Meredith v. Fair Plaintiff's Exhibit Vol. II

    PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 16 (Poges 12 to 225) 
(Jon. 25, 1962)

JAMES HOWARD MEREDITH

¥.

CHARLES DICKSON FAIR, ET AL

JACKSON CIVIL ACTION 3130

(19475 )

(Filed Sep, 20, 1961)

VOLUME II

(Testimony taken on Motion for Temporary Restraining Order 
and Preliminary Injunction.)



INDEX
Pages 226 - 492 Page

Testimony of Charles Clark 226

Testimony of Robert B. E llis 257

Plaintiff’s Exhibit #42: 1960 Catalogue 284

Plaintiff's Exhibit #44: Document 293

Plaintiff’s Exhibits 49 thru 53: Documents 311

Plaintiff's Exhibit #54: Student file 314

Defendant's Exhibit 26: Army Record 325

Defendant's Exhibit 5: Letter of M .I.A ,S . 327

Defendant's Exhibit 6: Letter of M.I.A*S. 329

Defendant's Exhibit 9; Document "Brainwashed" 334

Testimony of J. R» McLeod 334

Testimony of Robert B. Ellis-(Recalled) 358

Defendant's Exhibit 27: Excerpts from minutes 379
of the Board of Trustees

Defendant's Exhibit #28: Deposition of 383
James Howard Meredith

Defendant's Exhibit #29: Excerpts from minutes 383
of the Board of Trustees

Plaintiff's Exhibits 45 thru 48: Transcripts 414

Plaintiff's Exhibit #55: MLnutes of meeting 447
of the Committee on Admissions

Plaintiff's Exhibit #56: F iles 475



225 & 226 226

TRANSCRIPT OF TESTIMONY CONTINUED

MR. CHARLES CLARK called as a witness by the plaintiff,
having first been duly sworn, testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MRS. MOTLEY:
Q. Mr* Clark, would you state your full name for the record.
A. I am Charles Clark.
Q,. Are you one of the attorneys for the defendants in this 

case?
A. I am a special assistant Attorney General of the State of 

Mississippi.
Q. Are you one of the attorneys for the defendants in this 

case?
A. For the defendant Patterson.
Q. Let me show the plaintiff's army record, which was iden­

tified yesterday as Defendant’s No. 11, etc., and 
ask you if you secured that record?

A. I did.
Q. Where did you secure it?
A. At the office of General Services Administration in St. 

Louis, Missouri.
Q. When did you secure it?
A. On Wednesday morning August 9th, I believe.
Q. 1961?

A, Yes.
Q, Is this the entire service record of the plaintiff,



226 & 227 227

James H. Meridith?
A. It is not. Let me qualify my answer by saying that I

have no way of knowing what his service record con­
sists of, however, the part of his record that was 
there at the St. Louis office of the General Ser­
vices Administration was produced for me pursuant 
to his authority and it contained other papers other 
than those that were certified and which you hold 
in your hand.

Q. Those other papers you didn’t bring, did any of those
other papers show that the plaintiff had been court- 
martialed?

A. No.
Q. Those other papers you didn’t bring—

MR. SHANDS: For the record, we say that the records
are the best evidence of their contents. If plain­
tiff wants to get them all here that is another 
thing. This witness I don’t think can testify as 
to the contents of other written documents.
MRS. MOTLEY': If the court please, you recall that
the plaintiff had to giver permission in order for 
the state to get this record. He gave permission 
for them to get his entire record, and not to go 
down and pick out parts of his record to present 
here, and I am trying to bring out that what they 
have done is to go and select portions of the re­
cord without trying to find out— and we are trying



227 & 228 228

to find out what the rest of the record contained,
THE COURT: I believe I will overrule the objection.
If Mr, Clark made search and examination of the re­
cords I think it would be competent for him to testi­
fy, if he knows, what was not in there; but it would 
not be proper for him to testify to anything they 
contain. It is my recollection of the law that any 
person can examine the records for the purpose of 
testifying that the records do not contain anything, 
and that such testimony is competent without produc­
tion of the documents, but he can not testify as to 
anything as to what the records do contain for the 
reason that the records are the best evidence thereof. 
So if Mr, Clark is in a position to testify from his 
examination of the records the things it does not 
contain, I’ll let him be examined along those lines.

A. I am in a unique position and I have never been a witness 
before, but I know of my own knowledge that I did not 
have the opportunity to examine all of this man's ser­
vice record because the clerk who brought the records 
to me in the St. Louis office tole me specifically 
that other portions of the record were posed in Den­
ver, Colorado. So I can’t tell you. All I can tell 
you is that the records that I saw were examined by 
me and I will be glad to tell you whatever the court 
permits me to tell on that basis.
MR. SHAUDS: I would like for the record to show, too,



228 & 229 229

that that authorization he made— 'that she made the 
statement that that authorization meant all the file 
or no file at all, and I don’t think that is what it 
meant and the authorization itself shows what it says. 
I just merely want that for the record.
THE COURT: Well, I think it will not be necessary to
bring all of his records into court to make this part 
permissible. I think he could introduce such parts of 
the record as is competent and admissible, and then, 
since the plaintiff is in possession of his own re­
cords he could produce any part that he desired to 
produce.

Q, What part of the record did you examine but which is not 
contained here?

A, There were a number of transfer orders transferring this 
airman from station to station throughout the United 
States and to certain types of air force facilities 
in Japan. There were other portions of his medical 
records, I believe. Counsellor, I believe I better 
withdraw that. I cannot accurately recall, except I 
would say the papers you hold in your hand approximate 
a quarter of an inch thick. They are double the size 
that they would be because they were photostated back 
and front. I would say the man’s entire service re­
cord contains papers that would have been perhaps a 
half inch thick and I know that there were transfer 
orders and I believe some other type of papers in



229 & 230 230

there, but frankly, my recollection of the file Is 
not clear enough.

Q. Do you recall whether the papers which you examined but 
which are not here covered a period of nine years or 
what period did it cover?

A. They covered nine years, however, I know that one thing 
I was particularly interested in was this airman’s 
leave record and only a part of his leave record was 
summarized on one of the papers that I saw there and 
the other leave records I was advised were with some 
other part of his air force records in Denver; but all 
of his orders from base to base during the entire time 
from 1951 until he was released from the air force 
in i960 were there.

Q. Wow, of the papers which you examined and which are not 
here, they did not contain any court martial, did 
they?

A. No, they certainly did not, and the only thing I found in 
the examination of this record—

Q. Just one moment.
MR, SHANDS: Do I understand the court that I may have
a running objection to his testifying about this?

A. THE COURT*. I will give you a standing objection and
you do not waive it by failure to renew it and it 
will be overruled to the point on which I ruled defi­
nitely, and that is that he can testify, if he remem­
bers, and answer any question as to things that the



250 & 251 251

record does not contain, but the things that the re­
cord does contain he cannot testify about those be­
cause the records are the best evidence.

Q, The only thing you found in the examination of the records 
was what, before we were interrupted?

A. I believe it is going to be incompetent. You want me to 
say it anyway?
THE COURT: Mp ruling is this: I have given Mr.
Shands a standing objection. My ruling is this: 
that he cannot testify as to what the records do con­
tain, they would be the best evidence. He can testi­
fy and answer any questions you ask him if relavent 
as to what the records do not contain^
MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, Sir. At this point I was trying to
get him to complete the answer, which was interrupted. 
I don’t know if he was going to continue to tell me 
what it did not contain.
THE COURT: I believe he answered that question and
volunteered to answer something else, as I got it.
Your question was that the records do not show a 
record of court martial and he answered that they 
they certainly do not.

Q. Now, did the records which you examined which are not
here show that he had ever been disciplined for fail­
ing to obey orders?
MR. SHANDS: That is right in the teeth of that objec­
tion. If the stenographer will read that question,



251 & 252 252

that is in direct conflict with the court's ruling.
THE COURTS Overrule the objection because I think 
it calls for an answer, if they fail to show that 
he had ever been disciplined,
MS. MOTLEY-: Let me rephrase the question.

Q, The records did not contain any evidence that this air­
man had been disciplined for failing to obey orders, 
did they?

A. No, other than the general pattern of deterioration of 
his attitude, which is reflected in the records you 
hold in your hand. Now, this is a question that I 
didn't know whether it was competent or not. This 
man started out to be, as far as my examination of 
his records was concerned, a good airman, and some­
where along the line he began to have some difficulty 
in his marks that he got or his grading by his supe­
rior officers deteriorated until the last report which 
you hold there in your hand,

Q. Did you bring those papers which show that he was a good 
airman in the beginning?

A. They are right there in your hand.
Q. Show them to me.

M .  3HANDS: May I for the record make this observa­
tion: it is poaintiff’s record. If the plaintiff
wants to add to these records then he is within his 
power to produce here in court such additional parts 
of that record as he wants to produce, and, of course,



252 & 235 233

at that time they will be looked at and oar position 
thereasto will be stated at that time,
THE COURT: That is substantially in accordance with
what I have ruled. The question she is now asking 
I think is competent because he is going to testify 
of the records he has in his hand*

A. I would say this: the arrangement of the papers I gave to
the gentlemen for photostating evidently didn't mean 
anything to him, but My reference was to a perform­
ance report here which is the 23rd day of June, 1957* 
It shows Meridith to be raged as, "gets along with 
others very well; knowledge about his assignment very 
good; does he do his assigned duties-good worker;
Does he supervise— very good supervisor; overall 
rating— very good". And then the next reporting 
period, if you will indulge me just a moment,—

Q. While you are looking through that, did you select the 
papers that you wanted photostated, or did the army 
select them?

A, No, I selected the papers. My purpose in going there was 
to find out whether this man's service record bore out 
the facts that he had given to us in his previous 
testimony on deposition and on the preliminary hear­
ing and in connection with his application.

Q. What facts are those?
A. Well, for instance, the fact that he told the university 

on his medical application that he had never had



253 &23^ 23^

any type of nervous trouble or disorders and then I 
looked through the service record and I see that he 
has told the army that he has had depression or ex­
cessive worry.

Q. You say the plaintiff said he had it?
A. I tell you that this man’s report—
Q. Wait a minute. One question at the time. What you have 

just said is something the plaintiff said he had, 
right?

A. Counsel, I thought that you asked me why I examined these 
records, and did not bring every single part of his 
service record.

Q, I am not asking you that now. I am asking what—
THE COURT: I don't believe you gave him an opportuni­
ty to answer the first question. If you want to with­
draw the question you may do so, but he was going 
through the record to answer your question you had 
asked him, wherein was the difference between the 
testimony on the witness stand and there.
MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, I was going to come back to that
question as to what there was in the record that 
shows he was a good airman in the beginning. Then 
he started to go through it and I asked him whether 
the papers he brought were selected by him or the 
army, and then he expalained to me why he went there 
to get the papers, to substantiate or disprove certain 
facts which the plaintiff had brought up. And I



234 & 235 235

wanted to know what facts he was trying to substan­
tiate that the plaintiff had brought out on his pre­
vious testimony, because I didn’t remember any facts 
the plaintiff had brought out on his army record or 
health record at any previous testimony. Now, in Bi­
loxi they didn’t put his application in.
THE COURT: Suppose you start off anew, then. The
record is in evidence and I will let you ask the 
questions in your own way, but since I have given Mr. 
Shands a standing objection I did break in to say 
you hadn’t given him an opportunity to answer. So, 
we will just start anew and ask him whatever question 
you want to.

A, An I permitted to answer the question that she just just 
last put to me?
THE COURT: No, I believe that we will just start off
anew. The record is there.

Q, Let me start again. Let me ask you again who selected the 
papers which you brought here?

A. I selected the papers that are in this certificate which 
you have just handed me, which is a group of about 
twenty-five pages, with a red ribbon and gold seal 
on the front.

Q. Let’s go back to the question of what there is in this
record which you have brought which shows that in the 
beginning the plaintiff was a good airman. I think 
you read one thing. Now, would you continue with



255 & 256 256

that and read those?
A, The first record I read you from was a report, and to my 

best recollection it was the first of this type 
of performance reports that was in the file, however,
I do not want to make that as a precise statement 
because my memory is just not that good. I know at 
this time if there were any others they were compar­
able to this, that his performance has been accepta­
ble, and the report I read you from was for the period 
of October 1955 to the 25rd day of June, 1957* Then 
there is a performance report from the 24th day of 
June, 1957, to the 1st of May, 1958, and this report—

Q. What does it show?
A. He has some X marks showing—
Q. I want you to read it for the court so the court will 

know what you are talking about.
A. You want me to put it in the record.

"How Much Does He Know About His Assigned Duties?"
And the block checked is "Has Extensive knowledge of 
complex duties," and which there only two higher 
grades and three lower grades. In other words, he 
is above the medium or middle point line.
"How Well Does He Do His Assigned Duties?"
There again he is above the median, "Completes all 
assigned duties satisfactorily."
"How well does he supervise and lead?" "Not observed". 
"How well does he get along with others?" "Pleasant



236 & 237 237

to work with. Usually willing to help others even 
in difficult situations."
"What effort does he make in improving himself?" 
"Frequently seeks out opportunities to Improve him­
self. " His overall evaluation is "A Very Good Air­
man". The recommendation for promotion is "Along 
with airmen of similar service and experience."
Then there is a reporting period—

Q. Excuse me. Is there a name of a person who did that eval­
uation on there?

A. Yes.
Q. What is the name^
A. Maphors T. Weatherly, S/Sgt, USAF, listed as the reporting 

officer. There is a review by James A. Coleman, 
Captain, U. 3. Air Force, and there is— . I see no 
other signature, however, there is a name on here, 
Clifford L. Harrington, LtCol, USAF, Commander, and 
the review by the unit commander shows "Recommend for 
Good Conduct Medal".

Q. Oh, it does. Let’s go to the next report.
A. 2 May.
Q What's the year?
A. 2 May 1958 to 21 May 1959-
Q. Follow the same procedure.
A. "How much does he know about his assigned duties? Has 

extensive knowledge of complex duties."
This is the same mark he got on that the last time.



