necessary or indispensable 
factor in the vindication of plaintiffs’ rights.

/ s /  D errick  A. B ell , J r .
Jack Greenberg
Derrick A. Bell, Jr.

Suite 2030 
10 Columbus Circle 
New York, N. Y. 10019

Vernon Z. Crawford 
578 Davis Avenue 
Mobile, Alabama

Clarence E. Moses
1050% Davis Avenue 
Mobile, Alabama

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Designation of Contents of Record on Appeal



Designation of Contents of Record on Appeal 

. C ertificate of S ervice

This is to certify that the undersigned, one of counsel 
for plaintiffs, has on this date served two copies of the 
foregoing Designation of Contents of Record on Appeal and 
Statement of Points on George P. Wood, Esq., Palmer 
Pillans, Esq., and A. L. Phillips, Jr., Esq., P. 0. Box 935, 
Mobile, Alabama, by mailing same via United States mail, 
air mail, postage prepaid.

Dated: April 22, 1965.

D errick  A . B e ll , J r . 
Attorney for Plaintiffs

U. S. D istrict C ourt 
Sou. D ist . A l a .

Filed in Clerk’s Office 
Apr 23 1965

W illiam  J. O ’C onnor 
Clerk



55

Order Extending Time for Filing and Docketing 
Transcript of Record on Appeal

[ c a p t i o n  o m i t t e d ]

For cause shown,

I t i s  o r d e r e d  by the Court that the time for filing and 
docketing the Transcript of Record on Appeal in the United 
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in the above- 
styled case be, and the same hereby is, Extended to, and 
including the Thirteenth (13th) Day of July, 1965, under 
the provisions of Rule 73(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure.

Made at Mobile, Alabama, this the 24th day of May A. D., 
1965.

D an iel  H . T homas 
United States District Judge

U. S. D istrict C ourt 
Sou. D ist . A la .

Filed and Entered this the 
24th day of May, 1965,
Minute Entry No. 18445

W illiam  J. O’C onnor , Clerk,
B y: W illiam  E. T aylor 

Deputy Clerk



56

Transcript of Proceedings Had Before Hon. Daniel H. 
Thomas, U. S. District Judge, at Mobile, Alabama, 

on November 14th and 15th, 1963

[ c a p t i o n  o m i t t e d ]

A p p e a r a n c e s :
For Plaintiffs

Derrick A. Bell, Jr., Esq. 
Clarence E. Moses, Esq. 
Vernon Z. Crawford, Esq.

For Defendants
Palmer Pillans, Esq.
George P. Wood, Esq.
Abram Phillips, Esq.
George Stephen Leonard, Esq. 
R. Carter Pittman, Esq.

C r a n f o r d  H. B u r n s , being first sworn to speak the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, testified as 
follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. Would you give your name, sir! A. Cranford H. 
Burns.

Q. Your position! A. Superintendent of Public Schools 
in Mobile County.

Q. You have held that position for how long! A. Since
1952.

Q. And during the earlier phases of this case, you filed 
certain affidavits that have been made a part of this record! 
A. Yes, sir.



57

Q. Did you bring along this morning certain school zone 
maps that are used in relation to assignments of schools! 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Would you produce those maps, please! A. Yes, sir, 
Q. Now, you have three maps here, is that correct? A, 

Yes, sir.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiff s—Direct

Mr. Bell: I should like, may it please the Court, 
to have these three maps marked Plaintiff Exhibits 
1, 2 and 3 for identification.

Judge Thomas: Very well. You may proceed.
Mr. Bell: Now, Dr. Burns, I show you Plaintiff 

Exhibit 1 for identification, a map having to do with 
the administration of the Mobile County schools, and 
ask you if you will explain to the Court the signifi­
cance of this map.

A. This map, the large one to the right, is the outline of 
the attendance areas of the several schools that make up 
the City of Mobile and also the larger metropolitan area, 
including the section around Prichard and Chickasaw.

Judge Thomas: That is not the entire county, 
though ?

A. No, sir.

Mr. Bell: Now, on Plaintiff Exhibit 1, I note that 
there are large areas divided by red seemingly 
boundary lines, and each area a different color, and 
in each area there is a name. Would you explain 
that, please?

A. The different shade of color is to separate the districts 
and to make the different districts stand out.



58

Judge Thomas: School districts?

A. Yes, sir, whereas, the names shown on the white paper 
written with black ink make up the names of the schools.

Mr. Bell: Do those represent all elementary
schools?

A. Elementary schools, yes, sir.
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) All those are elementary 

schools? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does each elementary child, living within a particu­

lar zone, is he required to attend the school within that 
zone? A. Not necessarily.

Q. Would you explain that, sir? A. Well, we have a 
whole series of policies that make for a great deal of flex­
ibility in the handling of such matters administratively. 
True, children, living in a certain district, ordinarily attend 
the district in which their residences are located, but there 
is a wide variety of circumstances that are considered in 
working out some of those problems administratively.

Q. Is it correct that as of the 1963-1964 school year, all 
negro students in the system were assigned to, let us say, 
negro schools, and all white students were assigned to 
white schools?

Mr. Wood: Objection as to the 1963-1964 year. 
The suit was filed in 1963 and should reflect circum­
stances. It is immaterial what has occurred since 
the filing of the lawsuit.

Judge Thomas: Overruled.
Mr. W ood: Exception.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



59

A. Would you tell me what you mean by “assign” , because 
we do not assign all of the students to their schools indi­
vidually! All such matters are worked out by the board 
in the schools in conformity with broad general policies 
and we do not make individual assignments.

Mr. Bell: As a result of all those policies, are all 
negro children, attending, with the exceptions made 
because of a Court hearing, are all negro children 
attending negro schools?

A. So far as I know.
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Are all white children attend­

ing white schools? A. Yes.
Q. Would this map, marked Plaintiff Exhibit 1 for iden­

tification, does it contain both negro and white schools? A. 
That is correct.

Q. Is there a method, by looking at the map, of telling 
which is a negro school and which is a white school? A. 
No, sir.

Q. Is it correct that negro children living within a zone 
of a white school do not normally attend that white school? 
A. Yes.

Q. How is their assignment made or how is it determined 
which school they should attend? A. Well, we have one 
policy which says, in effect, that students may be allowed 
to attend the schools they have been attending, irrespective 
of the district, if there is room in that school, and if the 
principal approves, so we have a lot of folks continuing 
to patronize a given district on the basis of past boards 
and precedents, so long as the facilities are adequate to 
take care of the preferences of the students and the stu­
dents on that basis.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



60

Q. Let me understand you. Is the zone marked Saraland, 
is that a white or negro school? A. Well, it is an area 
that is populated for the. most part by white citizens.

Q. Where would negroes living within this zone attend 
school normally? A. Elementary, junior high or senior 
high ?

Q. Elementary? A. That would be Cleveland. I am 
not sure that is shown. If it is not shown, it is an error in 
the preparation of the map.

Judge Thomas: Show me on the map where that 
area should be.

A. There is an area on this part of this area that is ac­
commodated by the Cleveland School. I frankly don’t know 
why the Cleveland District is not shown.

Mr. Bell: You are pointing now, I guess, to the 
East?

A. East and also to the North, as I recall it. I am not 
familiar with the individual communities.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) That is to the Northeast of the 
Saraland District? A. East and North.

Q. There is a district known as the Cleveland School 
District? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do I understand correctly that the label marked Sara- 
land indicates the approximate location of that school? A. 
I am not sure. I would have to check each one individually 
to be sure about that.

Q. Is it correct that wherever negro children would live 
in the Saraland School District, they would, under normal 
circumstances, attend the Cleveland School? A. They 
would attend, but without individual assignment.

Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



61

Q. You indicate there are no policies or regulations of 
the board that would require the attendance of the negroes 
in the Saraland District at the Cleveland School? A. Not 
arbitrarily and not without exception.

Q. Could you explain that, please, sir? A. As I said a 
moment ago, the policies vary on placement, they are very 
flexible, they will allow for a lot of individual preferences. 
A lot of it is handled through the granting of transfers.

Q. Let me re-word my question. Under normal circum­
stances, are the policies and regulations such that would 
require negro children living within the Saraland School 
District to be assigned and attend the Cleveland District 
or another negro school? A. If I understand your ques­
tion—

Q. What I am trying to ask is what are the regulations, 
by what method are the negroes living in the Saraland 
School District not permitted to attend the Saraland School 
on the same basis of white children living within this dis­
trict who are permitted to attend the Saraland School? A. 
We have had no applications from negro students in that 
area.

Q. Is it required of white children attending the Sara­
land School to make application to that school, in order to 
attend? A. Not if they are in the prescribed Saraland 
District.

Q. They would be assigned to that school, based on their 
residence, unless some of the—

Mr. Wood: He keeps using the word “assigned” . 
The witness has explained that there is no individual 
assignment. I object to the use of the word “as­
signed” .

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



62

Judge Thomas: He has tried to stay away from 
that. Go ahead.

Mr. Wood: Exception.
Mr. Bell: Explain just how white students living 

in the Saraland District are allowed to go to the 
Saraland School?

A. The normal procedure is for students living in a given 
district to present themselves for enrollment in the school 
in that district at the beginning of that school term.

Q. What happens when they present themselves ? A. If 
they live within that district, they are admitted, unless they 
come in by special transfer.

Q. Could we then say that having presented themselves 
and having been accepted, this acceptance constitutes as­
signment of those students to the Saraland School? A. 
They would become enrolled in the school. That would be 
approved by the board.

Q. You are indicating as to any negroes living in the 
Saraland District or in any of the other white school dis­
tricts, that it is the practice for them to present themselves 
to the nearest negro school, is that correct? A. That has 
been the practice, but it has not been required by school 
board policy.

Q. I would just like to clarify the record. Would you 
briefly run through the names of the schools and indicate 
whether these are negro or white schools? We have ascer­
tained that Saraland School is a white school and while 
not shown on the map there is a negro Cleveland School. 
As I name the other districts, tell us whether they are 
white or colored.

Q. Chickasaw? A. White.
Q. Eight Mile? A. White.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



63

Q. Hamilton! A. White.
Q. Whistler? A. White.
Q. Thomas? A. Negro.
Q. Ellicott? A. White.
Q. Bienville? A. White.
Q. Whitley? A. Negro.
Q. Glendale? A. White.
Q. Carver? A. Negro.
Q. Prichard? A. We have so many schools in Prichard. 

We have one here, that is the Prichard Junior High School. 
I am quite sure it is white.

Q. Didn’t you indicate that all of the schools shown here 
were elementary schools? I thought I understood you to 
say that? A. The Prichard Junior High School is there. 
I am afraid that is an error, because we did not have a 
Prichard Elementary. I think that is intended to represent 
a school that is in the process of being named, and, if it is 
that school, it would be a negro school. I am pretty sure 
that is what was intended by the person who prepared the 
map.

Q. What is Whistler? A. White.
Q. Trinity Gardens? A. Negro.
Q. Palmer? A. Negro.
Q. Gorgas? A. White.
Q. Stanton Road? A. Negro.
Q. Grant? A. Negro.
Q. Fonvielle? A. Negro.
Q. North Side? A. Negro.
Q. Owen? A. Negro.
Q. Caldwell? A. Negro.
Q. Russell? A. White.
Q. Old Shell Road? A. White.
Q. Emerson? A. Negro.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



64

Q. Council! A. Negro.
Q. Leinkauf! A. White.
Q. Oakdale! A. White.
Q. Arlington? A. White.
Q. Craighead? A. White.
Q, Williamson? A. Negro.
Q. Maryvale? A. White.
Q. Woodcock? A. White.
Q. Williams? A. White.
Q. Brookley? A. White.
Q. Morningside? A. White.
Q. Mertz? A. White.
Q. Westlawn? A. White.
Q. Evans? A. White.
Q. Warren? A. Negro.
Q. Are there two Warren Schools? A. There is only 

one Warren School, but that is a divided district.
Q. Did you indicate that this is a white district? A. 

No, it is a negro district.
Q. Did I ask you about Crichton? A. White.
Q. Forest Hills? A. White.
Q. Austin? A. White.
Q. Orchard? A. White.
Q. Hillsdale? A. Negro.
Q. 16th Section? A. There is no school there. It is just 

marked there.
Q. Baker? A. White.
Q. Dickson? A. White.
Q. Fonde? A. White.
Q. Cottage Hill? A. Negro.
Q. Shepard? A. White.
Q. Let me ask you can you explain why the Warren 

School zone, which you indicate is a Negro School, is di­

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



65

vided into two parts on the Southeast and Southwest 
boundaries of the White School Crichton School District! 
A. It has always been that way, at least, for the entire time 
since I have been superintendent.

Q. Let me ask you are the persons living within the 
Warren divided School District primarily negroes? A. 
You mean the residents who live in the prescribed area? 

Q. Yes? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are the residents who live in the Crichton School 

District predominantly white? A. I would think so, yes, 
sir.

Q. I will ask you whether it is generally true that the 
actual make up of the school district tends to conform with 
the race of the school within that district? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Let us turn to Plaintiff Exhibit 2 for identification 
and tell me what this map is used for. A. The only differ­
ence between this map and the first one is that this one 
does not show the growing urban area to the North and 
including Prichard and Chickasaw. This map concentrates 
on what we have treated in the past as being the city.

Judge Thomas: The City of Mobile?

A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Bell: As to those zones which are shown here, 
are they identical zone lines to those contained in 
the first map, Plaintiff Exhibit 1 for identification?

A. So far as I know.
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Are the assigned procedures, 

as explained by you, as relevant to Plaintiff Exhibit 1 map, 
any different from those utilized here?

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



66

Mr. Wood: I object to the use of the word “as­
signed” .

Judge Thomas: Change the word “assigned” .
Change “assigned” to attend.

Mr. Bell: Exception.

A. They are the same.

Mr. Bell: Your answer to that was what?

A. They are the same.

Mr. Bell: Is there a particular usage to which the 
city map, marked as Plaintiff Exhibit 2 for identi­
fication, to which it is put that justifies maintenance 
of the separate city map, that is, does it have a spe­
cial function in the administration of the school 
system?

Judge Thomas: Do I understand you correctly, 
why is Exhibit 1 and why Exhibit 2?

Mr. Bell: That is my question.

A. It has no function, so far as the administration of the 
Mobile Public Schools is concerned. The purpose in pre­
paring this was to show the City of Mobile separate and 
apart from the other area, because the ruling of the Court, 
in connection with the temporary injunction, was, I believe, 
restricted to Mobile, and it occurred to some of us that it 
might be important to show this separate and apart from 
the urban area to the North.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Going back to the first map, 
which encompassed all of the city and the growing urban 
area to the North, is it correct that there are within this

Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



67

area junior high schools and senior high schools? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. Can you explain to the Court how students completing 
the courses in the elementary schools shown here attend 
the junior and senior high schools ? A. Elementary schools 
feed into junior high schools and junior high schools feed 
into senior high schools, and I have placed on charts the 
patterns which show how the elementary districts are re­
lated to the junior high and senior high school districts.

Q. Do you have copies of those charts? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Let us ask the Clerk to make those-—mark the first 

chart as Plaintiff Exhibit 4 for identification.

Judge Thomas: For the purpose of conserving 
time, all of these charts, as I understand it, were 
prepared at your request, were they not?

A. Yes, sir.

Judge Thomas : Plaintiffs wish to offer all of them, 
don’t they?

Mr. Bell: Yes, sir.
Judge Thomas: Rather than go through the pro­

cedure of marking them for identification and later 
marking them in evidence, let’s do it all at one time, 
unless there is any objection.

Mr. Wood: No objection.
Judge Thomas: On all exhibits, unless there is a 

particular objection, mark them, admitted in evi­
dence. All four of those are now in evidence.

(Thereupon, maps were marked Plaintiff Ex­
hibits 1, 2 and 3, respectively.)

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



68

(Thereupon, chart showing elementary, junior 
high and senior high schools, was marked 
Plaintiff Exhibit 4.)

Mr. Bell: Would you explain that chart, Plaintiff 
Exhibit 4, please?

A. The schools that make up the elementary districts are 
listed in the first column, the junior high schools are listed 
in the second column, and, in the third column, right, senior 
high school districts. In some instances, senior high schools 
include junior high school grades and elementary grades, 
but you do get a flow from the elementary to the junior 
high, and from the junior high to the senior high school 
district.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Is it correct that all elementary 
schools listed here are white elementary schools? A. Yes.

Q. Is it also correct that the Junior high schools and 
senior high schools listed are white junior high schools 
and white senior high schools? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Is it correct that you indicate that persons finishing 
in all these elementary schools, such as the Saraland school, 
under policies and regulations of the board, would, under 
normal circumstances, move on to the junior high school 
that is fed by that particular school? For instance, the 
Saraland school would feed into Satsuma junior high school, 
and subsequently into the Satsuma senior high school? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. The next chart, which we offer as Plaintiff Exhibit 5, 
against appears to indicate elementary, junior high and 
senior high schools. Would you tell us whether those are 
negro or white schools. A. White.

Q. The same procedure would be true, under normal 
circumstances, students finishing elementary school, would 
proceed to the junior and senior high schools? A. Yes, sir.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



69

Q. Is there any reason why these two groups of schools 
would have been placed on a different chart, any distin­
guishing factor? A. I don’t know of any reason. I do not 
prepare the charts myself. I do not know what procedure 
was employed in the preparation.

(Thereupon, said chart was marked Plaintiff 
Exhibit 5.)

Mr. Bell: We have three other charts, which we 
would like to have made Plaintiff Exhibits 6, 7, and 8.

(Thereupon, said charts were marked Plaintiff 
Exhibits 6, 7 and 8, respectively.)

Mr. Bell: Looking at Plaintiff Exhibit 6, which 
again lists elementary, junior and senior high 
schools. Are these negro or white schools?

A. Based on a hurried glance, I believe all of them are 
negro schools.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) With the same purpose, as 
previously explained, prevailing as to the feeding of ele­
mentary school children into the junior and senior high 
schools listed here? A. Yes, as the usual practice.

Q. Plaintiff Exhibit 7 again lists elementary, junior and 
senior high schools. Are these negro schools? A. Yes.

Q. The same procedures would prevail there? A. Yes.
Q. Finally, Plaintiff Exhibit 8, again listing various 

schools, elementary, junior high, which feed into the senior 
high school there? A. Yes.

Q. Those are predominantly white schools? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Going back just a bit, we have Plaintiff Exhibit 3, 

which, I believe, is a listing of the schools in the county, is 
that correct? A. Yes, sir.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



70'

Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Q- Would you explain how zone lines, if any, are pre­
pared for the county schools! A. Under school board pol­
icy, we do not use definite district lines in the county. The 
establishment of bus routes with the flexibility and prefer­
ences allowed in our set up have for all practical purposes 
determined the rural district.

Q. What is the procedure by which—

Judge Thomas: No. 3 is so called rural districts? 

A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Bell: How do the parents know which school 
to take the children to in the rural area?

A. We have buses that serve given areas, and it is gener­
ally known in each of the communities where these buses 
go, and, based on past practice, the children get on the bus 
and go to the school that they have been accustomed to at­
tend.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Would again there be schools 
which could be distinguished by the attendance, negro 
schools and white schools? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Would the attendance, procedures and practice, as far 
as applying to the schools, be approximately the same as 
those followed in the city? A. Yes.

Q. You intimated bus routes. Would there be separate 
buses serving negro schools and separate buses serving 
white schools? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Are any of the children in the city bussed to school? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Would these buses in addition be buses that serve 
either negro or white schools? A. Yes.



71

Q. As to the teachers and other faculty in the schools, 
would they be of the same race as the students attending 
that school in either the city or county! A. All the school 
board employees are teachers.

Q. Teachers are professional personnel? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I believe we did have in the record, in one of your 

affidavits, that the total number of negro and white students 
in the system is approximately 75,000? A. 77,000. 77,200.

Q. Can you give us an approximate percentage of negroes 
and whites in the total! A. 39% negro and 61% white, 
at least, approximately.

Q. Now, in accordance with the general procedure that 
you have explained, it is the practice for students to apply 
to the schools in the zones in which they are residents, and 
they are generally assigned to these schools!

Mr. Wood: Objection. There we go again. We 
object to the word “assigned” .

Mr. Bell: I am sorry.
Judge Thomas: I am not calling it assignment. 

I am transposing it to attendance.
Mr. Bell: They generally attend those schools?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Now, with that as a back­

ground, you will recall that some of the plaintiffs in this 
case had last year applied to the schools in their zone 
which turned out to be white schools. Now, is it the board’s 
contention that the sole reason for turning them away at 
that time was the problems you have set forth in the rec­
ord concerning overcrowdedness of schools and things 
of this nature? A. Yes, sir.

Q. What is the board’s opinion as to the situation with 
regard to over-crowdedness and the other building prob­

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



lems that you referred to last year as to similar arrange­
ments that would be made for the 1964-1965 school year? 
Do those problems still exist to the same degree? A. You 
indicated the opinion of the board. I cannot state the 
opinion of the board. I can state some of the conditions 
and facts that might be pertinent.

Q. Would you please do so? A. There has been some 
reduction in the number of children attending sessions 
since last, year, due to the progress of the building 
program. That has been going full steam for several 
months.

Q. What effect would this progress have, as far as the 
policy decisions that were made last year, if you were 
faced with the same problems and policy decisions this 
year? A. I would say there has been some improvement. 
However, the problems referred to in the board’s state­
ment for the most part still exist, in that we still have 
a rapid increase in enrollment year by year, and people 
are moving from one area to another, the residential area 
is moving to the west, out of down town Mobile, and we 
are engaged in a very intensive program of research and 
study and planning which will support a certain amount 
of re-districting in all of our down town schools, looking 
toward the time when we can utilize as nearly as possible 
all of our expanding facilities. We still have a lot of 
conditions and problems that stem from growth and 
change that make the administration of the schools more 
complicated.

Q. The plaintiff I had reference to was Mae Wornie 
Bolton, and she had sought to obtain a transfer to the 
Baker High School, which, I believe, you indicated was 
a white high school. Is it correct that all white students 
who ordinarily would attend Baker School or any of the

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



73

other schools did eventually attend Baker School or some 
other appropriate white school? A. You are speaking 
of transfers now? I cannot say whether or not all students 
applying for Baker High School as transfer students were 
granted that permission. I do not know.

Q. Did they either attend Baker School, all white 
children, or did they attend another white school? A. I 
would presume so, although I could not say, because I do 
not handle the transfers in my office.

Q. As to all students, who sought to come into the 
system for the first time, via the transfer route, who 
made application for admission to the Baker School, were 
all white students either permitted to attend Baker School 
or another white school? A. I do not know.

Q. What would happen to them? A. Judge Thomas: 
Normally, that would he true, would it not? A. Well, 
yes.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Mr. Bell: Are there any exceptions to that?

A. I really don’t know how all the tranfers were handled 
from the outside. That is handled in the pupil personnel 
office, hut all the problems worked out on the basis of 
transfers are handled in conformity with the school board 
policy.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) This normally means that all 
white students would either have been assigned to the 
Baker School or another white school? A. I imagine so. 
I don’t know whether we had any instances coming up 
that would have required facing that issue.

Mr. Bell: I have no further questions.



74

Cross Examination by Mr. Wood:

Q. Dr. Burns, you are here pursuant to the subpoena 
by the plaintiffs, are you not! A. Yes, sir.

Q. Were you subpoenaed to bring with you these maps! 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Let’s talk a minute about Mae Wornie Bolton. Where 
does the Bolton child reside, if you know, in what district?
A. I am not completely certain, but, as I recall it, she 
resided in the Hillsdale elementary district.

Q. Are there more than four students in that—high 
school students—in that Hillsdale Heights area? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. Is there a high school being built in the Hillsdale 
Heights district? A. Yes, sir.

Q. When is it scheduled for completion? A. I don’t 
recall, but not many months from now.

Q. Would you say before the next school year? A. I 
would think so.

Q. What degrees do you hold, academic degrees? A.
B. S. in Education, M. S. in Education and School Admin­
istration, Doctor of Education degree in School Adminis­
tration.

Q. Where was your doctorate obtained? A. Columbia 
University.

Q. How long ago? A. 1948.
Q. How long have you been with the Mobile County 

School system? A. Since 1948.
Q. How long have you been superintendent? A. Since 

1952.
Q. You were superintendent at the time that the compul­

sory segregation laws of the State of Alabama were re­
pealed, were you not? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And compulsory attendance at separate schools also? 
A. Yes, sir.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



75

Q. Now, you were questioned at some length about 
Saraland, for example, and the Cleveland School, that 
was inadvertently omitted from that area. Have you had 
any applications from negro children to be enrolled in the 
Saraland School? A. No.

Q. Other than those four applicants from the Hillsdale 
Heights Unit to Baker, has any negro parent or guardian, 
up to the time this suit was filed, made application for the 
transfer of a negro child to a white school, other than 
those four? A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. There were petitions filed in 1962 and 1955, I under­
stand, but were any negro children presented at the schools 
other than these four anywhere else? For enrollment? 
A. No, sir.

Q. That is the ordinary method of going to the school, 
enrolling, is it not? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, speaking of the Warren School that you were 
asked about earlier, have you had any applications from 
negro children living in the Warren School area for 
transfer to the white school? A. No, sir.

Q. Dr. Burns, how does the School Board of Mobile 
County generally go about determining the location of 
schools and the arrangements of school districts? A. 
First of all, it is based on continuous research and study. 
Growth and the changes that emanate from growth have 
to be constantly reflected in your school districts, if you 
keep schools properly located for the convenience of 
children and parents and at the same time utilize to the 
best advantage all of your expenses and facilities. One 
factor we consider with great care is the matter of hazards. 
Safety is going to be more and more important in plan­
ning and everything, and especially is this true with young 
children involved, so we try to get school districts estab-

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



76

listed in the neighborhoods where there can be a close 
working relationship between the teachers and parents 
and schools that are convenient to the children with as 
few hazards as possible.

Q. What would you consider hazards? A. Main 
thoroughfares and railroads. Those would be the two 
major ones.

Q. How about ravines, streams, and this sort of thing? 
A. They could be hazards in certain circumstances. We 
try to keep district lines co-terminous with these geo­
graphical factors that are distinct. They tend to separate 
communities, one from the other.

Q. Do I understand that the school is located in the 
community and serves a community as such? A. Yes, 
the school has a dual function; first, the school has a 
program for boys and girls who attend it, and the sec­
ondary function is to meet the needs of the community 
and provide facilities for a wide variety of community 
activities that uplift culture and improvement.

Q. Generally, in the City of Mobile, do you find the 
negroes in one community or group together in whatever 
activities they undertake and the whites generally group 
together in whatever activities they undertake? A. For 
the most part, yes, sir.

Q. Do you ever consult with the patrons or the parents 
or others in the community before locating schools or in 
the operation of the schools? A. We do.

Q. Tell the Court something about that, if you will, 
anything that you do in that regard. A. It is a common 
practice for the administrative staff to maintain liaison 
with all of our communities. Sometimes committees are 
activated by the P T A of the respective schools. In 
some cases, the superintendent activates a committee of

Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



77

citizens to join us in studying problems that are of vital 
concern to parents. Re-districting- is a problem that con­
stantly comes up for consideration. In these respective 
committees, we work with the staff. Sometimes citizens 
appear before the board itself to discuss their concerns 
and to make requests, and that action, in turn, results 
in a working relationship that would be established and 
the committee of citizens makes contacts and gets the facts 
that are pertinent to the problems which have been brought 
to the attention of the parents.

Q. Have you considered it important that there be a 
satisfactory relationship with the community, insofar as 
the success or failure of a particular school is concerned? 
A. Very fundamental.

Q. Dr. Burns, how do the physical facilities of schools 
attended by the negro students and those attended by the 
white students in Mobile County compare in quality? A. 
Very favorably.

Q. What do you mean by that now? A. I mean by 
that that the school board has applied the same principles, 
the same methods, to all of the schools, through research, 
through planning, and through the application of policy, 
through the application of administrative procedures, to 
meet the needs of communities, and the needs of boys 
and girls, without reference to race as such.

Q. Has this been a recently commenced program to do 
something on this line? A. No.

Q. How were the facilities comparable at the time you 
came into the Mobile System, as between the races? A. 
I made no special study of this when I came into the 
system in 1948. I worked four years in curriculum, in 
instruction, therefore, the building facilities was not an 
actual problem of mine, but, based on observation, I could

Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



say that I could see in evidence at that time an effort 
on the part of the school board to deal fairly with all of the 
citizens, as far as school facilities are concerned.

Q. How do the educational qualifications of the teachers 
of the negro race and teachers of the white race compare? 
A. The training of negro personnel is higher, certification- 
wise, than the training of the white professional teachers.

Q. How about salaries as between the races, the salary 
scale? A. Training being a factor in salary scales, it 
automatically follows that the average salary of negro 
professional personnel is higher than the average salary 
of white professional personnel.

Q. You use the same scale throughout the system? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. If a person has a Master’s degree, they would make 
a little more than a person having a Bachelor’s degree? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Then, depending on time and experience in the sys­
tem, that would be a factor, too, would it not? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. Generally, Dr. Burns, what is the policy making 
body, insofar as the school system of Mobile County 
is concerned? A. The Board of School Commissioners.

Q. Are you a member of that board or are you the 
executive officer of the board? A. The executive officer.

Q. Directly under you, what is the official? A. Under 
me?

Q. The employee of the school board, who is next under 
you? A. The associate superintendent.

Q. What is the next lower employee then in line of 
authority below the associate superintendent? A. Before 
going to the assistant superintendents who report to the 
associate superintendent, I have, in addition to the as-

Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs■—Cross



79

soeiate superintendent reporting to me, the treasurer- 
comptroller, and I have a supervisor of research, and 
supervisor of public information, so I have four people 
to report directly to me, and, then below the associate 
supenrintendent, we have five assistant superintendents.

Q. What is the order of the responsibility of those five 
assistant superintendents? A. One assistant superintend­
ent is in charge of business. One is in charge of staff per­
sonnel. One is in charge of pupil personnel. One is in 
charge of curriculum and instruction. One is in charge of 
administration. By that, I mean supervision of the ad­
ministration of local schools.

Q. Do they have authority over all of the schools of 
the county, insofar as that particular field is concerned? 
A. The staff is divided into two categories. We have 
staff members and we have line officers. The people in 
the line organization exercise authority. The assistant 
superintendent in charge of the administration is the line 
of authority under the associate superintendent, and the 
other assistant superintendents are members of the staff. 
They act upon the basis of leadership, and all of the mem­
bers report directly to the assistant superintendent in 
charge of administration.

Q. So, the assistant superintendent in charge of cur­
riculum would be responsible to you, through the associate 
superintendent, for the development of satisfactory cur­
riculum and making recommendations in that regard, etc.? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, Dr. Bums, have these older districts, for ex­
ample, continued pretty much as they were back before 
the state laws were repealed, requiring segregation be­
tween the races? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Has it seemed to be simply a matter of the children

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



80

continuing to turn up at these particular schools within 
that district! A. Yes, sir.

Q. Dr. Burns, I did overlook this. You do have a set 
of regulations, under which you operate, adopted by the 
board of school commissioners, do you not! A. Yes, sir.

Q. Is there now, or has there been since the time you 
have been superintendent, any regulation requiring the 
separation of the races in the schools? A. No.

Redirect Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. Now, in line with the question you just answered, has 
the board, subsequently to the 1954 decision, issued a 
public statement to the effect that negroes can be admitted 
to white schools, and that whites can be admitted to negro 
schools! A. I don’t recall such a statement,

Q. Do you think that there could have been a statement 
that you would not have recalled? A. I doubt it.

Q. Then, to your best knowledge, there has been no 
statement, advising the negro members of the community 
that there was no regulation from taking their children 
to white schools? A. No.

Q. I asked you a little while ago about one of the plain­
tiffs, Mae Wornie Bolton, and you indicated, on Cross 
Examination, I believe, pretty much what is contained 
in her affidavit, namely, that she attended the St. Elmo 
High School? A. I intended to convey the thought that 
her residence was in the Hillsdale district, but it is entirely 
correct, I am sure, that since she was of high school age 
that she was attending St. Elmo, because the Hillsdale 
elementary district is presently a part of the St. Elmo 
senior high school district.

Q. On the appropriate exhibit, without going to it, it

Cranford FI. Burns^—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



81

would show that the Hillsdale elementary school would 
feed its students into St. Elmo High School? A. Yes.

Q. Now, is it correct, as indicated in her affidavit, that 
the St. Elmo High School is located approximately seven­
teen miles from her home and that white schools are located 
within a distance from three to six miles of her residence? 
A. I would explain that in this fashion. Technically speak­
ing, the Hillsdale elementary district has not been a 
genuine part of the St. Elmo senior high school district. 
Actually, this district was accommodated at the high school 
level at St. Elmo, because it was the only place where 
we had space to accommodate those students. That is 
quite often the case throughout the system, where you 
take children in over-crowded communities and haul them 
a considerable distance to schools that have space irre­
spective of the factor of distance per se.

Q. With that explanation, in direct reply to my ques­
tion, it is true that she was attending the St. Elmo school 
seventeen miles from her home, while there were white 
schools located within three to six miles of her residence? 
A. I don’t know about the distance.

Q. Would this be approximately correct? A. I am sure 
it is further to St. Elmo than it is from Hillsdale to Baker. 
I presume that would be true about some of the other 
points.

Q. Just to repeat again, your reason or the reason that 
the board denied her request to attend the Baker High 
School, where white children customarily attended, was 
because of those problems of over-crowdedness and the 
other factor you mentioned? A. The Baker school was 
over-crowded at the time and any people making similar 
requests, irrespective of race, their requests would have 
been denied.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect

Q. But the white students who would be turned down at 
the Baker School would be admitted at another white 
school some place else, is that correct? A. Yes, sir.

Q. It does not show by the record, but I understand 
that the Davidson High School, also for whites, is closer 
to the home of this particular plaintiff than the St. Elmo 
school. Was there any direction given to her that she 
could perhaps enroll in the Davidson School? A. I don’t 
know.

Q. Do you think you would know if such direction had 
been given? A. I could not be completely certain. In all 
probability, there would be hundreds of applications and 
requests for transfers that I know nothing about.

Q. But is your answer then it is likely that no such 
direction would have been given to her, no direction that 
she might apply to Davidson School, where the crowded 
condition was not as serious at it was at the Baker School? 
A. As a rule, when a transfer request is made—

Q. Would you answer this question, please? Is it likely 
that she was not advised that she might apply at the 
Davidson School where the over-crowded condition was 
not as serious as it was at the Baker School? A. It is 
likely.

Q. Now, you indicated that the criteria you used__ A.
May I add to that? The Davidson School was over-crowded 
at this time also. In fact, and we were trying to move 
into the Azalea Road junior high school, and a number 
of portable units was under consideration. A transfer 
to that school at that time would have been completely 
out of the question.

Q. All white students in the same position as Mae 
Wornie Bolton were assigned either to the Baker or 
Davidson or other white schools, regardless of the over­
crowded problem?



83

Mr. Wood: Objection. We don’t believe the testi­
mony is anything of that sort. There is no evidence 
that any others requested it.

Mr. Bell: We won’t argue it.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) You were explaining about the 
criteria used in preparing these zone lines. You mentioned 
that the negroes and whites tend to live in different com­
munities for the most part. Is it correct, Dr. Burns, that 
the school boundary lines tend to conform to those negro 
neighborhoods and white neighborhoods? A. For the 
most part.

Q. This is then one of the factors that is considered by 
the board or by those who prepare the zone lines? A. 
Yes, the size of the school is a factor, also. Oftentimes 
the district has to be revised, to fit the number of class 
rooms that you have in a given facility.

Q. I understand that there are other criteria that have 
to be considered as well, but based on the general line 
of your earlier testimony, is it correct to conclude that 
one of the factors considered by the board, or those prepar­
ing the zone lines, are the racial characteristics of the 
particular neighborhood? A. Well, I have not been 
directly responsible for the preparing of these lines. I 
really don’t know to what extent that has been a factor.

Q. I didn’t ask you that. I just want to know, to have 
confirmed your earlier testimony that this is a factor? 
A. The persons handling such responsibility have not been 
instructed to so draw the district lines with that purpose 
in view.

Q. I just wanted to know whether this is one of the 
factors they would take into consideration? A. I really 
don’t know whether that has been a factor.

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



84

Q. You did testify earlier that for the most part the 
zone line is drawn so as to place negro schools in negro 
neighborhoods'?

Mr. Wood: We object to that.
Mr. Bell: I had reference to the testimony that 

the Warren School district is divided into two parts. 
Is that correct!

A. Yes, sir.
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) You further indicated that the 

Crichton School District, which separates the two parts 
of the Warren District, is a white school, is that correct? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. You further testified that the persons living in the 
two sections of the Warren School District are pre­
dominantly negroes! A. That is right.

Q. You further testified that the persons living in the 
Crichton School District for the most part were white? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, what I am now asking you, is it not correct 
that those who prepared the maps prepared the zone 
lines so as to use as a partial basis the desire to place 
a negro school zone or a white school zone, the white 
persons living in the Crichton District and the negroes 
living in the Warren District? A. The drawing of those 
district lines date back to the time before I was working for 
the school board.

Q. Those zone lines are still in effect today? A. Yes, 
sir, they are under study and there will be a lot of revision 
in the very near future.

Q. As for now, would you agree they have containing 
in the negro districts the negro community, and within

Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



85

the white districts the white community! A. Yes, except 
to the extent they have the opportuniy to show their 
preferences and desires.

Q. As far as these preferences and desires might en­
compass obtaining admission to the white school by 
negroes, the board has not issued a public statement to the 
effect that they may do this? A. No.

Q. Let me ask you where or not there are—you were 
speaking of the break down of the persons working under 
you, is it correct that there is a superintendent of negro 
schools? A. No.

Q. Is there a Mr. Scarborough working under you? A. 
He is Associate Superintendent.

Q. What is that? A. Dr. Scarborough is Associate 
Superintendent.

Q. What are his duties, sir? A. Well, he is my first 
lieutenant and he is at the beck and call of the superin­
tendent, on giving recommendations and getting our 
written communications to the schools, he correlates and 
supervises intensively the work and performance of the 
five assistant superintendents, whose work represents the 
main flow of operating the Mobile Public School System.

Q. I understand that his official title is Associate Super­
intendent in Charge of Pupil Personnel and Special 
Services? A. No, his new title is Associate Superin­
tendent. At one time, he served as Assistant Superin­
tendent in Charge of Pupil Personnel and Special 
Services.

Q. Was that for negro schools? A. No, sir.
Q. You don’t, generally, have an individual designated 

as for negro schools and for white schools? A. No, we 
have not for many years. When I first came to the Mobile 
Public School System, we did have a division of adminis­

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



86

tration associated with the negro schools, as such, but 
that was discontinued many years before.

Q. Is it correct that Mr. Scarborough is a negro! A. 
No, sir.

Q. Is there a negro official in the hierarchy above the 
level of principal? A. Yes, sir, coordinator, we have a 
coordinator of instruction, who is a negro.

Q. Does he coordinate instructions for all schools or 
just for negro schools? A. Just for negro schools.

Q. What is his name? A. Mr. Nathaniel Russell.
Q. You indicated that the schools were substantially 

equal, as far as the facilities and all the rest, is there any 
difference in the dollar expenditure of your funds for the 
negro schools and the white schools? A. No significant 
difference.

Q. There is not? A. No, but in all probability, it would 
be higher in the negro schools, because the cost of instruc­
tion is about 85% of the total budget, and since the negro 
school teachers’ salary is higher, the per capita cost in 
the negro schools would run a little higher.

Q. Does the basis on which your state and your federal 
funds are reflect that more money goes to the negro schools 
than to the white schools, or is a record kept on those 
funds? A. We get money from the state on the basis of 
teacher units. These units are considered according to 
the specification of the professional personnel, so it re­
sults that we get more money from the state when we 
report higher certificates on the part of our professional 
personnel.

Q. You get more money for the negro schools in this 
regard? A. Yes, than we do for the white schools. We 
do not get our federal monies on that same basis, however.

Judge Thomas: Take a recess.
* * # # #

Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



87

Transcript of Proceedings Had Before Hon. Daniel H. 
Thomas, United States District Judge, at Mobile, 
Alabama, on February 26th and March 5th, 1965

[ c a p t i o n  o m i t t e d ]

Appearances:
For Plaintiff—Derrick A. Bell, Esq.
For Defendants—George F. Wood, Esq.

Judge Thomas: Civil Action No. 3003-63, Birdie 
Mae Davis, et aL, vs. Board of School Commis­
sioners of Mobile County, et al., on a motion for 
further relief, what say the Plaintiffs?

Mr. Bell: Ready, your Honor.
Judge Thomas: What say the Defendants?
Mr. Wood: Defendants are ready, your Honor.
Judge Thomas: Let me make this statement at 

the outset.
I think the thing to do is to go ahead and start.
Mr. Bell: I would like at the outset to introduce 

to the Court Miss Sheila Rush, from our New York 
office. She has not yet been admitted to the bar, 
but she has been working as a clerk in our office.

Judge Thomas: All right.
Mr. Bell: I think, as preliminary, I might state 

the motion which should be heard this morning is 
one we filed in December, which the Defendants have 
recently answered. While it takes up several pages, 
I think the gist of it I can set forth in five or six 
sentences. That is, we are here because it is the 
feeling of the Plaintiffs that the School Board fails 
to come any place near reaching the standards



88

Colloquy

established by the Supreme Court and the Fifth 
Circuit in a number of particulars. First of all, the 
plan, as put into effect, and which we have been 
living with now for two years, the maintenance 
of the school zones and assignment policies on a 
segregated basis—the name might be changed, but 
generally assignments are carried out in the same 
fashion and the same results as the initial assign­
ments as they were when or before this suit was 
filed; second, the Negroes who are seeking transfers 
from all Negro schools, to which they have been as­
signed, are subjected to burdensome procedures and 
are tested and their applications are decided by the 
use of standards which are not applied to white 
pupils, who are enrolled in the schools where the 
Negroes seek to be transferred; third, the plan fails 
to provide adequate notice to the parents of what 
their rights are under the plan; fourth, the plan fails 
to provide sufficient time for careful thought by 
the parents before they make a decision; fifth, the 
speed of the plan is far, far too slow, in view of 
the many factors and reservations that exist in the 
community, as far as the Negro parents are con­
cerned and the small number of people who thus 
far have indicate a willingness to go through this 
application procedure. It seems to me there is no 
reason why there should be a limitation in the 
number of grades. Finally, as to the desegregation 
of faculty assignments, we feel that the policy of 
the board is such that the school system suffers 
and qualified teachers are not hired, and, of course, 
the rights of the plaintiffs are further harmed. 
Those are the points which we hope to make. We



89

Colloquy

have five or six witnesses, and I would think that 
most of them, except perhaps the superintendent, 
can be handled fairly quickly.

Judge Thomas: All right, Mr. Wood.
Mr. Wood: Your Honor, I wish to state only 

that we take sharp issue with the charges that the 
board is maintaining school zones and assignments 
as such on the same basis as before the plan. The 
facts are exactly to the opposite of that. The few 
dual zones that existed at the time of the adoption 
of the plan have been abolished and transfers have 
been considered on exactly the same basis, regard­
less of race. The admission policies are different 
and are non discriminatory, and we submit that the 
plan, which reaches half the system, half the grades 
in these three years, is not proceeding too slow, the 
speed was just double last year, and we submit it 
is proceeding at a proper pace, and is proceeding 
to completion faster than some of the plans which 
started much earlier than ours in other school 
systems. The notice to which complaint was made 
was such that was approved by this Court speci­
fically, and we will discuss more on this notice fea­
ture later in the case. We take sharp issue with 
any charge of discrimination or of failure to change 
methods of school zones and methods of enrollment.

Judge Thomas: You say you have several wit­
nesses?

Mr. Bell: Yes, your Honox*, we do.
Judge Thomas: All witnesses who have been sub­

poenaed or who are here in this case, please stand 
where you are, raise your right hands and be sworn.

Thereupon, Mr. O’Brien swore sevei-al witnesses.



Judge Thomas: Does either side ask for the rule?
Mr. Bell: No, your Honor, we do not.
Mr. Wood: Just a moment, your Honor. Yes, we 

would like to ask for the rule.
Mr. Bell: I think the only non parties are—all 

the witnesses I have are parties. I would call first, 
as the first witness, Mr. Algea Bolton.

Judge Thomas: All witnesses who have been 
sworn I have to ask you to wait out in the hall.

Mr. Bell: The ones who are remaining are all 
Plaintiffs. Would you invoke the rule as to Plain­
tiffs?

Judge Thomas: Yes. All witnesses go out in the 
hall, please, and remain there until we send for you.

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiffs—Direct

A lgea B olton , being first sworn to speak the truth, the 
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, testified as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. Would you state your full name, please? A. Algea 
Bolton.

Q. Your residence, please? A. 554 Felhorn Road, 
Mobile, Alabama.

Q. Are you a Plaintiff in this case? A. I am.
Q. Do you have a child who is a Plaintiff? A. I do.
Q. What is your child’s name? A. Mae Wornie Bolton. 
Q. Would you keep your voice up? A. Yes.
Q. Have you made any effort to have your daughter 

enrolled in a white school? A. I have.
Q. When was that effort made? A. That effort was 

made in the year of 1963, I do believe.



91

Q. In which school did you try to get her enrolled! 
A, Baker High School.

Q. Was that effort successful or not successful? A. It 
was not successful.

Q. Do you recall preparing an affidavit concerning your 
efforts to have your daughter enrolled at that time, which 
was filed in the case? A. I do. I recall that. I wrent to 
Baker High School and I was informed at the school that 
I should make a written request to Dr. Scarborough.

Q. Let me interrupt. All that information was contained 
in an affidavit, or group of affidavits, filed in the case, is 
that correct? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, after the 1963 school year opened and your 
child was not assigned to a school with white children, 
did you make another application in 1964? A. I did.

Q. Will you tell us about how you came to make that 
application, how you came to learn about what you should 
do, and what did you do, in connection with the application ? 
A. I learned that—I believe it was in April—from Mr. 
LeFlore that if I wanted my child to be transferred that 
I would have to go—at that time, it was a certain period 
of days, I forget which—but I would have to go and have 
my child transferred.

Q. Who is this Mr. LeFlore you mentioned? A. Mr. 
John LeFlore.

Q. What is his position that he would have informed 
you of this? A. He was and he is a director of case work 
in some committee organization of the civil rights 
organization.

Q. I interrupted you. You were saying that he told 
you that during a period of time you would have to make 
application? A. Yes, he told me that during a particular 
period of time I would have to go and make application,

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiffs—Direct



92

and I got off a half day from my job and I went to the 
school board to file this application. On arriving at the 
school board, they gave me a form to fill out. Then, I was 
told that my wife was going to have to sign it—she was 
not with me—I was told to take this form home and fill 
it out, so I didn’t think too much about this at the time, 
but I feel like that I could have filled it out there, since 
I was the father, but I went home to fill this form out.

Q. Approximately how far do you live from the school 
board? A. I live ten miles from there, but, upon arriving- 
home and filling out this form, I found that at the time at 
the bottom of this form that I had to return this form 
back personally to the school board, and this was a rather 
humiliating experience, because I thought a stamp could 
have taken care of the situation.

Q. What do you mean? You mean you could have mailed 
it back? A. I thought I should have been able to mail 
this back.

Q. Did you return the signed form? A. Yes, I got in 
my car and went ten miles distance and returned this 
form.

Q. Did you get your wife’s signature on the form? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. Do you recall whether the form indicated that you 
had to request the particular school you wanted your child 
to be transferred to? A. I do.

Q. Did you get a list of which schools were available, 
of which schools you should ask for? A. I asked for 
Davidson School.

Q. Was that because somebody told you that was the 
proper school?

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Mr. Wood: Objection, as leading.



93

Judge Thomas: Don’t lead the witness.
Mr. Bell: Why did you ask for Davidson School?

A. Because that was the nearest school in the city, as I 
understood it, within the city limits.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) You mean the nearest white 
school? A. Yes.

Q. Which school had your child been attending in 1963, 
after she did not get her application granted to a white 
school, which school had she been attending? A. St. Elmo 
High School.

Q. Which school was she assigned to in 1964? A. Hills­
dale Heights.

Q. How far away is the St. Elmo School? A. Seven­
teen miles.

Q. This Hillsdale Heights School, did that offer the 
same-—

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Mr. Wood: Objection, as leading.
Mr. Bell: Which grades were offered at the St.

Elmo School, do you recall? A. Only high school students, 
as I believe.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Let me ask you this: Is the 
Hillsdale Heights School a Negro school or white school? 
A. Negro school.

Q. As far as you know, are there any white students 
assigned to the Hillsdale Heights School? A. No whites. 

Q. Is it a new or an old school? A. A new school.
Q. How far is it from your house? A. It is just back 

of my house, very close.
Q. Very close to your house? A. Yes, sir.
Q. When did it open, if you know? A. For high school, 

this year.



94

Q. Notwithstanding the fact that this school opened this 
year, is it my understanding that you made an application 
for a transfer for your daughter to a white school1? A. I 
did.

Q. Let me ask you this: Why did you ask for Davidson 
School! A. Because it, as I understand it, was the nearest 
school for my child within the city limits.

Q. Did you receive any response from the school board? 
A. I did. I received a letter, declining my request, because 
my child was assigned to another district.

Q. Mr. Bolton, will you tell us whether or not you have 
been involved in any efforts to inform other Negro parents 
about their rights under the school desegregation assign­
ment plan, and, if so, what activity have you been involved 
in? A. Well, I have gone from house to house in my 
community. I guess I have gone to eighteen or twenty 
families and asked them to let their children send in ap­
plications for their children to be transferred to a white 
school, but I found that the parents were very reluctant 
to do this, simply because they had—

Mr. Wood: I object to the reasons why he thinks 
somebody is reluctant to do something.

Judge Thomas: Sustained.
Mr. Bell: Exception.
Judge Thomas: Any way, you found they were 

reluctant to do so, is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Judge Thomas: Let me interrupt you. What 
grade is your child in? ..

A. My child is in the eleventh grade.

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiffs—Direct



95

Judge Thomas: Where did you say you live?

A. 554 Felhorn Road.

Judge Thomas: That is in Hillsdale Heights?

A. Yes, sir.

Judge Thomas: Hillsdale Heights is right off 
Cody Road?

A. Yes, sir.

Judge Thomas: What grade did you say your 
child is in?

A. She is in the eleventh grade.

Judge Thomas: Thank you. Go ahead, please.
Mr. Bell: In talking to these parents, based on 

the information that they wanted, did you try to 
solve-—what type of problem did you try to solve 
for them that they raised to you?

Mr. Wood: Objection. I don’t know what that is 
getting at.

Judge Thomas: Sustained. That is hearsay.
Mr. Bell: Exception.
Mr. Bell: I think he is entitled to tell the Court 

the nature of his conversations with these other 
people and what problems he tried to solve for them, 
in response to questions that they asked, without 
going into the only thing which is hearsay, which 
is the truth of any statement made by them, that is 
certainly not in issue. What I am trying to get 
on the record here is the fact of his activity involved

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiffs—Direct



96

in this program, it is certainly crucial to the case, 
in that I gather from the response of the defendants 
they maintain that the reason for so few applica­
tions is that nobody is interested, we have to do 
as much as we can without bringing in every parent 
who was approached, stating that they didn’t want 
to go, under those conditions, and I thought that 
would be a suitable method for doing that.

Judge Thomas: It seems to me that any conver­
sation this witness had with other people in any 
kind of lawsuit would be hearsay.

Mr. Bell: The only part of the conversation we 
could possibly see would be hearsay if he testifies 
what the other people told him. He can certainly 
testify what he told the people and why he did talk 
about a particular problem rather than some other 
problem. I don’t think that is hearsay.

Mr. Wood: The issue here today is whether or 
not this plan is discriminatory. A conversation be­
tween two persons, patrons of the school system, 
reported by one of them is pure hearsay and has 
no place in the determination of this issue.

Judge Thomas: I think it is hearsay. I am sorry. 
Objection sustained.

Mr. Bell: Exception.
Mr. Bell: This is one of the Plaintiff’s. He is 

concerned. He has gone out in the community to 
try to explain to the parents what the school board 
has not explained to them. He has met with 
resistance

Judge Thomas: He has testified that he has gone 
to eighteen or twenty families and found them re­

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiffs—Direct



97

luctant to apply. What they said to him would be 
hearsay. Re-phrase the question, please.

Mr. Bell: Mr. Bolton, did you find, in going to 
these homes, and talking to these parents that there 
were certain—

Mr. Wood: Objection to leading the witness.
Judge Thomas: Let him finish the question.
Mr. Bell: Did you find that you had to refute 

certain specific information about their rights to go 
to desegregated schools, and, if you did find that, 
would you tell the Court what it was, what points 
you had to explain?

A. I did. I found that I had to explain to the people that 
they had a right to send their child to the nearest school, 
that it was not fair for us to have to send our children 
a seventeen mile distance, and that they had nothing to 
be afraid of, most of them were afraid because of job 
reasons or afraid that their children might be harmed in 
those schools, and I tried to impress upon them that they 
were within their constitutional rights, that they could 
send their children to these schools, because it was my 
opinion that the white schools were better schools and they 
could get a better education, the atmosphere was so far 
better, they were better schools.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Based on your experience with 
this and your efforts, let me ask you how much success 
did you have? Based on the people you talked to, how 
many people, to your knowledge, made application? A. To 
my knowledge, I believe four. I just could not say off 
hand. I believe four or five made application.

Q. Did you find that people generally were not satisfied 
with the schools where their children were attending? A.

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiffs—Direct



98'

Yes, I found that they were generally not satisfied. They 
were displeased at the distance. They did not feel that 
their children should have to go this distance when we 
had nearer schools for our children to go to, and the only 
thing that hindered most of them was fear of their jobs 
and fear that their children might be harmed.

Q. Based also on your experience with parents and your 
own experience in making application, what would be 
your suggestion, on this thing, as to methods, if it were 
in your power to make a suggestion, that the plan would 
be easier for you to sell to Negro parents, if you were able 
to make any changes in the plan!

Mr. Wood: May it please the Court, we are in­
terested in what this witness has to say about run­
ning the school system, but I doubt the admissibility 
of his thoughts on the proper ways of handling 
the school system of the size of this one. I object.

Judge Thomas: Sustained.
Mr. Bell: Exception. This man is not a person 

off the street. He is one of the people basically 
involved, and, furthermore, asking an opinion on 
this point—it can only be a question of the weight— 
I don’t think there is a jury here to be swayed—I 
think that the question is not completely inadmis­
sible by any means. There may be some doubt as to 
its phrasing.

Judge Thomas: The question is what would be his 
suggestion, as to how it would be easier for him 
to get the idea over to other parents. Is that the 
question!

Mr. Bell: That is right.
Judge Thomas: I will let him answer. Go ahead.
Mr. Wood: Exception.

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiffs—Direct



99

A. You mean getting the idea over to other parents as 
to getting their children to apply to white schools. Since 
most of the parents have jobs that they are afraid about 
losing, I think if the school board would assign these 
children to those schools without just the parents having 
to go back to apply and having to see it in the newspaper, 
where you file for your child to go to this school or that 
school, the pressure would be off the parents. I think 
the main thing really is the parents are afraid and that 
the school board should assign these children to the 
nearest school, in other words, desegregate the schools.

Q. At this point, let me ask you whether or not you are 
interested in getting a desegregated education for your 
daughter? A. Yes, I am.

Cross Examination by Mr. Wood:

Q. Your solution is required integration?

Mr. Bell Objection.
Witness: Bequired? What do you mean?
Mr. Wood: You say your solution is just to assign 

the children to the schools, you would take the pres­
sure off the parents, with the result that the Board 
by assignment would require integration of the 
schools ?

A. I am saying that the board should assign the children 
to desegregated schools.

Q. (Mr. Wood continuing) In other words, give the 
parents no voice, just assign a child to a school and that 
is where he goes? A. Yes.

Q. There is a brand new high school right behind your 
house. About how much would you measure that in dis­

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiff—Cross



100

tance, a block? A. Oh, it would be, I would say, about 
three hundred yards, I believe.

Q. About three hundred yards? A. Yes.
Q. About how far is Davidson School from your house? 

A. Approximately six miles.
Q. Do you know of any white children who have been 

permitted to transfer from anywhere in the general vicinity 
of where you live to Davidson? A. No, I don’t.

Q. All right, now, Avhen you applied to send your 
daughter to Baker, when she was in the St. Elmo School, 
that was before the suit was filed and before any plan was 
put forth by the school board for desegregation, is that 
correct? A. State that again.

Q. Now, you applied for your child to go to Baker, when 
she was in attendance at St. Elmo School, that Avas before 
this suit was filed and before any plan had been put for­
ward for the desegregation of schools, is not that correct? 
A. That is correct.

Q. And at that time she was in the tenth grade? A. I 
believe so.

Q. This year she is in the eleventh grade? A. That 
is right.

Q. Now, do you know whether the procedure for re­
questing transfers is different in the case of Negro parents 
than it is in the case of white parents? A. I do not know 
that.

Q. You don’t know? A. No.
Q. It could be well be the same? A. Yes.
Q. Do you know the volume of the requests that were 

made in this April 1st to 15th period this past year for 
transfers? A. I do not know.

Q. Of following this same procedure? A. I do not know.

Algea Bolton—for Plaintiff—Cross



101

Q. Are you aware that often times there is a dispute 
between father and mother as to where a child is to go to 
school? A. I am not aware of that.

Q. Sometimes they disagree, do you understand that 
that is the reason for requiring both parents to sign? A. 
Well, I don’t understand that.

Q. I see. You did file an application for 1964-1965 for 
Davidson, and it was returned, and was not a notation 
on it that your child did not reside within the district 
where children went to Davidson School? A. That is it.

Q. That is it? A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Wood: That is all.
Mr. Bell: No further questions.
Judge Thomas: Thank you very much. You may 

step down. Call your next witness.

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct

J oh n  L . L eF lore, b e in g  first sw orn  to speak the truth, 
the w hole truth, and n oth ing  but the truth, testified as 
fo l lo w s :

Direct Examination by Mr. Bell-.

Q. State your name and your residence, please? A. My 
name is John L. LeFlore. I reside at 1504 Chatague 
Avenue.

Q. Is that in Mobile? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you lived in Mobile, Mr. LeEfiore? 

A. All my life.
Q. Is that a considerable period of time? A. All thirty- 

nine years or more.
Q. Will you indicate whether or not you are active in 

civil rights work, and tell us what is the nature of that



102

work, summarize it! A. Yes, I have been active in civil 
rights work, first with the N A A C P, now with the Citi­
zens Committee, Alabama Conference for Social Justice. 
We have been interested primarily in the problems affect­
ing people, particularly, at this time, the Negro people, 
in the area, and with regard to segregation, job discrimina­
tion, lack of voter registration rights, and what we regard 
as inequality in our education system.

Q. How long have you been involved in that kind of 
work, just roughly? A. Roughly, about thirty-five years.

Q. This conference thing you are working with, are you 
an officer or otherwise? A. Well, I am director of case 
work for the Citizens Committee and also for the Alabama 
Conference for Social Justice. I am regarded as consultant 
for the Non Partisan Voters League, with regard to its 
civil rights work.

Q. Now, have you and this organization been at all in­
volved in the effort to desegregate the public schools in 
Mobile, and, if so, indicate generally the nature of this 
involvement? A. Well, we, I should say, we sponsor public 
school desegregation, after making certain observations 
of what we thought could be regarded as inequality in 
education, and firmly believe that a segregated society 
is not the best for America or for Alabama or for Mobile. 
We became quite interested in this particular question, 
and, after finding out there was considerable discontent 
among many Negro families on this particular question, 
we decided we would intervene on behalf of those families, 
on behalf of the Negro people.

Q. Which form did your intervening on behalf of Negro 
parents take? A. First, after consultation in determining 
the extent of discontent, we assured them that there were 
legal avenues which we felt would help them rectify the

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct



103

particular problem in conformity with the Supreme Court 
decision of 1954 of Brown vs. School Board, and many 
of the parents consented at that time to sign a petition. 
First, we submitted a letter to the school board—this was 
in January 1961—in which we asked the school board to 
consider the question of desegregation of the public 
schools. It was on January 28th, 1961.

Q. Just summarize just quickly what other efforts of 
that type were made? A. The subsequent step was that 
we filed a petition on November 13th, 1962, bearing the 
signatures of twenty-nine parents, asking for desegrega­
tion of the public schools, in conformity with the Supreme 
Court decisions of 1954, 1955 and 1956.

Q. Did you prepare that petition? A. Yes, we prepared 
that petition. The Supreme Court decisions were in 1954, 
1955 and 1958.

Q. I ask you whether or not you prepared that petition? 
A. Yes.

Q. Who got the signatures on it? A. I did, sir.
Q. How did you do that? A. Well, I got in my car 

and went to the various homes and talked to the people 
and talked to one or two public meetings after that when 
we made the initial contacts.

Q. Now, was there only one petition or series of peti­
tions? A. No, just one.

Q. What kind of response did you receive from the 
school board? A. Well, at the time I visited the school 
board—

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Mr. Wood: All this was in evidence in the hear­
ing on the merits of the case. We think that this 
is repetition, and we would like to object to it at 
this time.



104

Judge Thomas: I think a great deal of it is 
repetitious.

Mr. Bell: Yes, sir, I just want a little background 
of this man’s involvement.

Judge Thomas: Let’s don’t be too repetitious. 
Go ahead.

Mr. Bell: All right. Now, after the suit was filed, 
Mr. LeFlore and after—let me ask you this one other 
question: In addition to petitions, the record would 
indicate that there were parents who actually made 
application in January 1962 to various schools, ask­
ing that their children be assigned to these white 
schools, did you have any part to play in that!

A. Yes, sir.
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) What part was that! A. Well, 

the parents—at the request of the parents, form letters 
were drawn up in our office and some of them were signed 
up there by parents. Other parents took them home to 
sign them.

Q. Do you recall, just roughly, how many applications 
were signed to the white schools that your office helped 
to prepare and file! A. It seems to me twenty-nine. I am 
not quite certain, but I think there were twenty-nine.

Q. Now, will you tell us during what period of 1963 
those were sent! A. I think they were sent during the 
s n m m o r .  I am not quite certain. I think they were. Let 
me see—I think it was in July 1963.

Q. I think the record in the case indicates that finally 
two Negroes were enrolled in the white schools as a re­
sult of those applications. Would you, as leader of the 
group that was helping to sponsor the suit and the applica­
tions, summarize the events of the first year as to those

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct



105

who had been enrolled in the white schools? A. We filed 
during the summer, as an example, I think there were 
on this petition asking for desegregation of the schools 
twenty-nine signers or signatures. It appears that after 
this appeared in the newspapers that many of the colored 
people—shall I say—they became apprehensive about the 
exposing of their names in the papers and feared that it 
•would lead to job dismissal or violence at their homes or 
they projected some other kind of—

Q. Let me interrupt right there. I would like to come 
right to the question of the two pupils who wmre enrolled. 
What took place? What contact did you have with those 
pupils? I would like for you to summarize the experience 
that they had in the desegregated school during 1963-1964 
school year. A. We understand that the girl—

Mr. Wood: Just a moment. We object to what 
he understands.

Judge Thomas: Sustained.
Mr. Bell: Exception.

A. May I say this. We had a very close relationship with 
the family. It was our moral responsibility to keep in 
touch—in daily contact with the families, for the purpose 
of ascertaining that everything was working smoothly.

Mr. Wood: When you are speaking in the plural, 
I want to know whether that is a term meaning you 
or whom?

A. Thank you, Mr. Wood. I should use the personal pro­
noun.

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Mr. Wood: If it is you, that is all right.
Mr. Bell: If you could use the personal pronoun.



106

A. I will try to confine it to the personal pronoun. I was 
in contact with the families daily through our office, and 
the girl, from what we were able to learn, had a few 
difficulties, but the boy was subjected to harrassments and 
I think on several occasions he was tripped, as you call it, 
somebody put his leg out, and he was thrown to the floor.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Where did that happen! A. 
At Murphy High School.

Q. Which school were both students assigned to! A. 
Murphy. We should like to say that the faculty, as far 
as we were able to learn, did everything to prevent that 
from happening and to preclude such acts, and they did 
everything that they might have done, but it still happened. 
It was interesting to know that on the acceptance of those 
Negro students there, there were some disturbances 
created by a group of white students—we understand that 
the Citizens Council—we have no proof of that—was re­
sponsible, and only the prompt action of the school board 
and the faculty at Murphy and the police department 
probably prevented that thing from getting out of hand.

Q. Well, could you summarize and indicate whether or 
not this was only at the outset of the school year or did 
it last all during the year! Summarize what happened. 
A. It would last throughout the year. The situation of 
the children was such that the families were afraid to send 
them by bus to the school. It was always necessary to 
send them by car or by taxi.

Q. Did you ever participate in this service! A. I did. 
I carried them out in my car whenever I could, not by 
taxi.

Q. Now, tell us what preparations and what action you 
took, or your group took, in preparation for the second 
year of desegregation, for the 1964-1965 school year!

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct



107

A. It so happened that in the period preceding the 1964- 
1965 school year, the school board had suggested, and 
I think it had been approved, that the transfer period 
would be moved up from April 1st to April 15th. I be­
lieve, in the preceding school year, as an example—

Q. Was this for any particular grade? A. I think that 
was for all of the grades, I believe. Now, I know, insofar 
as the plan was concerned, for the first year, it was the 
twelfth grade, the second year it was the eleventh grade, 
but I think that an appeal was taken and the Appellate 
Court extended the desegregation to include two more 
grades, the first and tenth grades.

Q. What years would be included in the transfer period 
in April? A. The eleventh and twelfth grades.

Q. What did you do about that? A. Well, now, the 
truth is that most of the children and their parents’ minds 
were on completing the current school year and they were 
not thinking too strongly about the subsequent school 
year. Because of certain instances of violence that had 
occurred, we did not find as many Negro children willing 
to transfer at that particular time as we did in the pre­
vious year. I do recall very vividly any number who said 
they were afraid to go to mixed schools.

Q. Was there a later transfer period offered? A. A 
later transfer period was granted, I think, after the Ap­
pellate Court ruled to incorporate the first and tenth 
grades—to integrate the first and tenth grades—but that 
was strictly for the tenth grade.

Q. What period was that? A. That was in August.
Q. About how long a period was that, do you know? 

A. I think seven days.
Q. What did you do during that time ? A. During that 

time, we did our utmost to try to get Negro parents and

.John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct



108

their children to consider going to mixed schools. For 
example, the Negro children who lived in the Dauphin 
Island Park area had to go quite a distance to the William­
son School. Am I talking too rapidly?

Q. Maybe a little too fast for the reporter. A. I am 
sorry. I did not know I was that loquacious.

Q. Go ahead. A. It would have been more to their 
convenience to have been able to attend one of the three 
white schools in that area, four white schools, three ele­
mentary schools and one high school. We found, upon 
making investigation and upon making a survey, those 
Negro children were compelled to go seven or eight miles 
to attend the Negro school. Many of the Negro parents 
were afraid to send their children to the nearby schools— 
the orders of the Court were for their children to go to 
the nearest school, but this sort of thing was counter­
manded by the fact that they had fear of losing their 
.jobs.

Q. Would this be after application was made or before 
you got to that stage? A. That was before application 
was filed.

Q. Now, did you have any success in getting anybody 
to make any application at all? A. Yes, I had success in 
that area and in some other areas. One lady, whose hus­
band is an airman at the Brooldey Field Air Force Base, 
sent her child—her first grade child—to Woodcock. There 
were four people, I think there were four instances of 
persons who attempted to transfer in that area to schools— 
I think their requests were turned down because the school 
board indicated—in two instances, they said the white 
school was over crowded. However, it was—

Q. Let me interrupt you and get you back on the track, 
and try to slow down just a bit so the reporter can get it.

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct



109

You said you made a maximum effort to get applications 
and you got some. Would you tell us what you did to 
get those, who made the applications, and what assistance 
you provided to them, if any? A. We found that there 
was a growing interest on the part of the Negroes for 
desegregation, although it was not manifested in the 
number we were able to get to attend schools other than 
Negro schools, because, as we pointed out, apparently 
there was a fear that developed on the part of one parent 
or another or upon the part of the student, which served 
as a handicap to the desegregation effort. We used this 
Dauphin Island Parkway area as an example, because, 
in that area, there were three white elementary schools 
and no Negro elementary schools. There is also a white 
high school in that area and Negro children were compelled 
to go to the school in Maysville, a distance of approxi­
mately six to eight miles away. In one particular instance, 
two Negro children in the elementary grades filed request 
for transfer to the Williamson School.

Q. Do you know anything about how they were able to 
get their application form? Did you explain anything 
of that nature to them? A. The first year we helped 
them to prepare the form. The second year, the school 
board had a standard form. We were rather shocked at 
the difficulties that parents had to experience in order to 
complete the form and to return it to the school board. 
As an example, we have a lady that lives in Hillsdale 
Heights, which is approximately ten miles from the school 
board office. She wanted her son to attend Murphy or 
Davidson High School, but it was necessary, in that in­
stance, for her to go to town and get the form, take it 
home and get her husband to sign it, and have it returned 
to the school board, not by mail, but in person.

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct



110

Q. Do you have personal knowledge of this! A. Yes, 
Mr. Algea Bolton, who lived in Hillsdale Heights, brought 
the lady in ten miles to get the form, and he carried her 
back home, another ten miles, making twenty miles, to 
get her husband’s signature, and Mr. Bolton made an­
other trip of ten miles, making thirty miles, and I had 
to make a trip to Hillsdale Heights and take her back, 
making twenty miles, and I had to return home, which 
was ten miles, and that was thirty miles, so that was sixty 
miles between Mr. Bolton and myself to have one form 
completely filled out and then returned to the school board.

Q. Do you recall whether that transfer application was 
granted or denied! A. I think it was one that was denied 
on the ground that technically it was too late. I think 
that was it.

Q. Do you recall how many for school year 1964-1965 
were granted and how many were denied! A. Seven were 
granted and I think nine were denied. There was a total 
of sixteen.

Q. Did you take any further action on behalf of those 
parents whose transfer requests were denied! A. Yes, 
we asked the school board to re-consider them.

Q. How did you do that! A. By letter. That was re­
jected. The parents asked the school board to reconsider 
the requests.

Q. Did you help the parents! A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was the nature of the letters, generally! A. 

They respectfully asked the school board to reconsider 
its decision, with regard to it or something of that sort.

Q. Did you get any response from the school board! 
A. I am not quite certain whether they replied. I think 
they indicated to the parents that it was too late for any 
further consideration.

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct



I l l

Q, Have you kept in close contact with the students this 
year as you testified you did last year! A. Yes, sir.

Q. What has the situation been? A. Well, we were 
somewhat surprised that at Murphy where we have three 
girls this time—the girl was not bothered before—some 
of those children, probably all of them have made some 
forms of taunts, harassments, and, in several instances, 
violence. I recall that I put the three out one morning- 
on Carlen Street, and, before they reached the school build­
ing, about three hundred fifty feet away, one of the girls 
had been struck in the head. It was no fault, we empha­
size on the part of the faculty. The school authorities 
certainly did everything they could to provide adequate 
protective methods, but, like the American situation in 
South Viet Nam, it was not quite enough. On another 
occasion, one of the girls had some milk thrown on her, 
but a white man did everything he could to protect her, 
but one of the students that perpetrated this incident got 
by with it all right.

Q. Let me ask you, Mr. LeFlore, in closing, you inti­
mated you have lived in Mobile for at least thirty some 
odd years? A. I have lived in Mobile all my life, about 
fifty some odd years.

Q. Would you describe the neighborhood patterns in 
Mobile and indicate whether or not they have a racial 
character or whether or not they are integrated, just what 
the situation is? A. Well, for a number of years, there 
were neighborhoods which had integrated patterns a 
number of years ago, but, with the growing population 
we have today, perhaps the shifting sentiment, the neigh­
borhoods have become quite strongly segregated, in fact, 
almost all of them.

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Direct



112

Q. How does that work out? Are you able to tell? A. 
Well, in the area where I live, when I moved out there, 
there were only four Negroes. Now, the entire subdivision 
is composed of Negroes, and the same thing generally 
applies everywhere now. Now, there seems to be a very 
definite pattern to confine the Negroes to certain areas 
and usually housing apartments, public housing apart­
ments, about right in the center of those areas and so are 
the schools.

Q. You are indicating a little bit about some of the prob­
lems the people are having this year being similar to 
those they had last year. Is there anything else you have 
gotten from your contacts with the pupils attending de­
segregated schools about the situation? A. No, that has 
been primarily the problem, as far as neighborhoods are 
concerned. We understand they are treated like other 
students. They have no problem in that area.

Q. My question then is, aside from this problem, are 
there other problems they are experiencing, as far as you 
know? A. Perhaps your question is so broad.

Q. You indicated some of the difficulties they were 
having. You said a girl had gotten hit with a rock, and 
some others were pointed out. I wanted to know if this 
was the totality of their experience? A. No, the children 
very strongly feel that the integrated atmosphere has 
helped them materially.

Q. Have any withdrawn this year? A. No, none have 
withdrawn.

Cross Examination by Mr. Wood:

Q. Mr. LeFlore, you make no charge or suggestion that 
the school board or the teachers or the administrative 
personnel at the schools have been neglectful of their

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Cross



113

duties in relation to the Negro children who are in attend­
ance at predominantly white schools? A. As far as we 
have been able to ascertain, that is correct.

Q. As a matter of fact, there seems to be a genuine 
effort to see to their welfare? A. I think the informa­
tion we have been able to gather from the students, there 
has been impartiality reflected.

Q. Now, as a matter of fact, the City of Mobile has white 
and Negro citizens living in all parts of the entire city, 
isn’t that correct? A. The results of our surveys, sir, do 
not indicate that there is as much neighborhood mixing 
today as we had twenty to thirty years ago. There is al­
most none now.

Q. It would be difficult to pick a nine or twelve block 
area anywhere in the city that you would not find resi­
dences of both races in that area, would that be correct? 
A. I would beg to disagree.

Q. You would not agree with that statement? A. No.
Q. Now, the board, in locating the schools, has to keep 

the people in mind, does it not? A. Yes, sir.
Q. It must locate the schools where the people are, isn’t 

that correct? A. Well, I would say that generally so I 
would feel that should be a consideration.

Q. That is sound, on the face of it, anyway? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. If you have a large concentration of people, that is 
where a school ought to go, rather than where it is sparsely 
settled, would that be sound, generally? A. It would 
perhaps be practicable.

Q. I believe that you said that the two Negro students 
who were at Murphy last year, not the current year, but. 
last year, the girl was seemingly well received and that 
the boy had some difficulties, that he was tripped from

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Cross



114

time to time, and that sort of thing. That goes on be­
tween boys of the same race, in high schools! Have you 
never been tripped in a school? A. I would certainly agree 
with you that it does go on, but where this racial angle is 
involved, sir, it tends to animate the emotions more, and 
I don’t think that in a good citizen—and certainly I know 
that everybody is interested in good racial relations—who 
has the best interest of his community at heart, that situa­
tion should be allowed where a white boy trips a Negro 
boy—that brings about a different psychological effect 
than it would if it were to involve people of the same 
race.

Q. It takes on a different significance? A. Yes, sir. In 
this instance, referring to the Hobby boy, according to 
him, it was being done because he was a Negro.

Q. Do you know of any occasions when any punishment 
was meted out because of any such incident? A. Yes, we 
have nothing but praise for members of the faculty of 
Murphy High School and the way they attempted to handle 
such difficulties.

Q. Now, is it not a fact, Mr. LeFlore, that the school 
board has for many years had a standard transfer form 
that it employed in transfer requests? A. That is one 
angle of the school board work that I would be reluctant 
to answer.

Q. You don’t happen to know? A. No.
Q. You don’t charge that they have put in a standard 

form since this case has been pending? A. No, the only 
thing that we do charge is that the transfer period for 
the 1964-1965 school year was moved up to April 1st to 
the 15th, I think, wherein the previous year, I understand, 
it had been during the summer.

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Cross



115

Q. But do you know whether or not there has been, as 
long as you can remember, a period prior to the opening 
of the school year, during which transfer requests would 
be received? A. No, sir, I am not in position to give a 
truthful answer on that.

Q. You don’t know? A. No, sir.
Q. Let’s go back a moment to this ten mile trip we have 

heard so much about here. Do those parents work or live 
in Hillsdale Heights, these two that you have talked about? 
A. I imagine our records will show where the parents 
are employed? A. I am not asking for specific employ­
ment. Many of the parents work at Brookley Air Force 
Base? A. Yes.

Q. There are good roads going back and forth between 
Brookley Air Force Base and Hillsdale Heights! A. Yes, 
sir, I would unhesitatingly admit that.

Q. They drive ten or more miles each way to work? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. A ten mile drive is not very burdensome in these 
days of modern transportation, is it? A. However, I 
would say that since the transfer could have been handled 
more expeditiously, that it appeared to have been impos­
ing a hardship, the manner in which the school board was 
handling the transfer requests, that was imposing a par­
ticular hardship on those parents. Sixty miles is far too 
far, sir, to travel for the purpose of submitting one trans­
fer form, when perhaps had the school board permitted 
it to be submitted through mail, or some other method, 
as working through the various schools, it could have been 
facilitated without any serious disadvantage.

Q. You know none of the reasons why the school board 
requires the signatures of both parents on a transfer re­
quest, do you? A. Oh, yes, I can surmise, I guess there

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Cross



116

are instances where one parent may agree to something 
and the other parent may disagree. I cannot see why it 
should not be mailed in.

Q. Do you see any purpose behind not permitting pupils 
or anybody else to pick up these transfer forms without 
any control? A. Some mischief could develop probably. 
That is a possibility. The same thing is true about public 
welfare. Some people abuse it or misuse it, or any effort 
that we try to use to help the people.

Q. So, primarily, your thought is that they could be 
mailed back, is that your thought? A. Yes, sir.

Q. That is your primary objection to the method there? 
A. Well, it could—we feel that those forms could be made 
available to pupils, to students who desire transfers, at 
the schools they may be currently attending. The principal 
could call the school board, or they could devise some 
other means which would make it less difficult to the 
parents or the children who desire to transfer.

Q. In other words, the burden should be shifted to some­
one else rather than the parent? A. Not necessarily so, 
but a part of the hardship should be mitigated, sir.

Q. Now, you don’t know whether or not the same forms 
and the same procedures were followed with respect to 
white students and Negro students? A. No, sir, I could 
not answer that.

Q. You see no reason for Negro students to receive 
preferred treatment, do you? A. No, sir, but, at the same 
time, I don’t think it should be made difficult for white 
or Negro students. I have the same interest in one as I 
have in the other. They are all human beings.

Q. So long as they are treated the same? A. If we 
could just mitigate that difficulty.

Q. Make it a little easier on the parents? A. Yes, sir.

John L. LeFlore-—for Plaintiffs—Cross



117

Q. Just one other thing. I believe you said that some­
one was turned down, because you thought it was tech­
nically too late. Too late is too late, if the period is set and 
if it is not filed within that period, is it not? A. I imagine 
that is a choice of terminology.

Q. If it is not filed within the period set for requesting 
transfers, that is what you mean? A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Wood: That is all.

Redirect Examination by Mr. Bell-.

Q. On this business of applications being too late, Mr. 
LeFlore, I believe your testimony indicated—tell me 
whether this is true or not—was there a period in April 
at which eleventh and twelfth grade transfers were ac­
cepted? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Then, you indicated transfers for the eleventh and 
twelfth grades were submitted later in the summer when 
the board was accepting transfers for the first and tenth 
grades? A. That is right.

Q. Those transfers were then turned down as too late, 
is that what you meant? A. Yes, sir.

Q. You were asked to give your opinion on correcting 
some of the hardships or minimizing some of the hard­
ships on parents making the trip back and forth. Would 
you also indicate, based on your experience, working on 
this problem, the effect on the program of school de-segre­
gation of the school board’s actually making assignments 
on a non racial basis to the nearest school? A. Now, I 
believe that is rather paradoxically carried out. As an 
example, Negro children, who live in the area of Creola, 
Axis and Pennsylvania, who go to high school, are com­
pelled to pass the white high school at Satsuma and go

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



118

a distance of approximately ten miles over to the Negro 
High School at Plateau, to the Mobile County Training 
School. We have also observed that the Negro children 
who live in the area of Vigor go to the Mobile County 
Training School by bus. We have pointed out about the 
Hillsdale Heights situation. Should we say they have 
made available to them a high school that is near them— 
of course, it is a Negro high school, and there are many 
Negroes who have misgivings about it.

Q. Were the Negroes assigned to the nearest high 
school, prior to the opening of the Hillsdale Heights High 
School? A. They had to go seventeen miles to St. Elmo— 
that is thirty-four miles both ways.

Q. Do you know if there were white high schools nearer? 
A. Yes, sir, Davidson.

Q. But now they are being assigned to the nearest 
school? A. Yes, sir, of course, that is a Negro school. 
May I also add that there are some Negro children, who 
live near Sidney Phillips School in Crichton, who are 
compelled to go a greater distance around to the Negro 
school, a junior high school, the Booker T. Washington 
Junior High School.