237 & 238 238

"How well Does he do his assigned duties? Completes 
all assigned duties satisfactorily."
"How well does he understand instructions? Under­
stands quickly the main points of instruction."
"How well does he get along with others? Pleasant 
to work with even in difficult situations."
"What effort does he make in inproving himself?
Always seeks out opportunities and expends extra ef­
fort to improve himself."
"NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICER QUALITIES:
How well does he supervise? Not observed."
"How well does he utilize resources? Almost always 
effective in accomplishing savings in men, money, and 
material by inproving management procedures."

Q. Men and what?
A. Men, money and material by inproving management procedures. 

"How well does he accept responsibility? Accepts all 
assigned responsibilities."
You want me to turn to this next page?

Q. That*s right, and continue reading that report.
A  His overall evaluation is checked "A Very Good Airman".

Shall I read the comments?
Q. That's right.
A. (reading) SSgt Meredith is interested and very active in 

deucational activities. He expends a great deal of 
effort to expand his own education. He is Education 
NCO for the Squadron. He also supports the Squadron



258 & 259 259

athletic program in his capacity as Athletic NCO, 
Recommended Improvement Areas: SSgt Meredith is not
always tactful in dealing with other people. He 
allows himself to become upset too easily, and this 
is a strong contributing factor to his problem of 
displaying tact. In this situation, he loses his 
otherwise normally effective expression. He is aware 
of these occasional tendencies, and is making progress 
to improve in these areas.
Facts and Specific Achievements: SSgt Merdith carries 
out his duties in an effective and satisfactory man­
ner. He volunteered for and is performing the extra 
duties of Education NCO and Athletic NCO for the Squa­
dron. In his capacity as Education NCO, he takes a 
genuine interest in the educational problems of the 
airmen in the Squadron and assists them by advising 
and counseling them on improving their education.
SSgt Meredith is one of the most financially respon­
sible NCO's I have known. He manages his personal 
affairs in a commendable manner.
Suggested Assignments; Based on his background and 
his keen interest in the education area, SSgt Meredith 
should be most effective in an assignment where he 
would have the opportunity to work with base educa­
tion programs.
Other Comments: This report and all ratings given
have been discussed with SSgy Meredith. SSgt Meredith



259 240

does not supervise DAFC or Japanese National person­
nel. ,!
You want to ask me something?

Q, Yes, I wanted to ask you whether the same person made that 
report or whether it is a different person.

A. Well, this is made by Maphors T. Weatherly, who made the 
one previous I read, and he recommends him for pro­
motion along with airmen of similar experience and 
Leonard D. Jones, Major, TJSAF, concurs, and John W. 
Luhrs, Captain, USAF, has signed this.

Q. Now, are you sure the previous report was made by Weather­
ly? You want to look back at the previous one you 
read—

A. I read—
Q. — and see if they were made by the same person.
A. I made a comment to you that the report for the period of 

24 June, 1957, to 1 May, 1958# was made by Maphors T. 
Weathereby, SSgt. I explained to you further, I 
think, I hope, that James A. Coleman and Clifford L. 
Harrington had also signed these papers. I personally 
do not know who prepared the papers, but Maphors 
Weatherly’s signature appears on it, as does James A. 
Coleman and as does some mark down here in a block 
called signature or initials, And I presume of the 
man Harrington. Now, these last two signatures don’t 
appear on report I have last read to you covering the 
period of 2 May 1958 to 21 May 1959# but Maphors



240 241

T. Weatherly does appear on here with these different 
men Jones and Luhrs.

q . What I was trying to bring out was that different men
signed these different reports, not all signed by the 
same person, is that right?

A. Well, now, so far as Maphors Weatherly, of course, it
would be incorrect, and as to Coleman and Harrington 
it would be correct.

q . Let's read this one. Will you please read the next report 
and time of it, the date of it.

A. Counsel has used the phrase "next report". Actually this 
is the first report I referred to, which I have read 
from partially. It covers the period from 5 October 
1955 to 2? June 57, and if I remember correctly I 
did read the remarks on the second page of that re­
port, which has no type of identification on it as 
such. Then, the bottom of the front page of this 
form, which is called AIRMAN PERFORMANCE REPORT shows 
"Opportunity Of Supervisor To Observe Airman (Check 
appropriate boxes)— Time Rater Has Directly Supervised 
Man Being Rated". The box checked is two months. 
"Knowledge of Man Being Rated— See His Work Each Bay; 
Knowledge Of The Supervisory Skill Of Man Being Rated 
—  See Him Supervising Every Day".
And that completes it, other than the printed infor­
mation on the front page of that report form.

Q* Does this report that you have brought contain any of his



241 242

efficiency ratings or similar reports for the first 
part that he was in the army?

A, Counsel, my answer to that was, no, the reports I brought 
here do not contain anything for the period prior to 
5 October 1955, which is that reporting period I have 
just most recently read to you.

Q. In other words, this has to do with his second hitch in 
the army, right?

A. As far as those particular papers are concerned, the
answer is yes. But, of course, you hold the whole 
group of papers I brought here and many of those do 
refer to his first hitch.

Q. There are no efficiency reports of his first term in the 
army in this group of papers?

A. That’s correct, and I have no knowledge as to whether
those papers are now in Denver, Colorado, or at some 
other air force record center, or whether or not they 
were there in St. Louis and that I didn’t bring them.
I am inclined to think I brought all of his efficiency 
reports that I could find, but I could not say that 
to be a fact because my memory is not that good.

Q. You did not find any other medical reports having to do
with emotional problems, did you, in those papers you 
examined but did not bring?

A. I don’t know if I am qualified to answer the question or 
not.

Q. I am asking you about the papers which you examined your­



241 & 242 243

self but did not bring.
A. My answer Is that I do not know whether the papers con­

tained something about emotional disturbance or not.
I know they didn’t mean that to roe.

Q. This report of medical history about which there was some 
testimony yesterday, and identified as defendant’s 
no. 8, which was a report checked by Meredith as to 
various things which they had asked him whether he 
had, like scarlet fever, diptheria, rheumatic fever, 
so forth, and he checked "yes" as to nervous trouble, 
is that right?

A. Yes, And as to depression or excessive worry and as to 
car, train sea or air sickness. Those three things 
stood out in my mind because he had not checked some 
of those same boxes in the positive in the application 
blank he submitted to the university.

Q. These checks are made by Meredith, not by a doctor, is 
that right?

A. Now you are asking me something there that of course I 
can't answer. You asked the question did Meredith 
make these checks. I would have to tell you I wasn't 
present when the form was completed. All I know, 
Counsel, is that the signature that looks like Sgt. 
Meredith's signature appears on the back page of this 
same instrument in his record and it looked like the 
same signature that is on his verification to the 
complaint and on the application blank he submitted to



242 & 243 244

the University of Mississippi.
q . Didn’t you just say that it appeared he had checked some­

thing here he hadn't checked in the school record?
A. Yes.
Q,. That is what I am asking you.
A. It did appear to me. It still looks like it is there.
Q. What I want to bring out is that it looks like Meredith 

checked these and not a doctor?
A. It does to me.

MR. SHARDS; This witness has said he doesn't know; 
that he wasn’t there.
MRS, MOTLEY; The witness just testified he noticed 
that on here that plaintiff had checked things which 
did not correspond with the ones he had checked on 
his on his application, Your Honor. That is what he 
said and I am trying to bring out whether he is say­
ing that Meredith checked these on this record and 
also checked those on his application, or whether 
some doctor did it.
THE COURT; Very well, overrule the objection.

A. I thought I answered the question as clearly as I could, 
but my answer to it is that I cannot tell you on the 
witness stand under oath to tell the truth and nothing 
but the truth that this check mark on the original of 
the Instrument, of which this is a photostatic copy, 
was made by any particular person any more than I can 
tell you that Airman Meredith, or James Meredith



243 & 244 245

here in this court room, signed the complaint that is 
filed in this cause. M l  I know is that the signature 
of James H. Meredith on the second page of this form 
appears to be the same signature that was on a form 
submitted to the University of Mississippi and is on 
the verification to the complaint in this law suit.

Q. "What is the date of this medical report? Is there a
date on here?

A* If you will hand it to me I will see. Yes, June J , I960.
There is a signature there, too, Counsel, for whatever 
it might mean.

Q. Yes, itfs James Meredith.
A. No, I had reference to Donald J. Kubitz, Captain, USAF

(MC), but then his signature, apparently his signature^ 
appears on this form, also.

Q. This medical report at least purports to be information 
given by Meredith, doesn't it? It doesn't appear to 
be a doctor's report?

A. I am not qualified to answer that. The papers are there.
Q. You are a lawyer, aren't you?
A. Well, there is some question about that. I am admitted 

to practice law.
Q. You are admitted to practice law, so then you can deter­

mine, can't you, what this purports to be?
A. Yes, —

MRS. SHANDS: (interrupting) We think the witness
has answered that clearly and totally as can be



244 & 245 246

humanly done.
THE COURT: Yes, sustain the objection to that,

Q. Do you want to find the doctor's report you read, or some­
one had Meredith to read out here yesterday?

A, Now—
Q. The doctor's report,
A. This is what I mean: he read two things yesterday,
Q. I know that he did but I want you to find the doctor's 

report he read.
A. What X was just getting ready to tell you—
Q, That is Meridith's report, isn't it?
A. I have no idea. This is an entry on July 22, 1958* in 

the dispensary about emotional problems and I don't 
know who "D. P. something is, as to being a doctor 
or not.

Q. You don't know whether that is a doctor's report, then, 
and there is nothing that shows that this is a doc­
tor's report, is what you are saying?

A. All I am saying is that the paper was labeled HEALTH RE­
CORD, CHRONOLOGICAL RECORD OP MEDICAL CARE. Whether 
the medical care was administered by a person who was 
a medical doctor or not I don't know.

Q. It doesn't show on there?
A. No* I cannot tell from the instrument whether it was or 

not.
Q. We don't know whether a doctor wrote that or not, do we?
A. No.



245 & 246 247

Q, Let’s get the next record. JL Wow, you said that was 
read out, because there are some other medical re­
ports here.

Q. Yes, you read it out.
A. The report which was read from yesterday here in the

courtroom is on Standard Form 88, Revised June 1956, 
REPORT OF MEDICAL EXAMINATION. It consisted of three 
pages. At the time I saw it these three pages were 
clipped together with a paper clip. Do you want me 
to refer only to the page labeled CLINICAL RECORD?

Q, Let’s first see whether a doctor made that report. Does 
it indicate on there that that report was made by a 
doctor?

A, Yes, to me. But then again I have only the instrument 
here and will be glad to tell you what it says. 
CLINICAL RECORD CONSULTATION SHEET To: Psychiatry
From: Dispensary.
This other report had been made by the dispensary, 
was stamped DISPENSARY, when he showed the emotional 
problem in ’58.
(reading) "READING FOR REQUEST (complaints and find­
ings) Since early youth patient has been plagued 
with multiple episodes of nervous stomach, quick 
temper, obsessive thoughts. Provisional Diagnosis:
R.O. obsessive compulsive neurosis." Then the doc­
tor's signature, and then it is typed "s/DONALD J. 
KUBITZ". Then "PLACE OF CONSULTATION, On Call.



246 & 247 248

EMERGENCY OR ROUTINE" and it is checked "ROUTINE," 
Then you have "PSYCHIATRY REPORT 29 April i960.

Q. I want you to read the recommendation made by the doctor 
after he made this report.

A. Down below "Diagnosis"?
Q. Yes.
A, "Diagnosis: Passive Aggressive Reaction, chronic, mode­

rate. Recommendations: No treatment recommended.
Patient declined any medication."

Q. What is the date of that recommendatbn you just read?
A, You pointed to the figure of April 8, i960. That appears 

to be the day they referred him to psychiatry.
Q. The next one.
A. The psychiatry report appears to be dated April 29, i960. 

At least that is the day written out by it. Let's 
see just one moment. It shows a signature here of 
James E. Kirkham, Jr,, also dated 29 April i960, and 
then these identification things, which I presume 
relate to some part of his service station or number 
or something.

Q. Now, this medical report, going back to that, which Is
identified here as defendant's No. 8, where Meredith
had checked that he had this nervous trouble,--
MR. SBANDS: We object to that. There is a double- 
barelled question. She included in it "where Mere­
dith had checked", indicating that he had some ner­
vous trouble. The witness has undertaken, I think,



247 & 248 249

as fairly and completely as possible to say that he 
does not know whether Meredith did or did not check 
that. I think the question asked by counsel is Impro­
per.
THE COURT: Overrule the objection.
MRS. MOTLEY: I’d just like the court to look at this
document now that I am asking him about. That is a 
medical report made by the plaintiff on, I believe 
the date is June 6, i960, (hands to court)
THE COURT: I have examined this document, which is
marked defendant’s no. 8 for identification, and is 
two pages and which is a form headed "REPORT OP 
MEDICAL HISTORY" and apparently it is a document that 
is executed by the plaintiff himself and also by a 
doctor who examined. The report shows many questions 
asked whether he ever had or had now, and the place 
checked at the left of each item, a large number of 
items, and they are checked. On the following page 
is a block which reads "Check each item yes or no. 
Every item checked ’Yes’ must be fully explained in 
blank space on right".
Now, there are none in that block checked "yes".
Then at the bottom is the certificate and it is signed 
"James H. Meredith". Then Block 40 there is a report 
by the doctor, Dr. Kubitz. I say by the doctor be­
cause under that block 40 is the statement "Physi­
cian’s Summary and Elaboration of all Pertinent Data".



248 & 249 250

Then in parentheses "Physician shall comment on all 
positive answers in items 20 through 39". Then the 
physician gives some report of his findings, among 
others, mumps & pertussis in childhood] treated at 
USAF Hospital Tachikawa for tonsilitis; motion sick­
ness, air, recurrent, not incapacitating; depression, 
excessive worry, nervousness, manifested by nervous 
stomach."
So it is apparent to me that the document speaks for 
itself.
MRS. MOTLEY; Yes. I was trying to bring out that the 
plaintiff had supplied this information and the 
checks here and that the doctor had made—
THE COURT; Well, I would assume that is true and you 
needn’t question about it. I think that is a ques­
tion I can determine as well as anybody else, and I 
think the plaintiff checked those. Probably, I think 
a fair inference would be, but I would make it now, 
that he checked it in the presence of the doctor and 
the doctor made the examination and filled out the 
blocks.
MRS. MOTLEY; The other thing I wanted to bring out 
was the date, Your Honor. This report is June 7* 
i960 and the previous one was April i960, the one he 
read a minute ago. 
tHE COURT; Very well.