Q. I want you to directly answer this question: What 
is the effect, based on your experience, and your opinion, 
what effect would there be if the school board were to 
assign all students to the nearest school, regardless 
whether that was a school serving Negroes or whites? 
A. Are you asking me?

Q. I am asking as to your opinion, based on your ex­
perience, as to whether that would be a worth while method 
of taking the burden off the parents?

Mr. Wood: Objection to the expression of his 
opinion. Mr. LeFlore has not been shown to be

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



119

qualified as an expert in the administration of 
schools. We object to his opinion on this particular 
point.

Judge Thomas: I realize that, but I will let him 
answer the question.

Mr. W ood: Exception.

A. I rather think, that with all things being equal, that 
the school—I am looking at the record of Joyce Johnson 
here—there were certain advantages in Music at Murphy 
that, according to the information made available to us 
by her, were not or could not be received at Central High 
School at that time.

Judge Thomas: That is not the question asked 
you. Ask him the question.

Mr. Bell: Based on your experience—on just one 
or two occasions you have been telling us about 
the problems of driving back and forth being 
burdensome for the parents, and you are saying 
that the burden is a hardship on the Negro parents 
to have to go through all this procedure, based on 
your experience, is it your opinion, do you feel 
that this problem could best be settled if the school 
board assigned everybody on a non racial basis?

A. Yes, I was a little confused about the type of question. 
I should think it would be better for all concerned.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Do you have any additional 
feelings and any different feelings in addition to those 
you have already indicated? A. Yes, I have. I have enu­
merated several. There are family reasons to be cosidered. 
Certainly, everybody wants his child to be nearer home

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



120

or as near home as possible. There are other factors. 
Many parents work out, if the child is near home, there 
is the matter of nursery service or something in the same 
neighborhood where the school is located.

Mr. Bell: No further questions.

Recross Examination by Mr. Wood:

Q. Mr. LeFlore, do you advocate then a system of en­
forced integration as your solution to the problem of 
parents making transfer requests!

Mr. Bell: 1 think a little further expression as 
enforced—

Air. Wood: You say assign pupils arbitrarily and 
rigidly to some particular school, that is the system 
you would advocate, is that correct!

A. No, the system I do advocate, sir, would be one of 
equal consideration for all students, irrespective of race, 
color or creed, insofar as the neighborhood school is con­
cerned.

Q. (Mr. Wood continuing) You do not object to the 
neighborhood school concept? A. No, sir.

Q. If those neighborhood schools are open to both races, 
without discrimination, in an orderly fashion, would that 
solve the problem., as far as you are concerned? A. I 
think it would, as far as the Negro pupils are concerned.

Q. Now, you don’t know anything about whether any 
requests for transfers by white children made after the 
April 1st to 15th transfer period were turned down, be­
cause they were late? A. No, sir, I do not.

Q. You do not? A. No, sir.

John L. LeFlore—for Plaintiffs—Recross



121

Rosetta Gamble—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

Mr. Wood: That is all.
Judge Thomas: Step down, will you, please.

Thank you. Call your next witness.

R o s e t t a  G a m b l e , being first sworn to speak the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, testified as 
follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. State your name, please? A. Rosetta Gamble.
Q. Where do you live? A. 505 South Lawrence.
Q. Where is that? A. Down on the bay.
Q. Is that in the City of Mobile? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are you a student? A. Yes, I am a student.
Q. What grade are you in? A. I am a senior.
Q. What school? A. Murphy High School.
Q. How did you happen to be enrolled in Murphy High 

School? A. Well, I had heard about—I knew some of 
the kids that were attending Murphy.

Q. Are you a Negro? A. Yes, I am a Negro. I talked 
with some of them. I had heard about these organizations. 
I was interested in my rights, so I was interested in going 
to Murphy. I became very interested in going to Murphy. 
I just wanted to go to Murphy, just for my rights.

Q. Do you know how your application was filed, in order 
to get assigned to Murphy? A. No, I don’t.

Q. Was this done by your family, or do you know? A. 
It was done by my family.

Q. Where had you been attending school before this year? 
A. Williamson High School.

Q. Was that a Negro school? A. Yes, sir.
Q. The schools that you have attended from grade one



are in Mobile? A. In grade one, I attended Council Ele­
mentary School.

Q. Is that a Negro or white school? A. Negro school.
Q. Where did you go to Junior High School? A. Emer­

son Junior High School.
Q. Is that a Negro or a white school? A. Negro school.
Q. Is it correct to conclude that this year is the first time 

you have ever gone to a white school? A. It is correct,
Q. Miss Gamble, will you tell the Court, speaking loud 

enough so I can hear over here, your experiences this 
far in going to Murphy High School, telling us about the 
difficulties and contact with the students and teachers? 
Just summarize your experiences. A. Well, I don’t quite 
understand what you want me to say.

Q. Well, why don’t you start off by telling us how you 
have been received at Murphy High School? A. Well, this 
far I have been in some contact—I have come in contact 
with some of the pupils fairly well—the teachers seemed 
to receive us fairly well. The principal was wonderful. 
He was very nice. Naturally, some of the students were 
harsh and did unpleasant things or they would stop doing 
whatever they were doing when we passed by and then 
continue it after we went by—some of the students would 
play pranks, throw things—

Q. What is the nature of some of those pranks? What 
did the students actually do? A. You walk out the door' 
and some will slam the door on your back, some will call 
you all sorts of names—you go in the cafeteria and every­
body will get up from the table and leave—

Q. Does this happen even now? A. Yes, it happens 
now.

Q. As to the name calling or throwing things, did you 
report those to your teacher or your principal? A. Yes, 
we reported it to the principal.

Rosetta Gamble—for Plaintiffs—Direct



123

Q. Do you know whether any action is taken about this? 
A. Well, I don’t know. No, I don’t know.

Q. Do you know whether there has been any disciplining 
of the pupils who persist in calling you names or things 
of that kind? A. No, I don’t know.

Q. How do you go back and forth to school! A. We 
have transportation. Mr. Kyser, who lives near us, carries 
us to school and brings us home.

Q. I take it this is a neighbor? A. Yes, he is not exactly 
a neighbor. He lives near us, but he is not a neighbor.

Q. Why do you have him take you back and forth to 
school? A. Well, that is the only means of transporta­
tion we have there.

Q. Is there public transportation available? A. Buses, 
yes.

Q. Why don’t you ride the bus? A. Well, I don’t know 
why.

Q. Can you compare the courses and the class work in 
Murphy High School you are presently attending with 
the courses and the class work in the school where you 
attended before? A. Well, I would not say that the teach­
ing was any different—the teaching is the same, but I 
would say the equipment is much, much better. The assign­
ments are about the same. We have more tests, more 
studies called for—that is the only difference, in the equip­
ment.

Q. What kind of grades did yon make back in the 
Williamson School? A. Well, I made all A ’s and B’s.

Q. How are you doing now? Have you gotten any re­
port cards? A. Yes, I have all B’s and C’s at Murphy.

Q. Do you conclude that the work is harder or easier? 
A. It is not easier. I would say it is harder. It calls for 
more study, that is all.

Rosetta Gamble—for Plaintiffs—Direct



124

Q. Are you able to conclude whether or not you feel you 
are learning more now than you did last year? A. I feel 
that I have learned much more.

Q. Do you ever have contact with any of your former 
class mates back in the Williamson School? A. Yes, I 
have contact with them.

Q. Have you had occasion to compare the work or the 
progress you are making? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Will you tell us about what comparison you have 
made? A. Yes, I have compared some of my subjects 
with them and I have talked to them about others. I can 
say we are much more advanced in all subjects than they 
are. That is the only difference.

Q. Well, in summarizing the good experiences you have 
had and the bad experiences you have had, will you tell 
us whether or not you are willing to recommend to other 
Negroes that they seek admission to white schools? A. 
Well, I am willing to recommend more Negroes seeking 
admission to any white schools. I think it is a privilege 
and an opportunity.

Q. Do you yourself feel that the situation would have 
been eased any if there had been more Negroes? A. I do 
feel that if there were more Negroes it would have been 
easier, for the main reason it is just three of us up there, 
and, if we are going somewhere, when the three of us are 
along, they don’t usually say anything, when we are to­
gether, but, as soon as we are separated, they will call 
us names, they will do more of that, you know, when 
we are alone.

Q. You indicated that some of the facilities were dif­
ferent in the white and Negro schools. Have you been 
able to observe any differences, and, if so, wdiat are those 
differences in the two? A. I would first begin with physi-

Rosetta Gamble—for Plaintiffs—Direct



125

cal education. At the school I attended prior to Murphy, 
they didn’t even have a gym, just where you go for physi­
cal education, they don’t call it a gym, they didn’t have 
the equipment, they had a place where you played basket 
ball, whereas, in Murphy, we have swimming pools, basket 
ball, archery, bowling, tennis, and just about anything you 
want.

Q. How about academic subjects! Have vou noticed 
anything different in what is available for you to take 
at Murphy as opposed to Williamson? A. Well, just 
about anything you want to take they have it at Murphy.

Q. On your last answer, do you know, as a matter of 
your own knowledge, any courses that are offered in 
Murphy perhaps you have been able to take that were 
not available to you at the Negro school? A. I know 
they offer law, courses in law and doctors, they have 
courses for doctors and nurses.

Q. For those pupils that were planning to go into law 
or medicine? A. That is right.

Q. Do you know of any other differences? Do you re­
call any? A. Eight now I cannot think of any more.

Q. What are vour plans—have you made any plans for 
after high school? A. I plan to attend the University of 
Alabama and major in English and minor—I have not 
exactly decided on my minor yet.

Rosetta Gamble—for Plaintiffs—Cross

Mr. Bell: That is all.

Cross Examination by Mr. Wood:

Q. Miss Gamble, in your experience at Williamson, were 
there bad boys and bad girls over there at Williamson? 
A. Yes, there were some bad, not just everybody was bad. 

Q. I say there were some? A. Yes, sir.



126

Q. There were some bad girls and some bad boys at 
Williamson and some bad boys and bad girls at Murphy? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. You have found this everywhere you have been! 
A. Yes.

Q. You cannot suggest anything wrong with the school 
board or the teachers, because there are some bad boys 
and bad girls in the school? You don’t suggest that, do 
you? A. I cannot suggest that there is anything wrong 
with the teachers, no.

Q. You have been treated fairly by the teachers at 
Murphy? A. I have been treated well.

Q. And the administrative personnel? A. No, but there 
are several teachers that we have not been treated well by.

Q. You mean they have mistreated you or they perhaps 
have not been quite as happy about the situation? A. I 
will say when we go to physical education several teachers 
in there—-not my teacher, but other teachers, I don’t even 
know their names, they will run behind us, they will holler 
and scream, they will walk behind us and then in front 
and try to walk like us and start to laugh and call us all 
sorts of names.

Q. Those are teachers? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you reported that to the principal? A. No, 

I have not reported that to the principal.
Q. Don’t you think you should? A. Yes, I think I should, 

but I don’t even know their names, there are so many 
teachers.

Q. Don’t you expect you would get some attention to 
that, if you did report it to the principal? A. I expect 
we would. I know we would.

Q. Your own teachers do not do anything like that? 
A. No, I have some wonderful teachers.

Rosetta Gamble—for Plaintiffs—Cross



127

Birdie Mae Davis—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Q. You are treated real well! A. Yes, sir.
Q. You have not felt any threat to your safety! A. You 

mean like words being said?
Q. No, I mean physical threat to your safety! A. No, 

I have not.
Q. Now, the only two schools that you have gone to, on 

the high school level, are Williamson and Murphy? A. 
That is right.

Q. You don’t know how from school to school, through­
out the system, courses vary, do you? A. I don’t.

Q. You don’t know what goes into their determination 
in the school staff as to what courses will be offered at 
what schools, do you? A. No, I don’t.

Q. So that these decisions where you don’t know the 
basis for them, you just know what you found at William­
son and what you found at Murphy? A. That is right.

Mr. Wood: That is all.
Judge Thomas: Thank you. You may step down, 

please.

B irdie M ae D avis, being first sworn to speak the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, testified as 
follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. State your full name, and will you try to speak so 
I can hear you. Speak slowly, so the court reporter can 
hear you. Will you state your name and where you live? 
A. My name is Birdie Davis. I live at 451 Augusta Street. 

Q. Are you a student? A. Yes.
Q. In which school are you presently enrolled? A. 

Murphy High School.



Q. In what grade? A. The twelfth.
Q. Where did you go to school last year! A. William­

son High School.
Q. Do you know the process by which you got trans­

ferred or re-assigned from the Williamson School to the 
Murphy School? A. Partially.

Q. Will you explain that, if you have knowledge of it? 
A. Well, I know that at first—I think it was about two 
years ago, when my mother first filed a complaint, and 
then last year, the last school term, she wanted me to go 
and help integrate the school, it was according to grades, 
I know there were a lot of forms that she had to sign 
and a lot of red tape to go through, a lot of applications 
to sign, and she had to keep going down to the school 
board to sign different kinds of papers, in order to get 
me in.

Q. Now, you are, as you indicate, a Plaintiff in this 
case, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. I would like you to tell us a little bit about your 
experience in Murphy High School, the good things that 
have happened to you, good experiences you have had, 
as well as some of the things you may not think were 
as pleasant. A. Well, at first, it was pretty hard, be­
cause the students were very bad; they, I would say, 
hated us at first, but then they started to get a little better 
and they started to recognize us—I  think the worst and 
only bad incident that happened to me, when I first tried 
to eat in the cafeteria with them, I had milk thrown down 
my back and I was tripped up and hit on my back, and 
that was about all.

Q. Now, the question has been raised, you spent all of 
your school education, prior to this year, in all Negro 
schools, is that correct? A. Yes.

Birdie Mae Davis—for Plaintiffs—Direct



129

Q. Tell us whether or not there were bad children in 
those schools! A. Well, we were always taught that—I 
would not say we were taught, but it was considered that 
the white people were superior to us, and we were taught 
to respect our elders, whereas, in a 'white school, you find 
the kids don’t have as much respect for the teachers as in 
the Negro schools. I say that is a great difference.

Q. Well, as to these people who were doing unpleasant 
things to you, the students, did you have any unpleasant 
things to happen to you like this when you were in a 
Negro school? A. No.

Q. My question is was there any distinction between the 
type of bad conduct that you experienced in Murphy and 
perhaps bad conduct that you may have seen in Williamson 
or some of the other Negro schools! A. Well, I think 
that the conduct of some of the students was about the 
same, but you find that the majority of the Negro students, 
their conduct was about one hundred percent better than 
that of the white kids.

Q. You say you did not have the kind of things that 
happened to you at Murphy at the Williamson School? 
A. That is right.

Q. You indicated that at first it was very bad, tell us 
how it has it has been since the early days? A. Well, now, 
it has gotten a little better, but it is still pretty bad. Some 
of the boys will gang around and get in gangs and mock 
us and call us names and try to do things to make us feel 
bad, but that is all; most of the girls are pretty nice. It 
is just the boys.

Q. How do you feel when they do this kind of things? 
Do they succeed in making you feel badly or do they make 
you cry? A. At first, it used to worry me, but now it does 
not, because after I have made a distinction between the

Birdie Mae Davis—for Plaintiffs—Direct



130

two races, I find that at least, in my opinion, that they 
don’t want us there, because they are afraid that we could 
do better, because I had an incident in class where we were 
debating, and I think I was getting the best of the debate, 
and the boy—he got—

Q. Do you recall the nature of the debate at all? A. 
Yes, it was involving Martin Luther King, There was an 
editorial in the paper, and he made a statement which was 
not true, he said that Martin Luther King was a com­
munist, and I asked him on what he based his statement, 
what facts, and he didn’t have any, and so the debate 
continued from that, and our teacher had to stop us, be­
cause there was getting to be a lot of fussing and tur­
moil in the class.

Q. Do you find that after the students get to know you 
pretty well there is less hatred from them than some of 
the students you see passing in the hall? A. Yes, I think 
the kids we come in contact with and get to know in class 
treat us much better than the others we don’t have con­
tact with.

Q. How about the teachers? A. The teachers are very 
nice. At first, about one or two were pretty prejudiced, 
but they became much better.

Q. How did you determine they were pretty prejudiced? 
A. Because our government teacher, whenever she would 
call on someone in class and no one would know and I 
would raise my hand, she would disregard my hand and 
she would go on and answer the question herself, or when 
we would give out current events—we would be talking 
about politics and extremists, and she would take the side 
of the class and we would be the only ones not for ex­
tremism.

Birdie Mae Davis— for Plaintiffs—Direct



131

Q. How about some of the teachers who are not prej­
udiced, that you don’t have difficulties with? How would 
you describe their conduct to us? A. Well, most of them 
are pretty nice, except there is one teacher—she gets with 
some of the kids and she makes fun about us—she gets 
with the kids and talks about us and hollers down the hall 
and all that.

Q. Have you ever reported this to the principal? A. 
Ho.

Q. Have you reported some of those other incidents to 
the principal—the people who would throw things at you? 
A. Some of them.

Q. What would be your reason, if you have any, for 
not reporting any of the teachers whose conduct would not 
be proper? A. I just didn’t think it was necessary, be­
cause once you report someone and it didn’t seem that 
the principal would do anything about it, and I just didn’t 
report it, because it does not worry me as much as it did 
at first.

Q. Tell me whether or not, when you reported some of 
the students for some of those incidents, you noticed 
their reaction, did they tend to stop their conduct or in­
crease it? A. The only boy we actually reported to the 
principal, at first, for about two weeks, he stopped his 
behavior, but then he started back again.

Q. Tell me how do you go back and forth to school, 
Miss Davis? A. We have transportation.

Q. Who provides the transportation? A. Mr. LeFlore.
Q. Why is that? Why don’t you use public transporta­

tion? A. Because they are afraid if we would use the 
bus or something like that that we would be endangering 
ourselves.

Q. Have you had any difficulty or any accidents ŵ hile

Birdie Mae Davis—for Plaintiffs—Direct



132

going back and forth in private cars! A. Once some of 
the boys, at first, at school, they used to follow us in a car, 
and once they bumped into the back of the car.

Q. Did you report that? A. Yes.
Q. Did it stop? A. Yes, it stopped.
Q. How about the situation in your classes, in your 

courses, do you find there is any difference in the way 
you are taught at Murphy as opposed to Negro schools? 
A. I think that at Murphy, due to the fact that they have 
more equipment, I think we learn much more.

Q. What kind of equipment? A. For instance, like we 
need something in class, something extra, they can get it 
faster or quicker than the Negro schools. The teachers 
would have to put in long drawn out orders in Negro 
schools, and it would be months coming, and at Murphy 
we have equipment when we need it, and, therefore, illus­
trations and experiments help us to learn more.

Q. How about the amount of home work and the nature 
of the home work? A. I think at Murphy you study more, 
because they give more tests, whereas at the Negro schools 
you did more paper work and research work.

Q. What kind of grades did you get at Williamson 
School? A. It was B plus over all average.

Q. How does that break down in your eleventh and 
junior year at Williamson? Do you recall what grades 
you had? A. Do you mean by quarters?

Q. Hive us the final quarter? A. In my junior year, 
I had all A ’s and B’s—no, in my senior year, I had all 
A ’s and B’s, in my junior year, I had all A ’s and in this 
semester, I had all B’s.

Q. Your grades are not quite as good at Murphy as 
they were at Williamson, is that correct? A. Yes, sir.

Birdie Mae Davis— for Plaintiffs—Direct



133

Birdie Mae Davis—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Q. In your opinion, are you learning more or less? A. 
I think more.

Q. How about the grades, do you notice any difference 
in the way grades are given at Murphy and the grade 
procedure at Williamson? A. Yes, at Williamson, the 
grade procedure was not as hard as it is at Murphy. You 
can get an A easier at Williamson, I would say, whereas 
at Murphy, it is harder to receive an A.

Q. After you consider all of the good things that hap­
pened and the bad things that happened, would you recom­
mend to other Negro children that they try to go to 
desegregated schools and get a desegregated education? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Why is that? A. I think that the more students that 
attend the school the better it would become. I would also 
advise the students that they would be getting a better 
education than they would at the Negro school, and they 
would also have the use of better facilities.

Q. As a matter of fact, have you taken any action so that 
you could get your feelings about desegregated schools 
across to other Negro children? Have you told them or 
planned to tell others about it? A. I have been talking 
to some children, but now I have an idea to try to go to 
some of the schools and speak on the assembly programs 
to try to encourage juniors and sophomores to attend next 
year.

Q. Do you have any reason or wdiat is your reason for 
feeling that such appearances are necessary to try to go 
into the schools and talk to the students? A. I beg your 
pardon ?

Q. Why do you think that is necessary? A. 1 think it 
is necessary because most of the children I talk to have 
the idea that they are afraid to go, because of the things



134

that they do, but I try to tell them that it is not as hard 
as it really seems, because once you get used to it you can 
take it.

Q. That is your reason? A. Yes.

Mr. Bell: I have no further questions.

Cross Examination by Mr. Wood:

Q. You are in what grade this year? A. Twelfth.
Q. Now, this incident that happened earlier in the year, 

in the cafeteria when the milk was poured on you, has that 
occurred again? A. No, it has not.

Q. Has anything that serious or approaching anything 
that serious occurred since that time in the cafeteria? A. 
Not quite that serious.

Q. Now, let’s talk about bad students a minute. You 
have encountered bullies in both races wherever you have 
been to school, have you not? A. Yes.

Q. And there are some bad actors among Negro pupils 
and among white pupils, are there not? A. Yes, sir.

Q. You really cannot ever hope to reform everybody 
and make them behave themselves, can you? A. No.

Q. So that when you have reported incidents where you 
feel you have been mistreated by students, usually some­
thing has been done about it, has there not? A. Usually.

Q. Now, have you all through school liked every teacher 
you have ever had? A. Not all of them.

Q. Have you felt that all were equal in quality! A. No.
Q. Have you felt that all were equal in fairness? A. No.
Q. Now is this true, both at Murphy and at Williamson 

and where you went to school before Williamson? A. Yes.
Q. And sometimes you felt all through school, on occa­

sion, that the teacher had not just treated you exactly fair­
ly, have you not? A. Yes, sir.

Birdie Mae Davis—for Plaintiffs—Cross



135

Q. This happened before you came to Murphy and after 
you have come to Murphy! A. Yes.

Q. Sometimes you have not learned as much from one 
teacher as you have from another teacher, is that correct? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. That is the case at Murphy now, is it not? Don’t you 
learn more from one teacher than you do from another? 
A. I think I learn about the same from all teachers.

Q. Now, at Williamson and the other schools you have 
been, can you learn more from one teacher than you can 
from another? A. Yes.

Q. Now, tell me, Miss Davis, do you think that the Negro 
children who have been living in what used to be over­
lapping school zones, by race, realize that they can get a 
transfer for certain grades, just as you did! A. They 
realize it and they try to do something about it, but it 
was a dead line placed on it, so it didn’t do any good.

Q. Did they realize that had they applied, like all other 
pupils, at the proper time, that they had the opportunitv 
to transfer? Do you think they knew that? A. I am not 
sure.

Q. Do you think the pupils generally, the Negro pupils, 
I am talking about now, understand that the board has 
abolished the double zones and everything is in one zone? 
A. I don’t think they know that.

Q. Did you know that? A. No.
Q. Do you understand why your application for a trans­

fer was refused on one occasion and granted on another 
occasion? A. Yes.

Q. Was that because the plan had not reached your 
grade the first time you applied? A. Yes, sir.

Q. But it had reached your grade the second time you 
applied, so you were granted the transfer? A. Yes.

Birdie Mae Davis-—for Plaintiffs—Cross



136

Q. Were you given any special test by the school board 
to see if you’re qualified to go to Murphy ? A. No.

Q. None at all? A. No.
Q. Do you know why your application for transfer was 

granted and some others were not? A. I think I do.
Q. What are some of the reasons you think account for 

the others not being granted? A. As I stated before, one 
is the dead line, or some were not filed within the time set.

Q. Do you know of any others? A. One was out of the 
district.

Q. So, your understanding is that when an application 
for transfer was not filed within the time period set for it, 
or when they asked for a transfer outside the district, gen­
erally, those were not granted. Now, you had been in the 
Williamson district, had you not? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Well, that district was also a part of the dual system 
that included Murphy School, did it not? A. Yes, sir.

Q. So, there were people living not far from you, who 
were going, some to Williamson and some to Murphy, so, 
when you requested a transfer from Williamson to Murphy, 
it was granted? A. Yes, sir.

Judge Thomas: Thank you very much. Step
down, please. Call your next witness.

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct

S u p t . Cranpord H. B urns , being first sworn to speak 
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, testi­
fied as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. State your full name and position, please. A. Cran­
ford H. Burns, Superintendent of Public Schools, Mobile 
County.



137

Q. You are the Superintendent of Public Schools of 
Mobile County? A. Yes.

Mr. Bell: At this time, we would like to offer as 
Plaintiff exhibit, I am not sure what the number 
would be, the interrogatories served on the Defen­
dant and the answers supplied by Defendant, and 
have them marked and admitted at this time.

(Thereupon, said interrogatories and answers 
were marked Plaintiff Exhibit 9.)

Mr. Bell: Do you have a copy of the interroga­
tories and answers, Mr. Burns!

A. No, sir.

Mr. O’Connor: The answers of the Defendant, did 
you say?

Mr. Bell: That is correct.
Mr. O’Connor: Do you want to offer the interroga­

tories?
Mr. Bell: Yes, the interrogatories and answers, 

I think all as one exhibit would be sufficient.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Now, just before we go into 
some little discussion on the interrogatories, I would like 
to clear up a few basic points, Mr. Burns. At the present 
time, children in the school system here in Mobile are 
eventually in one way or another assigned to a school, to 
which school they are required to attend, isn’t that correct? 
A. No, sir.

Q. Well, let’s start at the beginning and I will ask you: 
Children are assigned to the school—let me say this—the 
question has been raised as to whether or not certain of

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct,



138

the witnesses this morning were in favor of enforced 
assignment—my question to you—you probably have had 
a little background on it—is it not a matter of fact that 
we have enforced assignment, that the children are assigned 
to a school and they have to attend that school? A. No, 
sir, nor arbitrarily. The Board of School Commissioners 
has certain general controls, with reference to such matters, 
but those policies are not arbitrary, and they are not auto­
matic.

Q. Well, eventually, a child is assigned to one school— 
for example, we had a lot of discussion— A. It depends 
on your definition of assignment. Let’s see what your defi­
nition of assignment is.

Q. Let’s take for example, throughout this trial there has 
been discussion that the children from the Hillsdale Heights 
area, where they lived back in 1963, who were assigned to 
the St. Elmo School, they were not happy about that 
assignment, but that was the school they were required to 
go to, if they were going to go to a school here in Mobile 
County, isn’t that correct? A. The policy in elementary 
schools is a little different from the policy applied to 
secondary schools, including the junior high and senior 
high schools.

Q. Those children were assigned to the St. Elmo School, 
if the Hillsdale school was one of the feeder schools into 
the St. Elmo School, they had to go there ? A. They were 
not assigned as individuals. They were assigned as the 
unit school to the St. Elmo School, which happened to be 
the only school where we had place for students at that 
time.

Q. The same thing is true—you will probably recall some 
of your exhibits including the charts showing the feeder 
system? A. That is correct. We have elementary school

Supt. Cranford //. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



139

districts that feed into junior and senior high school dis­
tricts, but I say again that policy is not arbitrary and al­
ways fixed, without exception. There are exceptions made 
by districts. You often have assignments in that regard, 
because there are special factors, extraordinary circum­
stances in some instances, which help us decide whether or 
not the whole of the elementary district wrould be going 
to a particular school, particular junior or senior high 
school, or whether the whole or a part of the elementary 
district was going to another school.

Q. Having made that decision, when you would not fol­
low the usual procedure, that would be their school—they 
would he required to go there, unless for some individual 
reason they were able to obtain a transfer somewhere else! 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. How does the elementary situation differ from that? 
A. Well, we have elementary district lines now, not dual 
districts, but we have elementary districts in the urban 
part of Mobile County, but we not have such districts in 
the rural part of Mobile County, because we have found 
that to be somewhat impracticable for the parents and 
students, the patrons of the schools in the rural part of 
the county, on the basis of the way bus routes are fixed.

Q. Were not the elementary school zones set forth on 
the map which you supplied for us during the trial, which 
I think was marked as Plaintiff Exhibit 3! A. Yes, sir.

Q. As I recall, one map referred to just the city zones, 
which I believe is Plaintiff Exhibit 2, and one map referred 
to both the city and the school districts within in the county. 
I believe it was this map, isn’t that correct? A. Perhaps 
so, as I recall it. I think this is Plaintiff Exhibit 1.

Q. I believe your testimony was at the earlier hearing 
that your elementary school was represented by its own

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs-—Direct



140

zone, which was here shown by a different color section 
on the map. Do I correctly recall your testimony on that? 
A. You mean by that we had overlapping districts at that 
time ?

Q. No, it was my understanding that the zones for the 
most part did not overlap. A. At the time we were work­
ing on that problem, and I don’t recall the exact status of 
development we were in at that time, but I do recall even 
more distinctly the progress that has been made in that 
connection since that time.

Q. May I ask you this: Are the zones that are reflected 
on Plaintiff Exhibit 1, are they still substantially accurate 
as far as the elementary zones are concerned? A. In many 
cases, yes, in many cases, the district lines will be different, 
in a few days from now, because we have been doing re­
search on this subject since the last time I testified on this 
subject, and recommendations with reference to these mat­
ters will be acted upon by our school board in the very 
near future, perhaps during the month of March, in all 
probability, the second Monday in March, if our plans 
materialize as contemplated.

Q. To make sure I understand how this thing wns set up, 
there was this zone marked Orchard Zone in brown, was 
there only one elementary school in the Orchard zone as 
that indicates? A. There has been some creation of some 
new districts since that time, with which I am not inti­
mately familiar.

Judge Thomas: We are speaking now as of the 
time that map was presented?

A. Yes, the map does reflect the status of our plan at that 
particular time.

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs— Direct



141

Mr. Bell: At that time, each of those different 
colored schemes represented the attendance area of 
one elementary school within the school district?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Now, you may recall that in 

reviewing the map before we discovered that at least one 
Negro elementary school zone had been omitted, the Cleve­
land zone, which you admitted should have been up above 
the Saraland Zone? A. I don’t recall that.

Q. In comparing the map with your answers to the inter­
rogatories, I don’t find a number of other elementary zones. 
I was wondering if you could provide us with some assist­
ance as to what happened with reference to those zones? 
A. What is your question now?

Q. As I understand, there are now elementary Negro 
schools, the Grant School, the Fonvielle School, Cleveland, 
of course, we mentioned, Barney and Adams. Let’s just 
take those for now. I was not able to find any of those 
schools on this map, except right now I see Grant, which 
I had not seen before. How about Fonvielle? Would that 
be this district here? A. Yes.

Q. How about Barney? A. That should be the Prichard 
area.

Sup!,. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Judge Thomas: You may step down there, Doctor 
Burns, you will find a pointer right there.

A. What are you looking for now?
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Barney? A. It should be right 

in there. That might be it. I would like to say this: that in 
a large school system such as ours, district zones mostly 
are handled by the board. I do not know as much on some 
of the details as would be true with Mr. McPherson, who



142

handles those and who prepared those maps. Barney 
School should be in this area. This may be it. I don’t know.

Q. How about the Adams School district! A. The 
Adams district has been created, if I am not mistaken, 
since that time. I believe it must be in this territory here, 
because the Whitley School district has been reduced. We 
have had a tremendous overload with half day sessions for 
a long time, and some transitions are going on there. In 
fact, quite a lot of redistricting has been taking place since 
those maps were prepared.

Q. That is by the school officials ! A. Yes, I don’t recall 
all of the particulars, but we have people on our staff who 
could give complete information in connection with all 
these matters.

Q. Let me ask you this: Was there a Brazia Zone! 
Brazier Zone! A. That is a new school also. It is out 
near Trinity Gardens. We have so many new ones lately. 
I think I am correct on that.

Q. How about the Burroughs School! A. That is near 
Theodore. That would be in the rural part of the county.

Q. Now, the Trinity Gardens School, an elementary 
school, from your answers to the interrogatories that is 
no longer an elementary school! A. It has been made into 
a secondary school, but there is a new elementary district 
created, which is a part of the Trinity Gardens School 
territory overall.

Q. Would you say whether or not the new elementary 
school in this area utilized the same general boundaries as 
the Trinity Gardens School did! A. I don’t recall. I 
doubt it, because, as a rule, the secondary school area 
served is larger than the elementary district, although I 
don’t recall.

Q. I would imagine that the Trinity Gardens area was

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



143

larger, but I wondered if the new elementary school served 
the same general area as Trinity Gardens? A. That is 
correct,

Q. What about the Dixon School? A. The Dixon School 
is between Alba and St. Elmo, in the Southwestern part of 
the county.

Q. Would that be a new school! A. No, it is an older 
school, but we have a new building program in the making 
and some new planning going on there also.

Q. It is not shown on this map? A. I don’t think so. 
I believe this is Dixon School, if I am not mistaken.

Q. There is a Dickson School, which I believe is a white 
school, a school formerly attended by all whites? A. So 
far, we have had no transfers approved to this school.

Q. What about the 16th section, which is just above the 
Dickson School area, what does that represent? A. That 
is a part of the school lands, which is made up of 16 sec­
tions lands throughout the county.

Q. Is there a school presently located on that property? 
A. The University of South Alabama is located on this 
part here, but there is no elementary school and no sec­
ondary school.

Q. How about the Hall School? A. The Hall School is 
in South Mobile.

Q. Would that be a new school? A. Yes, it is a new 
school. This map does not reflect the new district served 
by the Hall School, because it is in fairly close proximity 
to the Williamson School, a secondary school, and at one 
time the elementary grades in this area were served at 
Williamson. Now, we have the new Hall School.

Q. How about the Palmer School ? A. That is in Prich­
ard.

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



144

Q. How about the Thompson School? A. Would it be 
the Thomas School?

Q. I think there is a Thompson School? A. One thing 
that makes this rather difficult is the fact that we have had 
a fairly large number of schools re-named in recent times. 
We also have had in the past two schools with the same 
name, in some instances, and we have been trying to work 
ourselves out of that predicament, and it seems to me that 
we do have a Thompson School, but I cannot quite place it. 
I believe it has been re-named since this map was prepared, 
but Mr. McPherson can answer that question for you.

Q. How about the Wilmer School? A. The Wilmer 
School is a rural school and perhaps it is not shown on 
this map. It is North of Semmes, in the Northern part of 
the county.

Q. Now,— A. I beg your pardon, that reminds me, we 
do have a Thompson School in here, in the Wilmer terri­
tory, as I recall, that school was re-named not too long ago.

Q. Now, during the time that this map was prepared, it 
was completely accurate so far as representation of the 
zones? A. Except the error we discovered last time, which 
was an omission.

Q. As of the time when this map was accurate, there 
was no more than one elementary school in each of these 
zones, isn’t that correct? A. That must be true, as far as 
I know, and so far as I recollect.

Q. And also at that time, while the testimony was, as I 
recall, that many factors were considered in drafting those 
zones, that, as a matter of fact, the zone lines generally 
followed the racial neighborhood lines, so that there would 
be no white children living within Negro zones and no 
Negro children living in zones where white children were 
located? A. I don’t recall that testimony.

Supt. Cranford FI. Burns—for Plaintiff s—Direct



145

Q. That would be incorrect? A. Well, in several areas.
Q. In what areas? A. I recall very distinctly the multi­

ple factors that were discussed that are reflected in neigh­
borhood schools, and I recall also a discussion of the 
multiple factors that influenced decisions about how the 
neighborhood schools would be created and where they 
would be located and what areas they would serve and that 
sort of thing.

Q. Do you also recall, sir, that you were able to conclude 
or there was a conclusion made that notwithstanding or 
because of all of those factors, the boundary lines tend to 
conform to racial neighborhoods! A. To the degree that 
whites and Negroes live in separate neighborhoods as of 
that time, that was a factor, yes, but only to the extent that 
the two races live in the neighborhoods.

Q. Well, is it not correct, sir, that for the most part 
Negroes do not live in the school zone where white schools 
are located and vice versa? A. There is a considerable 
degree of overlapping in certain sections. I am not pre­
pared to tell you how much and exactly where, but the fact 
is recognized that there are or have been rather areas of 
overlapping in the elementary districts. Sometimes that 
has been referred to as dual zones, but that is past history.

Q. Well, before we get to that, generally, you state there 
are instances of overlapping, but is it generally true that 
the Negroes live within zones where they are served by 
Negro elementary schools, and whites live within zones 
where they are served by white schools? A. To a consid­
erable degree.

Q. Could you explain to what degree that is not correct! 
A. I am not able to answer that question.

Judge Thomas: Have, a seat up there, please, 
Doctor.

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Mr. Bell: I would like for you to turn to the answer 
to the interrogatories—your answer to Interrogatory 
6: As to each of' such school attendance areas or 
zones, using best available estimates or projections, 
if precise figures are not available, list the following:
a. Number of Negro school pupils residing within 

each such area and attending the grades for which 
such area applies;

b. Number of white school pupils residing within 
such area and attending the grades for which 
such area applies.

In response to Interrogatory 6, you said:
The number of Negro and white pupils residing 

in the sundry attendance areas as presently consti­
tuted and who are attending the school for which 
those attendance areas apply are as set out in Ex­
hibit 13 attached hereto and made a part hereof, 
with Negro children being shown in column a. and 
white children in column b. to correspond with the 
subdivision of the interrogatory.

A. I knew there was such an attachment.
Q. Now, when we look at Exhibit 13, attached to your 

answer to the interrogatory, I will let you look at my copy, 
and we see as we go down the list of schools—we can 
identify them, if not here, at least from some of the other 
answers, as being either Negro or white schools, and it 
seems that invariably where there is a Negro school, then, 
the totality of pupil population in that school will indicate 
that only Negroes live within that school zone, am I not 
correct on that! A. To a considerable extent.



147

Q. Could you explain to me how I may be in error? A. 
Of course, there are exceptions.

Mr. Wood: Excuse me a minute. If the Court 
please, may I interrupt at this point on this particu­
lar question. There was a matter of interpretation 
of what that interrogatory meant. I interpreted it 
to the Board. Whether 1 interpreted it rightly or 
wrongly, I don’t know.

Mr. Bell: We have no problem with it.
Mr. Wood: My understanding was they wanted 

the number of pupils who lived within a district and 
went to the school in that district—that total would 
reflect that fact—it does not mean-—we do not pur­
pose it to show that only those children lived in that 
district—those are the ones going to school in that 
district as well as living there—that is my under­
standing of the question. It was a bit vague and 
that was the best interpretation I could make.

Mr. Bell: All of the students who are going to 
school within their zone, the zone of their residence, 
they are reflected here. Now, do you know which 
situations would arise where an elementary student 
would not go to a school within his zone?

A. Well, the newcomers and the first graders automatically 
would go to—by choice—the school in which they reside 
or to the school nearest that district formerly served by 
their race, according to the plan.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) That kinder confuses me, Mr. 
Burns. Now, if I am a Negro child, living down here in 
the Cottage Hill zone, which we pointed out before is a 
Negro zone, entirely surrounded by the Shepard School

Supt. Cranford //. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



148

there in blue, at Cottage Hill, under the old procedure, I 
went to the Cottage Hill School. Now, under the desegre­
gation school plan, it seems to me that I have a right to go 
either to the Cottage Hill School, which is a school in my 
attendance area, or I have a right to go to the Shepard 
School, if that is the school where my race formerly at­
tended, and, since my race did not formerly attend the 
Shepard School, it seems to me that I have two choices, 
both of which end up by my attending the Cottage Hill 
School. A. Well, the choice would work differently in dif­
ferent kinds of situations.

Q, Am I correct as to how it would work in Cottage Hill? 
A. Well, at Cottage Hill, it would be that any first grader 
or newcomer, who moved into the Cottage Hill District, 
automatically would have a right to attend that school or 
the nearest school formerly attended by his race, and the 
next step would be to determine what that school would be.

Q. Have I accurately determined my own assignment, if 
I were a Negro first grader or an elementary student just 
moving into the Cottage Hill zone, I would have a choice 
to go to the school in my zone, Cottage Hill, or I could look 
to see what the situation was at Shepard School, and I 
would have to conclude that my race did not formerly or 
presently attend the Shepard School, and, therefore, con­
clude that I was assigned to Cottage Hill School, under 
the plan! A. Unless you wanted to attend the nearest 
school formerly attended by your race, whether you would 
be white or Negro.

Q. But I am a Negro? A. It applies to white also.
Q. I am mainly concerned—a little selfishly—with the 

Negro situation. It seems to me that the situation, as I 
understand it as to Cottage Hill, is the situation that ap­
plies to the method that is drawn as to each of these ele­

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



149

mentary schools. If, for example, I am a Negro first grader, 
and find myself up here in the Warren School Zone, which 
you pointed out is a Negro zone, entirely cut in half by 
the Crichton Zone, now, if I am a first grader, beginning 
school this past fall, in the Warren Zone, it seems to me 
that I have my choice of going to the school within my zone, 
which is Warren, a Negro school, or I can look and see 
whether the school in the nearest zone to me was a school 
that formerly served my race, and I could go there? A. 
Which in this case would be the Stanton Road School.

Q. So, I would have my choice of going to one Negro 
school or another Negro school? A. In this particular 
instance.

Q. I can think of a lot of instances similar to the one I 
have mentioned. Can you tell me some of the instances 
that I, in the first grade, would have an opportunity to go 
to a desegregated school? A. Well, if the first grader 
moved in the Austin School zone, or, in fact, any school 
district in Mobile County, and his residence was in that 
elementary school district—

Q. Let’s stick to the Negro. A. I am speaking now of 
both white and Negro.

Q. You could take one at a time. It would make it easier 
for me, for I must confess I am not too bright in school 
administration business. If I were a Negro and moved and 
found myself in the Austin School zone, as I entered the 
first grade, then, I would, under the plan, be entitled to 
go to the Austin School? A. Correct.

Q. I would also at that point have another choice? A. 
Correct.

Q. That would be what? To go to the Warren School 
perhaps, to the school that would be closest to the school 
formerly serving my 1’aee? A. Yes.

Supt. Cranford //. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



150

Q. Now, let me read your explanation and plan which 
were given in your answer to Interrogatory No. 5, or a 
part of that answer: you say:

(1) Pupils entering the school system for the first time, 
in grades 1, 2, 9, 10, 11 and 12 for the school year 
1965-66 have the right to enroll at the school in the 
attendance area of their residence, without regard to 
race.

A. Right.
Q. Now, as to that part, we can see, looking, at least, 

at the elementary school children, say, only for grades 
1 and 2, that most Negroes are going to find themselves 
able to exercise only the right to go to Negro schools, since 
most Negroes live in zones which are served by Negro 
schools I think we have gotten clear on that part. In Part 
(2) you say:

In considering transfer requests and initial enrollment, 
these dual zones existing prior to the desegregation plan 
under which the Board is operating, have been abolished. 
A. May I interrupt you and ask a question?

Q. Yes? A. A moment ago we were speaking of enroll­
ment in these schools as of now. There are many areas 
in Mobile, in the urban area of Mobile County, where 
white people live in Negro elementary attendance areas 
and vice versa in even fairly large numbers.

Q. Is that correct as to the elementary zones? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. I know they would be overlapping as they get higher- 
up. A. Yes, sir.

Q. It was my understanding and I think it was your 
testimony here today that with few exceptions, virtually 
all of the Negroes live in Negro elementary zones and

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



151

the same is true for whites! A. In terms, of generalities, 
but, after all, we have 79,000 students, and there is con­
siderable overlapping of racial residences in elemental 
attendance areas in the urban part of Mobile County.

Q. Have you made any study—are you able to tell us 
approximately how many students, Negro and white, are 
in that situation? A. Some study has been made of that, 
but I don’t recall the figures. I am reasonably sure that 
Mr. McPherson would know.

Q. You don’t recall approximately! A. No, I don’t. 
I am sorry to say I cannot even recall all of the specific 
details that are set forth in our reports, because they are 
voluminous, as you know.

Q. Well, at this point, we are stuck with the opinion 
that the majority of whites live in white zones and the 
majority of Negroes live in Negro zones! A. That is 
correct.

Q. Going back to part (2) of your answer to Interroga­
tory No. 5, in talking about transfers, you say:

In considering transfer requests and initial enrollment, 
those dual zones existing prior to the desegregation plan 
under which the Board is operating, have been abolished. 
A. That is correct.

Q. It goes on:
If, for example, a child lives in an attendance area 

where he was formerly permitted to enroll only in a 
school serving his race, but which residence was also 
in an overlapping attendance area of another race, he is 
permitted, at the option of his parents or guardian, to 
transfer to the school formerly serving the other race. 
A. You have the option of that.

Q. How does that fit my situation, if I am a Negro and 
happen to live in this Austin zone? A. Let’s take an

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



152

example which deals with two of the approved transfers 
this last year, the Williamson High School area and the 
Murphy High School area. We don’t have areas as such 
at the high school level, we have students.

Q. I want to get to the junior high school and senior 
high school level a little later. I thought we had at least 
one illustration with the elementary schools. A. I see. 
We don’t have overlapping attendance areas any more 
in the elementary level. What I started to say was that 
you get into a longer line of multiple factors and influences 
that operate within the junior and senior high school 
attendance areas. It so happens down in the Southeastern 
part of Mobile, you have quite a number of Negroes and 
whites living in that area, and we have no sharp line of 
demarcation between the attendance areas as such as be­
tween Williamson and Murphy. This year we had two 
requests for transfer in an area that was about equal dis­
tance from Williamson and Murphy and we examined the 
factors that wTe considered meritorious in the situation 
and those two requests were approved, because the parents 
of those two students had the preference, Murphy as 
opposed to Williamson.

Q. Again, I say I would like to go into that in a little 
more detail later, but it seems to me that the plan as to 
elementary school zones gives the child the right to go to 
the school within his zone of his residence and it also 
gives the child the right to go to a school in another zone 
if that zone for that school served his race prior to the 
desegregation plan, now, that is correct, is it not? A. 
Well, that is true for the first graders and the newcomers, 
according to the plan.

Q. Now, it seems to me that that plan provides an op­
portunity for students to choose, students who are sub-

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



153

jeet, by reason of the school zone in which they live, to 
go to a desegregated school, such as I would be, if I were 
a first grader living in the Austin zone, or any other white 
zone, it seems to me that would give me a choice to go 
back to a school serving my own race, and, if it does, 1 
would like to know whether or not you or the Board have 
distinguished this particular provision from the transfer 
provision that was held unconstitutional, without going 
into the legal argument, I was wondering if you could 
tell us that?

Mr. Wood: You are asking for a legal opinion. 
Now, we have to object to that. I am not sure that 
he is familiar with that.

Mr. Bell: My problem is so exactly like it, I was 
not sure you would have adopted it. I thought that 
there might be some distinguishing factors. We 
may make the argument later. You indicated that 
you presently are planning extensive new zone lines, 
would they encompass new elementary zone lines?

A. In the urban part, but not in the rural part of Mobile 
County.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) You indicate that in the rural 
areas you have not adhered as strictly to the zone lines 
as you have in the urban part of Mobile County? A. We 
have no zone lines as such in the rural part of Mobile 
County.

Q. Are any of the rural schools shown on this map, 
Plaintiff Exhibit 1? A. I don’t believe so, unless there 
was an error made in the preparation of this first map 
in the definition of what was rural and city. Alter all, 
a lot of changes took place on that front. I would hesitate 
to give a categorical answer.

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



154

Q. You don’t think there are any rural school zones 
shown on Plaintiff Exhibit I f A. I don’t believe so. If at 
all, they would be in the fringe area, as between what would 
be considered urban and what you would consider rural.

Q. How does the enrollment or assignment policy differ 
in the rural scholsf A. The bus lines are used to serve 
neighborhood areas at schools where we have facilities for 
them, and that is the dominant factor, and sometimes the 
bus lines are used and operated in such a wTay where a 
parent may have an option, but the lines are not used with 
that in mind. The bus lines are used to render the best 
possible service to all of the children in the rural areas. 
When parents have options, with reference to their schols, 
it is purely incidental and not intentional.

Q. So that the determination to which school the child 
would go would be by the bus line rather than the zone 
line? A. That is correct, but, on the basis of an approved 
transfer, because those transferring from one school to 
another have to have an approved transfer, except in the 
exceptions which we discussed a moment ago.

Q. Would you also indicate whether or not, as with the 
urban zone, where the rural assignments that are finally 
made on the basis of bus lines, etc., they have the same 
racial characteristic, that is, a majority of the students 
would be in the bus lines areas serving the schools of 
the children’s race? A. Well, for the most part, there is 
some overlapping, as you wmuld find in the urban part of 
Mobile County, yes, but you do have neighborhoods that 
are somewhat separate and distinct in rural Mobile 
County, somewhat similar to what you wrould find in the 
urban party of Mobile County.

Q. Now, in making these changes in new zone lines 
which you brought out a moment or so ago, will this same

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



155

structure exist, that is, most Negroes will be in zones 
serving Negroes and most whites in white school zones? 
A. I cannot say at this point just how much that picture wall 
change.

Q. Would you be able to tell us whether there has been 
a conscientious effort to change it? A. There has been 
a very conscientious effort made to comply fully with the 
requirements of the plan, as approved by the Court.

Q. Now, does that mean that you have made a conscien­
tious effort to draw zones which would not be all Negroes 
or all white? A. The attendance areas, when approved 
eventually, will be based on a careful consideration of 
quite a long line of things.

Q. I understand that. My question is : It is my under­
standing that there is a long line of factors considered 
in drawing those zones. I ask you whether or not the 
new zone lines wall generally result in elementary zones 
where Negroes are assigned to Negro schools and vice 
versa? A. Well, I have not reviewed in detail all of the 
research that is presently going on, and I would hesitate 
to comment on that, except in terms of very broad 
generalities. I think there have been some changes in 
neighborhoods as such that would be reflected in the new 
attendance areas, but there has also been tremendous 
development that in all probability will be reflected, such 
as new highway development, new safety development, 
shifting of population away from the urban part of Mobile 
County out to the branches of the city and what have 
you. These are only a few.

Q. I understand that, but my problem is: I think we 
have to concede that as these elementary zones are 
presently drawn that the great majority of Negro 
children—I think really we agree that the majority of 
Negro children would not, under the plan as presently

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs-—Direct



written, have an opportunity to go to a desegregated 
school. My problem is : Will this same situation exist 
after the new plan is put into effect or has there been a 
conscientious effort made to change that situation! A. 
There has been a conscientious effort made to create at­
tendance areas that will be convenient for the children and 
to provide facilities in fairly close proximity to the places 
where the people live.

Q. I understand that. Now, as presently operated, the 
majority of the Negro children are in the same situation 
as I explained in my illustration at Cottage Hill, they 
have a choice under the plan either to go to Cottage Hill 
or to go to Cottage Hill? A. No, or to the nearest school 
formerly attended by that person’s race, whether he be 
a white or a Negro. It could be a white person.

Q, But you agree that the Negro child, who wanted a 
desegregated education, the plan offers him only a choice 
to go to Cottage Hill or to the nearest Negro school. I 
want to know if, under the new plan, there has been made 
a conscientious effort to change this locked in situation 
wherein the great majority of Negro children have no 
choice? A. We have not intended to create a locked in 
situation in the designing of the attendance areas.

Q. Well, let’s get on to something else. I don’t want to 
get into an argument. We have had a lot of discussion 
all through this case about Negro children in the junior 
and senior high schools—our classic example is the 
children in the Hillsdale Heights area, who were taken 
by bus on a thirty-four mile trip to the St. Elmo school, 
when there were white schools much closer. Have there 
been any studies made by the Board to determine just 
how many students, either Negro or white, are taken 
distances past the nearest available school, in order to

Supt. Cranford / / .  Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



157

assign them to a feeder school, which is of the same race, 
any studies indicating how many miles of travel are in­
volved, how many students are involved! A. I don’t re­
call figures that would denote the miles and number of 
students involved, but I can say there has been a general 
practice of transporting students from one attendance 
area to another for many, many years, in fairly large 
numbers, because of the very demand and uncompromising- 
circumstances.

Q. What would they be, sir! A. One factor that 
operates is the fact that people on moving out of down 
town Mobile create pressure for new buildings on the 
fringe of the city. In all cases, we have not had buildings 
located where people live. We have had a difficult time 
maintaining the community school idea or neighborhood 
schools, especially for elementary children. We do not 
like to transport elementary pupils except under very 
demanding and uncompromising circumstances. For ex­
ample, we had a fire a little while ago, and we lost eight 
class rooms in a building that was an annex in a particular 
school. This left us with no other choice except to trans­
port those children to the school or schools where space 
could be located.

Q. I understand that. You certainly can explain emer­
gency situations of that nature, but, as general policy, 
we had the situation in the Hillsdale Heights area, where 
the children were bussed this long distance to get them 
to the nearest Negro school, although there were white 
schools closer.

Mr. Wood: I object to the assumption that they 
could have been bussed to white schools closer. I 
don’t believe that is in evidence. I don’t believe

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



158

there are any white schools that have any room 
for additional students.

Judge Thomas: You have a right to cross ex­
amine him. Go ahead.

Mr. Wood: Exception.

A. At the time the Hillsdale Heights students were trans­
ported to St. Elmo, it was true that we had space for them 
there and we did not have space for them in any other 
school. In fact, we have 39,000 boys and girls in over 
loaded class rooms in the system as of today.

Mr. Bell: I would like, since you bring this point 
up on the basis of space, to jump down in my 
examination. We have situations such as the fact 
there was a student named Madrid Vanessa Jacobs. 
In answer to Interrogatory No. 3, her name is listed 
as one of those Negro students who made applica­
tion for transfer to a school formerly attended by 
white students, who was denied for the reasons set 
forth there. You indicate that her request for trans­
fer to Gorgas School was denied because—I am 
sorry—strike that—the case I am looking at is that 
of Andreda Casher, who made application for trans­
fer to the Williams School, whose application was 
denied because the facilities at Williams were al­
ready beyond capacity, children being transported 
from Williams because of this condition. Now, will 
you look at the situation in the Williams School, 
as indicated in the answer to the interrogatory, 
showing the enrollment after the third day and 
after the third month, that there were 470 students, 
white pupils, enrolled on the third day, and 476

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



159

students enrolled at the end of the third month. 
I might add that almost without exception, with 
few exceptions, the list of schools showing enroll­
ment after the third day and after the third month, 
both Negro and white, shows generally increase in 
enrollment between the third day and the third 
month. We have students who, like this Casher girl, 
were turned down, because you say of over crowded 
condition. How do you explain that? It seems to 
me that different standards are applied.

A. When we have a school over crowded in a particular 
district, when we have to establish bus routes to carry 
the overload to other schools, the elementary district 
is divided into announced areas, and students in given 
areas are bussed to the other schools. It is entirely pos­
sible that the small number of students, representing the 
increase in enrollment, perhaps did not live in the pre­
scribed area that was to be transported to another school, 
because it would be much more expensive to run the bus 
all over the district, than give people a choice, or have 
a lot of confusion as to who would be in the transported 
group and who would not be in the transported group.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) I gather some of the other 
applications you turned them down because the child was 
not in the proper attendance zone. Evidently, this child 
was in the proper attendance zone and you turned her 
down because the facilities were already beyond capacity, 
and yet there seemed to be a growth in the enrollment of 
the school from the third day to the third month, and 
you indicate that some of this further enrollment was 
shipped off to another school, yet, there is no indication 
this student here would be given the opportunity to go

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



to this pressure released school? A. No student in the 
prescribed area to be transported was given an option 
or opportunity of attending the Adelia Williams School.

Q. You see my point, sir. She evidently was living in 
the right zone, but you turned her down because you say 
the school was too crowded, and she had to go back to 
a Negro school, but you also told me that you selected 
certain personnel to that Williams School zone? A. Not 
certain personnel, a prescribed area.

Q. I gather she was not within that prescribed geo­
graphic area? A. To be transported.

Q. Why was she not informed of the right that she could 
follow those kids to whatever school they were being taken 
to? A. Well, I suppose she was informed of whatever 
the facts were.

Q. Excuse me, but I believe I am fairly correct in saying 
the responses you made to the interrogatories are as much 
information as was given to each of those parents, and 
they were either told they were either in the wrong zone 
or in this situation, they were told that the Williams 
School was beyond capacity?

Mr. Wood: We object to the assumption by coun­
sel that this is all the information furnished to any 
of the children. That is not in evidence.

Mr. Bell: All right, Mr. Burns, was any other in­
formation furnished to the parents that you know 
of?

A. I really don’t know, for sure, how much information 
was furnished, since it was furnished by our personnel 
office. Let me add one bit of additional information, which 
is of interest in this connection. Adelia Williams District

Swpt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



161

is much over loaded. The South Brookley District area 
to the South likewise is very much over loaded, and we 
have on paper a new district in the making which will be 
in all probability in between those two schools, and the 
area where this particular student lives in all probability 
does fall or will fall within the area of what will be in the 
very near future a new district.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) But what does that have to 
do with what action was taken on her application to get 
a desegregated education during this period? A. I feel 
confident whatever information was given to the parents 
of this child was likewise given to all of the students and 
all of the parents whose children lived within the area 
prescribed to be transported to another school.

Q. You indicated that she obviously was not in the pre­
scribed area to be taken to another over loaded school, 
yet, she was not permitted to go into the school which 
you indicated that the facilities were over crowded? A. 
No, I said she was in a prescribed area to be transported— 
to the contrary, she may have been in an area prescribed 
for transportation.

Q. Did you indicate what the name of the school was 
where some of the over load from Williams School was 
taken? A. I really don’t recall exactly, because there are 
so many transfers made of so many different groups, to 
take care of over loads, that I really don’t remember, for 
sure.

Q. The thing that I am mostly concerned about in all of 
this is we only had some fifteen students who made ap­
plication for a desegregated education, after the plan 
which was placed in effect, under the orders of this court, 
and I would think that you would have fairly explicit 
information as to these particular nine students who made

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



162

application to go to desegregated schools, and whose 
applications were denied, now, we have one, this Andreda 
Casher, who made application for Williams, and we had 
Marion Crockett who made application to go to Williams 
and received the same response, and you indicated under 
the heading “Reason Denied” the same response, facilities 
at Williams already beyond capacity, children being trans­
ported from Williams because of this condition. A. I be­
lieve there were two in this category, as I recall. There 
must have been either three or four students who made 
application to attend school in districts that were far 
removed from their residence, which were denied.

Q. Let me ask you as to this. I guess you have no 
further information to give me on this Williams School? 
A. I am sorry. I do not have any more information. As I 
recall, they were also three or four, perhaps three, whose 
applications were denied, but because their applications 
were not submitted in conformity to the prescribed plan.

Q. Well, let’s take these up in order. First of all are 
the four who did not reside in one of the attendance areas 
served by the Murphy School. This was the situation of 
.Joyce Ann Johnson and Handy Shade, Jr.,—he sought 
admission to Davidson and was told he did not reside 
within one of the areas served by Davidson—Mae Wornie 
Bolton sought admission to Davidson, and she was told 
she did not reside within one of the areas served by David­
son; Richard Lebaron Jackson, who sought admission 
to Russell School, was told he did not reside within the 
attendance area served by Russell. In making those ap­
plications for transfer, was there any information given 
to any of those people so they would know which high 
school attendance zone they were eligible to request trans­
fer for! A. I really do not know. I don’t know all of the

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



163

information that was furnished, but I presume they would 
have such information.

Q. Was there any basis to presume that as to these 
four students, in view of the schools they requested to 
enter? A. I am not sure that I understand your question.

Q. I want to know if those people were turned down 
because they did not make the request for transfer to the 
right white school, what information was given to them, 
so that they would be able to make the right choice for 
a desegregated education for their children? A. Well, 
we don’t act upon the requests for transfer upon a racial 
basis.

Q. My problem again is this desegregated plan was not 
some general policy. This was required by the Court. I 
presume this would get at least as much attention as your 
general routine requests for transfer, or even extraor­
dinary requests for transfer. My simple question is 
whether or not, to your knowledge, there was any specific 
information given to parents that would enable them to 
intelligently choose a white school to apply for and choose 
one that was within their zone, as you had determined?

Mr. Wood: Objection on the ground that there is 
no showing under the plan or any order of this 
Court that there must be—that every child in the 
school system must have a choice between racially 
predominant schools. The question assumes that 
there must be a choice that will involve attendance 
at either all white or predominantly white schools 
for those particular Negro students. That is not 
in evidence and not a part of the plan and not a 
part of the Court order.

Mr. Bell: The order requires that students within

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



164

certain grades can make application for assignment 
to certain schools.

Judge Thomas: You can ask him was any ex­
planation made! Were they told what school they 
could have gone to? Objection overruled.

Mr. Wood: Exception.
Mr. Bell: To your knowledge, would you just say 

Yes or No?

A. Those conversations about transfers were conducted 
in our personnel office. I am not in position to say cate­
gorically just what information was furnished the ap­
plicants other than what is recorded here.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Is it possible then, based on 
your knowledge, that no information was furnished to 
them? A. I could not say. I really do not know.

Q. It is correct to say that you don’t know whether 
this information was furnished and you are superintendent 
of the schools? A. I cannot know what all the people on 
my staff say to all of the people who come into their office, 
to hold conferences.

Q. I have already mentioned Madrid Venessa Jacobs, 
who was seeking to gain admission to Gorgas School, and 
her request was denied, with the information that the 
request was filed after the expiration of the transfer period 
request. There is Floria Marie Hudson, who made ap­
plication for transfer to Vigor School, and her request 
was denied, with the information that the request was 
filed after the expiration of transfer request period. There 
is Ednol Leona Crockett, who requested transfer to the 
Bain School, and her request was denied because it was 
filed after the expiration of transfer request period. Now, 
the plan was supposed to permit desegregation of four

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



165

grades—a total of fifteen applications for transfer, nine 
of which were denied, and three of those wTere denied 
because you say that the applications came in too late! 
A. Yes.

Q. Now, is it correct that those were applications by 
students seeking to gain admission to either grade 11 
or grade 12, which were filed, not during the April period, 
which you had set up, but which were filed during the 
August 3rd to 10th period, which the Court had designated 
for applications to grades 1 and 10, which had been added 
by the Fifth Circuit mandate, is that correct! A. All I 
know is that the applications were not filed within the 
time limits prescribed by the Court orders and the an­
nouncements that were made in the press and the legal 
statements placed in the press accordingly.

Q. Those were legal notices that you placed in the 
paper to meet the requirements of the Court order for 
publication, is that correct! A. That is my recollection.

Q. Now,— A. May I tell you why they were denied 
and the background of it!

Q. All right, sir. A. You would be interested to know 
that there were many, many requests. I am sorry that 
I do not know the number, but there were many, many 
requests that were denied, and more white than Negro, 
and the reason for it is because we simply cannot make 
effective plans for the new school year and receive transfer 
requests at all times of the year. Most of the important 
phases of our planning for the new school year take place 
during the late Spring, and if you will break this rule, you 
open up the boundaries, you simply create chaos and 
confusion, in planning effectively for the new school year 
term, and, in so doing, you impose burdens on children, 
teachers, parents and what have you, and, in the mean­

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



166

time, you have to keep the facilities and children adjusted 
to each other, so far as possible, because of our tremen­
dous over load, we had 14,000 children in half day ses­
sions, and, except for our portable class rooms today, 
we would have almost that number still in half day 
sessions. Our building program, as mammoth as it has 
been, has been little more than enough to take care of 
our normal growth, and our portable class rooms are tak­
ing care of some, and this makes placement very difficult. 
This is another reason we have to plan ahead, to avoid 
chaos and confusion.

Q. Notwithstanding all the problems, sir, that you had, 
as superintendent, we had only three students who filed 
late. Let’s take Ednol Leona Crockett. A. We had to 
act on this impartially. We were not in a position to make 
exceptions in those three cases, because we would have 
obligated ourselves to give equal consideration to a long- 
line of others that we were not in position to grant.

Q. I see the practical problems you had, but I notice 
that in the Rain School, where the Crockett child wanted 
to enter, after the third day, you had 1253 students 
assigned to that school, based on information contained 
in Exhibit 3 in your answers to interrogatories, and after 
the third month the total had grown to 1259. Therefore, 
assuming some people had dropped out, you had taken 
in, after the third day of school, at least additionally six 
more children, which would indicate they were all white 
students, into that school, although you turned down the 
Crockett child’s application which was filed long before 
school opened. Now, am I quoting the correct figures! 
I understand you have given your testimony as to why 
you did it. 1 want confirmation whether this is true! 
A. Those figures were furnished for my signature by the

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



167

personnel office, based upon attendance records submitted 
by school principals.

Q. Now, as to Floria Marie Hudson, another of those 
children, who sought admission to a white school, whose 
request was turned down because it was filed late, we see 
in looking at the Vigor School white school, there were 
857 students there after the third day, and that total had 
grown to—I am sorry, 1856 after the third day, and 1869 
students thirteen additional students, after the third 
month. Now, correct me if those figures are inaccurate, 
or if I quote them inaccurately. As to Madrid Venessa 
Jacobs, who sought admission to the Gorgas School, turned 
down because her request was filed late, we see from the 
third day to the third month, six students were admitted 
to the Gorgas School, do I correctly state those figures! 
A. I would think so. Do you want to know the reason 
for that?

Q. You indicated the reason you turned them down was 
because they didn’t file the applications on time? A. Let 
me elaborate further. We have a policy which makes it 
possible for a student, without racial considerations, to 
enroll in a school that he attended the previous year with­
out any fan fare, without any signing of forms in the 
central office. It is a very simple procedure, one that has 
been traditional in the Mobile School System for a long, 
long time; if the students do not enroll, they have an 
automatic right, after traditional practice, to return to 
the school they attended the previous year; all of those 
students don’t enroll at the same time, and you have a 
certain amount of change taking place all along the way 
at the beginning of the new school term, which I think 
would explain the problem about which you are concerned.

Q. Does that not break down to the fact that assuming

8npt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



168

these students were trying to get into the 11th or 12th 
grade and filed their applications in July, instead of back 
in April, that white students, who had been previously 
enrolled in those white schools, have a right to enter, under 
your policy, any time up to the third month, and be en­
rolled, but a Negro child, who seeks to gain admission 
to that school, under the desegregation plan, and who 
files his application during the period when applications 
were being accepted for another grade, in August instead 
of in April, was turned down? A. This policy applies 
to both white and Negroes, in the same way, except for 
expansion in the plan.

Q. Except you only had Negroes seeking a desegregated 
education, isn’t that correct? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Just as a point of information, on your answers to 
Interrogatory 1 (e) and (f), which you answer on Exhibit 
4 of the answers to interrogatories, you have listed here 
the number of students in each school by grade, the num­
ber in the first grade, etc., on up to Grade 12. Now, under 
some of these schools, you have a designation “Exp.” . 
Would you tell us what that means? A. That, as I under­
stand it, has to do with exceptional classes, sometimes 
called special education, and the attendance of those 
students is reported separately. I think that is the reason 
why they are reported separately and distinctly here.

Q. What happens in those special classes? A. They 
represent a group of students, whose abilities and back­
ground achievement will vary considerably from the 
normal and they require a special type of instruction and 
classes. As a rule, we have quite a number of those classes 
scattered around throughout the schools.

Q. Do you mean those are intelligently gifted students 
or retarded students? A. Most of the intelligently gifted

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



169

students are limited in special elective classes in the high 
schools and junior high schools, but they are treated as 
regular groups, with the regular number of students en­
rolled, they do not quite fit the same category. These 
students are handicapped for the most part, either physi­
cally or mentally, or they are retarded or deficient in 
capacity to a point that they have to have special instruc­
tions.

Q. There seem to be fourteen of those exceptional 
schools for the whites, if my figures are correct, and 
three of those for the Negroes!

Mr. Wood: What exhibit are you looking at?
Mr. Bell: Exhibit 4 to the answers to inter­

rogatories.

A. I do not recall the number of classes we have by 
schools and by regions. I do know that we have had 
difficulty in having those classes approved by the State 
Department of Education, by virtue of the fact that such 
classes are reimbursed by the state out of funds that are 
specially appropriated for special education.

Judge Thomas: Take a fifteen minute recess.
Thereupon, a fifteen minute recess was had.
Thereafter, Court re-convened, and the following 

transpired :
Judge Thomas: Will you proceed, please?
Mr. Bell: Yes, sir.
Judge Thomas: Let me interrupt a minute. It is 

obvious that wre are not going to finish this case 
today. Isn’t that true?

Mr. Bell: I would think so. I will take another

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct

fifteen minutes or so with my remaining questions 
for this witness.

Judge Thomas: I am sure we will not finish it 
today. The case has to be concluded quickly and 
decided quickly, but the very first opportunity I can 
get to it is going to be a week from today.

Mr. Wood: That would be excellent with us, your 
Honor, because we have a witness who is himself 
in school.

Judge Thomas: That would be March 5th.
Mr. Bell: I was going to request if you could 

put it back to the latter part of next week that you 
would do so.

J udge Thomas: I can do it by shoving another 
case out of the way.

Mr. Bell: If I may interrupt, one problem seems 
to be—we had filed a motion we had hoped fairly 
early and you would have given us an early hearing. 
We were hoping this year that we would not get 
into the problem of last year—

Judge Thomas: Let me ask you this. Do you 
think we can finish this case in another half day?

Mr. Bell: Well, we would be finished after an­
other fifteen or twenty minutes.

Judge Thomas: Mr. Wood, do you think we could 
finish it in a half day?

Mr. Wood: I believe so. I would have a right 
extensive examination of Dr. Burns on the specific 
details.

Judge Thomas: Let’s get on with it now. I have 
a long distance call coming through. When it comes 
through, I will quit. The very earliest I can get to 
this case would be a week from today. You may 
proceed.



171

Mr. W ood: Just a moment before you start again. 
Obviously, we are not going to finish with Dr. Burns 
or more than that tonight. Let me excuse my other 
witness, who is standing by. He wants to go to 
work.

Judge Thomas: Surely.
Mr. Bell: Just to try to tie up some loose ends, 

we were discussing the difficulties—what we thought 
were difficulties in Negro parents of high school 
children knowing the attendance areas they resided 
in, as far as requests for transfer to white schools 
are concerned. Now, during the trial, I believe 
Plaintiff Exhibit 3, which I am holding here, was 
introduced. I believe your testimony at that time 
was that this chart reflected the locations of the 
secondary schools that were then in existence, is 
that correct!

A. Yes, sir.
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Now, it occurs to me— A. Did 

you say secondary schools?
Q. Yes, sir. A. Wait just a minute. Let me look at 

that a little more. I see Calvert on here. That is not a 
secondary school. It may have a seventh grade, and that 
is the reason it was included, because it had one of the 
secondary school grades, but I am not sure.

Q. Now, just a second. Calvert is listed on your Exhibit 
1 to your answers as having grades 1 to 6. A. That would 
appear to be an error, if this is the secondary school map. 
Dauphin Island is not. This is a rural map rather than the 
secondary school map.

Q. Am I correct—maybe counsel could help me on this— 
was there a map introduced that showed the attendance

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



zones for the secondary schools, or was there only the 
chart which reflected the feeder patterns, that is, the 
elementary schools that fed into them?

Mr. Wood: My recollection is that it was reflected 
on the chart—I don’t recall a separate map—because 
it was a feeder system.

Witness: I think that is correct.
Mr. Bell: Without going into these exhibits, which 

were Plaintiff Exhibits 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, you will recall 
there we had in Plaintiff Exhibit 6—I have made a 
copy of that, I hope it is accurate,—Plaintiff Exhibit 
6 indicated Negro schools—it showed elementary 
schools, it showed the junior high schools that served 
those elementary schools, and it showed the senior 
high schools that served those elementary schools. 
Now, is there any map whereby if I were a Negro 
and living in the Cottage Hill elementary zone, I 
would know that I would be assigned by tradition 
or otherwise, that I would go to the Dawes Union 
junior high school and to the St. Elmo senior high 
school, based on the feeder charts that were drawn 
at that time? My question is: Is there available 
any place a showing to which school I would request 
transfer, if I were the parent of a Negro high school 
student? I would know that I would be going, if I 
went to the school that your board assigned me to, 
to the St. Elmo school.

A. The board does not assign students individually to 
schools.

Q. Yes, but you indicated earlier that all students from 
the Cottage Hill elementary school would go to the Dawes

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



173

Union junior high school and from there to the St. Elmo 
school? A. Not automatically, as a rule, that is the pat­
tern. The board, by policy, reserves the right to revise its 
plans and designate these areas, even parts of districts, to 
fit the circumstances and the relationship that may exist 
between the school population and the facilities available.

Q. I will accept your statement. The feeder patterns 
would be followed although the board would reserve the 
right to change it? A. Yes, it is my opinion that most 
parents and most students understand that. I am sure 
information has been given by our pupil personnel office.

Q. Where is there available any information that would 
show then the feeder pattern for requesting transfer to a 
desegregated school? My question is whether parents were 
provided with this information. It occurs to me, as attor­
ney for these parents, I don’t know where I would suggest 
that the pupil would apply, and I am wondering if that 
information is available at all. Do you see my question? 
A. Well, we are available to answer whatever questions are 
raised with us. We constantly answer questions raised by 
citizens. I don’t recall having had such a question posed, 
frankly. The citizens must understand reasonably well 
what the facts are in such circumstances.

Q. All right, then, if I am a twelfth grade student— A. 
We do not follow the practice of withholding such infor­
mation if and when it is needed or if and when it is re­
quested.

Q. If I were in the Cottage Hill zone, ready to go to 
high school, in a desegregated grade, and I came to the 
school board, with my application form, and asked which 
white zone am I eligible to attend, which white school I am 
not eligible to apply admission to, what would be the 
answer on that? A. We would answer whatever question

Snpt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



is raised in terms of the Court approved plan and the poli­
cies developed to implement the plan.

Q. I am sure that you would, but my question is : I would 
like to know which white school would I be eligible to apply 
for. A. We have no restrictions upon the kinds of requests 
that may be made or the requests for transfer that may be 
submitted.

Q. I understand that. I am asking you to tell me what 
the board’s response would be to a parent living in the 
Cottage Hill zone, who indicated that, instead of going to 
St. Elmo as traditionally would have been the situation, 
they wanted to exercise their rights under the desegrega­
tion plan and they wanted to place in their request form 
the proper white school to which they were eligible to 
attend—they have seen the experience of some of these 
other children and don’t want to make the same mistake, 
which high school would they be assigned to?

Mr. Wood: Objection. I don’t understand the 
question. I don’t understand that there exists under 
the Court order or the plan the absolute right of 
every Negro child to attend a white school in Mobile 
County, nor of every white child to attend a school 
predominantly Negro in Mobile County. The ques­
tion is based upon the assumption that there is a 
right in every pupil to make application to attend a 
school predominantly attended by another race. It 
is recognized that the plan we are dealing with is 
a plan that is being adapted gradually. It is recog­
nized by the Courts that some of these pupils never 
will experience attendance at desegregated schools 
by the very condition of things.

Mr. Bell: Your Honor, I don’t think we should go 
into a filibuster. I asked a simple question. I want

Sup!,. Cranford. H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



175

to know what the school board tells him when he 
asks, in completing the application, which white 
school attendance area he is eligible to apply to for 
admission. That is my question, Mr. Burns, if a 
parent, living in the Cottage Hill elementary zone 
area, whose child has been going to the St. Elmo 
school, files an application for a transfer, and comes 
to you for the transfer and says “I don’t want to 
make the same mistake these other parents did, 
what is the proper white school that I should insert 
in this” , this seems like a simple question.

A. In the first place, that kind of question is not answered 
in the superintendent’s office. It would be answered, first 
of all, in the pupil personnel office, where questions of this 
kind are raised, but I feel sure, and I am confident that it 
is the practice in all of our offices to answer honestly and 
sincerely and accurately as we can whatever questions are 
raised.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Ho I assume correctly that you 
yourself do not know what would be the answer to that 
parent’s question, living in the Cottage Hill zone, as to 
what white school he should put in the application form! 
A. With some study I could tell that child that—

Judge Thomas: Where we are right now, Mr. 
Burns, do you know what the answer would be!

A. No, sir.

Mr. Bell: If I were a Negro child, in the same 
situation, Negro parent—I am sorry—living in the 
Warren School zone, we see from the feeder system 
that the Negro high school that would feed into—if

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



176

1 would go and ask you which white school I should 
insert there, would you know what the white school 
would be!

A. If a child came to me personally, from a specific district, 
saying what district he was from, and asked what white 
school he could apply to attend and request admission, I 
could, by looking at the plan, interpreting the plan and 
policies, have this information, and I could tell that child 
what he could request under the plan and under our policies, 
in other words, as we have already explained.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Would you do that for me with 
the Warren School, please! A. If he is living in the War­
ren School zone and he asks me what school could he at­
tend and apply to attend other than the Warren School, I 
would say that he could attend the closest school to Warren 
formerly attended by his race.

Q. I am saying that he is now a high school student, who, 
for purposes of identification, lives in the Warren school 
zone, and we can look at the feeder charts and find out 
which Negro High school serves the Warren School. As a 
matter of fact, I believe Plaintiff Exhibit 7 shows he would 
go to the Washington junior high school and then the 
senior high school. My child is in a grade to be desegre­
gated, and I want to put him in the right white school, 
what would you tell the parent in the Warren School situ­
ation? A. Before I could answer a question of that kind, 
I would have to refer to the placement arrangements that 
have been approved by the board or by special resolution, 
at the junior and senior high school level,—the elementary 
schools have certain schools into which they feed—there 
are exceptions, and I would have to make reference to those 
exceptions before I could answer a question of that kind.

Supt. Cranford Ii. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



177

I would have to deal in all probability with the pupil per­
sonnel office before that question could be answered.

Q. Would you tell us how you expected the Negro par­
ents, upon appearance at the school board office, who were 
issued those blank forms, to insert the name of the school! 
How did you expect them to be able to do what you your­
self would not be able to do without consultation with some 
of your staff members? A. Well, we have quite a lot of 
freedom in the Mobile Qounty schools as to what we can 
request in the form of transfer.

Q. Could you answer my question? How could you ex­
pect the parents to give the right information when you 
would have to go to your school officials, in order to find 
out what the right answer would be! A. You would have 
to be superintendent of a school system that serves 79,000 
children to understand why I would not be able to answer 
all the specific details of placement arrangements and the 
multitude of decisions to be made on related matters.

Q. My question remains: You could not answer the ques­
tion. How do you expect the Negro parents to do it? A. 
They could ask questions and get answers to their questions.

Q. But you concede there was no information on the form 
that would indicate to them a warning that they should 
ask questions rather than insert the school of their choice ? 
A. You cannot print everything in a form. There are a 
lot of ways of giving information other than printing it on 
a specific form. When you have a form, you have a unique 
specific purpose in mind. You cannot deal with forms that 
would cover a multitude of purposes. We have many dif­
ferent kinds of forms. They serve many different kinds 
of functions.

Q. But I gather you only had the one form for use in

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



178

making application for a transfer, is not that correct! A. 
So far as I recall.

Q. We have been talking about the Cottage Hill School, 
which is located down here, within the Shepard School zone. 
The various exhibits to the answers to the interrogatories 
indicate that there are four teachers assigned to that school 
and normal pupil capacity of 132; that the Shepard School, 
on the other hand, which serves a large zone, has twenty- 
five as the normal teaching staff and 825 as the normal 
pupil capacity. Now, in considering the various educational 
factors, would you explain how the Cottage Hill zone with 
four teachers and 132 students is justified within the large 
Shepard zone! A. Yes, sir. Of course, this map is com­
pletely out dated. First of all, you have a new district that 
has been created here, Windmill, and also here is Fonde. 
There is a new district not too far removed from this area. 
That would be the Windmill district, and the Cottage Hill 
district area or attendance area is a smaller attendance 
area than the neighboring attendance area, for the reason 
that we have a very limited amount of facilities there. We 
have—

Q. Is it not correct—

Mr. Wood: Wait a minute. Let him finish his 
answer. He wanted to know the justification for 
that, and the witness is trying to tell him.

A. We have a very good building there. It is an older 
building. It does not have a site large enough to lend itself 
to expansion. The citizens there have been conferred with 
on various occasions and they indicated they want to retain 
their school as it is.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Let me interrupt you. On Ex­
hibit 13, you indicate that within the Cottage Hill district

Supt. Cranford 11. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Direct



179

there are 119 Negro children and no whites! A. I don’t 
recall the facts.

Q. You don’t disagree with the facts contained in the 
answer to the interrogatory! A. No, I have no reason to 
disagree with them, but it is admitted that this is a smaller 
district than some of the districts in the area. I repeat 
again there are new districts being created in the area, due 
to growth.

Q. Are those white school districts or are they populated 
by whites? A. I don’t know the number of whites and 
Negroes that live in this particular district.

Q. Is it not correct that educationally speaking, edu­
cators find that when you have a school that is smaller 
than a certain number, a number above 132 students and 
four teachers, from an educational standpoint, that becomes 
a fairly poor school! A. There are both advantages and 
disadvantages in the small school, but, as a rule, the school 
systems move toward larger units than the Cottage Hill 
school is at present.