(Ten minute recess)



2^9 & 250 251

THE WITNESS: I wonder if I may clarify one thing.
I told you when you first started questioning me that 
I represented the Attorney General. I was confused 
between Cause No. 3150 and No. 3133* this being 3130. 
I do represent all the defendants in this cause and 
I am sorry that I made that.

Q. Now, Mr. Clark, continuing with the report, which the
court just read before the recess, and calling your 
attention to Item No. 40, PHYSICIAN'S SUMMARY AND 
ELABORATION OP AIL PERTINENT DATA. I want to ask you 
where the next page is on that doctor's report. Do 
you find it there?

A. At the time I examined this man’s records this report of 
medical history was a document in and of Itself. The 
report is on Form No. 89. It consisted of one page, 
back and front, which now appears in this copy as two 
pages photostated. There was no other page attached 
to this or related in any way. Now, the medical re­
cords, unlike what you hold here in your hand, be­
cause, as I say, the man who did the photostating and

did it
assembly at the time/ at some point in the building 
out of my presence and it came back to me this way. 
But the medical records in this man's file were in a 
brown manila envelope, as best I recall, and I again 
will have to ask you to indulge me and my memory 
on that. They were pulled out as a unit and showed 
to me as medical papers. This particular paper you



250 & 251 252

have handed me, which is marked defendant’s no. 8, 
was an instrument by itself. There was a REPORT OP 
MEDICAL EXAMINATION on Form— this appears to be 88,
I think, or C-8, not sure which— consisted of three 
pages. This report which appears in the certified 
documents as three continous pages was actually a 
doubled-over page. The front page and the second 
page were attached to each other at the bottom and 
they formed a sort of envelope and inside of that 
folded paper was this third page, CLINICAL RECORD 
CONSULTATION SHEET, but there was nothing attached to 
this report of medical examination dated June 6, i960,

Q. June 7th.
A. Pardon me. June 7, i960.
Q. you are saying that you are certain that there was no, 

as indicated here, no next page, but on the other 
medical report there are three pages but here you 
are certain that there was no next page as indicated 
here by "See next page consultation. You are certain 
there was no next page with a consultation on that?

A. You are asking me two questions and I will answer them one 
at a tine. You are telling me that there is an indi­
cation here that there was a next page. I am telling 
you, being the witness, that I don’t see the indica­
tion.

Q. What does that say? (indicating)
A. Would you let me complete the answer. Number 2, you are



251 & 252 253

asking me if I can testify positively that there was 
no other page attached and I will have to tell you 
that I am testifying to the best of my memory and I 
do not recall seeing any other report attached to 
this, and I might say that the reason I can be some­
what more certain than about the generalities of the 
file is that I know that I would not have consciously 
attempted to separate any papers to bring a story down 
here that was not complete,

Q, When you got that paper they were attached, weren't they, 
back to back?

A. This Form 89 was not a back to back form. This form 
89 was on a single sheet of papers, page 1 was the 
front of the paper, page 2— and I am reading from 
defendant’s no. 8 for identification— was the back 
of the same sheet that page 1 is on. Then—

Q. Wait a minute. That is what I am asking you. Were those 
papers clipped together or one page or were they 
separate pages?

A. I tried to say they were one page. One page front and 
back.

Q. They are now two pages?
A. They are now two pages.
Q. Which means they have been separated, does it not?
A. The photostat machine is the mechanical difficulty here. 

They don’t take on the same sheet, evidently— some 
machines I have seen will do it— but evidently this



252 & 255 254

one wouldn't.
Q. Were you there when the man photostated that report?
A. No.
Q. You don't know whether he photostated everything, do you? 

You weren't there.
A. He photostated everything I asked him to photostat because 

I kept a list of what I asked him to photostat and 
when he brought it back downstairs—

Q. There was a list? Where is that list?
A. — to me the next day—
Q. Where is the list? You said you kept a list.
A. I certainly did and I checked it off.
Q. Where is it?
A. I suppose in the wastebasket at the General Services Ad­

ministration, St. Louis, Missouri, I asked the man 
for certain papers. He took the papers out of my 
possession. This is on a Tuesday morning on the 8th 
of August, if X am correct. He told me that the 
photostating and certification of these papers would 
take some time. I came back the next day and picked 
them up, checked my list off with his, it was com­
plete, he had photostated everything I asked him to 
photostat.
THE COURT: Let’s see if I understand about the two
pages. As I understand it it was one sheet—
WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: — and it was photostated front page as



255 & 254 255

one page and then photostated the back page, which 
is page two.
WITNESS: Your Honor is exactly right.
MRS. MOTLEY: What I am calling his attention to,
Your Honor, right there next to the doctor's report 
that you have read a minute ago !iSee next page con­
sultation", and the next page we wanted was the con­
sultation.
WITNESS: Judge, the reason I disagreed with the
attorney Is because the words there "See HP consult." 
meant to me "See Weuropsycopathic consultant's re­
port", which was a previous record in his medical re­
cord—
MRS. MOTLEY: Where is that?

A. Which is the instrument right back here, (indicating)
where on the 29th day of April, i960, he had been re­
ferred for psyciatric treatment or psychiatric exami­
nation.

Q. Where they said "No treatment recommended", is that what 
it says?

A. That is one of the things it says.
Q. All right.
A. Together with chronic, obsessive neurosis.
0,. It said "no treatment recommended", didn’t it?
A. It did. Said he refused medication.
Q. Is medication psychiatric treatment to you? Do you know 

what medication is?



254 & 255 256

A, You are getting me way out of my field, but I would say 
this—

Q. Well, you were the one who said it, he refused medica­
tion, implying that medication is psychiatric treat­
ment.

A. Counsel, let me say this? and if you will, let me com­
plete my answer. The only acquaintance I have with 
medicine is probably similar to most attorneys in 
that I do occasionally have time or some reason to 
read medical reports, and one of the things I do 
know is that they have made the biggest strides that 
they have made in psychiatric treatment have been 
that they have developed medications that will aid in 
that treatment. So my answer to the question is 
based on only information that I have received in an 
indirect manner.

Q* It says "No treatment recommended". What does that mean 
to you— that he was to get psychiatric treatment 
through the use of medical drugs?

A. No, I don't think—
Q. No treatment means no treatment, doesn't it? That is 

plain English. Do you have to be a doctor to know 
that?
THE COURT: Let me see the document you are talking
about. (Same is handed to court)
Counsel has handed to me the document about which she 
has been questioning the qitness, and after diagnosis



255 & 1 257

are the words, "Passive Aggressive Reaction, chronic, 
moderate".
The next line "Recommendations: No treatment recom­
mended. Patient declined any medication". So I think 
the questions asked now are more or less argument!ve 
and I believe a matter of construction for the court 
as to what it means.
MRS. MOTLEY: I think that is all from this witness.
THE COURT: Any cross-examination?
MR. SHANDS: We have no further questions.
THE COURT: Stand aside.

(Witness excused)

MR. ROBERT B. ELLIS called as a witness by the 
plaintiff as an adverse witness, having previously been sworn 
testified as follows:

CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MRS. MOTLEY:
Q. I believe you were previously sworn and took the stand 

in Biloxi on June 12, 1961?
A. That is correct.
Q. I don't want to go over that testimony, but I want to ask 

you again how long you have been the resistrar at the 
University of Mississippi?

A. I have been in the office of the registrar since July of



1 & 2 258

*49, beginning as an assistant registrar, then a year 
as acting registrar, and since that time as registrar.

Q. Did you have any previous position on the university staff 
prior to *49?

A. Yes, in a part time capacity. I have been a program di­
rector for the Ole Miss nY", I have been a graduate 
assistant to a teacher of accountancy, I have worked 
as the director of student placement.

Q, How many years does that cover prior to l49?
A. This was a period while I was enrolled from the spring of 

l46 until the summer of *49.
Q. Are you a graduate of the University of Mississippi?
A. That is correct.
Q. Have you lived in Mississippi all of your life?
A. No. I am a Mississippian by preference.
Q. How long have you been in Mississippi?
A. Since 1940.
Q. Where is your home?
A. My home is Oxford, Mississippi.
Q. No, you said—
A. Where was?
Q. Yes.
A. Memphis, Tennessee.
Q. I believe that also on June 12th I asked you whether you 

had the authority to act upon and accept applications 
for admission to the University of Mississippi, is 
that right?



2 & 3 259

A. That authority is delegated to me, yes.
Q. I’d like you to briefly outline the procedure which is 

followed by your office, that is, the office of the 
registrar, with respect to processing applications. 
What happens when you receive an application for ad­
mission to the university?

A. Counsel, if you will— this gets complicated and it can’t 
be brief— could you specify the kind of application?

Q. Well, let’s take the application of the plaintiff here, 
which has now been marked as plaintiff’s exhibit 30. 
When you receive an application like that for admis­
sion to the college of liberal arts is it stamped 
with the date of receipt by your office?

A. Normally, yes.
Q. On what occasions would it not be so stamped?
A. When a clerk in my office overlooks or fails to do it, 

and it sometimes happens.
Q. Is there a date of stamp of receipt on this application?
A. Well, I don’t know.
Q. — by your office?
A. I don’t know.
Q. Want to look at it?
A. I surely do. I do not see a stamp on any of these papers.
Q,. Well, somebody forgot to stamp that, didn’t they, when 

they received it?
A. All I know is that they do not contain a date stamp.
Q. What is the next step after the application is stamped



3 & 4 260

"Received"?
A. I haven't told you the first step.
Q, What is the first step?
A. Thank you. Normally we get an inquiry from a prospective 

applicant and we will mail or give the forms to them, 
and we determine at that time, if at all possible, 
the residence of the individual, his place of resi­
dence. This will determine a procedure. Then we send 
the instructions and the forms to the prospect. He 
mails, brings, has someone deliver them to our office.

Q, Tell me how you can determine the legal residence—
A. (interrupting) I didn't say legal residence. I said 

we try to determine the residence.
Q, Explain how you determine the residence of a person.
A. As in the case of the plaintiff—
Q. Now you are talking about the plaintiff?
A. Will you let me finish? In the case of the plaintiff 

we had his return address.
Q. That is how you determined residence?
A, This determined what kind of forms to send him.
Q. And this is how you determined residence you spoke of?
A. No, I didn’t say we determined, I say we try to deter­

mine.
Q. By the return address?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, after those forms have been completed by the appli­

cant and sent back to you and stamped "Received",



4 & 5 261

what is the next step?
MR. SHAKES: We object to that question. I think 
that is a double-barrel question, two questions 
wrapped up in one— "after the form is completed and 
stamped and sent back to you what is the next step". 
The question, I think, is composed of three different 
questions, the first being that it assumes one was 
completed in accordance with instructions. I think 
that is an Improper assumption at this stage of this 
witness' examination thus far. Counsel furthermore 
is directing the witness' attention to the applica­
tion of James Meridith, plaintiff. We think: the 
question should be either asked one question at a 
time, or the category she is talking about should be 
more clear.
THE COURT: I overrule the objection. I think the
question is susceptible to an answer. You may ans­
wer. (The last question was read by the reporter)

A. If— and I say if—  the application forms received are
complete to that point, we place than in a folder and 
assign a student application number to it and then 
we await the receipt of the academic credentials that 
are required. At the same time that we do this pro­
cessing we send the letters— we have a form letter of 
recommendation—

Q. (interrupting) Excuse me. I want to take one step at
a time. Your are going now to the sending of letters.



5 & 6 262

I want to ask you about that application number.
That is why I want to take one step.

A. This is the same step.
Q. When you get the form back you put it in a folder, you 

say, and you assign a number, is that correct?
A. If the application is complete then we assign a number 

and we then send these letter of recommendation to 
the alumnae that the student has listed on the appli­
cation form.

Q. Let me ask you this: If the application is not complete,
what do you do with that?

A. Well, at any time there is an unusual application or a
problem application it will be referred to me for my 
attention, and I take whatever action I think the 
situation dictates.

Q. Now, on the Meridith application which category did that 
fall into, a complete one or an unusual one referred 
to you?

A. It was a definitely incomplete application. The applica­
tion as received included a cover letter, which is 
not included in this material, which I would like to 
see if I am going to discuss it. It is in my folder.

Q. Right here, (hands to witness)
A. We received this letter dated 31 January, at which time 

the applicant says:
"I will not be able to furnish you with the names 
of six university alumnae because I am a negro and



6 & 7 265

all graduates of the school are white, Further, X 
do not know any graduates personally, however, as 
a substitute for this requirement I am submitting 
certificates regarding my moral character from negro 
citizens of my state."
This constituted to me, in my thinking, a problem.

Q. And an incomplete application?
A. Absolutely.
Q. In what other respect was it incomplete, the application?
A. As an application it was incomplete at this time because 

we had not received any academic credentials.
Q. All right. What other respect was it incomplete?
A. Well, I think at this point this constituted the incom­

pleteness .
Q, That is all?
A. I think so.
Q. Incidentally, does this application have a file number?
A. No, that application does not have a file number. I

don’t recall whether a file number was assigned to It, 
I didn’t check.

Q. Now, proceeding with the steps it takes in processing an 
application, any application, you said, I believe, 
that the next step would be to send letters to alum­
nae in accordance with the names submitted by the 
applicant, is that right, is that the next step?
MR. SHANDS: I want the record to show that every
defendant objects, every named defendant, objects to



7 & 8 264

that question for these reasons: one, that thus far
there Is in evidence and in proof that this applica­
tion was incomplete— that it did not comply with the 
requirements. Now, upon that state of evidence I do 
not think: that any evidence or testimony of what 
would or would not have been done or what would or 
would not be done as to applications which were com­
plete can throw any light upon the issue here. The 
sole issue in this case, as I understand the position 
of the plaintiff, is that James Meridith has been 
denied admission, approval of his application, on the 
sole ground of race. When the proof is that tbs 
point you are dealing with is an inconplete and in­
sufficient application, evidence as to what would or 
would not be done with those that are complete is, 
we think, not admissible. It is an entirely diffe­
rent category and entirely different situation.
MRS. MOTELY: What we are aiming is to show is the
procedure normally followed in these cases so that 
we can in accordance with the allegations of the 
complaint show that this application was not treated 
in the same manner as all other applications. We 
allege in the complaint that the applications of 
negroes are not treated in the same manner as the 
applications of white, and we are going to show that 
in the case of whites the way the alumnae certificate 
requirements are handled. That is one of the issues



8 & 9 265

in this case, as to whether that requirement should 
be applied to negroes, and we say in a case of its 
application to negroes it is discriminatory and we 
have to establish how it is applied to whites. We 
have subpoenaed the records here, which we examined 
two days ago, which show how these applications are 
handled, and that is what I am about to get to, to 
show that in the case of whites this is all facili­
tated for them. In the case of negroes this was not 
done at all, plus the fact that you know we tried to 
take Mr. Ellisf s deposition and they had wide lati­
tude in discovering what they wanted from the plain­
tiff, and this man is called pursuant to Rule 
which permits us to cross-examine him and impeach him 
and anything else we choose to do with this witness 
under that rule. He is not our witness. We are 
calling him as an adverse witness.
MR. SHAKOS: The very basis of my objection she
has amplified by way of example. The plaintiff,
James Meridith, right at the tail end of his testi­
mony yesterday said that he knew— and I refer to the 
record if there is any question about it— when he 
sent this application in it was incomplete. If there 
are incomplete applications and this one is incom­
plete, let her stick to the treatment of incomplete 
applications. By way of illustration I am trying to 
think of a comparable situation in ordinary, general



9 & 10 266

facts. Suppose an action were filed against a rail­
road company for negligence for hitting somebody, 
running over somebody because of the use and operation 
of a defective locomotive. Now, would any court— and 
there was no issue as to whether that locomotive was 
defective or in good condition. This plaintiff here 
says he knew the application was incomplete. The 
answer of these defendants, including this gentleman 
on the stand, says that the application was incom­
plete. The letter of rejection refers to insuffi­
ciency. But those aren’t things plaintiff had to 
be told about, because he solemnly said here yester­
day he knew it was incomplete when he sent it. Now, 
there is no issue here as to whether that application 
is incomplete, because the plaintiff states it was 
and he knew it. Now why, and on what theory, would 
they have to go into the method of handling or pro­
cessing of complete applications or ones that listed 
the names of six alumnae of Mississippi. In the 
letter of transmittal of January 51* 1961, this plain­
tiff said he was not complying with that requirement 
and gave some reasons. Also, on the form itself what 
did he do on that? He says, "see letter and attach­
ment", I think. No, "see letter and attached certi­
ficates’.'. Now, if there were no issue between a 
plaintiff and a defendant but what a locomotive were 
defective, how when and where and under what circum-



10 & 11 267

stances, could any defendant or any plaintiff under- 
take to show how a locomotive that was not defective. 
How could that evidence be received in court? Now, 
if there were an issue as to whether the locomotive 
was defective or not defective, that is a different 
situation. But here this plaintiff says he knew 
it was incomplete when he shot it up there. We think, 
Your Honor, that that goes to the very heart of this 
lawsuit. We are seeking to, and we want to try this 
lawsuit as I originally announced, that we waive 
nothing. And I call the court’s attention to the 
last paragraph— next to last paragraph in the letter 
of January y i» 1961, from plaintiff, James Meridith, 
addressed to the office of the registrar— "except for 
the requirements above mentioned, my application is 
complete."

Now, how, under what theory, can an admittedly 
incomplete application be affected by, controlled by, 
within that .narrow ambit as to what would have been 
done if the application had been at that point com­
plete? And the circumstances immediately then sur­
rounding the submission of that application and what 
tells and what describes those circumstances? The 
application itself and the letter of transmittal and 
the plaintiff’s testimony to this point. We submit 
that the objection is well taken.
MRS, MOTLEY: May it please the Court, this is a



11 & 12 268

hearing, on a motion for a preliminary injunction and 
it seems to me that on this hearing a certain amount 
of latitude is allowed, but I don't think it is per­
missible for the attorney to get up and make a fif­
teen minute objection repeating himself over and over 
again, which delays this hearing unduly. I think we 
are entitled to a speedy hearing here without all of 
this long-winded objection, objections which he has 
made repeatedly and which are on the record they 
waive nothing, so forth, so forth. All of this delays 
this hearing unreasonably and I think we are entitled 
to a prompt hearing sith some latitude. We haven't 
taken this man’s deposition. We are trying to get 
the facts before the court as rapidly as possible so 
that the matter may be intelligible, and what we are 
going into is exactly what we charge, that the negroes’ 
applications are not treated in the same manner as 
whites and we can only do that by showing how white 
applications are treated, and we plan to do that.
We have subpoenaed them here and the records are here 
and we plan to show those applications are not treated 
in the same manner as the plaintiff's application was 
treated.
THE COURT: Row as I understand it, your question
is what would be the next step upon an application 
that was completed? In substance, that was your 
question, wasn’t it?



12 & 13 269

MRS, MOTLEY: Well, Your Honor, really, the point
Is what is the next step with any application, be­
cause I don1! think it is clear what is a complete 
or incompleted application. He said a minute ago 
when they get these applications they await the trans­
cript from the colleges and we can show that in fifty 
cases that they get an application from a white person 
the college has not sent in the transcript, they 
don’t have the letters of recommendation, they don’t 
have the health certificate, all of these things are 
waited on. There is no such thing as a completed, 
application when it is sent in. They have to await 
these other things, and so we are talking about some­
thing meaningless here. I am talking about any appli­
cation, really, and the attempt to limit us to a 
completed or incompleted application doesn’t make 
sense because there is no such thing. He just said 
that, that they get these applications and they await 
the other documents to come in.
THE COURT: Well, the question to which the objection 
was made was what was the next step upon the completed 
one?
MRS, MOTLEY: I’ll change the question, Your Honor,
and withdraw it and change it to what is the next 
step to any application.
MR, SHAKOS: My response to that is that that
goes right back to the same objection.



15 & 14 270

MRS, M0TLE7: Well, I don’t think we can be limited
to incomplete applications, if that is what he is try­
ing to say. I certainly don’t think we could be 
limited to showing only completed applications or 
incompleted applications on this kind of hearing.
MR, SHAKOS: I say to Your Honor that here in this
application Is an application from a person who at 
the outset says that he has not, cannot—
MR^S MOTLEY: Excuse me, Your Honor. This Is one
of our objections. Now he has already said that over 
a fifteen minute period and we are objecting to coun­
sel for defendants making a long-winded objection in 
which he repeats himself and repeats himself on the 
ground that it prejudices this plaintiff in this 
hearing because he is trying to get admitted to the 
next term. He has already missed three terms through 
delay, delay attributed to Mr. Shands, who Is now 
up here making long-winded objections which are pre­
judicial to the plaintiff’s interest in getting this 
hearing over with promptly, and we object to that.
THE COURT: Counsel, I overrule that objection
because that is for the court to determine, when he 
has heard enough argument. These questions are com­
plicated and I am going to hear full arguments from 
you and from him, too, unless it becomes too extended 
and I will interrupt you when I have let each one of 
you couplete your record, because I want the record



14 & 15 271

to be complete when it is submitted. So, as I under­
stand it now, you have withdrawn the original ques­
tion you were trying to propound, if I understood 
what the question was to which the first objection 
was made, and now the present question is "what is 
the next step on any application.
MRS. MOTLEY”: That's right.
THE COURT: Have you finished for the record your
grounds for objection?
MR. SHARDS: I had until she objected to something
else in her last remark.
MRS. MOTLEY-: The court overruled the objection.

What?
The court overruled the objection.
I overruled your objection—
— to his long-winded objection, 
-“because I want to see that each 

one of you get anything on the record that you think 
ought to go into it, because the court is trying to 
get the record complete, and I am going to help you 
do that and see that each side is given full oppor­
tunity to get anything on the record that they think 
is something that ought to go in. So, Mr. Shands,
I’ll permit you to proceed if you have any other 
ground.
MR. SHARDS: I have this observation, which in my
opinion is necessitated and caused by this last state-

MR, SHARDS: 
MRS. MOTLEY: 
THE COURT: 
MRS. MOTLEY: 
THE COURT:



15 & 16 272

merit she made. She said this is a preliminary in­
junction, that I recallJi. that we are trying a pre­
liminary injunction, for motion for preliminary in­
junction, for entrance this fall. Now, that’s not 
my understanding of what this temporary injunction 
proceeding is we are in the process of hearing. This 
was here first an original application for a temporary 
injunction.
THE COURT: Well, I believe that I willrule upon
the matter before the court at this time. I am very 
doubtful whether or not evidence as to what is done 
with regular complete applications is admissible, but 
I am going to let the witness— overrule the objection 
as to this extent at this time, and permit the witness 
to answer what would be the next step for an applica­
tion, one which was complete.
MR. SHANDS: May I have a running objection to
that type of testimony?
THE COURT: You may have a running objection to
that and if it gets beyong anything that you think 
you ought to call the court’s attention to you may 
raise further objection, and at this time the objec­
tion is overruled and you may answer what would be the 
next step to the application.
MR. SHANDS: I have one thing for clarification,
Your Honor. Now, am I required under the order of the 
court at the conclusion of her examination of this



16 & 17 275

witness to move to exclude?
THE COURT: Yes, you can do that and I will, as
I stated, give you a running objection at the present 
time to the particular type of questions and it will 
be overruled and you do not waive your objection by 
failure to renew, and you can move to exclude at the 
conclusion.
MR. SHARDS: And I also have the further protection
to my objection that may be permitted under the rules? 
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. SHARDS: I do not want in any way this record
to appear as if any defendant in this lawsuit is
waiving or consenting to or not objecting to any pro­
ceeding here other than as was recessed. I also want 
it to appear that the only application that this court 
has before it at this time that I know about is the 
application that was signed by the plaintiff Meridith 
and transmitted to the University, to the Registrrar 
of the University on January 51# 1961, and that there 
has been no other application of his than that one 
that I know of.
THE COURT: Very well, the objection that you
have made, the statement you have made, and the res­
ervations you have made will apply to every defendant 
in the case. Let that be understood. Did you want 
to say something further before you proceed with your 
examination?



17 & 18 274

MRS. MOTLEY: I thought the court was going to rule
this hearing was limited to an application for admis­
sion to the summer term, hut since that is not the 
ruling I don't have anything to say.
THE COURT: Well, that is what I had understood
it was. I wasn_t going to take the time to thrash 
that out at this time.
MRS. MOTLEY: You say the court is ruling this
hearing is limited to an application for the summer 
term?
THE COURT: I thought that was what the under­
standing was, but if I'm wrong in it I will hear argu­
ment on it either now or next week.
MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, Sir. I'd like to direct Your
Honor's attention to the motion which was filed May 
51 , 1961^
THE COURT: Very well, you want to argue that out
now or would you rather go on with this examination? 
Here is what is going to arise in a short time, and 
I might as well find out what it is right now, because 
it is getting close to 12:00 o'clock. Next Monday 
there are other cases of probably— certainly, equal 
priority, that are to be heard. Those cases are set 
for Monday upon applications of the United States, 
or a suit by the United States against certain regi­
strars of three or four or five counties of the state 
upon a motion for production of certain records to



18 & 19 275

be examined by them. Those matters are set and have 
been set for about two weeks now, I guess, for a 
hearing on next Monday. Judge Cox will hear those 
motions, but Mr. Shands and General Patterson are 
representing the State in those and can't be present 
in two places at the same time. So, it was my thought 
that probably we will recess this case until Tuesday 
and then when Judge Cox gets through with the motions 
set before him next Monday— , Mr. Shands, can I ask 
you how long you think it will take on those motions 
Monday before Judge Cox?
MR. SHARDS: I do not know. There are motions
that are to be presented on behalf of the defendants 
in the morning before Judge Cox and which may or 
may not have some affect upon the hearing on Monday, 
THE COURT: Very well. Mrs. Motley, what do you
think? It is my thought that Judge Cox is not going 
to get through with them in one day, and the United 
States Attorney has advised me that there will be 
some several witnesses to be examined, and as Judge 
understands. The court understands from him Mr. Doar 
will be down here personally to conduct the proceed­
ings on behalf of the Anited States. If they go into 
those witnesses it will take some time, probably two 
days. That is my guess about it. If they go into 
it on affidavits it probably might not consume but 
one day, might finish in one day. So I am trying to



19 & 20 276

determine what is the best procedure for the conveni­
ence of everybody, except myself. I will be here eit­
her Monday or Tuesday. I could set this Tuesday 
morning or Tuesday afternoon and we can go Into it, 
and if they are not through we can wait and go into 
it. Which would you prefer, to have it set for Tues­
day morning or Tuesday afternoon for this case?
MRS. M0TLE£: We had hoped this case would be fin­
ished today and I am going to try to finish our case 
before the afternoon is over.
THE COURT: We can't finish this case today,
I know, from the progress we have made. I am not 
criticizing anyone on it, because they are entitled 
to make their record. I am going to have to adjourn 
this case about 1:00 o'clock because I have an engage­
ment in Gulfport tomorrow that I must fill. Of 
course, ordinarily Saturday is a holiday, but I never 
do get one. So I have this matter coming up before me 
tomorrow and I have to leave here this afternoon.
If I could finish the case today I would stay, but I 
know we are not going to finish the case because I 
am going to want to hear argument on this case. I 
will want extensive argument on it. So it is of 
necessity going to have to go over until next week. 
MRS. MOTLEY-: May I ask a further question? On
the matter raised by Mr. Shands a moment ago that 
this hearing is limited to the plaintiff's application



20 & 21 277

for admission to the summer term, it is my under­
standing that from our motion filed here, which prays 
for such other, further, necessary or additional re­
lief as may appear to a court of equity to be required 
to secure his admission to the University of Missis­
sippi without regard to his race or color, that that 
does not limit us to a motion for preliminary injunc­
tion with respect to any particular term. Now,
Now, naturally in the motion we talked about the 
first summer tern, then we filed another motion with 
respect to the second summer term, and this hearing 
makes it clear that what is sought is admission to 
the next available term. What I want is an under­
standing that the order issued by this court, what­
ever it may be, is with reference to the next term 
coming up in September, and not to some term that 
has passed, because obviously an injunction can only 
speak as to the future, and cant speak as to the past. 
So I think we ought to clear that up for Me*. Shands, 
that what this court is going to rule on is the ad- 
missability of the plaintiff to the September term, 
and that much out of the way I think we can decide.
THE COURT: Probably then we better suspend the
examination of the witness and hear arguments on 
those. The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment 
and the motion for preliminary injunction for the 
June term was filed, and also for the July term, and



21 & 22 278

the hearing started on that theory and had to he 
recessed. Both of those times have passed, so it 
was my thought that when it was recessed for the 
first time that it would be heard before the July 
term. Circumstances beyong control arose, which 
set the case past that time, but since we were in 
the progress of the hearing I thought that the de­
fendant was entitled to complete the cross-examina­
tion of the plaintiff and that you were then entitled 
to proceed upon such evidence you desired to offer, 
certainly upon the complaint as to the declaratory 
judgment, and as to whether or not that embraced an 
application for the fall term or not I have not 
ruled upon and will want to hear some argument on 
that, whether or not plaintiff would be required to 
file another application with the registrar or should 
file one for entrance into the fall term, or whether 
or not the application heretofore filed will extend 
over to that., I want to hear argument from both 
sides on that question and I would like to be able 
to determine myself as to just exactly where we are 
going now, after Mr. Shands has completed the exami­
nation of the plaintiff started upon the hearing for 
a preliminary injunction as to the June and July 
terms. I will let you state your position first as 
to what we are trying. You may stand aside, Mr.
Ellis.