Q. You don’t have any other schools in the system that 
small, do you! A. Yes, I think so. We have other small 
schools, Calvert and Dauphin Island. Admittedly though, 
we don’t have a large number of small schools. I don’t 
remember the exact enrollment of the smaller schools. We 
do have some.

Judge Thomas: Let me interrupt. It is a quarter 
to 5 :00. I think we better recess until next Friday, 
at 9:30.

Mr. Bell: Thank you very much.
Judge Thomas: All parties and witnesses in this 

case are excused until Friday, of next week, at 9 :30 
o’clock. Please be back without being further sub­
poenaed. Mr. Bell?

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs■—Direct



180

Mr. Bell: Yes, sir.
Judge Thomas: It is my understanding that you 

are offering these interrogatories and answers as an 
exhibit!

Mr. Bell: Yes, sir.
Judge Thomas: Mark them in evidence, Mr.

O’Connor. Of course, they are part of the file. They 
should be marked in evidence as an exhibit.

(Thereupon, said interrogatories, answers and 
exhibits thereto were marked Plaintiff Exhibit 
9.)

Thereupon, Court recessed on February 26th, 1965.

Colloquy

Thereupon, on March 5th, 1965, the following pro­
ceedings were had:

Judge Thomas: Take up the Davis case, please.
Mr. Bell: Your Honor, I reviewed the progress 

during the week of the testimony, and, in the inter­
est of shortening it, I prepared a number of exhibits, 
some of which are based on the information con­
tained in the answers to the interrogatories we had 
served on the board, and I should like at this time 
to introduce those interrogatories and the answers 
as Plaintiff Exhibit 9, and then turn the witness over 
to opposing counsel.

Judge Thomas: My notes show you already intro­
duced the interrogatories and answers.

Mr. Bell: At this time, I introduce Plaintiff Ex­
hibit 10, which are five letters—copies of letters, the 
originals of which were mailed to the Assistant 
Superintendent by parents seeking reconsideration



181

of board rulings, denying the transfer requests, for 
the 1964-65 school year.

Judge Thomas: Is there any objection!
Mr. Wood: We have just seen them. May we 

have just a moment, your Honor! I assume these 
letters were delivered and we have no objection if 
they were.

Judge Thomas: All right, let them in.
(Thereupon, the copies of five letters were 

marked Plaintiff Exhibit 10.)
Mr. Bell: Next, as Plaintiff Exhibit 11,1 introduce 

a sample form of the request form, which parents 
received when they went to the school board, asking 
for applications. This one has actually been filled in, 
but we are introducing it for the purpose of showing 
the nature of the form and what it contains.

Mr. Wood: We have no objection to the introduc­
tion of the form. I wonder if it might not be better 
to substitute a blank form. We are prepared to fur­
nish one of those as a substitute.

Mr. Bell: That would be fine. I just did not have 
a blank form.

Judge Thomas: 1 think it would be best to substi­
tute a blank.

(Thereupon, said blank form was marked Plain­
tiff Exhibit 11.)

Mr. Bell: As Plaintiff Exhibit 12, we have a form 
which we want to introduce, just for the form, which, 
I believe, to be a letter from the school board to the 
parent, indicating the action that was taken on the 
transfer request. That is your Form SS-420. May I 
introduce it only for the form!

Colloquy



182

Mr. Wood: You want to do the same thing!
Mr. Bell: All right, I think a blank form would be 

preferable.

(Thereupon, said blank form was marked Plain­
tiff Exhibit 12.)

Judge Thomas: What is that form!
Mr. Bell: It is called Application F or Pupil 

Transfer, but it is really a notice of the ruling on 
the transfer application.

Mr. Bell: The next exhibit that I want to intro­
duce as Plaintiff Exhibit 13 is a document which I 
have titled “Survey of Special Courses Offered by 
Negro and White Junior and Senior High Schools” . 
The data in this exhibit was obtained from material 
and information contained in Answer No. 11 to the 
Interrogatories served by the Plaintiff on the De­
fendant Board. I would think that the Defendants 
might want to have an opportunity to look this over 
in some little detail, since it took me quite a little 
time to prepare it. The purpose of the exhibit is to 
show the number of special courses, other than in 
your basic English, Math, History courses, which 
are available in white schools and not available in 
Negro schools at the high school level or are avail­
able in more white schools than Negro schools.

Judge Thomas: Well, Mr. Wood, you look over 
the exhibit and I will not admit it now.

Mr. Wood: All right, if I may reserve the right 
to study it and note if we have an objection.

(Thereupon, said survey was marked Plaintiff 
Exhibit 13 for identification only.)

Colloquy



183

Mr. Bell: Now, I think at this time, your Honor, 
I had a few more questions for the superintendent 
which probably would be covered by the school board 
in their examination of him. Rather than review 
that material twice, I would request permission to 
perhaps have a little broader redirect examination 
than I would otherwise be entitled to. It would save 
time and possible duplication.

Judge Thomas: Do you tender the witness!
Mr. Bell: Yes, sir.
Judge Thomas: Let me ask counsel on both sides. 

Are we going to finish this case this morning!
Mr. Bell: This is our final witness. I understood 

the last time the Board was going to put on the 
stand the Assistant Superintendent, Mr. McPherson, 
and I was hoping he could clear up some of the 
areas about which Mr. Burns was not certain, and, 
if not, we would, on Cross Examination of him, fill 
in those gaps, but we have no other witnesses, and 
we are prepared to rest.

Mr. Wood: We do expect to put Mr. McPherson 
on the stand.

Judge Thomas: Do you expect to finish this morn­
ing !

Mr. Wood: I doubt that we will finish this morn­
ing.

Judge Thomas: I have pretrials scheduled all 
afternoon.

Mr. Wood: I think we will know more after we 
see how quickly we finish with Dr. Burns.

Colloquy



184

Cross Examination by Mr. Wood:

Q. Dr. Burns, just for the purpose of clarification, you 
were examined by counsel for the Plaintiffs as to the Cot­
tage Hill District and the four teacher school located in that 
district or attendance area. I will ask you whether or not 
there are any special circumstances surrounding the make­
up of the Cottage Hill District? A. First of all, it is a 
smaller attendance area than the average attendance area 
in the county. It is a rather compact community. The school 
has been there for a long time. It is one of the oldest schools, 
I think, in the system. I don’t know the date when it was 
established, but it is more of a community type school 
than many of our schools. I have been impressed by the 
fact that there is a very close working relationship between 
the faculty of this small school and the people of the com­
munity.

Q. Has there ever been any conversation or discussion 
with the parents of that community, with regard to the 
closing or consolidation of that school? A. Yes.

Q. What has been the result of those talks, please, sir, 
or the substance of those talks rather? A. In substance, 
the people living in the community have wanted to retain 
the small school. In instances when the issues have been 
discussed, we have pointed up the advantages and disad­
vantages of the smaller school. I think perhaps the citizens 
are aware of some of the disadvantages of the small school, 
but they seem to appreciate very keenly the advantages of 
having a neighborhood small school for their compact com­
munity.

Q. Have those meetings been held on more than one occa­
sion? A. Yes, sir, in some cases, only this subject has 
been discussed, and it was discussed as a part of the larger 
contacts when other matters would be discussed, about the

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



185

needs of the school, different problems, immediately exist­
ing in the school areas, and improvements of the school 
that might be made, and that sort of thing. I do recall that 
some improvements have been made in this school, as a 
result of the cooperative discussion and planning of repre­
sentative citizens.

Q. How strongly have the parents in this small district 
expressed themselves about any closing or consolidation of 
that school! A. They expressed a very strong, firm posi­
tion. I don’t recall how long since we held our last discus­
sion with them. I used to be in on nearly all such dis­
cussions, but, since our system has become so large, there 
are many discussions of this kind held now that are con­
ducted by the associate superintendent with the help of 
the assistant superintendent. It is entirely possible that 
there have been discussions with representatives of this 
community since I last participated in such discussions.

Q. Does the Board ordinarily take into account the feel­
ings of the community, with regard to its school in any 
degree! A. Yes, very much so. Based on my experience 
and observation, I would have no hesitation in saying that 
our Board attempts to develop and maintain a closely 
working relationship with the citizens in their respective 
communities more than any board of education with which 
I am familiar.

Q. That brings us to this point. You were asked many 
specifics by counsel for Plaintiffs in the direct portion of 
your testimony. Would you explain to the Court, please, 
the method of administration of the school board staff, 
under your direction, and your acquaintance with those spe­
cifics of each department, the organization of the depart­
ments, and so on! A. The administrative staff has been 
reorganized twice since I became a member of the staff.

Supt. Cranford LI. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



186

In 1948, when I became Assistant Superintendent, we had 
one assistant superintendent at that time, who was in 
charge of Negro schools and school bus transportation. 
I was assigned the responsibility of the curriculum and 
instruction, or, to make a long story short, the last and 
most recent reorganization of the staff has resulted in this 
kind of arrangement. The superintendent is obviously re­
sponsible to the board and the board to the people. Di­
rectly under the superintendent, we have the following 
people: the Associate Superintendent, the Treasurer- 
Comptroller, who is the budget officer, Supervisor of Pub­
lic Information and Co-ordinator of Research. The Associ­
ate Superintendent coordinates the main flow of admin­
istration as it is related to the operation of the schools 
themselves. He coordinates all staff planning. That in­
volves five assistant superintendents: one in charge of gen­
eral administration, one in charge of pupil personnel and 
special services, one in charge of curriculum and instruc­
tion, one in charge of staff personnel and one in charge of 
business administration. The principals report directly to 
the assistant superintendent in charge of general admin­
istration, the position of which is vacant at the present 
time, due to the resignation of Dr. Hall early last Pall, 
which means, of course, that the superintendent at the 
present time concentrates his major efforts giving inten­
sive supervision and direction to the associate superin­
tendent, who works closely with the Treasurer-Comptroller, 
to make sure that expenditures are in keeping with the 
board approved budget, and he spends a great deal of time 
in supplying and publishing information and directing and 
planning research to supply the information needed by 
citizens and by the board itself, but the most important 
function of the superintendent at the present time is his

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



187

working with and for the board. The work has become 
voluminous and special effort is made in Mobile to keep 
our board adequately informed on all phases of the pro­
gram. I suppose one-half or more than one-half of my 
time is given to reading and approving board activities, 
because of assigning responsibilities that stem directly 
from action taken by the board, making sure that the proper 
files are kept, which will give me an understanding of the 
complete status of every individual item that is being- 
handled by the board and by individual staff members.

Q. You just don’t have too much day to day contact with 
the statistics, the figures of each of the departments headed 
by the assistant superintendents? A. That is correct. I 
receive numerous information reports and I try to read 
all of those reports hurriedly and rapidly, but I seldom 
have time enough to assimilate those reports to the degree 
that I would be very familiar with very many specific facts.

Q. How long have you been engaged in public school ad­
ministration? A. I began teaching in 1930. I started as 
principal in a small rural school. Then, since that time, I 
have served as principal of two rather large high schools. 
I spent two years in the field of guidance, in the extension 
division of the University of Alabama, and then I came to 
Mobile as Assistant Superintendent in 1948. I became 
superintendent of the Mobile Public School System in 1952, 
so, in one form or another, I have been engaged in some 
form of school administration, after one year of teaching, 
beginning in 1930, about twenty-four years—no, thirty-four 
years, excuse me.

Q. Where did you get your work in the field, your col­
lege work in the field? A. My under graduate work for 
the most part and my master’s degree work both were com­
pleted at the University of Alabama. My doctorate work

Supt. Cranford II, Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



188

was completed at Teachers College, Columbia University.
Q. Where were you before you came to Mobile? A. I 

was at the University of Alabama, for a two year period. 
There was a break off in that period, one year having been 
spent in New York, attending Columbia University.

Q. Where were you born and raised? A. Cullman 
County, Alabama.

Q. Now, let’s look back for a moment at the plan, the 
desegregation plan, under which the schools of Mobile 
County are presently being administered and some of the 
provisions thereof. I first draw to your attention the pro­
vision of the plan that assignments to particular schools of 
those pupils in the school shall remain in effect, unless a 
tranfer be granted. I ask you if this provision was enacted 
new for the purpose of this plan? A. No, sir, it was a 
continuation of what had been a traditional practice in the 
Mobile Public School System, a long traditional practice.

Q. You say a long traditional practice. Can you date its 
beginning? A. Not with any degree of objectivity. It has 
gone back beyond 1948.

Q. But it has gone back at least that far? A. Yes, sir.
Q. How about a set period being provided during which 

transfers should be requested, is that new, by virtue of this 
plan? A. It is not.

Q. How long has that practice been in effect in the Mo­
bile School System, to your knowledge? A. As long as I 
can remember. I don’t recall the specific dates that have 
been announced at different times. I think I recall—I am 
not certain about this—there have been minor changes in 
some of the announced dates for certain reasons when 
transfers would have to be submitted, but I don’t think 
there have been significant changes in the announced dates

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



189

which gave the time transfers would have to be submitted 
for consideration.

Q. Is there a policy, Dr. Burns, with regard to the pre­
registration of first grade children in the Mobile School 
System, which is being followed at present? A. There is 
a policy, yes, sir.

Q. What is done in that regard by your system? A. 
Well, it is rather a complicated plan. It involves the pre­
registration of first graders in all school districts and the 
first grade teachers are given some time for this specific 
purpose. I believe it is our practice now that the presently 
enrolled first graders during a current term are kept home 
on preregistration dates, so that the first grade teachers 
and parents can engage in the necessary conversations and 
gathering of information and that sort of thing of com­
pleting the forms to facilitate all phases of planning and 
preparation for the new school term. This has come to be 
a very important part of our overall planning in moving 
from one year to another.

Q. When does this occur normally? I mean what month? 
A. I don’t recall the date, but it is along about the time 
when we are gathering a lot of other types of information 
that are used fundamentally in sound planning in moving 
from one term to another, but it is in the Spring.

Q. In the Spring of the year before the first graders are 
to enter school? A. That is correct.

Q. Is this a new practice, so far as the Mobile School 
System is concerned? A. No, sir.

Q. About how long, to your knowledge, has this been 
practiced in Mobile? A. As far as I can remember.

Q. Dr. Burns, has the Mobile County School System fol­
lowed any policy in regard to school attendance areas and 
neighborhood schools? A. I might say that the neighbor­

Supt. Cranford H. Barns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



190

hood school has been a traditional idea in the Mobile School 
System as long as I have been associated with the system.

Q. Are you yourself in favor of the neighborhood school 
system? A. Yes, I am. I have very strong opinions on 
the neighborhood school. In fact, at the time I served as 
principal of schools in Alabama, what little reputation I 
had as an administrator in those years was based primarily 
on the fact, I think, that I was noted for operating what 
was called then community schools. By community schools, 
I mean schools that include adults and citizens and young 
adults in a wide variety of activities, cultural and educa­
tional in nature, and, in some cases, recreational in nature. 
I am committed to the philosophy of education that is broad 
in perspective, broad in scope, and I believe that the public 
schools of America, more than any other institution, other 
than the family, has got to maintain a close working rela­
tionship with the community, to the end that parents and 
children will get their roots down in the culture real deep 
and to grow, learn and prosper in community life in mat­
ters that will be satisfying and areas that will be purpose­
ful and meaningful to them as well as uplifting to the 
community. I believe that the community school is one of 
the best things that America provides for this kind of 
activity in our culture.

Q. Now, by that, Dr. Burns, do you mean a system of 
neighborhood schools with the rigidity which requires that 
persons living close to that school attend that school! A. 
My concept of the neighborhood school is not one that is 
rigidly conceived and rigidly administered. There are a 
wide variety of circumstances extenuating in character 
which are important to parents and citizens in their school 
associations that, at least, traditionally in Mobile have 
been considered in the relationship between the board and

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



191

its citizens, so the community school concept uncontrovert- 
edly I think has an atmosphere of some degree of flexibility 
to take care of many factors that might be very humane in 
nature.

Q. Do you consider this important ? A. Yes, I do. How­
ever, I would say in all fairness to our plan that such flex­
ibility should not be used as a screen to support and prac­
tice racial discrimination.

Q. Is the school system under your administration prac­
ticing such discrimination by virtue of such flexibility?

Mr. Bell: Objection.
Judge Thomas: It invades the province of the 

Court, but I will let him answer it. Do you so con­
sider it?

Mr. Bell: Exception.

A. Shall I answer the question?

Mr. Wood: Perhaps I should re-phrase the ques­
tion. Do you consider that the administration of the 
school system, under your direction, is presently 
discriminating against pupils by virtue of race or 
color?

A. No, sir.
Q. (Mr. Wood continuing) Are you making a real effort 

to avoid such? A. That is correct.
Q. Now, based upon these long standing policies, Dr. 

Burns, which have been built into this desegregation plan, 
could you state to the Court what provisions have been 
incorporated into the plan, in order to insure its non dis­
criminatory character, and, first of all, as to these students 
now in the school system, what you have done to give it a 
non discriminatory character? A. Well, in the first place,

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



192

we have tried to understand the Court approved plan. We 
have tried to develop policies and administrative procedures 
that are peculiarly geared to the Court approved plan. 
This, I think, has led us to see our children in attendance 
at the public schools fall into two broad general categories 
perhaps. Your first group of students might be referred 
to as the students who are presently enrolled in schools. 
Children who are presently enrolled in schools have to get 
a transfer if they attend another school, so that two or 
three things can happen to this particular classification of 
students enrolled in our schools. They can request a trans­
fer and their transfer will be considered on the basis of 
merits as set forth in the request, and they are presently 
being considered on a non racial basis. They can attend 
the school where they are presently enrolled, or they can 
move their residence from one community to another area, 
and thereby become classified in another group of students, 
that we would look upon as being new so far as attendance 
areas are concerned. Now, this second classification or 
group of students that are less stabilized in the school 
situation include the first graders coming in for the first 
time and people moving into Mobile County not having 
affiliated their children with a particular school district 
prior to that time, just additional students who have come, 
and sufficient reasons make significant moves from one 
community to another, and thereby merit consideration 
becoming a part of the new attendance area.

Q. What rights do those newcomers and first graders 
have to go to a school? A. Well, they have two rights : one 
is absolutely non debatable; they can go to the school in 
which they reside, because we have eliminated dual ele­
mentary school districts. These districts are in the process 
of being completed and will be acted upon by our Board

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



193

in the very near future, but, for all practical purposes, we 
have already begun to act upon informally what we have 
every reason to believe will be legal in the very near future.

Q. So the newcomer and the first grader have a perfect 
right to attend the school in his attendance area ? A. With­
out regard to race.

Q. Does he have any option or choice? A. He has one 
option, and that is he can also attend the closest school 
otherwise formerly attended by his race. That would apply 
to both white and Negro alike. In this case, he does not 
have to furnish reasons. Of course, some limitations have 
to be placed upon transfers, as you can understand, because 
we have a terrific problem when it comes to keeping facili­
ties and enrollment in proper adjustment to each other.

Q. Now, these newcomers who have the right to attend 
the school in their district or in their attendance area have 
an option to attend the nearest school formerly serving 
their race. Do either of those procedures require any trans­
fer or anything other than turning up at the school? A. 
As I recall, nothing is required of them, except to appear 
at the school and to request admission. This gives the 
school board a little less control obviously over this matter 
of keeping facilities and children adjusted to each other 
to the best possible advantage, but, thus far, it has not 
proven to be an insurmountable disadvantage.

Q. Do you consider that much loss of control desirable? 
A. I consider this a logical step in what the Courts of 
America appear to be trying to accomplish.

Q. I am speaking though from the standpoint of school 
administration, do you think it desirable to have something 
else than utter rigidity? A. Yes, I certainly do.

Q. Now, with regard to this option— A. May I respond 
further to your question?

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



194

Q. Yes. A. It has been my experience as Superintendent 
that the Board of Education can exercise proper discretion 
and proper control in keeping facilities and enrollment in 
proper adjustment to each other with some degree of flexi­
bility in regard to these multitudes of factors that parents 
and citizens have come to think of as being important in 
working out their school associations.

Q. Now, just a moment on this option, if a parent deter­
mines that he would prefer for some reason good unto 
himself not to send his child to the school attendance area 
where he lives and elects and turns up at the school former­
ly serving his race at that district, is this option exercisable 
without regard to the racial make-up of the school in the dis­
trict! A. It has nothing to do with it.

Q. Is the option exercisable or is it tied at all to the 
race of the pupil? A. No, sir.

Q. Is it tied at all to the racial make-up of the school 
outside the district where he has the option to attend, 
its present racial make-up! A. Theoretically, this option 
could be to a school that would serve one race, or it might 
be to a school that would be serving two races. Theretically, 
it could be either one, but it would depend upon the par­
ticular context that would prevail at a particular time in 
the developmental scheme.

Q. It is described simply as its former status, not pres­
ent or future status? A. That is correct.

Q. Now, there is one other area in the plan that I want 
to explore a moment. You spoke earlier of the abolition of 
the dual districts by race. Is there any specific policy or 
practice with regard to those Negro or white pupils who 
are in a particular school because they are living or have 
lived in one of those former dual zones? A. Yes, we have 
had some experience working with that problem.

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



195

Q. What does the school board do under those circum­
stances? A. We have gone beyond what we consider the 
Court approved plan to technically demand and require, 
whereas we were moving out of the dual zone system, we 
have in some instances received requests from a few stu­
dents who lived in the dual zone, and, in such instance, 
insofar as I can recall, in all instances, we have given the 
parent the choice, unless there were very, very compelling 
external reasons why this would not be practical and 
feasible. In other words, we have avoided what some might 
consider to be an effort to evade the overall purpose of 
the Courts, with reference to this question, and the illus­
tration that might be given in this connection would be 
the students who were approved for Murphy High School, 
who lived in a neighborhood where both white and Negro 
citizens reside, many of the white students—the white stu­
dents going to Murphy High School and the Negro students 
going to Williamson High School, but they are living in 
what was classified as a dual zone. Special consideration 
was given to those applicants and the Board was in a 
position to give them their option by virtue of that fact, 
but this policy does not mean that the Board automatically 
and arbitrarily disregarded any and all other considera­
tions.

Judge Thomas: It has been an hour and fifteen 
minutes since we had a recess.

Mr. W ood: In about a minute, please, your Honor, 
I am almost through with this thought.

Birdie Mae Davis, who is one of the Plaintiffs in 
this case, and is now attending Murphy High School, 
has testified from this stand that her transfer was 
granted to Murphy when she was in the Williamson- 
Murphy District?

Supt. Cranford II. Burns-—for Plaintiffs—Cross



196

A. I believe so, but I am not too sure about all of the names.
Q. (Mr. Wood continuing) But there has been special 

consideration given to those who requested transfers out 
of dual zones and an option has been given to them to go 
to a school of the other race? A. If at all possible.

Mr. Wood: I think this would be all right, Judge.
Judge Thomas: Take a fifteen minute recess.
Thereupon, a fifteen minute recess was had.
Thereafter, Court re-convened and the following 

transpired:

Mr. W ood: Dr. Burns, you were asked last Friday 
on Direct Examination as to what you would advise 
a Negro parent, who came to you and said: I want 
to request a transfer. To which school should I re­
quest a transfer for my child. Why are you unable 
to answer such a question?

A. First of all, it is an involved question, and many of 
those requests for transfers have implications, they have 
more than one set of phenomena—sometimes a request will 
involve half a dozen factors, sometimes there is only one 
major factor under consideration that is important to the 
particular applicant, and, of course, I am not independently 
familiar with all these things, except what I learn through 
the staff members, but I do know that it requires an ex­
change of ideas and information and extended conferences 
often times to bring out all of the facts that are important 
in looking realistically and fairly at a particular application 
for a transfer.

Q. (Mr. Wood continuing) As a matter of fact, Dr. Burns, 
are not actions on transfer requests withheld until all re­

Supt. Cranford If. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



197

quests are in hand? A. Yes, and I recall distinctly that 
this change in policy was made at my direction many years 
ago, in fact, shortly after I became Superintendent, be­
cause one of the things I discovered was the fact that some 
of the early requests that would come in for transfers 
would be granted and later on there would be other requests 
submitted by people who were neighbors of those persons 
who might have as good or better reasons perhaps than the 
persons making the requests already acted upon, and that 
would make for general confusion, conflict and criticism in 
the community. So, we finally decided on a policy to receive 
and hold all applications for transfers until the dead line 
had passed, then, in terms of what can be accomplished for 
the good of the sj'stem, in terms of what the facilities would 
allow, and then in terms of the applications that had the 
best reasons, we could make decisions on the basis of groups 
of requests so that we could be fair to all parties concerned, 
and still not get the school system out of gear, as far as 
maintaining the proper relationship between facilities and 
students are concerned. That practice has been in opera­
tion now for many years. It must date back some time along 
about 1952 or 1953, because I think that is one of the first 
new policies I instituted as superintendent.

Q. What is the status of the re-draft of attendance areas, 
insofar as the Mobile County System is concerned? A. 
The basic research has been completed and the materials 
that describe and reflect this research are now in the process 
of preparation and we would hope to be able to present the 
interpretation of the materials with recommendations to 
the Board at an early date, certainly some time during this 
month—I would hesitate to say that this could be handled 
at the next board meeting, because Mr. McPherson has 
been at graduate school this semester and he has been a

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



198

little short handed, but, if everything works out favorably, 
we should get this cleared with the Board quite soon.

Q. Your Board meets how often? A. Twice a month.
Q. You have a meeting of the Board next Wednesday? 

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Then another meeting two weeks from then! A. Yes, 

sir.
Q. You feel confidant it will be presented at one of those 

two meetings! A. Yes, sir, the time factor is very impor­
tant in this case. It might be important enough to justify 
a special called meeting of the Board. That has not been 
discussed, however, at the Board, but I would like to em­
phasize the time factor there, because this is a key decision 
to all of the other decisions that will have to be made in 
the Spring period that relate to the development of plans 
for next year. By plans, I make reference to transportation 
routing, personnel assignments, number of teachers to be 
assigned to given schools, amount of money to be set up in 
the budget for certain purposes, as apportioned to schools, 
and all this kind of thing, so you can see the planning in 
the pupil personnel office is the first step in the total com­
plex of planning that helps you move from one school year 
to another.

Q. Now, speaking of the total complex of planning, sup­
pose the present plan in effect in this system were to be 
discarded and an entirely new method of administering 
the school system of Mobile County would be adopted, 
what would that involve from the standpoint of the school 
board ? A. I can only speculate about it, not knowing what 
the new plan might be, how many changes might be in­
volved, I would not hesitate to say that any change in our 
planning at this particular time would create serious prob­

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



199

lems, as far as carrying out the planning in making prep­
arations for the new school term ahead.

Q. You are speaking now of any significant changes? A. 
That is correct.

Q. Suppose, for example, the new system were ordered 
to grant to all pupils complete freedom of choice as to 
where they wanted to go to school, what would be the result 
on the part of the school board? A. Not knowing what 
the choice would be, I am afraid it would be utter choice. 
This is not facetious when I say I might want to submit 
my resignation, because I can hardly imagine a school sys­
tem with 39,000 children overloaded in our class rooms 
right now, with the tremendous changes that are taking 
place that present problems ahead, and to make a change 
of that kind, I think would just present insurmountable 
problems. We had 14,000 children in half day sessions a 
little more than two years ago, and, although we have all 
of our children out of half day sessions this year by using 
more than two hundred portable class rooms, we still have 
39,000 children in very crowded class rooms, we still have 
substandard facilities, in many, many instances, we have 
children being taught in cafeterias, we have all kinds of 
improvisations going on, in order to avoid half day ses­
sions, and a recent study we have made shows that to catch 
up and be up with our building program, five years from 
now, based on projected trends, we would have to spend 
in the neighborhood of approximately $40,000,000.00 on 
capital outlay facilities. This gives you just a general idea 
of the context in which we are trying to carry forward this 
Court approved plan in good faith. The more difficult these 
circumstances are, the more complex they are, the less 
flexibility our board has in meeting demands that might be 
unreasonable and impractical. The Board, under those cir­

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiff's—Cross



200

cumstances, will have to maintain some degree of control 
over the process; otherwise, in all sincerity, it would be 
utter chaos.

Q. Would it make the problem much easier if your sys­
tem were re-organized to permit every child to, say, go to 
the nearest school to his home? A. Well, there again we 
would have a lot of confusion and chaos because proximity 
is only one of a multitude of factors that are important in 
school attendance areas. You have the preference of par­
ents and citizens. You have safety hazards. You have new- 
housing developments. You have super highways, they are 
coming in, completely re-vamping communities, making out­
dated facilities, you have neighborhoods that formerly have 
been accommodated by such facilities, you have a general 
movement of people from the business areas of the com­
munity to the western districts, creating vacant class rooms 
in some areas, creating pressures and demands in areas of 
growth, and our board has been compelled to follow the 
practice of transporting pupils from many crowded com­
munities to areas of declining growth, as one means of 
keeping enrollment and facilities somevdiat in adjustment 
to each other.

Q. Returning to another subject for a minute, the motion 
before the Court presently is a request for the assignment 
of teachers and administrative personnel without regard 
to race. What would be the effect of such a method on the 
school system, were it to be instituted presently? A. This 
is not an easy question for anyone to answer. I can only 
speculate, but wTe know, we have reasons for believing that 
this particular phase or stage of desegregation will be one 
of the most difficult because it involves not only adult rela­
tionships, which are more difficult in most cases than child 
and youth relationships, but you have involved some deli­

Supt. Cranford //. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



201

cacies and some intimacies as between and among the par­
ents, the students and the teachers, and a wide variety of 
activities, including counseling problems, solving displeas­
ing matters, and what not, that there would be present more 
difficult problems for us, to say the least. I would certainly 
think and be willing to generalize that the Court has been 
wise in suggesting other phases of desegregation as pre­
liminary steps in the overall foundation and long range 
view of such arrangements.

Q. Do you— A. I started to say one further thing. 
People have differences of opinion on subjects of this kind, 
as we all know, but, knowing people to be what they are, 
I would anticipate and contemplate a lot of problems and 
dissatisfactions among personnel, both white and Negro, 
and I would certainly be running the risk of getting resig­
nations that would hurt us at some of the strategic spots, 
as far as manning the specialized features of the school 
program is concerned.

Q. What is the present supply of good teachers that is 
available, of personnel, to bring into the system? A. The 
situation is slightly better than it was a few years ago. We 
find ourselves slipping back however sometimes on certain 
fronts in some of the specialized fields, such as science and 
mathematics, but we are in fair shape personnel wise at 
the present time. Most of the applicants that are unas­
signed are applicants who do not have high professional 
standing and rating. There might be minor exceptions in 
some cases, in a particular subject matter area, where 
teachers have been overtrained, as opposed to certain other 
subject matter areas where we do not have enough trained 
teachers to carry on the program as it should be carried. 
At the present time, we are trying to develop and maintain 
a close working relationship with all teacher training insti­

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiff's—Cross



202

tutions in Alabama, so that those institutions can be con­
stantly aware of our needs and the imbalance that some­
times is allowed to develop in the specialized training areas, 
and that is one of our major problems today in the field 
of education. For instances, we have too many people 
wanting to train to teach social studies and PUnglish, as 
opposed to teaching mathematics and science.

Q. Dr. Burns, for the 1964-65 school year, were any tests 
administered to Negro children, who applied for transfers 
that were not administered to white children? A. No, sir.

Q. As a matter of fact, were any tests administered at 
all for those seeking transfers? A. That is right, no tests 
at all. I might add that the year before we sincerely thought 
that the test program might be of additional assistance 
along with all of the other data, and there were some tests 
given, but we found that those tests did not add signifi­
cantly to the overall picture of the individual student and 
the practice was discontinued, and this year, as opposed 
to giving the standardized tests, we started the practice of 
reviewing the overall accumulative record of the individual 
student.

Q. Was that for all persons requesting transfers? A. 
For all of the students in the specified grades. I am not too 
sure about just what groups were included in that.

Q. What I had in mind, were there differences racially ? 
A. No difference in practice and policy racially, but I don’t 
recall specifically the groups of transfers that were re­
viewed on this basis. I presume it must have been those 
students who had specific applications to the Court ap­
proved plan. Mr. McPherson could be more explicit on this 
point.

Q. Dr. Burns, Plaintiffs have filed an exhibit, purporting 
to be a summary of courses being offered at some schools

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



203

and not at others, which we have not had an opportunity 
to review, but may we talk about why courses are offered 
at various schools? Will you state generally why some 
courses are given at some schools and not at others? A. 
Well, the foundation of your educational program is based 
upon a counseling program that is conducted with indi­
vidual students and their parents. This counseling pro­
gram involves the development of both educational and 
vocational plans. Those educational and vocational plans 
are different in many respects, because they are geared to 
the preference of students. There are no restrictions placed 
upon students to what they can work toward as goals in 
life. We have certain courses which are required to assure 
meeting the needs of society—they are required courses, 
and, individual differences being as great as they are, we 
have to have special groups within this frame work of re­
quired courses, including some remedial courses—that is 
called general education. Then, we have a long list of what 
we call special education, elective courses that are designed 
to develop specialized interests, specialized abilities, and 
specialized aptitudes, and these special courses lead toward 
specialized advanced training and specialized vocations.

Judge Thomas: Let me ask you this: Were the 
same courses being offered at Murphy and Central 
High?

A. In broad, general terms, for the most part, but there 
would be some exceptions perhaps.

Judge Thomas: All right, would the same courses 
be offered at Murphy as were offered at the high 
school at Grand Bay?

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



204

A. Well, there would be a greater difference, because of 
the greater difference in the size of the schools, because 
the greater the number of students in your student body, 
the greater will be the spread of your courses offered, if 
you have a program that is peculiarly geared to the bal­
anced needs and abilities of your student body. Now, we 
run into this problem, and this is a costs factor, it costs 
more to operate a small secondary school than it does to 
operate a large secondary school. You simply cannot afford 
financially to offer all the specialized elective courses in a 
small high school that you can offer in a larger high school. 
I would have to admit that some secondary students are 
limited in some of the specialized studies, if they attend 
a small school, where we do not have a sufficient number 
of students to justify offering certain courses, but, to over­
come this, we have a policy to locate personnel on a basis 
that partially overcomes this handicap by virtue of the 
fact that our policy allocates teachers on a basis in such an 
area that you have more teachers per students in the 
smaller high schools than is true in the larger high schools, 
so this partly overcomes that problem, but not completely.

Mr. Wood: Let me ask you about whether or not 
your experience has shown that difficulty for the 
students in courses varies materially from school to 
school? I don’t know whether my question is clear 
or not. Are some schools harder than others, harder 
for the student?

A. Yes, I think so. I cannot speak too authoritatively on 
this subject, because I have not done the kind of research 
that would make it possible for me to answer such a ques­
tion, with a high degree of objectivity, but we do know that

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



205

socio-economic backgrounds of school communities are re­
flected in the intellectual aptitudes and abilities of the 
children who attend those schools, and the teachers find 
themselves unconsciously, I think, making an adaptation 
of the backgrounds and abilities of youngsters and adopt­
ing standards somewhat accordingly, without throwing 
standards to the wind and without disregarding standards 
as such.

Q. (Mr. Wood continuing) As a generality, would a large 
high school be more difficult for the student than a small 
high school? A. Not necessarily so, but in all probability.

Q. How about, say, a rural school? A. The larger high 
schools are generally located in your larger communities, 
and, in most instances the socio-economic backgrounds of 
families are higher, and you certainly have a greater spread 
of elective courses in the large schools. It goes without 
saying that faculties expect and demand and require higher 
standards and higher performance in the elective courses 
than is true in the required courses. This is important in 
my opinion, because in general education, the major em­
phasis has been citizen education, preparing boys and girls 
to live effectively in a Democratic society and to take their 
responsibilities as citizens, realizing the tremendous spread 
of individual differences that are represented in the elec­
tive courses, we have an obligation to society and to the 
individual student to see to it that he learns his foundation 
well and solidly, and is qualifying himself step by step 
for the next stage of education, and if he cannot meet the 
uncompromising specializations in those specialized areas 
he needs to learn early enough in his career to re-think and 
re-plan his course of study and his future plans.

Q. Do the facilities, the physical facilities provided in 
the secondary schools, vary from school to school? A. Yes.

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Cross



206

Q. Is this true along racial lines or some other factor? 
A. It is not a racial line, but you will find some differences 
in preferences as between schools that are predominantly 
white and predominantly Negro, because of traditions, be­
cause of opportunities that have been available in the past, 
and you will find minor differences in the elective courses 
offered in all of the high schools of the system. Some of 
those differences go back to the factor of size, some go 
back to the factor of community background, but perhaps 
most important of all is related to the individual preference 
of students and their parents that are reflected in the 
counseling process each spring, as they are preparing for 
the signing up of students for the courses they are to take 
the following year.

Mr. Wood: That is all.

Redirect Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. You indicated, Dr. Burns, that no tests were given 
to transfer applicants last year. A. You mean for this 
year, 1964-65?

Q. Yes? A. That is correct.
Q. The plan still provides provisions for testing of trans­

fer applicants, does it not? A. I would have to admit 
that I don’t recall explicitly. You mean as mandatory?

Q. As a proper criterion to which transfer applicants 
could be submitted? A. I might add—

Q. Could you answer that first, whether or not you 
recall? A. No, I am sorry to say that I cannot recall 
distinctly.

Q. Let me just show you what I think is an accurate copy 
of the plan contained in the record under the second sec­
tion of transfers. It gives various information about how

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



207

the transfers are to be made, pupil placement criteria used, 
and let’s turn it over to Section E, Tests and Interviews 
may be required, but those interviews, who may conduct 
or authorize such examinations or tests or other investiga­
tions. You say it is not mandatory, as I understand it? 
A. Such tests can be given.

Q. Such tests can be given! A. Yes, let me, if I may, 
explain in little more detail why we arrived at this decision. 
Along about the time our plan was instituted or shortly 
thereafter—I don’t recall exactly when—the state itself 
instituted a standardized test program at given grade levels 
and these test scores annually are made a part of the 
cumulative record of all students, so we knew in effect 
that if we gave up the testing program ourselves that we 
would be without sufficient test results that would be re­
flected on the cumulative record of the students which has 
been reviewed in this process of dealing with transfers.

Q. So, what you are saying, with applicants last year, 
while you gave them these special tests, you did review the 
result of tests as given as part of the school career? A. 
Yes.

Q. You indicated also—I am not real certain about it— 
that the only persons whose test results were reviewed 
by you, as a part of the action and decision on the transfer 
application, were students who sought to take advantage 
of their rights under the desegregation plan. Is that cor­
rect or not? A. I think the review of the records— 
frankly, I am afraid I don’t know the answer to that 
question—I do know there was considerable effort made 
to review the cumulative records of the transfer group 
and I would hesitate to say how far that was extended, 
how many students were involved, because it was all 
handled by our pupil personnel office, but I know this

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



208

part of the program was conducted on a non racial basis. 
Whatever was done in connection with requests from 
whites for transfers followed in the same way in dealing 
with the transfers for Negroes.

Q. Except that you didn’t have any requests from white 
pupils to be assigned to desegregated schools this past 
year, did you! A. No, sir, I believe not.

Q. How many transfer requests did you get of all types, 
not only for desegregated schools, but all types! A. I 
really don’t know, but a sizable number.

Q. Do you mean several hundred? A. Perhaps a few 
hundred.

Q. Many of those would be because of change of res­
idence? A. They would represent every form of human 
circumstances, all kinds.

Q. A child might want—I notice in Plaintiff Exhibit 13 
some of the high schools offered an impressive list of 
subjects—a child who was in one of the smaller high 
schools you were discussing and who wanted to get en­
richment in language or science may use this as the basis 
for transfer request? A. There may have been a few 
instances where curriculum problems have merited some 
consideration, but not to the exclusion of other factors.

Q. You indicate to give freedom of choice to every child 
in the system would lead to chaos and possibly your 
resignation, in that answer, were you considering giving 
freedom of choice to every child for every reason? A. 
Well, I was thinking in terms of granting the requests 
that might be submitted. I could only speculate.

Q. In other words, your answer was based on per­
mitting every one of the 80,000 pupils in this system to 
indicate to you which school they wanted to go to, regard­
less of all other factors, and this is what you said would

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



209

lead to chaos, isn’t that correct! A. Well, that would be 
one interpretation you could place upon it, but there are 
also other interpretations you could place upon that, ques­
tion.

Q. Do you feel there would be more chaos if freedom of 
choice were offered in a more limited fashion! A. It 
would depend on how much flexibility was provided, how 
much control left to the Board, on the number of indi­
vidual cases, you would have to investigate and deal with, 
because it is only humanly possible to deal with a given 
number of requests from an administration standpoint.

Q. Let me ask you this: Let’s limit the question as to 
what would be the result of order or chaos, if absolute 
freedom of choice were given, with one limitation—that 
being the over crowded condition in a school—in which 
case whoever lived closest to the school would have a right 
to go to that school, if absolute freedom of choice with 
that limitation were granted to those students seeking a 
desegregated education, what would your answer be as to 
how the school board could carry this out? A. I think it 
would be almost insurmountable.

Q. Now, last year we had desegregation in four grades, 
isn’t that correct? A. Yes.

Q. All told, according to your answers to the inter­
rogatories, we had, including those coming in from out 
of town, between fifteen and twenty applications for deseg­
regated education, isn’t that correct? A. That is correct.

Q. Novq the year before, if I am not mistaken, counting 
every type of notice to get a desegregated education, start­
ing with the parents of some Negro children at white 
schools, early in January 1963, including the whole flock 
of twenty or twenty-five applications that came to you, 
outside of the time limits that were later set up by the

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



210

Court and including those few that came during the period 
when the Court indicated applications could be received, 
I would think there were about thirty or thirty-five re­
quests, isn’t that correct, those were in all grades? A. I 
don’t recall the number, but there must have been twenty- 
five or thirty, but I don’t recall, all told.

Q. Now, my question then is: In view of the number of 
applications you got for all grades during 1963, in view 
of the number of applications you got for all grades dur­
ing 1964, in view of the number of grades that the Board 
is presently committed to open on a desegregated basis for 
1965, would you explain why you feel that guaranteeing 
that every applicant who seeks a desegregated education 
this Fall could get it would result in chaos and confusion 
in the system?

Mr. Wood: Your Honor, I object, on the grounds 
that there is no way that the Negro children are 
entitled to be discriminated in favor of against all 
others—

Judge Thomas: Sustained.
Mr. Bell: What did you say?
Judge Thomas: Sustained. Re-phrase your ques­

tion.
Mr. Bell: My question is: In responce to the in­

formation Mr. Burns has given on Cross Examina­
tion, granting freedom of choice would cause chaos 
in the system. First, I want to know what he means 
by freedom of choice; being answered fully on that, 
I pose the situation where freedom of choice is 
limited to those students who are seeking a deseg­
regated education—that is, Negroes seeking admis­
sion to white schools, as a practical matter, I point

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



211

to the figures of the number who sought such ap­
plications during 1963-64 school year, and T asked 
him why he feels that granting of such applications 
for 1965 would result in chaos, if it would?

A. Well, I have no way of knowing.

Mr. W ood: I renew my objection.
Judge Thomas: Overruled.
Mr. Wood: Exception.

A. I have no way of knowing how many whites and how 
many Negroes this next school term would like to have 
a desegregrated education.

Mr. Bell: Has the School Board made any sur­
veys or gone out into the community and tried to 
ascertain that information? A. No, sir.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) : But you do have the ex­
perience of the last two years, isn’t that correct? A. Yes, 
if I may offer this additional thought. I think some of the 
new stages, the new developments of the plan, and the 
broader application of the plan, without any shadow of a 
doubt, will open increased opportunities for both white 
and Negroes to get into desegregated schools to a much 
greater degree than has been true up to this point.

Q. In addition to the Board’s requirements to take at 
least two more grades, 2 and 9, what other factors do you 
feel would tend to increase the number of pupils who 
would be seeking desegregated education this year? A. I 
think the gradual result of the plan itself and the period 
of orientation that the community has had and the peace­
ful way in which the program has been accepted and the

Supt. Cranford H. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



212

overall reaction of citizens generally would seem to add 
up to the conclusion that there can be an acceptance on 
the part of more people to the broader implementation of 
the plan.

Q. To your knowledge, have any of the school personnel 
made studies of the use of freedom of choice and how much 
response there is to such desegregation plans in other 
communities'? A. No, I have had no opportunity to in­
vestigate this on a broader front.

Q. Do you believe even without this investigation, even 
with the knowledge that there are only twenty to thirty 
applications in the school system of almost 80,000, only 
twenty to thirty applications in the last two years, that 
this year there would be a sizable increase in the number 
of applications? A. I intended to say that there would 
be broader opportunities and greater opportunities, but I 
have no way of predicting the reactions of the citizens—

Q. Has the school hoard, in its planning, made any plans 
for the larger number of applicants for a desegregated 
education? A. We are prepared policywise and admin­
istratively procedure wise to implement in good faith the 
Court approved plan without racial discrimination.

Judge Thomas: Gentlemen, I will have to recess 
for lunch. I have an appointment at 1:30 that I 
would be compelled to keep. I will just have to keep 
it. I will recess until 2:00 o’clock.

Thereupon, Court recessed for lunch until 2:00 
P.M.

Thereafter, at 2:00 P.M. Court, re-convened, and 
the following proceedings were had:

Judge Thomas: You may proceed.
Mr. Bell: In the interest of saving perhaps a 

little time and eliminating some duplication, we

Supt. Cranford II. Burns—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



213

would request that we tender the witness, Dr. Burns, 
at this point until after testimony of Mr. McPherson, 
the Assistant Superintendent, with the understand­
ing that we could recall him if there were areas to 
be covered.

Judge Thomas: That is all right.
Judge Thomas: Mr. Wood, do you have any fur­

ther questions of Dr. Burns?
Mr. Wood: No, sir. May Dr. Burns be excused 

now from the rule, so that he can remain in the 
court room?

Mr. Bell: We have no objection.
Judge Thomas: All right.

Janies A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct

J ames A. M cP herson , being first sworn to speak the 
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, testified 
as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Wood:

Q. Mr. McPherson, don’t be afraid to speak up, because 
the court reporter has to record what you say and every­
body is interested. What is your occupation, Mr. McPher­
son? A. Assistant Superintendent of Mobile Public 
Schools, in charge of pupil personnel.

Q. How- long have you been so employed? A. Since 
August 1963.

Q. So that you have been Assistant Superintendent in 
charge of pupil personnel for the last two school years in 
Mobile County? A. That is correct.

Q. What did you do before that, please, sir? A. I served 
as Principal of Vigor High School.

Q. For how long? A. Five years.



214

Q. And before that! A. Principal of K, J. Clark Junior 
High School for two years.

Q. Both of those schools are in the Mobile County 
System? A. Yes, sir, that is correct.

Q. Where did you do your college work? A. I did my 
B. S. and M. A. degree at the University of Southern 
Mississippi.

Q. When did you get your Master’s? A. When?
Q. Yes? A. In 1951.
Q. Are you now pursuing a course of study in a higher 

institution? A. Yes, sir, at Auburn University.
Q. What does that lead toward, the study you are now 

doing? A. I hope it leads to Doctor in Education and 
Administration.

Q. How near are you to being through? A. I will com­
plete residence in August and then I will need the require­
ment of dissertation.

Q. During the time that you are school now, at Auburn, 
are you participating in any fashion in the administration 
of your department here at Mobile ? A. Yes, in a general 
supervisory capacity.

Q. When did you go to Auburn last? That is, when did 
you enroll for the the last time? A. January 4th, 1965.

Q. Prior to that, you had been here in Mobile, at your 
job, during, say, the first semester of this school year? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Were you at full time on your job here all of last year? 
A. No, I was on leave during the summer in 1964.

Q. I was speaking of the last school year? A. Oh, the 
last school year, yes.

Q. In a moment I am going to ask you something about 
the basic plan here in the Mobile County System for deseg­
regation. First of all, I would like to inquire about transfer

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct



215

requests that have been made by those students in the 
school system within the last two years. Do you recall 
about how many transfer requests you had during the 
April 1st to 15th transfer date for the current year? A. 
Approximately 500.

Q. Now, were those students of both races? A. Yes.
Q. Were all of those applications for transfer acted 

upon favorably? A. No.
Q. Could you give us any information of how many 

were granted and how many were denied? A. Not any 
specific numbers, but I would estimate we did not approve 
more than fifty percent of them, if that many.

Q. Would those approximately five hundred transfer 
requests represent all of the pupils in the Mobile County 
system who changed schools this year? A. Oh no, this 
only represents those that requested transfer through my 
office. In addition to that, I would estimate two, three or 
four thousand children that may change schools because 
of change in residence.

Q. That is moving from one attandance area to another? 
A. That is correct.

Q. Are those pupils required to make transfer requests 
during the April 1st to 15th date? A. No.

Q. How do they enter school, after they have moved? 
A. Simply by presenting themselves for enrollment and 
presentation of a transfer issued by the preceding prin­
cipal.

Q. I see. That is worked between schools. That does not 
even go through your office? A. There is a copy of the 
certificate of transfer that goes through my office.

Judge Thomas: I didn’t get that. What are you 
speaking of?

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct



216

Mr. Wood: I asked Mm if those five hundred were 
all the pupils that changed schools this year and he 
said No. Those who moved from one attendance 
area to another changed schools and that did not 
have to go through his office. Does this require any 
action on your part or the part of the central office, 
in order for them to go to a new school! A. No.

Q. (Mr. Wood continuing): Now, those persons changing 
attendance area, by moving, how are they considered in 
the overall desegregation plan of the Mobile County School 
System! A. Well, upon changing residence, if this change 
in residence would make it impracticable for them to con­
tinue in the present school, they simply present them­
selves to the school in the new attendance area, or to the 
nearest school formerly serving their race, on the option 
of the parents.

Q. Do they have the absolute right under the plan to 
attend the school within their residence? A. Yes, sir.

Q. But they do have this other option if they choose to 
exercise it? A. Yes, sir, that is correct.

Q. How do the number of applications for transfer re­
quests, those five hundred that came in your office, compare 
in number with those, say, of a year ago? A. About the 
same number.

Q. Was not, by virtue of the plan, the transfer period set 
ahead a bit? A. Yes, the dead line was moved from 
July 31st to April 15th, that is from April 1st to 15th.

Q. What was the reason for setting the transfer period 
ahead like that? A. Well, the growth of the school sys­
tem and the crowded condition—it was deemed necessary 
to have knowledge of the number of students that would 
be requesting transfer and the number that would be

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct



217

granted, in order to make necessary plans for housing 
the children properly and provide other facilities by Sep­
tember. This requires advance planning.

Q. Now, how does this transfer cut off period compare 
with the practice of preregistering the first grade children 
as to date? A. The transfer period is from April 1st to 
15th, and the preregistration of first graders has usually 
been for many years held during the latter part of April, 
and has been scheduled for this year on April 22nd.

Q. You say that has been done for many years? A. 
Yes.

Q. Now, let’s go back to the procedure for requesting 
tranfers for those now in the school system. It has been 
testified to that it is required their parent or parents pick 
up the transfer requests for them. Is that the practice? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Why is it that you make that requirement? A. Well, 
you cannot permit children to pick those forms up. Children 
could make application, if the forms were available to 
them, without the knowledge of the parents. We feel it is 
necessary to have some control of who gets the form and 
who makes the application.

Q. Now, do you require a signature on this form by both 
parents, if the child has two living parents? A. We re­
quire the signatures of both parents or an explanation, if it 
is not possible to have both signatures.

Q. Why is this? A. There are many instances in the 
system, from time to time, where parents are divided about 
where the children will go to school. We have some cases 
where the parents are separated and one parent will steal 
a child away, and the other parent will steal the child back, 
and we feel it necessary for the parents to be unified in 
this sort of matter.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct



218

Q. Has it been required that the parent return in person 
the application for transfer? A. Yes, sir.

Q. What was the purpose of that requirement? A. 
Well, in issuing the request forms, we ask that the parent 
sign, so that we would know when the signature comes back 
it is the signature of the parent, and we want to be sure 
that the application is being made by the parent of the 
child. It is just simply a control mechanism, to be sure 
that we are receiving the request from the parent of the 
child.

Q. Has this same procedure been required of both races ? 
A. Oh, yes.

Q. There has been no difference? A. No difference at 
all.

Q. Have you had any complaints from any persons made 
to you, or to your knowledge, to your department, about 
the procedure? A. None whatsoever.

Q. Now, these transfer requests, these five hundred odd, 
that came in last April, tell the Court, please, sir, how you 
went about determining which of those requests would be 
granted and which would be denied? A. Well, as the re­
quests arrived in our office, they were stamped as to the 
date and hour received and filed by the clerk, according to 
the school to which the request is made. After the dead 
line period and all requests have been received, the requests 
to a particular school are then assorted by the general 
area from which the requests come, that is, from which 
the child is presently enrolled or where he presently lives. 
We do this, in order to give the same consideration to 
the same requests from the same area, in order not to 
do for one child what we cannot do for another. Once this 
has been done, then, the requests are considered as to 
reason and the number in light of the facilities available

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct



219

at the school to which the request has been made, then, 
upon the application of board policy and the plan, the 
requests are acted upon.

Q. Now, in connection with the requests, did you make 
any examination of records of the children, whose parents 
were requesting transfer for them? A. Yes, in all requests 
for Grades 11 and 12, in the April 1st to 15th request 
period, we examined the records of the local school records 
of all applicants. Those were the only grades at that time 
that applied under the plan. This was done for both races.

Q. Were any children denied transfer by virtue of any­
thing you found in those records during this last period? 
A. No, they were not.

Q. Were any white children denied transfer during this 
past period? A. Oh, yes, many.

Q. Could you estimate how the proportion would com­
pare between the races? A. This would be difficult to do. 
I just don’t have this sort of information in mind.

Q. Now, let me ask you this. Were the transfer requests 
considered by you without regard to race? A. Yes.

Q. Were they granted or denied without regard to race?

Mr. Bell: Objection, as leading.
Judge Thomas: Overruled.
Mr. Bell: Exception.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct

A. Yes.

Mr. Wood: Did you consider race?
Judge Thomas: I think technically you are cor­

rect. This is a non jury case. If it were a jury case, 
I would certainly sustain your objection.

Mr. Bell: I would agree with that philosophy.



220

Mr. Wood: I think this would be admissible. Did 
you consciously apply any consideration of race to 
your consideration of those applications!

A. No, I did not.
Q. (Mr. Wood continuing) Do you ever have any late 

applications for transfers! A. Oh, yes.
Q. Could you give us any idea of whether any substan­

tial number or small number or what? A. We had a sub­
stantial number this past year.

Q. What action did you take with regard to late appli­
cations? A. They were denied on the ground that the 
requests were not submitted within the period.

Q. For both races? A. For both races.
Q. Why is it important to have those applications made 

within the time? A. Well, as I stated earlier, it is a matter 
of planning and providing facilities and instruction staff. 
The plan that is made in the Mobile public schools for the 
ensuing year is based upon the projected enrollment figures 
that are arrived at in my office through our research. The 
plan that is made is based upon those figures. It is very 
important that this be done early.

Q. For what reasons were requests made to transfer 
children? Do you recall some of them? A. Well, they are 
made for various and sundry reasons. We have requests 
made because of the parents’ working hours and necessity 
for children staying with someone else, or, in case of some 
younger children, it is necessary for them to attend a day 
school, that is, a private kindergarten, or a child care center, 
to attend school near that center. We have transfer re­
quests made because of reasons of health. We have chil­
dren with physical disabilities that prohibit them climbing 
stairs. Maybe there is a child on crutches. In a few cases,

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct



221

we have had wheel chair students. It is necessary for them 
to be in a school on a one grade level. Sometimes there is 
a transportation problem or parents are working in a 
certain part of town, traveling back and forth, and have to 
transport the child. We have just about as many different 
reasons as we have requests.

Q. Now, directing your attention to the applications that 
were made for transfers by Negro children to what had 
been white schools or predominantly white schools, do you 
recall any of those having been made on the ground of 
subject matter, inability to get proper subjects! A. No, 
not that specific reason.

Q. Did you ever have any inquiries from parents as to 
how to go about requesting a transfer! A. Oh, yes, we 
have calls. We are at this time receiving letters from par­
ents, indicating a desire to make a transfer request. In 
these cases, we mail them a form indicating to them the 
transfer period and the procedure for making the transfer.

Q. Do you ever advise a parent to what school he can 
transfer his child! A. No. I never tell them that they may 
transfer to this school or that school. I feel that this is a 
decision that the parent will want to make. Then, the 
request will be considered after it is made.

Q. Now, the first witness that the Plaintiff put on the 
stand was Mr. Algea Bolton, who lives in the Hillsdale 
Heights community, do you recall an application by him, 
on behalf of his daughter, to transfer from Hillsdale 
Heights to Davidson! A. Yes, I recall that application.

Q. Can you tell the Court why that—tell us what dispo­
sition was made of that transfer request! A. The request 
was denied on the ground that the student did not live 
within one of the attendance areas served by this school 
requested. Of course, this particular child lived almost

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct



222

adjacent to the Hillsdale School and more than six miles 
from the school requested.

Q. Now, have you had, or did you have this past year 
any applications from white students to go to Davidson 
that you denied! A. Yes, a large number, especially in 
the Llanfair and the Country Club Estates area.

Q. Why were those denied? A. They were denied on 
the same basis, that they did not live in one of the attend­
ance areas served by the school.

Q. In prior years, to your knowledge, have there been 
other applications in the area between Hillsdale and David­
son by white children for transfer to Davidson School? 
A. Yes, many of them, in the area just to the West of 
Dickson School, on Bit and Spur Road, I believe it is.

Q. Have you denied any of those? A. Oh, yes, we have 
denied all of them, sir.

Q. On the same basis? A. Yes.
Q. Now, let me ask you about school attendance areas. 

Have you had any activity since you have been with the 
School Board, with regard to re-arrangement of school 
attendance areas? A. Yes, this has been one of my major 
activities for two years.

Q. What is the status of the revision on which you are 
now working on the school attendance areas in Mobile? A. 
We have the data complete. Our recommendations are 
ready to be submitted to the Board.

Q. Do you know when they will be submitted? A. I 
dictated the memorandum this morning, transmitting the 
material to the Superintendent for presentation to the 
Board at the earliest possible moment.

Q. Now, what factors do you consider, Mr. McPherson, 
in setting up school attendance areas? A. Well, there are 
many factors. If I may, I would like to relate my remarks

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct



223

to the re-designing of the attendance areas we have just 
completed, because I think this comes closer to what we 
are talking about. The first factor that we considered was 
as near 100% utilization of present facilities as possible; 
due to our increased enrollment and shortage of facilities, 
this was absolutely necessary to do the best job. This was 
one factor. Another factor we considered was the future 
plan of the system as to buildings, as to sites owned for 
future buildings, future attendance areas. All of those 
factors had to be taken into consideration. More specifi­
cally, as related to an individual attendance area, we con­
sidered such factors as traffic hazards, patterns of trans­
portation, patterns of traffic in the city, major traffic thor­
oughfares, the highway program that is going on in the 
state, for instance 1-65—the 1-10 would become an absolute 
barrier to the movement of younger school children. We 
have a number of streams in the city, Three Mile Creek, 
Dog River, all of those must be taken into consideration, 
natural barriers, the safety factor, as far as children going 
to and from school are concerned. I am not sure that covers 
all of them, but generally that.

Q. Do you consider the neighborhood school concept in 
your design? A. Oh, yes, that is a very definite factor 
and we design the attendance areas in order to maintain 
this type school for the elementary school, and the area 
school for the junior high school, and the regional school 
for the senior high school.

Q. In re-designing the attendance areas, did you design 
them to make the attendance areas all white or all Negro? 
A. No, this is not possible in Mobile.

Q. What percentage, if you know, of the attendance areas 
contain children of both races, as you have re-designed

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct



224

them? A. I would say most of them contain children of 
both races or the majority of them.

Q. Would these districts, however, be predominantly one 
race or another? A. Because of the pattern—of the resi­
dential pattern, yes. This would be true, I think, in most 
cases. There are a few cases that I can think of where they 
might be one race or another, but most of them are bi-racial.

Q. Most of them are bi-racial? A. Yes.
Q. Does the proposed re-zoning of the school attendance 

areas eliminate the old dual district by race! A. Yes.
Q. Mr. McPherson, have you given any special attention, 

or any attention out of the ordinary to applications for 
transfer from those students who are in a school of their 
own race only because of residence in dual districts? A. 
Yes, we have given special consideration to those requests; 
as a matter of fact, we have granted all such requests if 
they were made within the period.

Q. Can you illustrate any of those? A. Oh, yes, two 
requests for Murphy High School in 1963-64 were such 
cases. The three students now attending Murphy High 
School live in the same area and the three students at 
Toulminville Junior High School also fit into this category.

Q. Now, the plan with regard to its treatment of first 
graders or pupils new to the system, including those who 
have shifted their residence to another attendance area, 
what rights did you say they had? A. They have the 
absolute right to attend the school in the attendance area 
of their residence, or, on the option of the parent, if they 
so choose, to attend the nearest school serving their race, 
regardless of the racial pattern within their school, either 
the school in the attendance area or the optional one.

Q. Does it make any difference whether it is the racial 
make-up of the school in their own district? A. None 
whatsoever.

James A. McPherson.—for Defendants—Direct



225

Q. I believe you said—we were talking about people who 
moved a while ago—in the case of new comers, first graders 
or persons who have moved to another attendance area, 
does it require any action by your office! A. No action. 
They simply present themselves to the school.

Q. Now, let’s take the first graders and the pre-registra­
tion provisions, you say that pre-registration is set for, 
you believe, April 22nd? A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. What would a child do who wanted to go to the school 
in his district, or whose parents wanted the child to go to 
the first grade next April 22nd ? A. The parent would take 
the child to the school on April 22nd and enroll the student.

Q. Would that require any assignment or action by any­
body else other than the parent and the school? A. The 
parent and teacher and principal at the school would be 
enough.

Q. Suppose this parent elected to use his option to go to 
the closest school formerly serving his race, what would be 
required? A. The same procedure.

Q. So that first graders are not assigned as such, they 
have an option, is that true? A. That is correct.

Q. The question was asked about figures furnished in 
answer to interrogatories, showing enrollment being a 
smaller figiire on the third day than at the end of the 
third month of the term, why is this, if there is a general 
reason? A. Well, the enrollment in the various schools, 
that is, the number that we project in that school—first, 
you realize this is a projected figure and you cannot pos­
sibly be exact; however, we are very accurate generally, 
at the end of the third day, which is Friday, after registra­
tion began on Wednesday, the peak enrollment has not been 
reached in that school; sometimes the peak is reached by

James A. McPherson—for Defendants-—Direct



226

the end of the first Monday. Some students are late in 
enrolling. This explains the change.

Q. Would those normally be students who had attended 
that school the year before? A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. Do you have anything to do—or does your depart­
ment have anything to do with treatment of the children 
in the school by teachers and administrative personnel! 
A. Yes, we do deal with cases that are referred.

Q. How about general instructions to teachers and ad­
ministrative personnel in the schools about the treatment 
of the children? Do you issue any instructions of any sort? 
A. Not directly from my department, but there are some 
matters that are covered in the policy relative to this. We 
only get involved in specific cases that are referred, either 
on the request of the parent or on the request of the prin­
cipal. We do give some general instructions as to health 
matters and attendance and things of this nature.

Q. Do you ever issue instructions that all teachers are 
to be fair to the pupils or welcome them or anything like 
that? A. No, we assume that all children are welcome in 
the public schools.

Q. Do you expect that sort of action from your teachers, 
as a matter of course? A. Yes, we don’t feel it is neces­
sary to issue special instructions as to that.

Q. Mr. McPherson, did you give any special tests to any 
of the students this year who requested transfers? A. No, 
we did not.

Q. Now, did you have available, when you looked at the 
files of all those transfer requests by pupils, some testing 
in there? A. Yes, we had available tests results on the 
general tests given throughout the system in the various 
grades, and, of course, their academic records.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Direct



227

Q. You denied no requests based on any of those records? 
A. No, we did not.

Mr. Wood: I tender the witness.

Cross Examination by Mr. Bell:

Q. You understand, of course, that the school board is 
under Federal Court order to carry out the desegregation 
of the schools? You understand that, don’t you? A. Oh, 
yes.

Q. You also understand that the requests of students to 
be assigned to desegregated schools is not in the same order 
of priority that requests to go to another school because 
of a child center there or a transportation problem? A. 
No, I don’t understand that. I understand that all requests 
are the same.

Q. In other words, the requests of the Negro children to 
go to white schools are treated by you with no higher 
priority than any other requests that might be made for 
any reason at all, is that right? A. I give consideration 
to every request made on the basis of the board policy, 
the application of the plan, in regard to the facilities avail­
able and as to what can be done with the general group of 
applicants to that particular school.

Q. But you have two methods of getting into the school: 
one of them is if the child happens to live in the attendance 
zone where he seeks to enter, and these people you indicate 
generally have the absolute right to be enrolled in the 
school of their attendance zone, isn’t that correct? A. That 
is under the plan, that is the case.

Q. Students who want to go to a school that is not in 
their zone, which takes in every Negro who wants to seek 
admission to a white school, have to request a transfer and

Janies A. McPherson—for Defendants—-Cross



228

go through this transfer procedure? A. No, that is not 
correct.

Q. Where is that not correct? A. Under the plan, the 
child has the absolute right to attend the school in his 
attendance area.

Q. When does that enable a Negro to go to a white 
school on that part of the plan? A. It gives him the right 
to go to the school in the attendance area in which he lives.

Q. My question is when—tell me some instances where 
there are Negroes living within what are now white zones, 
that start on the elementary level—

Mr. Wood: Objection to the question as designat­
ing zones that are white and Negroe, we have aban­
doned this with the use of the plan. We know that 
some schools are predominantly attended by whites 
and some predominantly attended by Negroes, be­
cause of residential patterns, but, to refer to a Negro 
going to a white school or vice versa, we object to 
the question so framed.

Judge Thomas: Go ahead.
Mr. Wood: Exception.
Mr. Bell: Would you like me to re-phrase the 

question?

A. Yes.
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) My first question is: As the 

elementary zones are presently drawn, are there any situ­
ations where Negroes who went to the schools within their 
residence attendance zone would be enrolled in white 
schools ?

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross

Mr. Wood: Objection to the use of white schools. 
There are no white and Negro schools.



229

Judge Thomas: Overruled.
Mr. Wood: Exception.

A. I am afraid the question is not clear. Would you refer 
to what attendance zone you are talking about?

Mr. Bell: You said a child, under the plan, has 
the absolute right to be enrolled in the school in his 
attendance zone?

A. That is correct.
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) I want to know in which situa­

tions would this permit a Negro to be enrolled in a school 
within his zone which is a school serving white children? 
A. It would permit any child, living in any attendance area, 
to attend the school in his attendance area, regardless of 
who is attending that school.

Q. Without going down through the whole list of school 
zones, there is a Shepard School zone. Are you familiar 
with that? A. Oh, yes.

Q. Are there any Negro children living within the Shep- 
ard School zone? A. As the zones are being presented to 
the board—

Q. Let’s stay with the old zones. I have not had a chance 
to see the new zones. A. Are you talking about the old 
zones?

Q. That is right. A. I am not sure that there are Negro 
students living in the Shepard attendance area. There may 
be some living in one of the adjoining attendance areas.

Q. Let’s take the Cottage Hill school. Are there any 
white children living in the Cottage Hill zone? A. I don’t 
think so.

Q. This is my question: Now, taking all of the school 
zones and asking the same questions that I have just asked

Janies A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



230

you as to the Shepard and Cottage Hill school zones, are 
there any children of the opposite race living in the seventy 
odd elementary school zones that you have in the city! A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. Tell me where they are and, roughly, how many there 
are. Let me ask you this: Could you indicate whether 
there are Negro children living in white zones and which 
zones they are, and whether there are white children living 
in Negro zones and which zones they are!

Mr. Wood: Do you want him to recite every zone 
and how many Negro and white children in each one?

Mr. Bell: My impression was there were not any 
—if you could start with one, under the old zones, 
as they were drawn, can you give me just the first 
instance of Negro children who live in a zone serv­
ing white children on the elementary level.

A. On the elementary level?
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) That is right. A. I am not 

sure—these elementary zones—
Q. Under the old pattern, where they are living, in other 

words, under the old standard presently in use, at the 
elementary level, there are No Negro children, who are 
living in zones serving white children, isn’t that correct? 
A. Will you state your question again? You have a double 
one in there.

Q. Under the zones, as they are presently drawn, under 
the school zones as they are presently drawn, no Negro 
children are living in zones where there are schools serv­
ing white children? A. I cannot be sure about that.

Q. You are not sure about the question or about the 
answer? A. I am not sure about the answer.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



231

Q. That would indicate there are not very many, if there 
are any, is that correct? A. There may be or there may 
not be. There is a large number of areas in the city.

Q. Well, in your Exhibit 13, in your answer to the inter­
rogatories, let me let you see my copy of it.

Mr. Wood: Now, you recall, Mr. Bell, just last 
Friday the question about Exhibit 13 was raised 
again. There was a question as to the meaning of 
the interrogatory. I stated my interpretation to the 
board that you asked for the number of children 
who lived in the district and who went to school 
in the district, since they were all of one race or 
another, under these circumstances, that was my in­
terpretation. That may not have been what you 
wanted.

Mr. Bell: Are you familiar with that question?

A. I am familiar with that question. That is the way I 
interpret the question.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) As counsel has pointed out, as 
we go down the list of school zones, we have children at­
tending schools in those zones, all of either one race or 
the other, now, in gathering data for this interrogatory, 
will you indicate to me whether in any of those zones there 
were children of the opposite race living within that zone 
who were not attending the school within the zone, and, if 
so, why were they not attending the school? A. I did not 
check that. I checked what I interpreted the question to ask, 
and so indicated in the answer here.

Q. Under what policy would it have been possible for a 
Negro child who was residing in this Adams zone not to 
have been assigned to the Adams School?

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



232

Mr. Wood: Let me raise the question here: Do 
you mean before the plan was introduced last year, 
this year, what grade, we have different situations.

Mr. Bell: We will take it any place you want. 
Last year is a good enough place to start.

A. Will you re-state your question!
Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Under what policy would a 

child living in the Adams School zone, a Negro child living 
in the Adams School zone, or a white child, not have been 
assigned to the Adams School? A. In what grade?

Q. In Grades 1 to 6? A. In Grade 1—you mean a child 
living within the attendance area?

Q. That is correct, if he wanted to attend another school? 
A. Then, in Grade 1, he could have asked for a transfer as 
spelled out in the plan.

Q- No, I am talking about initial assignments. The 
answer that you gave to my question here showed this is 
the number of students residing in this Adams Zone, who 
are attending the Adams School. You indicate there are 
638 of them. A. That is right. Under the plan, all chil­
dren presently enrolled continued in the school in which 
they were enrolled unless a request for transfer was made.

Q. Does that mean there were no white children living 
in the Adams Zone ? A. I am not sure.

Q. Why? A. I have not checked to see.
Q. If there were white children living in the Adams Zone, 

they would not have gone, under your plan, to the Adams 
School? A. They were already enrolled in another school.

Q. If they were in the first grade? A. If they were in 
the first, grade, they would have been pre-registered in a 
school.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



233

Q. Would this be the closest white school? A. Which­
ever school they were pre-registered in. I don’t know which 
school.

Q. It would have been the closest or a close white school? 
A. Probably.

Q. Then, he would have remained enrolled in that school 
unless he requested a transfer, as spelled out in the plan. 
Then, under your plan, if there are any white children 
living in that Adams or any other Negro zone and they 
are entering the first grade this year, they will not have to 
go to Adams School, will they? A. They have an absolute 
right to attend Adams School.

Q. They don’t have to go to Adams School? A. They 
can.

Q. My question is: Do they have to go there? A. If 
their parents choose the option of attending the nearest 
school previously serving their race, then, they would not 
have to go. They have the right.

Q. Let’s look at the Negro child in the Adams School 
Zone. The Negro child has the absolute right to go to the 
Adams School, too? A. Sure.

Q. Suppose the Negro child wants to go to the white 
school, what does he have to do?

Mr. Wood: I object to that phraseology again. 
There are no white schools as such.

Judge Thomas: Go ahead.
Mr. Wood: Exception.
Mr. Bell: Would you indicate what the Negro 

child has to do, in order to get into a desegregated 
school, assuming that Adams School would not be 
desegregated this Fall?

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



234

A. That is difficult for me to answer, because I don’t know 
what the composition of the nearest school would be. It 
might be desegregated.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Don’t you show in your own 
plan that the child entering the first grade has the abso­
lute right to go to the school within his zone or to the 
closest school formerly serving his race? A. That is right.

Q. How much option does that give a Negro child in the 
Adams Zone? He has the option to go to the Negro school 
or the option to go to another Negro School, isn’t that cor­
rect? A. No, he has the right to go to the Adams School. 
You call it a Negro School. I don’t know what the compo­
sition is.

Q. Are there any white children in the Adams School? 
Let’s not play games. A. In the present Adams School?

Q. Yes? A. To my knowledge, no.
Q. Were there any last Fall? A. No.
Q. 0. K. The Negro child has a right to go to the Negro 

Adams School or he has a right to go to the Adams School? 
A. Eight.

Q. What is his option then? A. To attend the nearest 
school to his residence formerly serving his race, whether 
he be a Negro or white child. It might be a Negro or 
desegregated school.

Q. Was it last Fall a Negro School or a white school? 
A. It would depend where that child lived.

Q. If he lived in the Adams Zone, the nearest school to 
his residence, depending on where he lived! A. Whichever
it was.

Q. Last Fall it was a Negro school, if he has the option 
of attending a school formerly serving his race, and it was 
going to be last Fall, with our knowledge of how much 
desegregation took place in the first grade, it would be the

James A. McPherson—for Defendants-—Cross



235

same this year, a Negro School? A. You are asking me 
to speculate.

Q. I don’t know what your problem is, but you are under 
oath, you understand that? A. Yes, I understand that I 
am under oath.

Q. Will you please answer the question! A. I answered 
it to the best of my ability. I have no way in the world 
to know wThat the composition of that enrollment will be 
in September.

Q. What is your problem of understanding what the 
enrollment will be ? A. There is a pre-registration of first 
graders going on in April, there will be requests for trans­
fers between April 1st and 15th, and I have no way of 
knowing who will request a transfer or to what school, so 
I would not speculate.

Q. Do you know what the composition of the school at 
this time is, so far as race is concerned? A. In the area 
surrounding Adams?

Q. In all of the schools? A. Yes, I know.
Q. As of looking now back to last Fall, you knew what 

the situation was to be, as far as whether the school would 
be all Negro or all white? A. Yes, because the pre-regis­
tration and the transfers had taken place at that time and 
the transfers had been granted. If you had asked me this 
question as of September, I could have answered it.

Q. I think I may be wasting a lot of time here. Are you 
familiar with the Warren School? A. Yes.

Q. You know what the present composition of that school 
is, so far as race is concerned? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know whether or not—are you familiar with 
the Crichton School? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know the composition of that school at the 
present time? A. Yes.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



236

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross

Q. What is it! A. White.
Q. What about the Warren School? A. Negro. All of 

the students attending the Warren School are Negroes.
Q. If I am a Negro parent of a child entering the first 

grade this Fall, and I live within the Warren School Zone, 
would you explain to me where I may take my child? A. 
You may take your child to the Warren School or you may 
take your child to the nearest school to your residence 
formerly serving your race.

Q. If I am a white parent, living in the Warren Zone, 
and have a child entering the first grade this Fall, would 
you explain the option I would have at that point? A. 
You would have the same option to attend the Warren 
School or the nearest school formerly serving your race.

Q. Now, at the present time, if I were residing in the 
Warren Zone, and my child were going into junior high 
school, I think the record indicates that there were a set 
of feeder lines that showed that the particular junior or 
senior high school would serve a number of elementary 
schools, isn’t that correct? A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. Now, as a matter of fact, this set of feeder lines was 
the only real zoning that was done, as far as junior and 
senior high schools was concerned, there were no geo­
graphic lines as there were in the elementary schools? A. 
That is correct.

Q. Is there going to be any change in this method of 
zoning junior and senior high schools, after your new plans 
are adopted? A. The policy states that the attendance of 
students at junior and senior high schools will be deter­
mined administratively by the combination of whatever 
elementary attendance there is for junior and senior high 
schools—the set up is the feeder system—it will be the



237

same pattern of operation. I would not say there is any 
change.

Q. Under the system presently in effect, elementary 
schools serving Negroes were fed into junior and senior 
high schools serving Negroes, and elementary schools 
serving whites were without exception fed into junior and 
senior high schools serving whites. Is there going to be 
any differential from that policy, understanding, of course, 
as we go through the years, there will be at least more 
Negroes in predominantly white schools, but, under your 
feeder plan, will there be any change or proposed change 
in the feeder system set up? A. There are always changes 
from time to time and new schools are added and enroll­
ment making it necessary.

Q. I guess you did not understand my question. The 
question is whether there will be any change in the policy 
of having schools generally serving Negroes at the ele­
mentary level feed into high schools generally serving 
Negroes and vice versa? Is there going to be any change 
in that? A. The racial make up of the school enrollment 
for September and for each succeeding year might or might 
not be the same that it is now, so you are asking me to 
speculate into the future on something that is difficult for 
me to do.

Q. The school board charts submitted to the Court do 
show on Plaintiff Exhibit 6 Adams, Barney, Cleveland, 
Palmer and Whitney Schools, all of which were Negro 
Schools, fed into the Mobile County Training School for 
junior and senior high school, does that look familiar? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. My question is—let me say that the same thing is 
true for whites—whether under the new feeder line being 
drawn up, there is any instance where there is a white

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



238

elementary school feeding in to a Negro junior or senior 
high school, or a Negro elementary school feeding into a 
white junior or senior high school?

Mr. Wood: Is your question is there now?
Mr. Bell: Will there he? Under the new feeder 

line that you are going to submit to the Court?

A. There have been some changes or redesignations of 
the elementary schools as a feeder school to the junior 
high school, but there has been no re-shuffling of the feeder 
lines to accomplish that.

Q. I guess we have difficulty understanding each other. 
My question is whether there is even one instance of what 
I am talking about of Negro elementary schools feeding 
into junior or senior white high schools or vice versa, in 
the feeder lines you plan to submit to the hoard, is there 
one such situation? A. Taking one elementary school that 
has all Negroes to feed into a junior high school which 
formerly served white students?

Q. Yes? A. I don’t think this has been done purposely.
Q. Now, in judging those transfers, you indicated that 

they were all handled without regard to race? A. That is 
correct.

Q. Yet you indicate that some applications of Negroes 
seeking admission to white schools were turned down be­
cause the schools that they sought admission to were not 
in their attendance area or they did not live in the attend­
ance aiea of the schools to which they sought admission? 
A. That is correct.

Q. Now, how did you determine whether or not they were 
asking for a school within their attendance area? A. 
Would you take one case as an example? We are talking 
about several children.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



239

Q. Let’s take one, Mae Wornie Bolton, who lives out in 
the Hillsdale area, who sought admission to the Davidson 
School, and she was told that this was not a school within 
her attendance area. How did you determine that? A. 
By the residence of the child in relation to the location of 
the school. This particular child lived in the Hillsdale 
Heights area and within a very short distance of the Hills­
dale High School, and, in order for this child to attend 
Davidson High School, this child lived in the Hillsdale 
attendance area, an elementary school which feeds into 
the junior and senior high school, in order to attend David­
son, this child would have to cross two other elementary 
schools attendance areas—

Q. Of course, the children in the Hillsdale area, which is 
a Negro attendance area, never attended Davidson before 
the plan? A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. As a matter of fact, until last year, children in the 
Hillsdale area were transported to the St. Elmo School, 
about a thirty-four mile round trip every day? A. They 
were part of the St. Elmo School, until the new school was 
built.

Q. That was going across a lot of school districts, was 
it not? A. The same would hold true for the Davidson 
School.

Q. That is a new school. Those children had attended 
Murphy High School? A. That is true.

Q. My question remains the same: The pupils in the 
Hillsdale area were sent to the St. Elmo School, a Negro 
High School, and, after the construction of the new Hills­
dale High School, that feeder line was altered so that the 
Hillsdale elementary children were assigned to the Hills­
dale High School, here is Mr. Bolton, who wants to take 
advantage of his right under the desegregation plan, who

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—•Cross



240

comes down and fills out an application form, who is asked 
which school do you want a transfer to, he writes in David­
son : now, with the feeder system existing as it is, my ques­
tion remains: how were you able to look at that applica­
tion form and conclude and inform him that he was not 
in the Davidson zone, if he wanted to get a desegregated 
education for his child ? A. He did not live within one 
of the attendance areas that served Davidson High School.

Q. Let me ask you this: Is there another predominantly 
or all white high school which, had he placed down for 
his choice of school, he could have gotten a transfer to? 
A. I don’t know.

Q. If you don’t know, how was he supposed to know? A. 
I don’t know where any child can transfer to, until he makes 
a request and until we consider his request in the terms 
of the plan, the board’s policy and facilities available.