22 & 25 279

WITNESS EXCUSED BY THE COURT 

MRS. MOTLEY:
M //M M M /./ I would like to conclude with this 
witness, just give him one or two more questions and 
put these documents in and I am ready to argue that 
motion.
THE COURT: I doubt if we can get very far. You
will argue that question?
MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Then 1*11 let you complete your
examination of the witness.

(Cross examination by Mrs. Motley continues)
beenQ. Have you ever/, authorized to admit negroes to the Univer­

sity of Mississippi?
MR. SHANDS: I didn’t get the question.
(The last question was read by the reporter)
MR. SHANDS: We object to that, Your Honor,
whether he has ever been authorized to admit members 
of that race to the university. Let him state what 
his authority is. That assumes that he hasn't. Her 
questlonis not proper because it assumes that there 
have been some limitations on authority. I think 
the record should show that. We think the question 
should be “do you have authority to admit all per­
sons"? I don’t think a question ought to assume 
something.



2 5 & 24 280

THE COURT: Overrule the objection.
A. I have been delegated the authority to admit students.

I have never received any kind of instructions con­
cerning races in the admission of students.

Q. Have you been authorized to admit negroes, specifically 
authorized?

A. I have never been given a specific authorization to admit 
negroes.

Q. That is all.
A. Neither have I been given a specific authorization to 

to admit -white people.
Q, That is all.

MR. SHANDS : Let him finish the question.
MRS. MOTLEY: He has answered the question.

A. I said neither have I been given a specific directive 
to admit white or oriental or what have you.

Q. I am going to ask you one more time. Have you been 
authorized to admit negroes to the University of 
Mississippi?

A. I have never seen any kind of authorization concerning
negroes or admissions at the university of Mississip­
pi.

Q, Do you have the records which we asked you to bring?
A. Yes.
Q. We'd like those. We want to offer them in evidence 

right now.
A. Which records?



24 & 25 281

Q.

A.

Q.

A*
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q*
A.
Q.

A.
Q.

Student records and the people who have actually been 
enrolled. We subpoenaed you and you have a copy of 
the subpoena. We gave you a list the other day.

The marshal’s office has the folders, applications from 
students who entered in the second semester.

I gave you a list of students to bring to this court for
this hearing.

I have them.
The list?
I have the subpoena.
Do you have the records^
I have the records.
That is what I want.
The marshal has them.
What about the list of students actually enrolled and the 

latest catalogue?
I have the catalogue.
And a list of students actually enrolled.

MRS. MOTLEY: Weould the Marshal get those records?
THE COURT: Bring them in and let the boxes be
marked,
MRS. MOTLEY: 
MR. SHARDS: 
MRS. MOTLEY: 
MR. SHARDS:

Would you mark this, please?
Are you offering that?
Yes, we are.
We object to that catalogue as being 

introduced because—
MRS. MOTLEY: We’ll introduce the other one if that



25 & 26 282

is what you want. We'll introduce them all,
THE COURT; Are you withdrawing your offer?
MS, MOTLEY; Yes, we will offer this one, which is 
the issue of February 1, 1961.
THE COURT; Let counsel see it.
MS, MOTLEY: This is the same one as that one,
February 1st.
M .  SHARDS: But the difference lies in that the
catalogue under which this applicai±>n was made accord­
ing to the testimony of plaintiff on yesterday on 
yesterday was general catalogue issue i960 and which, 
if my memory serves me correctly, he said he read a 
copy of in the library at Jackson State College, 
and what she is seeking to introduce is a catalogue, 
general issue catalogue, 1961.
MS. MOTLEY: Well, you can put in that other one.
We are going to offer this in evidence.
THE COURT: Which one?
MS. MOTLEY: This is February 1, 1961, that is
the day his application arrived in the office of the 
registrar. Any rules applicable to that application 
is set forth in here.
M .  SHARDS: And I would like to amplify that
objection by saying those records there have been 
delivered, on the table there, by the marshal.
THE COURT: Wait now, let's get one thing at
a time. Let's get this catalogue so I can rule upon



26 & 27 285

the objection.
MR. SHARDS: The catalogue does show by the Inside
date February 1, 1961. I don't believe that this 
catalogue was in circulation on February 1, 1961, but 
Mr. Ellis could answer that in a minute.
THE COURT: Very well, I'll let Mr. Ellis answer
that.
WITNESS: Your Honor, the publication date,
according to our postal certification, is February 
1st. We didn't get the catalogue from our printer 
until almost;— I think it was up in March sometime. 
This catalogue was not distributed at the time, 
the time of the second semester registration.
THE COURT: Sustain the objection to the intro­
duction of that one. Do you want it marked for 
identification?
MRS. MOTLEY: We'd like It marked for identifica­
tion.
the court: Mr. Reporter, you can mark that 1961
one and give it an exhibit number, but it is excluded 
from consideration and the objection is sustained. 
(Same marked Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 4l for identi­

fication)
MR. SHANDS: Now, I want to call attention of
counsel that on the front of this one it has the 
name "Edward Cates", and I can tear that off.
MRS. MOTLEY: It is not necessary.



27 & 28 284

MR. SHARDS? And here at page 8j5 Is underscored 
the word in ink, "approved institutions". I will try 
to get one that has not been marked for counsel and 
make it available to her.
MRS, MOTLEY: We don’t object to those marks, Me.
Shands. We’d like to offer the i960 catalogue in 
evidence.
THE COURT: Let it be marked.
(Same received and marked plaintiff’s Exhibit #42, 
which exhibit is not copied here as the original 
will be sent up with original record.)
MRS. MOTLEY: The catalogue for i960 has been
marked Plaintiff’s exhibit No. 42. we offer that.
MR. SHANDS: To which we object. She says that
she offers that in evidence. Oh, that is the i960, 
MRS. MOTLEY: One other question of this witness.

Q. Mr. Ellis, I’d like to show you this booklet from the 
U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 
Office of Education, "Accredited Higher Institutions- 
i960". I’d like you to read from page 108 of this 
document entitled, "Accredited Higher Institutions - 
i960". We’ll have it marked for identification.
MR. SHANDS: We object to this witness testifying
from the document, when there has not been a ruling 
on the admissibility.
MRS. MOTLEY: We’ll have it marked now and we want
to offer it in evidence.



28 & 29 285

MR. SHAHDS: To which we object. Shall I state
grounds for our objection?
THE COURT: Yes, you might as well state your
grounds.
MRS. MOTLEY: This document is offered.
(Same marked as Plaintiffs Exhibit Ho. 43 for identi

fication)
MRS, MOTLEY: This document has been marked as
plaintiff's exhibit 43 as to page 108 only, and we 
would like to offer this document in evidence.
MR. SHAHDS: To which we object. The first ob­
jection is that it is neither certified nor authenti 
cated copy. Two, this purports to be put out by the 
U. 3. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 
Office of Education. Insofar as each and every def­
endant in this case is concerned it is totally, com­
plete, thorough and unquestioned hearsy.
THE COURT: Yes, upon that ground I sustain the
objection without further argument because it is not 
properly authenticated to and certified by proper 
authorities and certainly is not admissible. I am 
not ruling upon the admissibility of the contents 
at this time.
Gentlemen, it is apparent that we won't be able to 
finish this case, in my judgment, for two or three 
days, so I am going to recess it until 9:00 o’clock 
Tuesday morning and at the same time I will permit



29 & 50 286

counsel for the plaintiff to proceed with the exam­
ination of this witness first, or I will permit her 
and opposing counsel to argue the question raised a 
few minutes ago on the record about just what is 
being heard at this time, and particularly, as to 
whether or not the applications heretofore filed 
were sufficient to require entrance to the fall term 
and if he is properly qualified to enter. So I will 
hear that argument either first, or after this exami­
nation is completed of this witness, and, of course, 
will permit Mr. Shands to examine the witness after 
counsel for plaintiff has finished, if he so desires. 
The records that were marked among the confusion 
while ago I don't think have been received in evi­
dence. We will take care of that Tuesday definitely, 
as to whether they are or not. Of course we got 
off into the argument about the catalogue and I 
don’t think those records have been marked as intro­
duced in evidence thus far. They were offered by 
counsel for the plaintiff, but I will give you an 
opportunity to, complete that part of the record 
when we resume this hearing and as soon as the case 
that is pending before Judge Cox is completed, which 
I hope will be done Monday. If it isn’t, this case 
will hold its place and be the first thing to resume 
hearing after Judge Cox completes his.
MR. SHAKOS: There are additional grounds that I



30 & 31 287

may later wish to state as objection to this, if I 
may be permitted.
THE COURT: I realized you weren’t through, but
it wasn’t necessary to go into those because it is 
not properly authenticated. So that will be the pro­
cedure. As I stated, if we could complete the case 
this afternoon I would forego things I must attend 
to Saturday, but is 175 miles to Gulfport and by the 
time I get lunch the time we save this afternoon 
would be immaterial. Did you want to say something 
further?
MRS. MOTLEY: I certainly want the record to show
we ob ject to the continuance of this hearing on the 
ground it has been delayed a number of times and 
adjourned and continued. We are trying to get 
through with this hearing so the court can rule in 
time for the application of this student with res­
pect to the September term, and, as fir. Shands always 
says, I don’t want the record to appear that we con­
sent to this adjournment. We have been fighting and 
fighting and fighting to get the hearing through 
with, and I want the record to show we are prepared 
at 12:15 today to finish this case in the next few 
minutes so it could be before the court. We are 
through with the examination of this witness, were 
going to only offer this document and those records, 
which have already been gone over, and we were



31 & 32 288

through, hut this hearing on a motion for prelimi­
nary injunction so the court could rule on it.
THE COURT: You don't think the other side is
entitled to he heard?
MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, Sir, but I was just trying to
get the record straight that we object to these delays 
and continuances and all of that sort of thing on a 
motion for preliminary injunction.
THE COURT: May I make this observation here. Of
course I had hoped that we could go right straight on 
through, but things beyond control of this court are 
happening. There are only two judges in the district 
and since this case was filed there have been five 
suits filed by the government of the United States 
against five registrars in the State of Mississippi, 
which has also priority, I guess certainly priority 
of the quality of cases. As chief judge, I have 
assigned those cases to Judge Cox and they are set 
for hearing next Monday on motions, and those mo­
tions ought to be completed in one day, is the in­
formation I have. The state of Mississippi is de­
fending those lawsuits, as it is its duty to do under 
the statutes of the State of Mississippi. The Attor­
ney General of the State of Mississippi is required 
to defend those suits. Of necessity the Attorney 
General, who is present in the court room today, 
and the chief first assistant Attorney General, Mr.



52 & 53 289

Shands, are in the trial of this case, and Mr. Cates 
is in the trial of this case, a young Assistant 
Attorney General, as well as Mr. Stockett. Mr.
Shands has been leading counsel throughout the trial 
of the case and to my personal knowledge has taken 
the lead in all matters of civil rights cases. In 
addition to that there have been five petitions of 
removal from the county court of Hinds County, 
Mississippi, to this court here by defendants who 
have been convicted as violators of the breach of 
peace statutes, generally known as in Mississippi, 
and those cases have been set for next week. Five of 
the defendants have filed petitions for removal to 
this court. Those were heard by Judge Cox this morn­
ing and I understand for some lack of proper forms 
of the pleadings they were postponed until next week. 
However, Me. Shands will not be in that case because 
they are defended by the district attorney and county 
attorney of Hinds County and probably some other 
attorneys. But that is the situation that has been 
thrust upon the court almost all at the same time, 
and certainly, I don't criticize and am not intending 
to criticize anyone, because they have a right to 
file a lawsuit, but there is a limit to what judges 
can do and it is necessary a judge exercise his best 
and sound discretion in order to see that justice is 
done, and that is what I intend to do in this case



53 & 256 290

and do It in a hearing just as expeditiously as it 
can be. So, with those remarks this court will be 
recessed until 9:00 o’clock next Tuesday morning. 
The court stands in recess.

(TUESDAY, August 15, 1961, at 10:00 A.M. )
BY THE COURT: I believe when we recessed last week
Mr. Ellis was on the witness stand.
BY MS. MOTLEY: That’s right, Your Honor.