Q- I don’t want to feed a dead horse. Let me get this 
straight. When a child makes application for a transfer, 
under the desegregation plan, and fills out one of these 
forms, he indicates the school where he is asking to be 
tranferred, it is the job of that child or, at least, his parent, 
to make a choice without any standards or without any 
idea of whether that is going to be a suitable choice or not, 
and then the school board will review all those factors that 
you just mentioned and determine whether or not he has 
accidentally or somehow chosen the right school where he 
can get assigned, is that right? A. I could not answer that.

Mr. W ood: Objection. The question is argumenta­
tive. I don’t understand it myself.

Judge Thomas: I think the question is: If some­
one comes down, if the parent wants to put a child 
in a desegregated school, would you advise him the

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



241

most likely school for him to apply to, isn’t that 
yonr question!

Mr. Bell: 1 think that is part of it.

A. The only advice I give to parents concerns making out 
the application, their right to make the application, under 
the plan and under board policy. I don’t advise any parent 
to make any application to a particular school or advise 
them that the request will be granted, if it is made to a 
particular school: I feel that the parent is the one that 
should make this request.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) You indicated that special con- 
sideration was given to children who lived in what you 
called dual zones, and that Birdie Mae Davis, for example, 
was assigned to Murphy High School, because she was one 
of those children who lived in a dual zone. Now, how did 
you determine that! In view of the feeder system, how 
did she come to live in a dual zone? A. I determined this 
by the fact that she lived in an area where there were stu­
dents already attending Murphy High School and there 
were also students attending Williamson High School liv­
ing in the same general area, therefore, the request was 
granted.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—-Gross

Judge Thomas: Mr. Bell, it is about time for a 
recess. When you get to a breaking point, let me 
know.

Mr. Bell: One more question. Suppose Birdie Mae 
Davis’ mother had requested assignment to the Da­
vidson School, what action would you have taken on 
that application?

A. Well, that is difficult to say, because I would have had 
to have had the application in light of all the others, but



I am assuming, generally speaking, it would have been 
denied.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) On what basis? A. On the 
basis she didn’t live in one of the areas where Davidson 
School students reside.

Mr. Bell: I think that is a good point.
Judge Thomas: Take a fifteen minute recess.
Judge Thomas: You are not through?
Mr. Bell: No, sir.

Thereupon, a fifteen minute recess was had.
Thereafter, Court re-convened, and the following 

transpired:

Mr. Bell: Has the Board made any plans for dis­
seminating to the public the information about the 
new zones, the newT way the school districts will be 
operated or set up, after this new zoning situation is 
adopted?

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross

A. Those plans have not been developed specifically, but 
this will be done. The specific means have not been estab­
lished.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) At the present time, you are 
still planning to follow the April 1st to April 15th transfer 
date, is that right? A. That is right, as spelled out in the 
plan.

Q. The same thing for the April 27th pre-registration? 
A, April 22nd is the actual date, with the follow up on the 
23rd. The 26th, I believe, is on Monday, the following 
Monday.

Q. Now, in accordance with the requirement that you 
provide notice about the rights of desegregated education, 
what type of information are you going to disseminate to



243

parents who bring their first grade children to school! A. 
I am sorry. I did not understand what you said.

Q. Are there plans to make available information con­
cerning the right of first grade children to attend desegre­
gated schools! Are there any plans to get this information 
to the parents prior to the pre-registration date!

Mr. Wood: Objection. There is no showing that 
the child has a right to an integrated or desegre­
gated school as such.

Judge Thomas: Overruled.
Mr. Wood: Exception.

A. It will be our intention to inform, through whatever 
means is developed, parents concerning their rights under 
the plan and under the policy of the board, as to their right 
to attend the school in their attendance area or the option 
and the right to request transfers.

Q. (Mr. Bell continuing) Now, you indicated that, in 
addition to the approximately five hundred transfer re­
quests, there had been perhaps two to four thousand trans­
fers for change of residence, is that right! A. Yes. Of 
course, this figure is flexible. I have no way of knowing 
how many. I said it could be one, two, three or four 
thousand.

Q. You said there were from one to four thousand trans­
fers made without any forms being filed or without the 
people coming to your office or without any knowledge on 
the part of your office! A. No, that was not exactly my 
statment. My statement was there was a large number of 
one, two, three or four thousand, I don’t know exactly how 
many, I never checked on those. They request from the 
present school a certificate of transfer to the school in the

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



244

attendance area to which they are moving and present them­
selves to that school for enrollment. A copy of this cer­
tificate comes to our office for the purpose of following up 
that the child continues in school and is not lost between 
schools and does not require a formal application.

Q. You indicate that the child, having changed his resi­
dence, has a right to transfer to the school of his residence, 
is that right? A. He has, under the plan, the right, upon 
moving residence, to enroll in the school of his attendance 
area, or the option.

Q. I gather that this tpye of transfer takes place all 
during the school year, whenever people move, is that 
right? A. Yes.

Q. Then, going back to the situation, where I am a Negro 
parent, we talked about the options that I might have, if 
I were living in a zone serving Negro students for the 
most part, and I was interested in getting a desegregated 
education for my children, the certain way for me to do it 
would be for me to move to the attendance zone where the 
school served white children in the main, wouldn’t that be 
correct? In other words, if I moved into the Shepard 
attendance area, I would have the absolute right to enroll 
my child in the Shepard Zone school, if the child was in 
the first or sixth grade? A. In the grades that the plan 
applies to, yes, that is correct.

Q. Mr. McPherson, do you know, or has the Board or 
your office made any studies as to the difficulties or the 
obstacles that would be placed in the way of a Negro 
parent who sought to move into a white community in 
Mobile? A. I have not made any such study. I don’t feel 
this is a part of my responsibility.

Q. Have I not asked you before about zones where both 
Negroes and whites live? A. Yes.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



245

Q. You indicated that you thought there were some even 
under the old plan and you thought there might be a few 
more under the new zone lines to be adopted. I will ask 
you whether or not Emerson School Zone is not one where 
Negroes and whites live? A. Under the old plan?

Q. Yes? A. This is possible, because there are students 
in that area attending high schools that are white I know. 
I assume there are probably some.

Q. I believe Birdie Mae Davis we talked about attended 
the Williamson School. You indicated that she had been 
able to attend Murphy High School because there were 
white children within that area who had been assigned to 
Murphy? A. That is correct.

Q. In the Emerson Zone, the school there serves only 
Negroes at the present time, isn’t that right? A. That 
is correct.

Q. So that means that the white children in the elemen­
tary school are assigned elsewhere, isn’t that correct? A. 
They are attending elsewhere.

Q. They are attending elsewhere? A. Yes.
Q. As of last year, children in the first grade, by virtue 

of the option afforded them in the desegregation plan, did 
not have to attend the Emerson School, isn’t that correct? 
You understand the question? A. No, I am afraid I don’t.

Q. White children entering Grade 1, who resided within 
the Emerson Zone, did not attend the Emerson School, but 
attended a school formerly serving white children, under 
the provisions of the desegregation plan, isn’t that cor­
rect? A. Yes, they attended other schools outside of that.

Q. How about the county school situation, the record 
indicates now that there are not zone lines drawn, but a 
system of bus lines was in use, and the bus route determined 
where children attended schhol. Now, will that be at all

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Cross



246

revised as a result of the new plans that you are submitting 
to the Board? A. The new plan being presented to the 
Board does not include a general re-shuffling or re-arrange­
ment of the area in the county served by buses.

Q. Well, let me ask you this: Is there any change made 
at all in the bus routes for the county? A. Well, there are 
always some changes from time to time, but there have not 
been any proposed, as a part of the rezoning of the metro­
politan area in general, in the bus routes.

Q. Are there any changes that would result in Negro 
children being carried to schools serving white children? 
A. None to my knowledge.

Q. How about vice versa, would there be any changes 
in resulting bus routes taking white children to schools 
serving Negro children? A. Not to my knowledge.

Mr. Bell: No further questions.

Redirect Examination by Mr. Wood:

Q. Mr. McPherson, actually, what we spoke of as a feeder 
system, that is really" a combination at the junior high 
level of several elementary schools attendance areas, is it 
not? A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. It would be combined more to form the senior high 
school attendance area? A. Yes.

Q. So that you are able to determine whether a child 
lives in the senior high district or one of the districts 
served by the senior high district, are you not? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. Let’s examine just one portion or prospective portion 
undei the plan. Take Sidney Phillips School now. Is that 
elementary, junior high or senior high school? A. That is 
a junior high school.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Redirect



247

Q. Is the student body all while, all Negro, or is it at 
this time partially one and partially the other? A. At 
this time, the student body is made up of all white students.

Q. Will you tell me what elementary school districts go 
to make up the Sidney Phillips student body? A. The Old 
Shell Eoad elementary school, Augusta Evans, West Lawn, 
Crichton, a very small portion of the Woodcock district, 
that is North of Government Street, the Austin District, 
a small area of the Dickson.

Q. Now, let me ask you—well, let’s examine the Crichton 
District, that is one of the districts forming the Phillips 
District, is it not? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Are there white children living in the Crichton School 
District? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Are there Negro children living in the Crichton School 
District? A. Yes, sir.

Q. I am speaking of your proposed districts? A. Yes, 
both live in that attendance area.

Q. As a matter of fact, they were both living in the 
attendance area before, under the old plan? A. Yes, sir, 
that is correct.

Q. Now, is the Crichton elementary school attended by 
children of the white race, Negro race, or both? A. At 
the present time, all white.

Q. Now, if I were a parent of a Negro child expecting 
to enter the first grade, if I lived in the Crichton district, 
where would I have a right to go? A. A right to enroll 
in Crichton.

Q. With the option that you spoke of? A. Yes, sir.
Q. So I would have a right to enroll in this predomi­

nantly white school? A. That is correct.
Q. How about the Austin District? Are there families of 

both races living in that district? A. Yes, sir.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Redirect



248

James A, McPherson■—for Defendants—Redirect

Q. If I were a Negro parent, living in the Austin Dis­
trict, with a child entering the first grade, would I have 
a right to enter that school? A. Yes, sir.

Q. How about Augusta Evans District? Are there both 
races living in that district? A. I do not believe there 
are any Negroes living in the Evans District,

Q. How about Old Shell Road District? Are there fami­
lies of both races living there? A. Both races.

Q. If I were the parent of a Negro child, entering the 
first grade next year, living in the Old Shell Road District, 
would I have the right to put my child in that school? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. How about the West Lawn District? Do families of 
both races live in that district? A. No, I don’t think so.

Q. So that in three of the five districts that go to make up 
Phillips, there are families of both races living there? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. So that prospective first graders then would have a 
right to enroll in three different elementary schools that 
are going to feed Phillips? A. That is right.

Q. Suppose I were a Negro parent that moved into any 
one of those five districts, with a child in the second grade 
this coming year, would I have a right to enroll that child 
in the second grade in that district? A. You would have.

Q. Or the option? A. Yes.
Q. And the following year, the third grade, is that cor­

rect? A. That is correct.
Q. The first, second and third? A. Yes, sir.
Q. If I came to the community from outside, my first time 

in this school system, if I were a Negro parent and moved 
into any one of those five districts, would I have a right to 
send my child to any grade covered by the plan, to the 
school in that district? A. You would.



249

Q. Those children would feed into the Phillips Junior 
High School! A. That is correct.

Q. Now, where does Phillips Junior High feed to! A. 
To Murphy High School.

Q. What other junior high schools feed into Murphy! 
A. Mae Banes and formerly Barton, which has been dis­
continued at the end of this term.

Q. Now, of course, Murphy, for the last two years, has 
had children of the Negro race attending it, along with 
predominantly white children! A. Yes, sir, that is right.

Q. Now, let me turn to just one more subject, and that is 
this Hillsdale-St. Elmo situation. Is it true that the Hills­
dale District or attendance area was set up actually some 
time before the school was built and the prospect of that 
school being built! A. Yes, I was not on the job at that 
time in the present position, but that is true.

Q. When you came on to your job, it was that way, was it 
not! A. It was already established.

Q. I will ask you if it is not true that those students 
designated for that Hillsdale area were transported in a 
body to St. Elmo! A. That is right.

Q. Those are not individual transfers down there or in­
dividual assignments, they were transported in a body! 
A. As an entire group.

Q. Why were they taken to St. Elmo rather than some 
other school! A. Well, we had facilities there for them 
and facilities were not available elsewhere.

Q. I see. That is all.

Recross Examination by Mr. Bell:
Q. Now, I asked you those questions about whether there 

were zones under your new plan that had certain white 
schools and had Negroes living in them, and you were not

Janies A. McPherson—for Defendants—Recross



able to remember them. I am glad you are able to remem­
ber some. Now, taking the first, this Crichton School Zone, 
which serves white children, approximately how many 
Negroes eligible to attend the Crichton School reside within 
the Crichton School Zone! A. You mean under the pro­
posed plan!

Q. Let’s say, if you know, for Grades 1 through 6! A. 
How many Negro children live in the new proposed Crich­
ton attendance area!

Q. That is right, A. I am not sure, but I believe there 
is probably over one hundred.

Q. You think it would be over a hundred! A. Yes, I 
think so. I think it would be over a hundred.

Q. Now, these Negroes did not live in what was consid­
ered the Crichton Zone under the present plan, is that cor­
rect? A. The same families I am not sure, but probably 
many of them did.

Q. Would I take it, from that response, that under the 
new zoning the lines have been altered so that the Warren 
Zone, the Negro zone, is no longer divided into two com­
plete sections! A. That is right.

Q. How about the Old Shell Road Zone, approximately 
how many Negro children, Grades 1 to 6, reside there! A. 
I would say less than twenty-five. I am not sure of the 
figure, but I would say approximately that number.

Q. How about the West Lawn Zone? You indicated there 
was one other, the Austin School Zone? A. Are you ask­
ing me the number?

Q. Yes? A. I am not sure. There has been some shift 
in some of the residents out there, but I would estimate 
twenty-five or thirty, maybe not that many. I have not tried 
to keep those figures in mind.

Q. Are there any other zones, under the new plan, that

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—-Recross



251

will have Negroes residing in re-drawn white school zones? 
A. Yes, sir, most of them.

Q. Would it be on a basis similar to that existing today? 
A. Some would be more, some would be less. I don’t have 
those figures.

Q. How about the opposite situation! Under the re­
drawn lines, are there going to be zones serving Negro 
schools that will have a sizable number of white children 
residing within the district? A. There will be schools 
formerly serving Negroes that will have white residents, 
yes.

James A. McPherson—for Defendants—Recross

Mr. Bell: I have no further questions.
Judge Thomas: Step down, please.
Judge Thomas: Are there any more witnesses?
Mr. Wood: We have no more witnesses, your 

Honor.
Judge Thomas: Mr. Bell, do you have any further 

witnesses?
Mr. Bell: No further witnesses, your Honor.
Judge Thomas: This case will be taken under sub­

mission. Do you wish to file briefs?
Mr. Bell: Plaintiff submitted a brief this morning, 

your Honor.
Judge Thomas: I have it here.
Mr. Bell: I did not attempt to make a careful 

analysis of the facts, but I think the brief generally 
summarizes the facts that we feel are particularly 
important, and I am not at all certain, meaning no 
disrespect, there were any additional facts that came 
in today that materially alter the matter.

Judge Thomas: Do you wish to file a brief, Mr. 
Wood?



252

Colloquy

Mr. Wood: I would like to. It will not take me 
too long, if I might have next week, or is that longer 
than your Honor would like !

Judge Thomas: I would like to have it by the end 
of next week or by Monday a week. Next week I 
have a civil jury all week, and the following week 
I have non jury cases, and I can perhaps devote some 
time to this case.

Mr. Wood: There will be no difficulty getting it 
by next Friday, your Honor.

Mr. Bell: Would a short summary of the respec­
tive positions be any aid to your Honor?

Judge Thomas: No.
Mr. O’Connor: I call your attention that Plaintiff 

Exhibit 13 has not been admitted.
Judge Thomas: Do you have any objections to 

Plaintiff Exhibit 13?
Mr. W ood: I am sorry, your Honor, but I have not 

even looked at it. Could I let you know Monday? I 
am sure it is accurate, but I would like an opportu­
nity to look at it.

Judge Thomas: Yes.
Thereupon, the survey was marked Plaintiff Ex­

hibit 13 for identification.
Judge Thomas: I think everything else is in evi­

dence.
Mr. Wood: We have furnished the substitute 

forms, your Honor.
Judge Thomas: 0. K. I have your brief, Mr. Bell.
Mr. Bell: Thank your, your Honor.
Judge Thomas: The Court stands in recess.



253

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 1

MAP



254

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit, 4

FEEDER CHART

(See O p p o s ite ) !® '’



ELEMENTARY JUNIOR HIGH SENIOR HIGH

SARALAND 3ATSLtri At — SATSUM A

INDIAN SPRING  
LJILMER-

ORCHAR 
TANNER WILLIAMS
FOREST H1LU

SEMMES

-TAN N ER WILLIAM E MIMES

SHAW

GRIGGS THEODORE THEODORE

BIENVILLE (Jfe) 
C H IC K A S A W ^  
E IG H T  MILE  
E L L IC O T T  
H A M ILTO N  
W H IS T L E R
B IEN VILLE  m  
GLENDALE

CLARK

VIGOR

=>P R IC H A R D  JR. HIGH



255



256

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 5

FEEDER CHART

(S ee  O p p o s ite )I® 3



ELEMENTARY JUNIOR HIGH SENIOR HIGH

DAUPHIN ISLAND-

DICKSON (H) — __
TANNER WILLIAMS

—a l b a -

— BAKER

ALBA

BAKER

FONDE
d ic k s o n
LEINKAUF (reO------- : A Z A L E A  ROAD
MORNING SIDE'
SHEPARD---------

DAVIDSON

BROOKLEY
WILLIAMS- RAIN RAIN



257



258

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 6

FEEDER CHART

(S ee  Opposite)B3PF‘



ELEMENTARY JUNIOR HIGH SENIOR HIGH
ADAM 
BARNET 
CLEVELAND 
PALMER 
WHITLEY
THOMAS

COTTAGE HILL- 
DAWES UNION"-----
HILLSDALE —
BURROUGHS^ 
DIXON—

MOBILE CO.TRNG.

TH O M A

MOBILE CO.TRNG.

•AWES UNION

HILLSDALE  

ST. ELMO

T. ELMO

T R IN IT Y  GARDENS----- T R IN IT Y  GARDENS— TRINITY GARDENS

COUNCIL' 
EMERSON-----—
WILLIAM SON

= - SOUTH SIDE 

W ILLIAM SO N
WILLIAMSON



259



260

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 7

FEEDER CHART

(See O p p o s ite ) !® "



ELEMENTARY JUNIOR HIGH SENIOR HIGH

(

C A R V E R  —  BLOU N T ------------------- B L O U N T
GRANT-------------

C ALD W ELL
NORTHISIDE— ^ ^ M D U N B A R -^
OWENS— ^
FONVIELLE 
P A L M E R -  
STANTON  
W A R R E N

ROAO^T
A S H IN G  T O N

EN TR AL

O T TL O T T
T H O M P S O N  

M T . V E R N O N n i  VERNON



261



262

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8

FEEDER CHART

(S ee  O p p o s ite ) !® "



ELEMENTARY JUNIOR HIGH SENIOR HIGH

LEINKAUF 
OAKDALE 
RUSSELL  
WOODCOCK
ARLINGTON  
CRAIGHEAD  
MARYVALE 
M ERTZ
A U S TIN  
CRICHTON 
E V A N S

ARTQ

ANES

O L D  SHELL ROA 
WESTLAWN----------
GORGAS

UR PHY

H IL L IP S ^

TOULMINVILLE



263



Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

INTERROGATORIES

[ c a p t i o n  o m i t t e d ]

To:
George F. Wood, Esq.
Palmer Pillans, Esq.
A. L. Philips, Jr., Esq.
P. O. Box 935
Mobile, Alabama

Attorneys for Defendants.

Plaintiffs request that the defendants, the Board of 
School Commissioners of Mobile County, Cranford H. 
Burns, Superintendent, William B. Crane, Chairman, 
Charles E. McNeil, Jack C. Gallalee, Arthur Smith, Jr. and 
Kenneth Reed, Members, or the successors to the above, 
answer under oath in accordance with Rule 33 of the Fed­
eral Rules of Civil Procedure, the following interrogatories :

1. List for each public school in the Mobile County, 
Alabama School District (using latest available figures 
unless otherwise indicated):

a. Grades served by each school;
b. Number of classrooms and pupil capacity;

c. Number of Negro pupils assigned and/or in attend­
ance as of the beginning of the 1964-65 school year, 
and as of the most recent date for which figures are 
available at each school ;

d. Number of white pupils in attendance as of the 
beginning of the 1964-65 school year, and as of the



265

most recent date for which figures are available at 
each school;

e. Number of Negro pupils in each grade;
f. Number of white pupils in each grade;
g. Difference between numbers of pupils enrolled and 

capacity of school (i.e. number of pupils in excess 
of capacity or below capacity);

h. Average class size for kindergarten, regular and 
special classes and average for all classes;

i. Pupil-teacher ratio;
j. Number of Negro teachers and other administrative 

or professional personnel employed as of the begin­
ning of the 1964-65 school year at each school;

k. Number of white teachers and other administrative 
or professional personnel employed as of the begin­
ning of the 1964-65 school year at each school;

2. As to desegregated assignments or transfers for the 
1964-65 school year made in accordance with the desegre­
gation plan submitted by the Board and ordered into effect 
as modified by the Order of the District Court dated July 
31, 1964, please list the names of Negro students assigned 
or granted transfers to schools formerly designated solely 
for whites, indicating the schools to which each such child 
was assigned and where such child is presently attending 
school. 3 * *

3. List the names of all Negro students who sought as­
signments or transfers to formerly all-white schools for
the 1963-64 and 1964-65 schol years and had such requests

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9



266

denied, indicating to what school and grade each request 
was made and why (providing as much detail as possible) 
each request was turned down.

4. List all new schools, proposed or under construction, 
indicating with respect to each:

a. Location
b. Expected date of occupancy
c. Pupil capacity
d. Probable area to be served
e. Number of Negro and white pupils living in area 

to be served in grades to be served.

5. Explain the basis by which the Board now plans to 
initially assign all pupils for the 1965-66 school year (in­
cluding children entering school: at the first grade level, 
at an upper grade level, after promotion from elementary 
school to junior high or high school, after promotion from 
junior high to high school, and after changing residence 
from one place served by defendants to another place 
served by defendants), indicating in detail, and with maps 
if available, the proposed attendance zones to be served by 
each school, and how such assignments differ, in result, 
from those made in accordance with policies in effect prior 
to the Board’s adoption of its present desegregation plan. 6

6. As to each of such school attendance areas or zones, 
using best available estimates or projections if precise fig­
ures are not available, list the following: .

a. Number of Negro school pupils residing within each 
such area and attending the grades for which such 
area applies;

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9



267

b. Number of white school pupils residing within such 
area and attending the grades for which such area 
applies.

7. List and explain any changes in the Board’s desegre­
gation plan to be made for the 1965-66 school year.

8. State and explain what obstacles, if any, will prevent 
complete desegregation of the Mobile County school system 
at the beginning of the 1965-66 school year, by either:

a. Assigning each child, regardless of race, to the 
school nearest his residence offering the grade such 
child is entitled to enter;

b. Permitting each child, regardless of race, to select 
either the nearest formerly Negro or white school 
offering the grade such child is entitled to enter.

9. State by race the number of new teachers hired dur­
ing each of the past five school years and the total number 
of teachers employed during each such year (if possible, 
distinguish between replacement teachers and new teach­
ers), and indicate the difference in qualifications required 
by the Board and salary scale received by the teachers, if 
any.

10. State and explain what obstacles, if any, will pre­
vent assigning teachers, particularly replacement or new 
teachers, to schools without regard to race or color, begin­
ning with the 1965-66 school year.

11. State any and all courses, programs or facilities 
available at schools attended solely or predominantly by

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9



268

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

whites which are not available at schools attended solely by 
Negroes.

12. Using latest available figures, state the differential, 
if any, in expenditures for Negro and white pupils, indi­
cating whether such expenditures are from state or local 
funds.

P lease T ake  N otice that a copy of such answers must 
be served upon the undersigned within fifteen (15) days 
after service.

Dated: December 21, 1964

[Signatures and Certificate Omitted]



269

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9 

ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES

[ c a p t i o n  o m i t t e d ]

The defendants in answer to the interrogatories hereto­
fore propounded to them by the plaintiffs, say as follows :

1. (a) The grades served by each school in the Mobile 
County System in the school year 1964-65 are as set out in 
Exhibit I attached hereto and made a part hereof.

(b) The number of teaching stations and pupil capacities 
of each such school for said term are as set out in Ex­
hibit 2 attached hereto and made a part hereof.

(c) and (d) The number of pupils, by race, in attendance 
at each such school for the third day and at the end of the 
third month of said term are as set out in Exhibit 3 at­
tached hereto and made a part hereof.

(e) and (f) The numbers of pupils, by race and grade, 
in attendance at each such school for said term are as set 
out in Exhibit 4 attached hereto and made a part hereof.

(g) The comparison of capacity and enrollment for each 
such school for said term is as set out in Exhibit 5 attached 
hereto and made a part hereof.

(h) The average class size for each such school for said 
term, based upon average daily attendance, is as set out 
in Exhibit 6 attached hereto and made a part hereof.

(i) The Teacher-Pupil ratio for each such school for 
said term, based upon average daily attendance, is as set 
out in Exhibit 7 attached hereto and made a part hereof.



270

(j) The number of' negro teachers employed and the 
schools at which they are teaching are as set out in Ex­
hibit 8 attached hereto and made a part hereof.

(k) The number of white teachers employed and the 
schools at which they are teaching are as set out in Ex­
hibit 9 attached hereto and made a part hereof.

2. For the school year 1964-65 the parents or guardians 
of the following negro students were granted transfers 
for said pupils to schools formerly attended solely by white 
students:

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

____________Student_____________

Benjamin LaVelle Baker 
Patricia D. Halsell 
Nancy Lynn Robison 
George Russell Horn

Formerly Requested Transfer to 
Enrolled at: and now attending:

Council Woodcock 
Central Toulminville 
Central Toulminville 
Central Toulminville

The following negro students were granted transfers to 
a school attended predominantly by white pupils:

Formerly Requested Transfer to
____________Student ________________ Enrolled at: and now attending:

Bettie Ann Davis Williamson Murphy
Birdie Davis Williamson Murphy
Rosetta Gamble Williamson Murphy 3

3. For the year 1963-64, the parents or guardians of 
only four negro students applied for transfer to schools 
formerly attended solely by white students. Two with­
drew their applications and the other two requests were 
granted. None was denied.

For the year 1964-65, requests from the parents or guard­
ians of the following negro students for transfers to schools



271

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

formerly attended solely or predominantly by white stu­
dents were denied for the reasons set out:

Student School Requested Reason Denied

Joyce Ann Johnson

Handy Shade, Jr.

Mae Wornie Bolton

Ednol Leona Crockett

Marion Crockett

Murphy Did not reside in 
one of the attend­
ance areas served 
by Murphy

Davidson Did not reside in 
one of the attend­
ance areas served 
by Davidson

Davidson Did not reside in 
one of the attend­
ance areas served 
by Davidson

Rain Request filed after
expiration of trans­
fer request period

Williams Facilities at Wil­
liams already be­
yond capacity. Chil­
dren being trans­
ported from Wil­
liams because of 
this condition

Richard Lebanon Jackson Russell Did not reside in 
attendance area 
served by Russell



272

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

Student School Requested Reason Denied

Floria Marie Hudson Vigor Request filed after 
expiration of trans­
fer request period

Andreda Casher Williams Facilities at Wil­
liams already be­
yond capacity. Chil­
dren being trans­
ported from Wil­
liams because of 
this condition

Madrid Venessa Jacobs Gorgas Request filed after 
expiration of trans­
fer request period

4. (a), (b) and (c) Proposed new schools and additions 
to existing schools, with location, expected date of occu­
pancy and pupil capacity are as set out in Exhibit 10 at­
tached hereto and made a part hereof.

(d) Probable area to be served by those schools which 
will be newly established are as shown on Exhibit 11 at­
tached hereto and made a part hereof.

(e) Best present projections of the number of negro and 
white pupils living in said areas are as shown in Exhibit 12 
attached hereto and made a part hereof. 5

5. Interrogatory 5 seems, in the main, to call for a re­
stating of the provisions of the desegregation plan under 
which defendants are operating and which, by direction of 
the Court of Appeals, and the District Court, projects its 
terms through the school year 1969-70.



273

Under the terms of that plan: (a) All pupils presently 
enrolled in a school in the system will continue in attend­
ance at that school unless a transfer be requested and 
granted; (b) Children entering the Mobile County School 
system for the first time may be enrolled, at the. election 
of the parents or guardian of the particular pupil, at the 
school in the attendance area of his residence or the near­
est school formerly, serving his race, if the pupil is enter­
ing grades 1 or 2; may, at parents option, attend the 
school which serves the attendance area of his residence 
or the nearest school formerly serving his race, if he is 
entering grade 9; may, at jjarents option, attend the high 
school serving the Junior High School of Ms attendance 
area, or the nearest High School formerly serving his 
race if he is entering grades 10, 11 or 12.

A change of residence to a different attendance area, if 
continuance at school where then enrolled would be in­
equitable, creates the right to elect to attend the school 
of his new attendance area or the nearest school formerly 
serving his race, the choice being that of parents or 
guardian.

The revision of the system of attendance areas, which 
has been in the planning and development stage for the 
past two or three years, is almost complete and should be 
ready for submission to the School Board in February, 
1965, when the planning for the school year 1965-66 is 
commenced. The revised attendance areas will be fur­
nished plaintiffs as soon as adopted.

There are two major respects wherein the attendance 
at a particular school by pupils of any race differ under 
the plan now in effect from the policies in existence prior 
to the adoption of the plan:

(1) Pupils entering the school system for the first 
time, in grades 1, 2, 9, 10, 11 and 12 for the school

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9



274

year 1965-66 have the right to enroll at the school in 
the attendance area of their residence, without regard 
to race.

(2) In considering transfer requests and initial en­
rollment, those dual zones existing prior to the deseg­
regation plan under which the Board is operating, 
have been abolished. If, for example, a child lives in 
an attendance area where he was formerly permitted 
to enroll only in a school serving his race, but which 
residence was also in an overlapping attendance area 
of another race, he is permitted, at the option of his 
parents or guardian, to transfer to the school formerly 
serving the other race.

To summarize, a freedom of choice is permitted within 
the limitations of the community school concept and sound 
administrative procedures.

6. The number of negro and white pupils residing in the 
sundry attendance areas as presently constituted and who 
are attending the school for which those attendance areas 
apply are as set out in Exhibit 13 attached hereto and made 
a part hereof, with negro children being shown in column 
a. and white children in column b. to correspond with the 
subdivision of the interrogatory.

7. None, except insofar as the plan itself calls for exten­
sion of its effect to grades 2 and 9 in addition to grades 1, 
10, 11 and 12, throughout the system. 8

8. (a) and (b) The general re-assignment of pupils in 
attendance at the existing 94 schools according to any rigid 
rule of proximity of residence to a school or permitting

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9



275

school enrollment solely by request of pupil or parent 
would be impractical since it would tend to overload some 
schools and leave other facilities in less than full use. Such 
an arrangement would make it impossible to project en­
rollments for the 94 schools and near 80,000 students at a 
time when the system still faces overcrowded classrooms, 
portable classrooms, makeshift rooms and other measures 
being used to meet the rapidly growing enrollments. It is 
imperative that projections or estimated enrollments be 
as accurate as possible in order to fit enrollment to facili­
ties, assign personnel, allocate supplies, textbooks, equip­
ment, and minimize adjustments during the beginning days 
of the school term of either students or personnel.

There are many factors other than nearness of residence 
to school to be considered in determining school attendance 
and attendance areas. Among these are full utilization of 
facilities, pupil-teacher ratio, size of classrooms and spe­
cial facilities, natural and man-made barriers, major traffic 
thoroughfares, housing developments, growth and mobility 
of population, future school construction plans, transpor­
tation, and maintaining schools of a size to facilitate good 
instruction and administration.

The Board is in the midst of an accelerated building 
program that has eliminated half-day sessions for the first 
time in several years. Despite this, the Board still faces 
the almost insurmountable task of meeting the building- 
needs of a rapidly growing enrollment, while it tries to 
meet a backlog of building needs. This task is made more 
difficult by a shift in population to the suburbs, the dis­
placement of families by highway construction and the 
concentration of families by public housing developments. 
These factors have made it necessary to resort to every 
available means of housing students. If the Board faced

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9



276

the necessity of students being assigned or permitted to 
choose the nearest school, utter chaos would reign due to 
the inability to plan in advance to meet enrollments with 
facilities and staffs.

In brief, the obstacles faced would be almost insurmount­
able from a planning point of view and extremely imprac­
tical in that it would be a disservice not only to the system 
but to the pupils.

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

N E W  T E A C H E R S  T O T A L  IN

White
1964-65 ..........  229
1963-64 ..........  262
1962-63 ........... 181
1961-62 ..........  194
1960-61 ..........  174

Negro S Y S T E M

108 2655
83 2585
84 2374
71 2285
75 2221

There is no difference in qualifications required by the 
Board. There is no difference in the salary scale received 
by teachers.

10. It is not possible at this time to forecast with any 
degree of accuracy the effect of using or ignoring any par­
ticular factor in the employment and assigning of new 
teachers for the year 1965-66. Too many factors are now 
unknown, including number and nature of vacancies oc­
curring; number and qualifications of applicants; particu­
lar skills required; preference of teachers for particular 
schools; residence addresses of applicants; etc.

11. Attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit 
14 are charts showing all courses offered in the High 
Schools and Junior High Schools of Mobile County. Cor-



277

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

responding to the phraseology of the interrogatories, the 
schools are grouped according to whether they are pres­
ently attended solely or predominantly by members of 
one race. [Note: Exhibit 14 was not printed. But see 
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 13, p. — infra.]

12. There is no differential in expenditures for white 
and negro pupils either from state or local funds.

/ s /  Cranford I i . B urns 
Cranford H. Burns

[Notarization Omitted]



278

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9 

EXHIBIT 1

Grades

Adams 1-6
Alba 1-12
Arlington 1-6
Austin 1-6
Azalea Road 7-8
Baker 1-12
Barney 1-6
Barton 7-9
Bienville 1-6
Blount 7-12
Brazier 1-6
Brookley 1-5
Burroughs 1-6
Calcedeaver 1-12
Caldwell 1-6
Calvert 1-6
Carver 1-6
Central 10-12
Chickasaw 1-6
Citronelle 1-12
Clark 7-9
Cleveland 1-6
Cottage Hill 1-6
Council 1-6
Craighead 1-6
Crichton 1-6
Dauphin Island 1-6
Davidson 9-12
Dawes Union 1-6
Dickson 1-6



Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

Grades

Dixon 1-6
Dunbar 7-9
Eanes 7-9
Eight Mile 1-8
Ellicott 1-6
Emerson 1-6
Evans 1-6
Fonde 1-6
Fonvielle 1-5
Forest Hill 1-5
Glendale 1-6
Gorgas 1-6
Grant 1-6
Griggs 1-6
Hall 1-6
Hamilton 1-6
Hillsdale 1-12
Hollingers Island 1-8
Indian Springs 1-6
Lee 1-6
Leinkauf 1-7
Lott 1-12
Mertz 1-6
Maryvale 1-6
Mobile Co. High 1-12
Mobile Co. Training 7-12
Mon Louis Island 1-6
Morningside 1-6
Mt. Vernon 1-8
Mt. Vernon Elem. 1-8
Murphy 10-12
Northside 1-6



280

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

Grades

Old Shell Road 1-6
Orchard 1-6
Owens 1-6
Palmer 1-6
Phillips 7-9
Prichard Jr. High 7-9
Rain 7-12
Russell 1-6
St. Elmo 7-12
Saraland 1-7
Satsuma High 7-12
Semmes 1-12
Shaw 6-10
Shepard 1-6
Southside Jr. High 7-9
Stanton Rd. 1-6
Tanner Williams 1-8
Theodore 1-12
Thomas 1-8
Thompson 1-6
Toulminville Jr. High 7-11
Trinity Gardens 7-12
Vigor 10-12
Warren 1-6
Washington 7-9
Westlawn 1-6
Whistler 1-6
Whitley 1-6
Williams 1-6
Williamson 7-12
Wilmer 1-8
Woodcock 1-6



281

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

EXHIBIT 2

No. of No. of
Normal Emer, Normal Emergency

Teaching Teaching Pupil Pupil
Stations Stations Capacity Capacity

Keg. Spec. Reg. Spec. Reg. Spec. Reg. Spec.

Adams 17 18 561 594
Alba 49 1 54 1 1352 15 1477 15
Arlington 14 1 462 495
Austin 14 1 462 495
Azalea Road 33 1 39 1 957 15 1131 15
Baker 30 1 33 1 891 15 972 15
Barney 8 9 264 297
Barton 18 1 22 1 522 15 638 15
Bienville 16 4 17 4 528 60 561 60
Blount 70 84 2010 2410
Brazier 40 41 1320 1353
Brookley 14 15 462 495
Burroughs 10 11 330 363
Caleedeaver 12 13 381 373
Caldwell 20 21 660 693
Calvert 3 3 99 99
Carver 34 35 1122 1155
Central 52 62 1352 1612
Chickasaw 18 19 594 627
Citronelle 37 39 1118 1170
Clark 49 1 56 1 1421 15 1479 15
Cleveland 15 16 495 528
Cottage Hill 4 4 132 132
Council 22 23 726 769
Craighead 27 28 891 924
Crichton 24 25 792 825
Dauphin Island 3 3 99 99
Davidson 60 70 1681 1960
Dawes Union 8 9 264 297
Dickson 23 1 24 1 759 15 792 15
Dixon 11 12 363 396
Dunbar 33 3 39 3 957 45 1131 45



282

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

No. of 
Normal 

Teaching 
Stations

No. of 
Emer. 

Teaching 
Stations

Normal
Pupil

Capacity
Beg. Spec. Beg. Spec. Beg. Spec. Reg.

Eanes 41 1 48 i 1189 15 1392
Eight Mile 20 21 640 673
Ellicott 18 19 594 627
Emerson 17 18 561 594
Evans 12 1 396 429
Eonde 21 22 693 726
Fondielle 37 38 1221 1254
Forest Hill 25 26 825 858
Glendale 22 23 726 759
Gorgas 26 27 858 891
Grant 47 1 48 i 1551 15 1584
Griggs 28 29 924 957
Hall 36 37 1188 1221
Hamilton 19 20 627 660
Hillsdale 30 32 903 947
Hollingers Island 16 17 512 545
Indian Springs 12 14 396 462
Lee 4 4 132 132
Leinkauf 15 16 495 528
Lott 28 31 818 896
Maryvale 31 32 1023 1056
Mertz 18 19 594 627
Mobile Co. High 31 35 948 1044
Mobile Co. Trng. 41 48 1149 1344
Mon Louis Island 1 1 33 33
Morningside 25 26 825 858
Mt. Vernon 6 6 190 190
Mt. Vernon Elem. 18 20 578 640
Murphy 110 1 124 i 3080 15 3472
Northside 18 19 594 627
Old Shell Boad 15 16 495 528
Orchard 26 1 27 i 858 15 891
Owens 44 45 1452 1485
Palmer 17 18 561 594

Emergency
Pupil

Capacity

15

15

15

15



283

Phillips
Prichard Jr. High
Bain
Bussell
St. Elmo
Saraland
Satsuma High
Semmes
Shaw
Shepard
Southside Jr. High 
Stanton Boad 
Tanner Williams 
Theodore 
Thomas 
Thompson
Toulminville Jr. High
Trinity Gardens
Vigor
Warren
Washington
Westlawn
Whistler
Whitley
Williams'
Williamson
Wilmer
Woodcock

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

No. of 
Normal 

Teaching 
Stations

No. of 
Emer. 

Teaching 
Stations

Normal
Pupil

Capacity

Emergency
Pupil

Capacity
Beg. Spec. Beg. Spec. Beg. Spec. Beg. Spec.

34 1 42 1 986 15 1218 15
20 1 23 1 580 15 667 15
38 44 1072 1234
10 9 11 9 330 130 363 130
24 28 669 776
24 27 792 858
32 37 898 1033
49 1 51 1 1343 15 1425 15
32 38 885 1059
25 26 825 858
24 29 696 841
29 30 957 990
14 15 380 413
58 67 1698 1949
11 12 351 384
4 4 132 132

24 28 641 757
34 40 950 1106
64 1 75 1 1750 15 1856 15
13 14 429 462
34 1 41 1 986 15 1189 15
15 16 495 528
23 24 759 792
20 21 660 693
14 15 462 495
48 55 1326 1515
12 13 396 426
19 20 627 .660



284

EXHIBIT 3

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

Negro Pupils 
3rd Day 

Beg. Spee.