(MR. ROBERT B. ELLIS resumes the stand for further cross 
examination by Mrs. Motley:)

BY MRS, MOTLEY: Just as we adjourned, I believe I 
was handing up for admission into evidence a copy of 
a document entitled ACCREDITED HIGHER INSTITUTIONS, 
published by the United States Department of Health, 
Education and Welfare, Office of Education, to which 
Mr_ Shands had objected on the ground that It was not 
a certified copy of that document. We now have a 
certified copy of that document which we would like 
to offer into evidence.
BY MR. SHANDS: May we look at the document?
BY THE COURT: Yes.
(Same handed to counsel)
BY M .  SHANDS: As the record shows, I think at the



256 & 257 291

hearing last Friday I included as one of ray grounds 
of objection to this that this document constitutes 
and is totally and entirely and completely hearsay 
evidence insofar as every defendant is concerned in 
this case. Furthermore, as an additional ground 
of objection, it is nothing but an expression of 
opinion and conclusion by whoever wrote the thing.
If it purports to be a publication put out, who 
wrote it? That's the best evidence. What is the man 
who did it? Wot the book. If I come in here and 
offer to introduce a book, I know I would be met 
with objections, andproner objections, so this 
appears to bear a certificate here and a letter re­
gistering on it with a golden seal, and this is 
"secretary to the associate general counsel." Now,
I don't know whether he is the keeper of this docu­
ment or not. I don’t know whether that certificate 
should be by the Secretary of Health, Education and 
Welfare personally or not. I don't know whether 
this certificate should be by the clerk, chief clerk, 
or the keeper of the records and documents of the 
Department of Health, Education and Welfare; but the 
secretary to the general counsel —  And I don't 
know the regulations, if any there be, of the Depart­
ment of Health, Education and Welfare that make even 
the general counsel a keeper of the records and 
documents of the department. Offhand, it would appear



257 & 258 292

to me that a lawyer’s secretary, as she has styled 
herself there, would hardly be the keeper and repo­
sitory of the official documents of the Department 
of Health, Education and Welfare,

Also, I make reference to Title 28, U.S.C.A., 
Section 1739 thereof. And upon examination of said 
Section 1739, offhand, at this moment, I don’t 
believe that certificate complies with the provi­
sions of that section.

Another objection I think ought to be added. The 
letter of May 25, l$6l written by the registrar to 
plaintiff in this case, as I recall —  as I recall - 
stated that one of the ground thereof that Jackson 
College was not a member of the Southern Association 
of Universities and Colleges. I suspect of those 
matters that I have stated as additional grounds 
for objection to this document. There has been no 
showing of the competency of the person that signs 
it. I should think that should come from the person 
who is the keeper of the records and documents.
E l THE COURT: I will overrule the objection. I
think your objection goes to the weight of the docu­
ment as evidence, rather than its admissibility. So 
for that reason I will overrule the objection and 
let it be received in evidence.
m  MRS.^MOTLEI: We would like to offer Plaintiff’s 
Exhibit 44 in evidence.



258 & 259 293

BY MR. SHARDS: To which our objections a moment
ago —
BY THE COURT: Let the objections be overruled.

(Plaintiff's Exhibit 44 for Identification received in evi­
dence, which exhibit is not copied here as the original will 
be sent 15) with original record.)

(By Mrs. Motley:)
Q. Mr. Ellis, you were asked to bring the transcripts of

Mr. Meredith, the plaintiff, which you had received 
from the previous colleges attended by the plain­
tiff. Did you bring those?

A. I surely did.
Q. We would like those so we can introduce those in evi­

dence, please.
A. Shall I extract all of these from the file? (Hands to 

counsel)
(Same marked as Plaintiff's Exhibits 45, 46, 47 & 48 for 
Identification.)

BY MRS. MOTLEY: Your Honor, we have four transcripts 
here from colleges previously attended by the plain­
tiff. The first is a transcript from Washburn Munici­
pal University, Topeka, Kansas, which has been marked 
Plaintiff's Exhibit 45. Next is a transcript from 
the University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 
which has been marked Plaintiff's Exhibit 46.



259 & 260 294

The next is a transcript from Jackson State College, 
Jackson, Mississippi, which has been marked Exhibit 
47j and the fourth transcript is a transcript from 
the University of Kansas, which has been marked 
Plaintiff’s Exhibit 48.
BY MR. SHARDS: You are now offering those?
BY MRS. MOTLEY; We are now offering those in evidence. 
BY MR. SHARDS; As I understand, the previous marking 
was for identification only. If the Court please, 
these were received by the registrar, Mr. Robert B, 
Ellis, of the University of Mississippi, and as to 
their either sufficiency or their authenticity or 
their contents, we make the objection that the docu­
ments may or may not by merely being received make 
it competent in evidence in a court proceeding. So, 
though these documents were received, we object to 
their introduction because they are not properly 
authenticated or certified according to the require­
ments as a condition precedent to their introduction 
in evidence in the trial of a case; and that as to 
the defendants in this case they constitute and sole­
ly are solely in the realm of hearsay evidence, state­
ment of conclusions, and there is no certification or 
authentication as required.
BY THE COURT; What do you say about that?
BY MRS. MOTLEY; I have nothing to say on that.
BY THE COURT; Well, I sustain the objection on the



260 & 261 295

ground that they are hearsay. Their authenticity 
has not been established by any proper sworn testi­
mony, and therefore would be inadmissible.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I'd like to point out, Your Honor, 
that each one contains a certificate from the regis­
trar of the transmitting school.
BY THE COURT: That is not shown to be genuine,
whether the registrar actually certified that or not. 
That would be the same thing as the hearsay rule, 
so I sustain the objection.
BY MR. SHARDS: Could we have the record made clear
on each document that his marking, or the marking 
that was placed on these documents, was for identifi­
cation only? I'm not familiar with the marking —
BY THE COURT: I think the record sufficiently shows
it is simply offered in evidence and the objection 
was sustained! so that while it becomes a part of 
the record, it is excluded as evidence, but the re­
cord also shows it would not be considered as evi­
dence upon the issue in the case. The record shows 
she referred to certain numbers and they have not 
been received in evidence. The record shows the 
objections are definitely sustained. So I think it 
is clear they are not considered a part of the evi­
dence.

(Mrs. Motley continues:)
Q. How, Mr. Ellis, do you have any other memoranda or



261 & 
262 296

correspondence with other university officials con­
cerning the plaintiff's application for admission?

A. No.
Q. —  whichyou were subpoenaed to bring. Your answer is no?

BY MR. SHANDS: Is counsel talking about the subpoe­
na?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: That's right. We subpoenaed him to 
bring any other correspondence or memoranda which 
he had on this.
BY THE COURT: And he answered lie had none.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: The next thing we would like are the 
records there which we had on Friday of the students 
which we inspected, Your Honor, sitting on the table 
there.
BY THE COURT: Mr. Marshal, hand them over there.

Q,. Let meask you this first, Mr. Ellis, Isn't it a fact
that with respect to applicants for admission to the 
summer session, many applicants were admitted and 
attended classes before you received their trans­
cripts from colleges previously attended by them?

BY MR, SHANDS: We object to that. She is going into
the contents of these records, and the records them­
selves speak as to their contents. We are objecting 
to questions predicated upon memory about the con­



262 & 265 297

tents of these records when the records are here, 
and it is our position that we can take them up, 
if she desires to follow that course, or rather, I 
would say the course that she would be required to 
take would be to take him up on each file and his 
answers upon each file. We will object to any lump­
ing in and introduction of all of these files at one 
time. If that is what counsel is headed toward, I 
want to give plaintiff fair warning of our position. 
Also, as each file is presented, then will arise 
the propriety and right of the defendant to make 
objection as to each in connection with each file. 
Furthermore, as an additional ground, she is asking 
this witness for an expression or conclusion or 
opinion upon the total group of files or on each 
file when the contents of each file itself is in 
writing in this courtroom and each file speaks for 
itself.
BY THE COURT: Overrule theoblection if he knows of
his own personal knowledge. The question propounded 
was whether or not any students were permitted to 
attend classes before their transcripts were received. 
If he knows of his own personal knowledge, I will let 
him answer. Overrule the objection.
BY MR. SHARDS: We make a further objection here that
there is a difference between attending, enrollment, 
admission to school, and she should specify, In our



265 & 264 298

judgment, as to what files she is talking about 
unless this man can remember and. has personal know­
ledge of the contents of every single solitary file. 
Furthermore, that question is too broad because it 
goes beyond the scope and the issues in this case.
She had it covering all students. This case involves 
a transfer student.
BY THE COURT: I will confine it to transfer stu­
dents.
BY MR, SHARDS: Undergraduate, This man applied as
an undergraduate.
BY THE COURT: That’s right. I’ll confine it to the
status that this plaintiff is seeking admission, as 
an undergraduate transfer student. To that, if he 
knows of his own personal knowledge, I will overrule 
the objection and let him testify.

A. I think I can recall the question, but I would appreciate 
having it read to me.
BY THE COURT: I think I can repeat it. The ques­
tion as I recall it was whether or not any students - 
and my ruling was any transfer students, undergra­
duates —  were permitted to attend classes before 
that transcript was received.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: That’s right.
BY MR. CATES: To his personal knowledge.
BY THE COURT: Yes, to his personal knowledge.



264 299

A. Yes. —

BY MR, SHANDS: We object to that further on the 
ground that such would be hearsay as to every other 
defendant in this lawsuit.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection and adhere to
my ruling.

A. The answer is yes. There is a rather unique problem
for students entering in the summer session. Many of 
them are in colleges elsewhere. Through no fault 
of an applicant, the losing institution cimply cannot 
get a transcript to us before the date of registra­
tion. We do not admit such a student, You will not 
find, I think, a certificate of admission for any

/such student in our files. We will permit a student 
to register pending the receipt of the transcripts.

Q. And attend classes?
A. That's what registration infers, yes.
Q. Now, isn't it a fact, Mr. Ellis, that students, under­

graduate transfer students, were permitted to attend 
the summer session at the University of Mississippi 
before you had received alumni letters or letters of 
recommendation in a case of an out of state student? 
BY MR. SHARDS: We object to that on the same grounds,
Your Honor.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection, with the same



265 300

limitation I put on the other question,

A. I'm sure it is true that we do permit students to regis­
ter pending the receipt — /

BY MR. SHARDS: If the Court please, to me this ans­
wer indicates that the witness is not answering of 
his own personal knowledge, and that, if I understand 
it, is what this question is restricted to. "Did he 
personally know that?" or is he testifying upon the 
contents of those records? And we further object 
unless the circumstances surrounding each case or 
each incident that he is talking about are expressed, 
rather than the language the witness used, because 
we think that is not responsive to the question and 
not admissible.
BY THE COURT: I confine it to his own personal
knowledge. If he knows that fact, he can answer the 
question. So I overrule the objection and will let 
the witness answer.
BY I©. SHARDS: And I further object, as to what stu­
dents he is talking about and what circumstances as 
a student that he personally knows about.
EY THE COURT: You can bring that out on your examina­
tion of the witness. Overrule the objection.

Q. Do you know of your own personal knowledge that students



266 501

have been so admitted? Don’t you?

BY MR. SHAKOS: 
BY THE COURT: 
BY MR. SHAKOS:

We object —
Overrule the objection.
That is not limited at all to such

students.
BY THE COURT: I*11 put this limitation on all ques­
tions: Any undergraduate student applying as a trans
fer student, and confining his testimony to what he 
knows of his m m  personal knowledge,
BY MS. MOTLEY: Would the reporter read the last 
question and answer.

(The last answer and question were read)

A. I’d like to stress the fact that no student is admitted 
until he has met all the requirements and his appli­
cation has been considered on the merits of that 
application. So to my personal knowledge, I know of 
none.

0,. But you know of your m m  knowledge that some have been 
permitted to attend classes? Register, as you put 
it, pending receipt of those alumni letters?

BY MR. SHAKDS; We object unless that personal know­
ledge is different from and not dependent upon the 
contents of a written document.



266 & 267 502

BY THE COURT; Overrule the objection.

A, To ray personal knowledge, I think it is possible.

BY MR. SHARDS: We object to what is oossibleand 
move to exclude the answer.
BY THE COURT; Yes, I will sustain the motion to ex­
clude the answer that it is possible. If he knows 
of any particular one and knows it as a fact that 
someone has, he can so say. If he does not have per­
sonal knowledge of it, then he can so testify.

A. Well, I certainly cannot recall a particular individual 
and comment on that application.

Q. Irm not asking you to recall a particular individual, but 
with respect to the summer session, I am asking you 
if it isn’t a fact that students have been permitted 
to register pending the return of the alumni forms 
which you have sent out?

BY MR. SHARDS; We object to that, if the Court 
please. "Have students been permitted to register
pending the return of alumni--- "
BY MRS. MOTLEY; Forms, which the registrar sends 
out. Yes.
BY MR. SHARDS; Well, now, which forms? Are you 
talking about the form requesting the listing of six



267 & 268 303

alumni, names of six alumni, or the form sent out to 
alumni asking if they recommend that person and cer­
tify as to his good moral character? Which of those 
forms?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: The latter.
BY THE COURT: Suppose you rephrase the question
so he can get what the question is now.

Q. Let me ask you this, Mr. Ellis: You send out to the
alumni listed by each applicant on his application a 
form, don't you, to be filled out by the alumni 
attesting or certifying to the good moral character 
of the applicant and recommending his or her admis­
sion to the university?

BY MR. SHARDS: We object to that, if the Court
please, because that question does not include in it 
at what stage or what has been done prior to the 
sending out of those letters. Furthermore, as to 
what has been done in this case we say is not compe­
tent. It is what this man knows was done of his own 
personal knowledge. And furthermore, as an additional 
ground of objection, the plaintiff in this case —  
and this record has stated and this record shows 
that he knew he was sending in an application that 
did not meet with the requirements; to-wit, among 
other things, the listing of the names of six alumni.



268 & 269 304

Now, we think this evidence should be restricted to 
people in comparable situation with this person.
Those whose said, "We don’t send in the names of 
six alumni," if it should be broadened from that, 
which we don’t think it should be, but there must be 
some further predicate laid before this sort of thing 
can be done; and again we say that whatever was done 
or might have been done is not the question here.
It’s a question of what was done, and what was done 
is shown by the record.
BY THE COURT; I overrule the objection. I think it 
is competent evidence to be considered on the issues 
along with all the other evidence in the case. I 
think it is a competent question, if that is what he 
does with reference to a transfer of an undergraduate 
student,

A. Upon receipt of the application, together with the form 
on which the applicant lists the names of alumni, we 
then send those alumni a form or memoranda or letter 
which the alumni is asked to consider and if he is 
willing to recommend the applicant, to sign, give his 
address, and make any comments he cares to.

A. Now, isn’t it a fact that students have attended this
past summer session —  that is, registered -- before 
you received all those forms back from the alumni?



269 & 270 305

BY MR. SHARDS: If the Court please, we object to
that. The records are the best evidence of what was 
or was not done unless this man handled personally, 
passed upon each and every one of these applications. 
If he be speaking from a record —
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection on the ground
the records are the best evidence of that.

Q. Let me ask you this: Isn’t it a fact that you admitted
to the summer session, or permitted to register 
rather, students who did not meet the academic grade 
requirement for admission to the University of Missis­
sippi?

BY MR. SHARDS: We object to that, if the Court
please. The best evidence of that is the records, 
and furthermore, that question is so broad I don’t 
think it can be —  that it is possible to answer.
This, one of the grounds of objection —
BY THE COURT: I believe I will sustain it on the
ground the records are the best evidence.

Q. Have you ever discussed the application of the plaintiff 
Meredith with the defendant Board of Trustees of 
Institutions of Higher Learning?

A. No.
Q. Do you have an answer to that question?



270 & 271 30 6

BY MRS. MOTLEY: Do you have an answer to that ques­
tion, Mir. Reporter?
BY THE REPORTER: He said "No."
BY MR. SHARDS: I am going to be out a moment, and in
order not to delay, Mr. Cates will carry right on.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Mark these for identification. (Hands 
to reporter)

(Same were marked as Plaintiff rs Exhibits 49 through 53 for 
Identification.)

BY MR. CATES: May we see them?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, sure. (Hands to opposing coun­
sel)
BY MR. SHARDS: I want the record to show that it
appears, and this objection is made on our originally 
announced theory that the defendants in this case 
waive nothing, and we make an inquiry here, that the 
stenographer is marking these for identification be­
fore they are offered, and I inquire whether or not 
that is the procedure the Court wishes followed, or 
whether all marking would be made only after an offer 
and permission to introduce or the document is re­
jected.
BY THE COURT: There are two procedures that can be
followed, and this is one of the types that can be.
Of course, nearly every court has different methods. 
My procedure has always been, of course, to state 
what the document is, foregoing offering it in evi­



271 & 272 307

dence, and to let it all be marked at one time. On 
the other hand, it is perfectly permissible and a 
great many courts require that it first be marked 
for identification. That does not make it a part 
of the record. Then when it is offered, if it should 
be offered as evidence, then you have an opportunity 
to object; and if the objection should be sustained, 
the document becomes a part of the record but its 
consideration in evidence is excluded. If the docu­
ment is received in evidence, then for the first time 
it is in evidence. So her procedure is all right, 
and I will permit her to proceed in her own way with 
reference to having them marked.

(Mrs. Motley continues;)
Q. Mr. Ellis, Ild like to show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 49

for Identification, which is the application of Carol 
Leonard Collins. In fact, I'd like to show you also 
Plaintiff's Exhibit 50, which is a group of letters 
stapled together, one from —  it looks like Hale 
Odom VanHorn, owner of Odom Drug Company; Harry C. 
Johnson is the next letter —

BY MR. SHARDS: May I interrupt counsel? We object
to putting into the record any part or parcel of the 
document until the document itself has been either 
admitted or rejected. She is eliciting information



272 & 273 308

from a document that goes into the record before the 
document itself is admitted.
BY THE COURT: Let me ask counsel. She referred to
Plaintiff*s Exhibit 50. Now, I took it from the 
question that has already been introduced in evidence. 
Am I right?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: No, sir. The stenographer marked
these for identification, Your Honor. He marked a 
group of letters which are stapled together.
BY THE COURT: And that is marked for identification?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, sir.
BY THE COURT: Very well. If you will just always
call it as having been marked for identification, I 
will understand what it is about. Usually, when 
you say "I show you Plaintiff's Exhibit so-and-so," 
that means it is introduced in evidence.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: That is right.
BY THE COURT: So if you will use the word "for iden­
tification. 2
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, sir, I will do that.

^  The second letter is Plaintiff's Exhibit 50 for Identi­
fication and is a letter — —

BY MR. SHANDS: Excuse me. Did the Court overrule
my objection?
BY THE COURT: Yes, I overruled the objection because



275 & 274 509

it is not in evidence.

Q, The second letter is Harry 0. Johnson Company. The third 
letter is the Young and Vance Supply Company, and the 
fourth letter is Daniels Construction Company of 
Alabama. Plaintiff's Exhibit 50. I will show you 
Plaintiff’s Exhibit 51 for Identification, which is 
a letter from firs. Robert E. Lucas. I show you 
Plaintiff's Exhibit 52 for Identification, which is 
a copy of a letter in her file dated July 10,1961, 
and addressed to the applicant, Mrs. Carol L. Collins, 
at Box 552, University of Mississippi. It says:
"Dear Mrs. Collins....!l

BY MR. SHMD3: We object to reading the contents.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I am trying to identify the document. 
BY THE COURT: Very well. Overrule the objection.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: It isn't a complete copy. It says, 
"Dear Mrs. Collins..." and then there are some X 
marks on the paper, several, and then "Howard College" 
appears and some more X marks.

Q. I show you Plaintiff’s Exhibit 55 for Identification,
which is a letter from Walter N. Neils en, and I will 
ask you if it is not a fact that this applicant was 
admitted or registered in the summer session prior 
to the receipt of the letters which form Plaintiff’s



274 & 275 510

Exhibit 50 for Identification, Plaintiff's Exhibit 
51 for Identification, and Plaintiff's Exhibit 55 
for Identification,

BY" MR. SHAKOS: We object to that, if the Court
please. The documents in that file are the best 
evidence of whether he was or was not admitted.
BY THE COURT: I will sustain the objection at this
time and if she intends to offer those exhibits that 
have been marked for identification, she may offer 
them in evidence and if they are received, then they 
are a part of the evidence. If they are excluded, 
then of course they are not in evidence. But at 
this point I will sustain the objection.
BY MRS, MOTLEY: The objection is to my question to 
the witness?
BY THE COURT: The question to the witness about
documents which have not been offered in evidence 
or received in evidence.
BY MS. MOTLEY: We'd like to now offer these docu­
ments in evidence.
BY MR. SHAKOS: To which we object, Your Honor. Those
records are merely part of the file there. The file 
has a number and we think that if she is going to 
talk about the application, and so forth, that she 
should offer the entire file.
BY THE COURT: If these are documents that were



275 & 276 511

taken from the files of the University with refer­
ence to these particular parties and they are under­
graduate transfer applications, I will overrule the 
objection. Are those documents that were taken from 
the files?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, Sir.
BY THE COURT: And they are the ones of undergrad­
uate transfer students?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, sir.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection. Let them
all be received in evidence.
BY MR. SHARDS: May we ask counsel and make the
request of counsel for her own convenience and ours 
that when she is dealing with a file that bears a 
number that she refer to the number of the file, 
because that is a part of the system of keeping 
up with the entire file.
BY THE COURT: Very well. I think that is a
reasonable request.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: All right. The number of this case 
is 46504, Your Honor.

(Plaintiff's Exhibits 49 through 55 for Identification were 
received in evidence, which exhibits are not copied here as 
the originals will be sent up with original record,)

(Mrs. Motley continues:)
Q* Calling your attention again, Mr, Ellis, to Plaintiff* s



276 & 277 312

Exhibits 49 to 53> 1 will ask you again, isn't it 
a fact that this applicant, Carol Leonard Collins, 
was permitted to register before you received her 
letters of recommendation?

BY MR* SHARDS: We object unless there is a written
document which is the answer to that question. If s<* 
that then is the best evidence.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection*

A. I think what I can testify to is that some of these
letters which you indicated a while ago as coming 
from companies but which are from individuals--

BY MR. SHARDS: Would the witness speak louder,
please?

A. Yes, sir. These letters referred to received from
individuals from Birmingham, those which are dated 
by our office are dated after registration. I be­
lieve that applies in each case. All of them, of 
course, are not stamped in our office.

Q* Each letter has a date, doesn't it?
4. Each letter does have a date.
Q* And that applicant was attending classes when you wrote 

her on July 10th asking for certain information?
1 assume she was.



277 313

BY MR. SHARDS: We object to what he assumes, Your
Honor, unless he has personal knowledge about It.
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection unless he
knows.
BY MR. SHARDS: And if there be any evidence.

Q. Is this letter dated July 10th a copy of a form letter 
from your office?

A. Yes, it is.

BY MR, SHARDS: We would like the record to further
show, Your Honor, that it appears that this was a 
non-resident applicant. Plaintiff in this suit 
claims to be, I think, a resident, and this non­
resident would not be in the same category under 
any circumstances as would be the plaintiff.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

Q. I’d like to show you —
BY MRS. MOTLEY: May I have this marked for identifi­
cation? This is the file of Crines George Pittman, 
and the number on the file is 0051. Would you mark 
this for identification. (Hands to reporter)

(Same marked as Plaintiff’s Exhibit 5^ for Identification.)

Q* Mr. Ellis, I show you Plaintiff’s Exhibit 5^ for Identi­
fication, which is the file of Mr. Crines C-r-i-n-e-s



278 314

George Pittman, and ask you if it is not a fact 
that this student was admitted as a provisional stu­
dent because of poor scholarship.

BY MR. SHARDS: We object to that. The records are
the best evidence of what they show, and not his con­
clusions therefrom.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

A. This student was admitted and there is an admission certi 
ficate attesting to that fact, on a provisional basis 
and by the committee on admissions.

Q. He had a very poor record, didn’t he?

BY MR. SHARDS: We object to that. The record speaks
for itself.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We'd like to offer this file in evi­
dence.
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection. Let it be
received in evidence.

(Plaintiff's Exhibit 54 for Identification received in evi­
dence, which exhibit is not copied here as the original will 
be sent up with original record.)

BY MR. SHARDS: We will make an objection from the
standpoint of every other defendant in this case, 
that as to them it is hearsay, that they are not



278 & 279 315

bound, by the actions of this party defendant with 
connection with this file, and he is not testifying 
from his own personal knowledge,
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection. Of course,
on the final argument I might sustain the objection.—  
BY MR. SHARDS: I might add to that objection, this
file shows this person, Crines George Pittman, is a 
non-resident of the State of Mississippi.
BY THE COURT: Well, I will adhere to my ruling.
BY I4RS. MOTLEY: That completes our examination of
this witness, and after the cross examination the 
plaintiff will rest.
BY THE COURT: Very well. You may cross examine.
BY MR. SHANDS: Will the court indulge us at this
point?
BY THE COURT: How much time do you want?
BY MR. SHANDS: Plaintiff has announced she rests
after this, as you say, cross examination. Do you 
mean my examination of this witness?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: That is right.
BY MR. SHANDS: In the light of that statement, we
would like a recess because with that statement this 
would call for the same kind of thought and conside­
ration that would be given if she had made a final 
announcement of resting, and I would like to 
BY THE COURT: Why not go on and finish up with this
witness, and then we will see what develops? 1*11



279 & 280 316

hear from you then. I'll give you ten minutes recess 
now for conference, and then I will let you proceed 
with the examination of this witness. Then we will 
determine what course.

(Ten minute Recess)

After Recess
BY THE COURT: Very well, Mr. Shands. Do you have
any examination of the witness at this time?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: May it please the Court, I have just
read over the examination of Mr. Ellis from last Fri­
day, I think it was, and there is one more question I 
would like to ask him before we conclude our examina­
tion. I thought I had asked him, but I read it over 
and don't see it here.

(Mr. Ellis recalled for further cross examination by Mrs.
Motley:)
Q* Mr. Ellis, have any Negroes ever been admitted to the 

University of Mississippi, to your knowledge?

BY MR. SHANDS: ¥e object to that unless this wit­
ness knows the lineage of every person who has 
attended the University of Mississippi since the 
day it opened, whenever that was.
BY THE COURT: I'll overrule the objection and let
him answer if he knows.



280 & 281 317

A. I don’t know.
Q. Does the application ask for race?
A. Yes.
Q. Since you have been registrar of the University of Mis­

sissippi, have you ever seen an application which 
indicated that a Negro was applying, in answer to 
the question "Race"?

BY MR. SHANDS: We object as to what the application
indicated if counsel for plaintiff is accepting or 
offering that as proof of race.
BY THE COURT: I will overrule the objection and let
him answer if he knows.

A. I have received applications that have indicated the 
Negro race on the application form.

BY MR. SHANDS: I didn’t get the answer.
(The last answer was read by the reporter.)
BY MR. SHANDS: Read the question too.
(The last question and answer were read.)

Q. Since you have been registrar of the University of Mis­
sissippi, have any Negroes been actually admitted to 
the University?

BY MR. SHANDS: We object to that, if the Court



281 & 282 318

please.
BY THE COURT: If he confines It to transfer stu­
dents, undergraduate students, I overrule the objec­
tion.
BY MR. SHARDS: And the further ground is that the
question does not include whether the applicants 
were qualified or not, and the mere fact of whether 
they were or were not admitted Is not, we think, a 
full and complete and proper question, and we think 
a reading of the question will clarify and support 
this objection.
BY THE COURT: I'll overrule the objection and let
him answer if he knows.

A. Counsel, I don't know all of the students who have
entered the University since I have been registrar.
I don't know the answer to your question.

Q. Have you ever seen a Negro student at the University of 
Mississippi since you have been —

BY MR. SHARDS: We object.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Can I finish my question, please?
BY MR. SHARDS: Certainly. You may. Indeed, you
may.