Negro Pupils 
3rd Month 

Beg. Spec.

White Pupils 
3rd Day 

Beg. Spec.

White Pupils 
3rd Month 

Beg. Spec.

Adams 619 617
Alba 1463 18 1473 14
Arlington 395 409
Austin 486 491
Azalea Road 1023 12 1049 13
Baker 1003 10 1018 11
Barney 389 294
Barton 527 12 538 18
Bienville 538 51 554 61
Blount 2475 2503
Brazier 1314 1381
Brookley 438 459
Burroughs 347 361
Calcedeaver 308 314
Caldwell 668 687
Calvert 73 74
Carver 1171 1213
Central 1806 1841
Chickasaw 503 510
Citronelle 1127 1131
Clark 1307 11 1312 18
Cleveland 459 490
Cottage Hill 111 111
Council 736 774
Craighead 891 909
Crichton 911 909
Dauphin Island 60 63
Davidson 1763 1784
Dawes Union 193 192
Dickson 811 12 833 12
Dixon 396 417
Dunbar 1116 36 1155 41
Eanes 1023 24 1032 14



Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

Negro Pupils 
3rd Day 

Reg. Spec.

Negro Pupils 
3rd Month 

Reg. Spec.

White Pupils 
3rd Day 

Eeg. Spec.

White Pupih 
3rd Month 

Eeg. Spec.

Eight Mile 523 542
Ellicott 414 443
Emerson 603 612
Evans 398 414
Eonde 766 784
Fonvielle 1272 1329
Forest Hill 938 940
Glendale 770 800
Gorgas 506 500
Grant 1557 17 1588 20
Griggs 998 1050
Hall 1035 1078
Hamilton 675 698
Hillsdale 944 984
Hollingers Island 548 554
Indian Springs 486 491
Lee 732 734
Leinkauf 427 415
Lott 780 805
Maryvale 790 803
Mertz 632 633
Mobile County High 1019 1044
Mobile County Trng. 1405 1472
Mon Louis Island 14 14
Morningside 911 921
Mt. Vernon 180 181
Mt. Vernon Elem. 559 584
Murphy 3 Q 2855 15 2909 14
Northside 671 657
Old Shell Road 460 480
Orchard 884 915 8
Owens 1722 1782
Palmer 510 635
Phillips 1265 13 1261 15
Prichard J r. High 650 10 654 17



286

Bain
Bussell
St. Elmo
Saraland
Satsuma. High
Semmes
Shaw
Shepard
Southsicle Jr. High 
Stanton Boad 
Tanner Williams 
Theodore 
Thomas 
Thompson
Toulminville Jr. High
Trinity Gardens
Vigor
Warren
Washington
Westlawn
Whistler
Whitley
Williams
Williamson
Wilmer
Woodcock

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

N egro 
3rd 

Beg.

Pupils
Day
Spec.

Negro Pupils 
3rd Month 

Beg. Spec.

White
3rd

Beg.

Pupils
Day
Spec.

White Pupil: 
3rd Month 

Beg. Spec.

1253 1259
277 99 317 119

664 689
865 865

1090 1104
1425 11 1435 12
1124 1121
905 924

536 581
1045 1104

346 357
1984 2038

397 416
61 62

3 3 470 461
999 1033

1856 21 1869 15
458 473

1290 14 1304 15
483 497
803 838

717 741
470 476

1286 1287
432 441

1 1 572 564



287

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

EXHIBIT 4

SCHOOL G R A D E S
.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Adams (N) 110 95 119 100 98 95
Alba (W) 153 130 135 115 112 111 134 135 133 115 108 92

Exp. (W ) 14
Arlington (W ) 74 59 75 60 71 70
Austin (W ) 61 76 97 85 88 84
Azalea Road (W) 504 545

Exp. (W) 13
Baker (W) 84 68 82 64 65 59 92 96 126 101 106 75

Exp. (W ) 11
Barney (N) 50 52 49 50 55 38
Barton (W ) 124 177 237

Exp. (W) 18
Bienville (W) 104 90 99 96 83 82

Exp. (W ) 15 16 15 15
Blount (N) 503 442 489 439 340 290
Brazier (N) 228 250 252 220 208 223
Brookley (W) 89 104 112 78 76
Burroughs (N) 79 54 64 58 59 47
Calcedeaver (W ) 31 39 30 32 26 31 16 29 21 22 23 14
Caldwell (N) 114 146 113 108 119 87
Calvert (W) 14 12 14 10 9 15
Carver (N) 203 223 209 204 192 182
Central (N) 761 565 515
Chickasaw (W) 65 82 99 86 99 79
Citronelle (W) 100 93 89 99 92 86 93 101 98 118 81 81
Clark (W) 419 462 431

Exp. (W ) 18
Cleveland (N) 71 90 78 72 87 92
Cottage Hill (N) 13 20 14 21 22 21
Council (N) 141 148 142 117 118 108
Craighead (W) 136 115 146 131 152 229
Crichton (W ) 154 163 149 152 138 153
Dauphin Island (W) 15 18 8 6 8 8
Davidson (W) 488 457 414 425



288

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

SCHOOL
1

Dawes Union (N) 34
Dickson (W ) 132

Exp.
Dixon (N) 77
Dunbar

Exp.
Eanes

Exp.
Eight Mile (W) 52
Ellicott (W) 75
Emerson (N) 128
Evans (W ) 57
Fonde (W ) 128
Fonvielle (N ) 254
Forest Hill (W ) 185
Glendale (W ) 133
Gorgas (W ) 78
Grant (N) 236

Exp.
Griggs (W ) 157
Hall (N) 205
Hamilton (W) 95
Hillsdale (N) 109
Hollinger’s Is. (W ) 55
Indian Springs (W) 92
Lee (W) 122
Leinkauf (W) 45
Lott (N) 41
Maryvale (W) 149
Mertz (W ) 97
Mobile Co. High (W) 94
Mobile Co. Trng.
Mon Louis Is. (W) 3
Morningside (W ) 167
Mt. Vernon (W) 25

G R A D

2 3 4 5 6

37 35 27 27 32
149 144 129 132 147

(W ) 12
64 65 79 61 71

(N) 15
(N)

(W )
(W)

67 79 65 74 65
72 78 72 77 69

101 107 96 100 80
71 76 68 65 77

150 127 136 126 117
262 279 278 256
200 185 178 192
134 140 122 142 129
91 86 77 84 84

298 289 286 253 226
(N) 20

192 188 177 179 157
193 183 181 162 154
125 124 118 111 125
99 103 91 108 77
81 86 63 77 68
86 83 77 81 72

134 134 108 99 137
60 74 54 69 60
62 56 43 47 37

133 126 119 149 127
102 117 110 101 106
110 78 95 90 98

(N)
1 5 1 3 1

178 141 166 136 133
26 21 20 22 20

E S
7 8 9 10 11 12

413 439 303
26

365 347 320
14
66 74

15

105
57

77
67

70 69 40 36

53
51 54 131 106 85 92

88 80 98 66 81 66
269 275 264 252 210 202

20 27



289

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

SCHOOL G R A D E S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Mt. Vernon Elem. (N) 64 93 87 57 67 83 81 52
Murphy (N ) 1 2

(W ) 907 960 1042
Exp. (W) 14

Northside (N) 112 131 121 111 98 84
Old Shell Road (W) 70 74 84 72 100 80
Orchard (W) 163 188 157 138 125 144

Exp. (w;1 8
Owens (N) 326 316 331 278 288 243
Palmer (N) 71 69 75 61 75 284
Phillips (W ) 455 369 437

Exp. (W ) 15
Prichard Jr. High (W ) 229 221 204

Exp. (W ) 17
Rain (W ) 251 205 250 193 196 164
Russell (W) 69 49 51 54 45 49

Exp. (W) 54 14 13 12 13 13
St. Elmo (N) 153 147 158 93 77 61
Saraland (W) 150 116 126 132 122 108 111
Satsuma (W ) 107 203 234 223 158 179
Semmes (W ) 52 45 61 38 44 45 139 137 162 185 277 250

Exp. (W) 12
Shaw (W ) 190 236 270 227 198
Shepard (W) 132 158 138 163 165 168
Southside (N) 212 197 172
Stanton Road (N) 185 219 183 178 169 170
Tanner Williams (W) 60 46 54 40 45 51 25 36
Theodore (W) 89 86 108 87 83 90 246 230 301 248 262 208
Thomas ( N ) 48 58 53 52 51 55 47 52
Thompson (N) 16 12 12 9 7 6
Toulminville (N ) 3

( W ) 87 109 96 85 84
Trinity Gardens (N) 240 205 208 159 116 105
Vigor (W) 737 569 563

Exp. (W ) 15
W arren (N) 73 83 76 76 87 78



290

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit .9

SCHOOL G B A D E S

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Washington (N) 466 446 392
Exp. (N) 15

Westlawn (W ) 77 85 89 92 72 82
Whistler (W) 140 143 143 141 131 140
Whitley (N) 130 121 118 132 118 122
Williams (W) 98 92 81 74 70 61
Williamson (N) 189 127 182 321 274 194
Wilmer (W ) 52 68 64 43 47 41 74 52
Woodcock (N) 1

(W ) 78 95 102 98 99 92

N— Negro 
W—White



291

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

EXHIBIT 5

NORMAL CAPACITY EMERGENCY CAPAGIT
Regular Special Regular Special

Over Below Over Below Over Below Over Belo
Adams 56 23
Alba 121 1 12 1
Arlington 53 86
Austin 29 4
Azalea Eoad 92 2 82 2
Raker 129 4 46 4
Barney 30 3
Barton 16 3 100 3
Bienville 26 1 7 1
Blount 493 93
Brazier 61 24
Brookley 3 36
Burroughs 31 2
Caleedeaver 37 59
Caldwell 27 6
Calvert 25 25
Carver 91 58
Central 489 229
Chickasaw 84 117
Citronelle 13 31
Clark 109 3 167 3
Cleveland 5 38
Cottage Hill 21 21
Council 48 5
Craighead 18 15
Crichton 117 84
Dauphin Is. 36 36
Davidson 103 176
Dawes Union 72 105
Dickson 74 3 41 3
Dixon 54 21
Dunbar 198 4 21 4
Danes 157 1 360 1



Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

NORMAL CAPACITY EMERGENCY CAPACITY

Regular Special Regular Special
Over Below Over Below Over Below Over Below

Eight Mile 98 131
Ellieott 151 184
Emerson 51 18
Evans 18 15
Fonde 91 58
Fonvielle 108 74
Forest Hill 115 82
Glendale 74 41
Gorgas 358 391
Grant 37 5 4
Griggs 124 93
Hall 110 143
Hamilton 71 38
Hillsdale 81 37
Hollingers Is. 42 9
Indian Springs 95 29
Lee 602 602*
Lienkauf 80 113
Lott 13 91
Maryvale 220 253
Mertz 39 6
Mobile Co. High 96 0
Mobile Co. Trng. 323 128
Mon Louis Is. 19 19
Morningside 96 63
Mt. Vernon 9 9
Mt. Vernon Elem. 6 56
Murphy 168 1 560
Northside 63 30
Old Shell Road 15 48
Orchard 57 7 24
'Owens 330 297
Palmer 74 41
Phillips 275 43
Priehard Jr. High 74 2 13



293

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

NORMAL CAPACITY EMERGENCY CAPACITY

Regular Special Regular
Over Below Over Below Over Belo

Rain 187 25
Russell 13 11 46
St. Elmo 20 87
Saraland 73 7
Satsuma High 206 71
Semmes 92 3 10
Shaw 236 62
Shepard 99 66
Southside Jr. Hi. 115 260
Stanton Rd. 147 114
Tanner Williams 23 56
Theodore 340 89
Thomas 65 32
Thompson 70 70
Toulminville 177 293
Trinity Gardens 83 73
Vigor 119 13
Warren 44 11
W ashington 318 115
Westlawn 2 31
Whistler 79 46
Whitley 81 48
Williams 14 19
Williamson 39 228
Wilmer 45 25
Woodcock 62 95

Special

11

* New building under construction. Overload transported to Gorgas, Chicka­
saw and Ellicott.

** Recent fire destroyed 8 classrooms. Overload is transported to Hall & 
Williamson.



294

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

Adams
Alba
Arlington
Austin
Azalea Road
Baker
Barney
Barton
Bienville
Blount
Brazier
Brookley
Burroughs
Calcedeaver
Caldwell
Calvert
Carver
Central
Chickasaw
Citronelle
Clark
Cleveland
Cottage Hill
Council
Craighead
Crichton
Dauphin Island
Davidson
Dawes-TJnion
Dickson

EXHIBIT 6

Elem.
Jr.

High

32
29 25
32
31

26
33 22
32

23
32

27
32
31
31
24 19
31
24
32

32
31 23

25
30
27
31
31
34
19

25
30
32

Sr.
Total

32 
26 
32
31 
26
24
32 
22
29
25 
32 
31 
31
23
31
24
32
24 
32
26
25
30 
27
31 
31 
34 
19
26
30
31

High Special

23 12

11
20 9

16
14

23

27

24 

22
15

26

12



295

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

Jr. Sr.
Elem. High High Special Total

Dixon 31 31
Dunbar 24 19 24
Eanes 24 12 24
Eight Mile 29 26 28
Ellieott 31 31
Emerson 30 30
Evans 32 32
Fonde 31 31
Fonvielle 32 32
Forest Hill 34 34
Glendale 32 32
Gorgas 31 31
Grant 31 17 31
Griggs 34 34
Hall 34 34
Hamilton 33 33
Hillsdale 32 23 23 28
Hollingers Island 31 30 31
Indian Springs 33 33
Lee 38 38
Leinkauf 29 26 28
Lott 30 24 22 25
Maryvale 30 30
Mertz 33 33
Mobile Co. High 31 23 22 26
Mobile Co. Trng. 27 23 25
Mon Louis Island 13 13
Morningside 33 33
Mt. Vernon 32 22 29
Mt. Vernon Elem. 32 25 30
Murphy 23 13 23
Northside 33 33



296

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

Jr. Sr.
Elem. High High Special Total

Old Shell Road 33 33
Orchard 32 32
Owens 31 31
Palmer 33 33
Phillips 26 13 26
Prichard Jr. High 22 14 22
Rain 26 23 25
Russell 31 11 21
St. Elmo 26 19 23
Saraland 31 26 31
Satsuma High 27 23 25
Semmes 30 26 24 10 25
Shaw 46 26 21 27
Shepard 34 34
Southside Jr. High 24 24
Stanton Road 34 34
Tanner-Williams 30 28 29
Theodore 32 25 26 27
Thomas 33 31 33
Thompson 29 29
Toulminville Jr. High 28 18 23
Trinity Gardens 24 24 24
Vigor 24 13 24
Warren 32 32
Washington 26 14 25
Westlawn 30 30
Whistler 31 31
Whitley 35 35
Williams 35 35
Williamson 22 24 23
Wilmer 29 30 29
Woodcock 30 30



297

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9 

EXHIBIT 7

School Teacher Pupil Ratio

Adams E. 32.21
Alba E. 29.29

J. 24.77
S. 22.51
Sp. 12.10
T. 26.02

Arlington E. 31.86
Austin E. 31.12
Azalea Road J. 26.42

Sp. 10.80
T. 26.02

Baker E. 32.92
J. 21.87
S. 19.73
Sp. 9.20
T. 24.23

Barney E. 31.60
Barton J. 22.63

Sp. 16.20
T. 22.35

Bienville E. 32.34
Sp. 13.72
T. 28.62

Blount J. 26.99
S. 22.59
T. 24.91

Brazier E. 32.01
South Brookley E. 30.72
Burroughs E. 30.64



298

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

School________________________ _________ Teacher Pupil Ratio

Calcedeaver E. 23.70
J. 19.06
S. 27.05
T. 23.10

Caldwell E. 31.34
Calvert E. 23.96
Carver E. 31.94
Central S. 24.01
Chickasaw E. 31.68
Citronelle E. 31.20

J. 22.66
S. 21.59
T. 25.89

Clark J. 25.19
Sp. 15.20
T. 24.99

Cleveland E. 29.95
Cottage Hill E. 26.60
Council E. 30.97
Craighead E. 31.03
Crichton E. 34.15
Dauphin Island E. 19.46
Davidson J. 24.56

S. 25.91
T. 25.52

Dawes-tTnion E. 30.26
Dickson E. 31.74

Sp. 11.70
T. 30.97

Dixon E. 31.36
Dunbar J. 24.39

Sp. 18.60
T. 24.14



299

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

School___________ ____________________  Teacher Pupil Batio

Eanes J. 24.39
Sp. 12.10
T. 24.09

Eight Mile E. 29.18
J. 26.42
T. 28.41

Ellicott E. 31.37
Emerson E. 30.30
Evans E. 31.99
Fonde E. 30.87
Fonvielle E. 32.45
Forest Hill E. 34.34
Glendale E. 31.64
Gorgas E. 31.44
Ella Grant E. 31.43

Sp. 16.90
T. 31.13

Griggs E. 33.53
Hall E. 33.82
Hamilton E. 32.89
Hillsdale E. 31.87

J. 23.44
S. 22.66
T. 27.64

Hollingers Island E. 31.34
J. 29.50
T. 30.91

Indian Springs E. 33.17
Robert E. Lee E. 37.89
Leinkauf E. 28.80

J. 25.50
T. 28.33



300

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

S c h o o l _________ ______________ Teacher Pupil Ratio

Rosa A. Lott E. 29.76
J. 24.42
S. 22.41
T. 25.22

Maryvale E. 29.53
Mertz E. 32.96
Mobile Co. High E. 31.28

J. 22.55
S. 22.02
T. 26.43

Mobile Co. Tr. J. 26.83
S. 22.81
T. 24.88

Mon Louis Is. E. 12.50
Morningside E. 33.45
Mt. Vernon E. 32.15

J. 22.35
T. 28.88

Mt. Vernon Elem. E. 31.80
J. 25.32
T. 30.00

Murphy S. 23.48
Sp. 12.80
T. 23.39

Northside E. 33.49
Old Shell E. 32.71
Orchard E. 31.88
Owens E. 30.70
Palmer E. 32.91
Phillips J. 25.90

Sp. 13.00
T. 25.63



301

Plaintiff s’ Exhibit 9

School__________________________________ Teacher Pupil Ratio

Prichard J. 22.29
Sp. 13.80
T. 21.98

Rain J. 25.60
S. 23.28
T. 24.53

Russell E. 31.04
Sp. 12.15
Tr. 8.90
T. 21.41

Saraland E. 31.27
J. 26.40
T. 30.55

Satsuma High J. 27.03
S. 22.73
T. 24.68

Semmes E. 29.87
J. 25.56
S. 23.69
Sp. 10.40
T. 25.03

Shaw E. 45.57
J. 25.96
S. 21.14
T. 26.84

Shepard E. 33.96
Southside J. 23.91
Stanton Road E. 34.35
St. Elmo J. 25.99

S. 19.26
T. 23.25



302

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

8eh° o1__________________________________ Teacher Pupil Ratio

Tanner-Williams E. 29.56
J. 28.30
T. 29.33

Theodore E. 31.81
J. 24.81
S. 25.65
T. 26.70

Martha Thomas E. 33.13
J. 31.46
T. 32.71

Robert Thompson E. 29.10
Toulminville J. 27.80

8. 18.25
T. 23.27

Trinity Gardens J. 23.93
S. 23.76
T. 23.87

Vigor S. 23.86
Sp. 13.00
T. 23.72

Warren E. 31.65
Washington J. 25.62

Sp. 13.80
T. 25.38

Westlawn E. 29.55
Whistler E. 31.02
Whitley E. 34.54
Williams E. 34.82
Williamson J. 22.26

S. 24.20
T. 23.40



303

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

School_________ _________________________Teacher Pupil Ratio

Wilmer E. 29.45
J. 29.57
T. 29.48

Woodcock E. 29.78

G r a n d  T o t a l s

Elementary 31.83
Junior High 25.07
Senior High 23.43
Special 13.62
Total 27.83



304

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

E X H I B I T  8

Adams
Barney
Blount
Brazier
Burroughs
Caldwell
Carver
Central
Cleveland
Cottage Hill
Council
Dawes Union
Dixon
Dunbar
Ella Grant
Emerson
Fonvielle
Hall, George
Hillsdale
Lott, Rosa
Mobile Co. Tr.
Mount Vernon Elem.
Northside
Owens
Palmer
Southside
Stanton Road
St. Elmo

18
9*

91
41
10
20
35**
72
15

4 *

23
6*

12
46
48
18
38
31
31
29**
56
18
18
5 3  * *  

18
23**
30
28* *

Teaching Principals included as teachers. 
Teaching Assistant Principals included as 
teachers.



305

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit ,9

Thomas 12
Thompson 2
Trinity Gardens 40
Warren 14
Washington 48
Whitley 20
Williamson 51

T o t a l s 1028
Principals 35
Assistant Principals 8

G r a n d  T o t a l 1071

Teaching Principals included as teachers.



306

Alba 53
Arlington 12
Austin 14
Azalea Road 39
Baker 38
Barton 21
Bienville 20
Brookley 14
Calcedeaver 12
Calvert 3
Chickasaw 15
Citronelle 41
K. J. Clark 51
Craighead 27
Crichton 25
Dauphin Island 3*
Davidson 65
Dickson 25
Mae Eanes 40
Eight M'ile 18
Ellicott 13
Evans 12
Fonde 23
Forest Hill 26
Glendale 23
Gorgas 15
Griggs 29
Hamilton 20
Hollingers Island 17
Indian Springs 14
Lee, Robert E. 22
Leinkauf 14

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

E X H I B I T  9

Teaching Principals included as teachers.



307

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit, 9

Maryvale 25
Mertz 18
Mobile County High School 36
Mon Louis Island 1
Morningside 26
Mount Vernon 6“
Murphy 117
Old Shell 14
Orchard 27
Phillips 48
Prichard Jr. High 28
B. C. Rain 48
Russell 19
Saralancl 27
Satsuma 41
Semmes 53
Shaw 43
Shepard 26
Tanner-Williams 10
Theodore 71
Toulminville 19
Vigor 74
Westlawn 16
Whistler 25
Williams 14
WTilmer 14
Woodcock 18

Total 1628
Principals 59
Assistant Principals 21

G r a n d  T o t a l 1708
* Teaching Principals included as 

** Teaching Assistant Principals
teachers, 
included as

teachers.



308

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

EXHIBIT 10

School Location
Expeeted Date 
of Occupancy

Pupil
Capacity

Maryvale Elementary 1265 Dauphin Island Parkway September 1966 ** 0
Mobile County Training 6 Whitley Street September 1966 ** 500
Citronelle Addition P. 0. Box 97, Citronelle, Ala. January 1966 ** 300
W. D. Robbins Main Street, Prichard, Alabama September 1965 800
Stanton Road 625 Stanton Road September 1965 ** 600
Burroughs P. 0. Box 171, Theodore, Ala. January 1966 ** 132
Fonde 3956 Cottage Hill Road January 1965 ** 330
Cleveland N.E. Limits of Saraland December 1966 1100
Dixon Elementary Bayou La Batre Road January 1966 ** 330
Alpine Hills Summit Drive, Alpine Hills September 1965 800
Windmill Burma Road September 1966 800
Vigor
Emerson

913 N. Wilson, Prichard, Ala. 
No Site-Central Texas Street 
Urban Renewal project to 
provide site.

December 1965 ** 300

Montgomery Snow Road, Semmes, Alabama September 1965 800
Dunbar 500 St. Anthony Street September 1965 ** 650
Nan Gray Davis Swedetown Road, Theodore, Ala. September 1965 800
Hillsdale 6301 Biloxi Avenue January 1965 800
Robert E. Lee Baker Road, Satsuma, Alabama September 1965 800

** This project to improve existing facilities and enrollment will be increased as shown.



309

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

E X H I B I T  11

W. D. Robbins Elementary—Area bounded by St. Stephens 
Road, Bessemer Avenue, G.M. & 0. Railroad and Grant 
Street.
Alpine Hills Elementary—-Area bounded by Three Mile 
Creek, Middle Ring Road, Overlook Road, Mississippi 
Street, Moffat Road, proposed Highway 90-45 connection.
Windmill Elementary—West of Demetropolis Road, north 
of Highway 90 and Halls Mill Creek to a point even with 
West Road, northward to and along West Road to Cottage 
Hill Road to intersection of Oak Terrace Drive and Cottage 
Hill, southwest to the intersection of Demetropolis Road 
and Burma Road.
Nan Gray Davis Elementary—A rural area near Theodore 
which is determined by bus routes.
In addition to these new schools, additions and renovations 
have been proposed at the following existing schools:

Maryvale Elementary
Mobile County Training
Citronelle Addition
Stanton Road
Burroughs
Fonde
Cleveland

Dixon Elementary
Vigor
Emerson
Montgomery
Dunbar
Hillsdale
Robert E. Lee



W. D. Robbins ■—Negro—Approximately 800 
White—Approximately 91

Alpine Hills •—Negro— 0
White—Approximately 800

Windmill -—Negro— 0
White—Approximately 800

Nan Gray Davis—Negro—Not available
White—Approximately 800

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

E X H I B I T  12



311

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9

E X H I B I T  13

Adams
Arlington
Austin
Barney
Bienville
Brazier
Brookley
Caldwell
Chickasaw
Cleveland
Cottage Hill
Council
Craighead
Crichton
Dickson
Eight Mile
Ellicott
Emerson
Evans
Fonde
Fonvielle
Forest Hill
Glendale
Gorgas
Grant
Hamilton
Hillsdale
Indian Springs
Lee
Leinkauf

a. b.
638

213
480

251
396

1212
476

541
528

396
119
459

288
543
691
352
306

431
283
629

1095
931
490
507

875
642

549
452
693
237



312

a. b.

Maryvale 896
Morningside 813
Northside 580
Old Shell Road 226
Owens 1507
Palmer 273
Russell 243
Saraland 707
Shepard 789
Stanton Road 584
Thomas 370
Warren 215
Westlawn 416
Whistler 516
Whitley 782
Williams 483
Woodcock 332

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9



313

The originals of the attached five letters were mailed 
to the defendant Board’s Asst. Superintendent by parents 
seeking reconsideration of Board rulings denying trans­
fer requests for the 1964-65 school year.

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10

1333 Doyle Avenue 
Mobile, Alabama 
August 28, 1964

Mr. J. A. McPherson
Assistant Superintendent
Pupil Personnel and Special Services
Mobile County Public School System
504 Government Street
Mobile, Alabama

Dear Mr. McPherson:

This is to acknowledge information provided by you with 
regard to rejection of application for transfer filed on be­
half of our daughter, Andreda Casher, 1333 Doyle Avenue, 
Mobile, Alabama.

We were disappointed that the Mobile County School 
Board denied the application for transfer of the said child 
from the Williamson School to the Adelia Williams School. 
In view of the stated crowded condition at the Adelia Wil­
liams School, we respectfully request that the transfer 
desired in this instance will be made to, first, the Maryvale 
School, second choice, the South Brookley School.

We shall appreciate your favorable consideration of out- 
request in this matter.

Respectfully yours,

» /
(Mrs) Clevie Casher

s/
Nathaniel Casher



314

2960 Cedar Crescent Drive 
Mobile, Alabama

August 28, 1964

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10

Mr. J. A. McPherson
Assistant Superintendent
Pupil Personnel and Special Services
Mobile County Public School System
504 Government Street
Mobile, Alabama

Dear Mr. McPherson:

This is to acknowledge information provided by you in 
application for transfer submitted on behalf of my daugh­
ter, Ednol Leona Crockett, 2960 Cedar Crescent Drive, 
Mobile, Alabama.

We were disappointed that the Mobile County School 
Board rejected the application for transfer of Ednol Leona 
from the Williamson High School to the B. C. Rain High 
School. It was our opinion that the ruling of the Fifth 
Circuit Court of Appeals since the April 1964 transfer 
period, nullified the effect of the said April transfer re­
quirement and reopened the matter for additional transfer 
applications.

We are, therefore, respectfully asking your reconsidera­
tion of the ruling given in this instance and implore that 
the Mobile County School Board will permit Ednol Leona 
to attend the B. C. Rain High School for the 1964-1965 
school year.



315

The Williamson High School is approximately from six 
to eight miles farther from our home than the B. C. Rain 
High School. This, of course, adds a serious difficulty to 
the school problems involved in this matter.

Respectfully yours,

8/
(Mrs) Bernice Crockett 

s /
Andrew L. Crockett

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10



Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10

2960 Cedar Crescent Drive 
Mobile, Alabama
August 28, 1964

Mr. J. A. McPherson
Assistant Superintendent
Pupil Personnel and Special Services
Mobile County Public School System
504 Government Street
Mobile, Alabama

Dear Mr. McPherson :

This is to acknowledge information provided by you with 
regard to rejection of application for transfer filed on be­
half of our son, Marion Crockett, 2960 Cedar Crescent 
Drive, Mobile, Alabama.

We were disappointed that the Mobile County School 
Board denied the application for transfer of the said child 
from the Williamson School to the Adelia Williams School. 
In view of the stated crowded condition at the Adelia Wil­
liams School, we respectfully request that the transfer de­
sired in this instance will be made to, first, the Maryvale 
School, second choice, the South Brookley School.

We shall appreciate your favorable consideration of our 
request in this matter.

Respectfully yours, 

8/
(Mrs) Bernice Crockett

s/
Andrew L. Crockett



317

505 S. Cedar Street 
Mobile, Alabama
August 28, 1964

Mr. J. A. McPherson
Assistant Superintendent
Pupil Personnel and Special Services
Mobile County Public School System
504 Government Street
Mobile, Alabama

Dear Mr. McPherson:

This is to acknowledge information provided by you with 
regard to rejection of application for transfer filed on be­
half of our son, Richard Lebaron Jackson, 505 S. Cedar 
Street, Mobile, Alabama.

We were disappointed that the Mobile County School 
Board denied the application for transfer of the said child 
from the Emerson School to the Russell School.

We are, therefore, respectfully asking your reconsidera­
tion of the transfer application in this matter.

Respectfully,

8/
(Mrs) Dollie Jackson

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10

8/
Andrew Jackson



318

714 Magee Avenue 
Prichard, Alabama
September 1, 1964

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10

Mr. J. A. McPherson
Assistant Superintendent
Pupil Personnel and Special Services
Mobile County Public School System
504 Government Street
Mobile, Alabama

Dear Mr. McPherson:

This is to acknowledge information provided by you with 
regard to rejection of application for transfer filed on be­
half of my daughter, Gloria Marie Hudson, 714 Magee 
Avenue, Prichard, Alabama.

I was disappointed that the Mobile County School Board 
denied the application for transfer of the said child from 
the Mattie T. Blount High School to the Vigor High School.

I am, therefore, respectfully asking your reconsideration 
of the transfer application in this matter.

Respectfully yours, 

(Mrs) Mary M. Hudson



22 75 9

BOARD OF SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS OF MOBILE COUNTY
MOBILE, ALABAMA “

PARENTS OR GUARDIANS REQUEST FOR RJPIL TRANSFERNT,FPS EXH'BIT N°p -
C A T E : .................S ‘ (r J>

__________   ____________ _____ ____ _____________— — —  WILLIAM J. O'CONNOR, CLERKDate _>•
B Y  ............Q P .

This is a request for a transfer from _______________________________________ School

to

for

Day

(boy_ . girl
School

)
(Name of pupil)

■whose birthday is ____________________
Month

Pupil was assigned to _____  in ________________________________
grade (Lastschool attended)

requesting assignment to _____  in the new school.
grade

Pupil lives with father : mother

Year
and is

; legal guardian j acting guardian

i f  acting guardian explain

The reasons for this transfer request are

Father Mother

Address (street and number) Address (street and number)

Telephone number 

_ Lega'q11 guardian

Address (street and number)

Telephone number 

Acting guardian 

Address" (street and number)

Telephone number) Telephone number)
Signature o f both parents required or a satisfactory explanation i f  only one signa­
ture. When completed and properly signed this form should be delivered in person 
to Mr. J. A. McPherson, Assistant Superintendent, Pupil Personnel O ffice, $0̂ - Gov­
ernment Street, on or before the 15th day of April 196L.
Notice of action taken on this application shall be made in writing on or before 
June 15, 1964, This action is final unless a Board hearing is requested in writing 
within ten days from the date notice of action is mailed. This form is valid only 
i f  submitted by person to whom it was issued.

emitted
in
Î0£NC£



319

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 11

SAMPLE TRANSFER REQUEST FORM



320

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 12

PUPIL TRANSFER FORM

(See Opposite)BP



2 2 7 5  9

F o r m  S 3 - 4 2 0  A P P L I C A T I O N  F O R  P U P I L  T R A N S F E R

M o b i l e  P u b l i c  S c h o o l s

D a t e _________________________________________

P a r e n t  or  g u a r d i a n  r e q u e s t i n g  t r a n s f e r __________________________________________

T e l e p h o n e  N o , _______________________ M a i l i n g  A d d r e s s ------------------------------------------------

S t r e e t  or  R o a d  A d d r e s s  ____________________________________________________________

PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT No,

BATE:

. 1 1

BY

WILLIAM JyO ’CONNQR, CLERK

T h i s  i s t o  r e q u e s t  t r a n s f e r  o f  :

N a m e  o f  C h i l d  G r a d e
N a m e  o f  s c h o o l  f r o m  w h i c h  N a m e  o f  s c h o o l  t o  w h i c h
t r a n s f e r  i s  r e q u e s t e d  t r a n s f e r  i s  r e q u e s t e d

R e a s o n ( s )  f o r  r e q u e s t  o f  t r a n s f e r

Blanks b e l o w  t o  b e  f i l l e d  i n  b y  o f f i c e  o f  P u p i l  P e r s o n n e  1 a n d  S p e c i a  1 S e r v i c e s

C I R C U M S T A N C E S  DO NOT S E E M  T O  P E R M I T  A P P R O V A L  FOR REASON C HEC KED  BELOW.
_________ (a)  S c h o o l  c a n n o t  a c c o m m o d a t e  a n y  n e w  o u t - o f - d i s t r i c t  c h i l d r e n  w i t h o u t  i n j u s t i c e  t o  t h e  s c h o o l .
________ ( b )  T r a n s f e r  s e e m s  u n w i s e  w h e n  v i e w e d  o v e r  a l o n g  p e r i o d ,  e v e n  t h o u g h  i t  m i g h t  be  i m m e d i a t e l y

d e s i r a b l e .
_______ (c) S y s t e m  c a n  b e t t e r  s e r v e  s t u d e n t  i n  h i s  p r e s e n t  d i s t r i c t .
________ ( d )  T r a n s f e r s  s h o u l d  b e  a v o i d e d  e x c e p t  a t  b e g i n n i n g  o f  s c h o o l  y e a r  w h e n  a t  a l l  p r a c t i c a l .

_______ ( e ) ' O t h e r ___

S i n c e r e l y ,

J . A . M e P h e r s  on
A s s i s t a n t  S u p e r i n t e n d e n t ,  P u p i l  P e r s o n n e l  a n d  S p e c i a l  S e r v i c e s

r
A B O V E  R E Q U E S T  IS H E R E B Y  A P P R O V E D .  I t  i s u n d e r s t o o d  i f  t h e  g r a d e  i n  w h i c h  a n y  o u t - o f -  
d i s t r i c t  p u p i l  i s  e n r o l l e d  b e c o m e s  o v e r c r o w d e d ,  he or  s he  m a y  b e  r e q u e s t e d  t o  t r a n s f e r  t o  
a n o t h e r  s c h o o l  w h e r e  t h e r e  is r o o m .

S i n c e r e  l y ,

J.  A ,  M c P h e r s o n
A s s i s t a n t  S u p e r i n t e n d e n t ,  P u p i l  P e r s o n n e l  a n d  S p e c i a l  S e r v i c e s

DISTRIBUTION
White copy for parent to take to new school ( if request is approved).
Yellow copy for school from which child is transferring.
Pink copy for office of Pupil Personnel and Special Services.



321



322

Survey Of Special Courses 
Offered By

Negro and "White Junior and Senior High Schools

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 13 for Identification

The information contained in this exhibit was gathered 
from defendants’ Answer No. 11 to plaintiffs’ Interroga­
tories which shows that approximately 120 courses are 
presently offered in the Mobile County public schools.

The chart on the following pages omits 27 standard 
courses such as English, General Math, American History 
and Civics which are offered in virtually all schools, and 
lists 75 of the special courses such as Journalism, Short­
hand, Latin, Industrial Arts and Elementary Psychology, 
which are either not available at Negro schools or are 
offered at more white than Negro schools. In addition to 
this list, there are 8 courses which are offered at as many 
Negro as white schools, and 12 courses offered at more 
Negro than white schools. In the latter group, the Negro 
schools offering the course exceed the white schools by only 
one in 9 courses and by two schools in 3 courses.

A review of this data reveals, inter alia, the following:
1. There are a total of 45 courses offered at white 

schools which are not offered at any Negro school.
2. Eight courses are generally available at white schools 

but offered at only a few Negro schools:
Course White School Negro School

Journalism 8 2
Speech I 10 2
Solid Geometry 10 1
Bookkeeping I 12 2
Business Arithmetic 8 2
Business Law 9 3
Shorthand II 9 2
Typing II 12 3



323

3. There are a total of 374 classes offering the 75 
courses listed on the accompanying chart at white schools 
as compared to 99 classes offering 30 of these 75 courses 
at Negro schools.

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 13

Dramatics 
Journalism 
Speech I 
Speech II 
Adv. Arith.
Plane Geometry 
Solid Geometry 
Trigonometry 
Elem. Psychology 
Bookkeeping I 
Bookkeeping II 
Business Arith. 
Business English 
Business Law 
Commercial Geography 
Office Machines 
Record Keeping 
Shorthand I 
Shorthand II 
Typing II 
French III 
French IV 
Latin I

N um ber o f  Courses

W h ite N egro W h ite N egro
Senior Senior J u n ior J u n ior

H igli H igh H igh H igh

3 2 - -

8 2 1 —

10
K

2 3 -
0

5 1 _ _
13 6 — -

10 1 ~~ —

11
8

12

5 - -

2 _ _
3 - - —

8
3
9
1
1

2 - -

3 -

3
13 5

- -

9 2 - -

12 3 - -

2
1
6

- -

2



324

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 13

N um ber o f  C ourses

Latin II

WhiteSeniorHigh
6

NegroSenior
High

WhiteJunior
High

NegroJuniorHigh

Latin III 2 — w_

Latin IV 1 — __ ___

Spanish III 2 _ _ —

Art III 1 — _ __

Orchestra A 3 _ 3
Orchestra B 1 _ __ __

Industrial Arts II 6 — _ __

Industrial Arts III 2 — __ _

Machine Shop 1 — — —

Mech. Drawing I 11 — — —

Mech. Drawing II 8 - - —

Mech. Drawing III 1 — — —

Vocational Agriculture I 3 _ — —

“ “ II 3 — — —

“ “ III 3 — _ —

Vocational Radio & T.V. I 2 1 _ __

Vocational Drafting I 2 — — _

Vocational Homemaking 5 — — _ _

Vocational Homemaking II 5 — — —

Vocational Homemaking III 4 - — —

Voc. Machine Shop I 1 — — _

“ Sheet Metal II 1 — — _

Marine Industry 1 — _ __

Guidance 3 _ __

Guidance 3 _ __ . . . .

Algebra III 4 _ _ ___

Voc. Agriculture IV 1 — — ___

Advanced English 1 — — _



325

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 13

Number of Courses

German I

White
Senior
High

3

Negro
Senior
High

White
Junior

High

Negro 
J unior 
High

German II 2 — — —

Note Hand 2 — — —

Creative Writing 1 - -

World Literature 1 - — —

Physics 7 6 - -

Spanish IV 1 - - -
Economic Geog. 2 - -
Art I 8 5 2 2
Art II 2 1 — —

Band A 13 6 6 1
Band B 10 5 3 —

Band C 4 3 2 —

Industrial Arts Metal Shop 4 2 - -

Choral A 11 7 4 2
Choral C 1 - 1 -

Music Appreciation 8 6 3 3
Homemaking Exploratory 2 1 - -
Genl. Homemaking I 8 6 2 2

“ “ II 5 1 - -

“ “ III 2 1 - _

BSCS (Biology) 2 1 - -
Restaurant Management 1 - - -
Genl. Business 2 1 — _



MEILEN PRESS INC. —  N. Y, C ^ ! , ,