Since you have been registrar?

BY MR. SHARDS: We object to that, if the Court



282 & 285 319

please, unless he knows every student and the lineage 
of every student. We think that is improper and we 
think it calls for personal knowledge and he just 
disclaimed personal acquaintance with every student 
there. Whether he has seen them or not insofar as —  
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.
(The last question was read by the reporter.)
BY MR. SHARDS: May we add the further objection that
this would be total hearsay and inadmissible as to 
every other defendant and, for the reasons assigned, 
not admissible as against this defendant.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

A. Well, in the twelve years I’ve been on the campus and in 
the registrar’s office, I have seen students with 
varying degrees of darkness of skin, but I can’t 
tell you whether any of them were of the Negro race 
or not.

Q. Aren’t those foreign students you have just referred to, 
these dark people?

A. .Some of them might have been.
Q* You have foreign students there, don’t you?
A. We have some foreign students.
Q. Do you have any from Africa?

BY MR. SHANDS: We object unless he knows where they
are from.



28? & 284 320

BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

A. As I recall in the past, we have had students from Africa. 
Q. What African countries have you had them from?
A. Well, you*re asking me to recall something from my memory. 
Q. Yes, because it is very important to this case. You have 

testified that there were African students. I want 
to know where they have come from.

A. I know we have had Egyptians. I think we have had Moroc­
cans.

BY MR, SHARDS: We object to that, a conclusion.

Q. Only just what you know.

BY THE COURT: Counsel has corrected it now, so
there is no necessity for my ruling upon the objec­
tion. Just what you know.

A. I know of one case, a student from Egypt.
Q. Do you know of any other African students?
A. I don’t know.
Q. Do you handle the foreign student applications?
A. Our office handles all the applications.
Q* And the only one you know is one from Egypt? Is that 

right?

BY MR. SHARDS: We object to that. We don’t think



284 & 285 521

that is what the witness said.
BY THE COURT; Overrule the objection.
BY MR. SHARDS: We don't think the witness says he
knows that’s the only one or that's the only one 
he knows.
BY THE COURT: As I recall his answer, that is the
only one definitely he is able to say.

A, Now, your question was— ?
Q. My question was: The only one you know of is the one

from Egypt? Is that right? The only one you know 
of?

BY MR. SHARDS: We object to that further, for the
further reason that whether he does or does not know 
is no proof of any kind whether there were or were 
not such students.
BY THE COURT: Overrule. That goes to the weight
rather than the admissibility.
BY MR. SHARDS: We have a further objection on that.
The only question before this Court is whether or not 
the plaintiff, James Meredith, was denied admission 
solely because of his race. That Is the charge in 
the Complaint.
BY THE COURT: I will overrule the objection and ad­
here to my ruling.



285 522

Q. I think I was asking you whether the only African stu­
dent you know of your own knowledge is the one from 
Egypt? Is that right?

A. The only student that I knew personally who came from 
Africa was an Egyptian.

Q. Wow, the original question I asked you was this: Have
any Negroes been admitted to the University since you 
have been registrar?

BY MR, SHANDS: We object to that, if the Court
please, unless he knows every student personally who 
had been there and also whether he knows the lineage 
of each one of them; and that goes to the objection 
applicable to this defendant. As to all other defen­
dants, the same objection is made, together with the 
further objection that any statement made by him in 
response to that would not be binding upon them be­
cause as to them it would be hearsay and a conclu­
sion on the part of this witness.
BY THE COURT: I overrule the objection.
BY MR, SHANDS: May I get this in: And would fur­
ther —  the questions that counsel has been asking 
this witness —  call for a conclusion and nothing 
more. She is asking him to determine the matter of 
fact the race of the person she i3 asking about, 
and that can be nothing but conclusion, speculation, 
or a guess.



286 325

BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

A, What was the question?
Q,. Since you have been registrar of the University of Mis­

sissippi, have any Negroes been admitted to the 
University?

A, I don’t know.
Q. Have you ever discussed with the Board of Trustees the 

question of admission of Negroes to the University 
of Mississippi? /

A. You asked me that question before, and I told you no.
Q. Would you admit a qualified Negro to the University of 

Mississippi if you got a completed application 
showing all qualifications?

A. I don’t have any instructions to the contrary.
Q. Would you admit him?
A. I just indicated that I would.
Q. You would?

BY MS. MOTLEY: That is all, Your Honor.
BY MR. SHANDS: Does counsel rest?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Well, I assume you are going to 
cross examine the man.
BY THE COURT: Do you have any examination of the
witness at this time?
BY MR. SHANDS: At this time I have no examination of
this witness. I understand that counsel says she is



286 & 287

going to rest in the event we do not have that 
examination at this time.
BY THE COURT: Well, you have a right to reserve
your examination of any party to the lawsuit, so you 
are reserving your right to put him on later?
BY MR. SHARDS: Oh, yes, Sir, Your Honor. She has
called him, as I understand it.
BY THE COURT: As I understand it, you have no ques­
tions at this time?
BY MR. SHARDS: As I understand it, she called him
as an adverse witness.
BY THE COURT: She has finished her examination of
him now and tendered him to you, and, as I understand 
you, you have no questions at this time?
BY MR. SHARDS: Right.
BY THE COURT: Very well. You may stand aside.

(Witness excused)
BY MRS. MOTLEY: The plaintiff rests, Your Honor.
BY MR. SHARDS: It is now ten minutes to twelve, and
the defendants would ask that recess —
BY THE COURT: Very well. I’ll recess until two
o’clock.

(Whereupon the court was recessed until 2:00 P.M.)

32^

(After Recess)
BY MR. SHARDS: Plaintiff has rested?



287 & 288 525

BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, Sir.
BY MR. SHARDS: The defendant offers in evidence the
certified copy of the Army records which were testi­
fied about last Friday, I believe, properly certi­
fied.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We would like to object to the ad­
mission of the Army records in evidence on this 
ground: On the ground that the plaintiff's Army
record is not relevant or material to the issues in 
this case since at the time the plaintiff was denied 
admission he was not denied admission on the ground 
of anything contained in his Army record. The Army 
record was not secured, Mr. Clark testified, until 
August 9, 1961, which was just a few days ago.
When this plaintiff's Complaint was filed, his 
cause of action arose as of that time. His reasons 
for being turned down were stated in the registrar's 
letter of May 25, 1961, and we object on the ground 
it is not relevant or material to the issues in this 
case.
BY THE COURT: Objection overruled.

(Same received in evidence and marked as Defendant's Exhibit 
#26, which exhibit is not copied here as the original will 
be sent up with original record.)

BY MRS. MOTLEY: May I ask a question about the



288 & 289 326

introduction of this Array record? Is the entire re­
cord feeing offered in evidence as Defendant’s Exhi­
bit 26?
BY MR. SHANDS: All that is under that certificate
is feeing offered.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Thank you.
BY MR. SHARDS: The defendants next offer in evidence
a document dated March 9> 1961, heretofore marked 
Exhibit Number 5 for Identification to the testimony 
of the plaintiff, James Meredith, feeing a document 
which he has testified he assisted in the prepara­
tion of over the name of MISSISSIPPI IMPROVEMENT 
ASSOCIATION OP STUDENTS, M.I.A.S. That is offered in 
evidence.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We object to the admission of that
document on the ground that it is not relevant or 
material to the issues in this case.
BY THE COURT: At this time I will overrule that
objection and let you argue it upon the final argu­
ment.

(Defendant’s Exhibit No. 5 for Identification received in 
evidence and follows here below:)



327

"DEFENDANT* S EXHIBIT NO. 5!l

EXHIBIT# Defendants #5......
w i t n e s s!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

a u g 10 1961
19475United States District Court 

Southern District of Mississippi 
DENTON B. JORDAN,Reporter

MISSISSIPPI IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION OF STUDENTS

M.I.A.S. vs BIAS 
Circular #2 March 9# 19^1

TO: All Students:
M.I.A.S. (Mississippi Improvement Association of Stu­

dents) wants you! You may ask; who is M. I.A. S. Or, why 
should I support M, I. A. S. ? In answer to this question, the 
leadership of M.I.A.S. is composed of the most carefully 
selected group of students in the state of Mississippi.
Each potential leader is screened, drilled and questioned 
and then a vote is taken as to whether or not he is accep­
table. M.I.A.S. feels that any organization is only as 
strong as its weakest link. We realize that some Negro 
students are afraid; therefore, since M. I.A. S. plans to be 
a success, we use this method of selecting leaders. Those 
few that are accepted into the leadership of M. I. A. S. must 
^ke the following pledge under oath: "I (John Doe) hereby
swear to uphold principles, and to work dutifully for total 
objectives of this organization. Giving forfeiture of per-



328

sonal gain, but keeping in mind human rights as rational 
stimulation of my conduct and affilations with this organi­
zation. 11

What are the aims of M.I.A.S.? It aims to work toward 
the improvement of conditions in the state of Mississippi.
(2) It aims to gain the proper respect for our citizens, 
especially for our elderly people, children and our Negro 
ladies. (3) M.I.A.S. aims to increase the opportunity for 
our people to receive diversified training and thereby get 
better jobs. (4) It aims to get better medical facilities 
for our people and to make a way for our young people to 
become doctors, nurses, and to enter other professions in 
our state. (5) It alms to break the White monopoly on elec­
ted officials in our towns, counties, and State.

How does M.I.A.S, plan to do these things? It plans to 
unify the students and people of Mississippi. Unity, not 
only in form, but in our way of thinking as well. M.I.A.S., 
or at least its memory, shall live forever!

What can you do for M.I.A.S.? First of all, you must 
pledge your support, and stick by your pledge. You must know 
your friends, your classmates, your teachers, your roommate, 
your faternity brothers or sorority sisters; you must know 
what and how they are thinking, and you must be ready to 
report to M.I.A.S. any and all who are against the progress 
of1 our people. This is important to you because the person 
who will not support you and M.I.A.S. is the same person who 
will run to others and stab you in the back to get your job



289 329

ten (10) years from now. He is the same person who will 
inform on you when you attempt to get your voting rights at 
a later date. Beware of him.*

Sincerely yours,

Mississippi Improvement Association 
of Students (M.I.A.S.)

PS Pass this on to your friends.
* * * * * *

BY MR. SHANDS: Defendants next offer in evidence
as an exhibit that document dated April 20, 1961, 
which the plaintiff testified he assisted in wri­
ting, over the name of MISSISSIPPI IMPROVEMENT 
ASSOCIATION OP STUDENTS M.I.A.S., and which has 
previously been designated as Defendant's Number 6 
for Identification. That was identified in the 
course of the plaintiff’s testimony,
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We object to the admission of that
document on the same grounds.
BY THE COURT: Overrule for the same reason.

(Defendant's Exhibit No. 6 for Identification received in 
evidence, and follows here below:)



350

"d e f e n d a n t's exhibit n o. 6"

MISSISSIPPI improvement association op students 
General Delivery, Tougaloo, Mississippi

19^75
M.I.A.S. vs BIAS April 20, 1961
Policy Letter #3
TO: All Students:

M.I.A.S, feels that it is appropriate at this time to 
explain some of its policies. During the recent social up­
heaval, M. I.A.S. was both misrepresented and erroneously 
slandered. Some party or parties, unknown to the leadership 
of M.I.A.S., published at least two pieces of literature that 
villianously attacked the administration of Jackson State 
College, using the signature of M. I.A. S. This certainly was 
not the work of the serious-minded M.I.A.S. leaders. The 
President, in his speech before the student body, associated 
M.I.A.S. with a plot "to break-up Jackson College We of M.I. 
A.S. were deeply hurt by this alleged association of our 
group with such a dishonorable plot.

We would like to restate, for clarity, the aims of 
M.I.A.S. (1) It aims to work toward the improvement of 
conditions in the state of Mississippi, (2 ) It alms to gain

proper respect for our Negro citizens, especially for 
°ur elderly people, children, and our ladies. (3 ) M.I.A.S, 
aims to increase the opportunity for our people to receive 
diversified training and thereby get better jobs. (4) It 
aims to get better medical facilities for our people and to 
Make a way for our young people to become doctors, nurses,



331

and to enter other professions in our state. (5) It alms 
to break the White monopoly on elected officials in our 
towns, counties, and State. We think that these are honor­
able aims.

In obtaining these aims, M.I.A.S. does not look upon the
adminlstratl__and staff of Jackson State College as foes,
but as allies, and we seek their support in accomplishing 
our goal. However, we realize that it is literally against 
the law for Negroes to actively seek to change the soci_^_ 
and political structure for their betterment in the state of 
Mississippi. Jackson State College is a state supported and 
controlled institution; and if the administration of any 
State supported school follows the policies as handed down 
by the state officials, it will naturally conflict with the 
aims of M.I.A.S. as stated above.

There is, however, a special group of Negroes that M. I. A.
S. readily recognizes as arch-enemies. These are the ones 
who seek only selfish ends, and are indiscriminate in the 
methods they are willing to use in obtaining their goals.
Some of these people are known by M.I.A.S, to be agents 
and stogies of the White Citizens Council and the Sovereignty
Committee.

Also, it has been rumored that M. I. A. S. was a subsidiary 
of NAACP. We are not connected with, supported by, or 
advised by any outside group. In fact, our budget has been 
funded entirely by self-denial on the part of member students.

We have adopted the seal which appears on this



532

publication as our symbol, and it will appear 
on all subsequent publications issued by 
M.I.A.S.

(SEAL) Sincerely yours,
Mississippi Improvement Association 
of Students (M.I.A.S.)

P.S. If you would like for these pamplets to 
continue, M.I.A.S. needs your financial support 
Please make your check or money order to"Cash,T. 
Also, cash remittance are welcomed. Send to 
the the above address. All contributions are 
confident^

(On back)
EXHIBIT, Defendants # 6......
w i t n e s s!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!..

AUG 10 1961
United States District Court 
Southern District of Mississippi 
DENTON B, JORDAN, Reporter

19^75
* * * * * * * *

BY MR. SHANDS: Defendants next offer in evidence a
document marked Defendant's 9 for Identification, 
over the name of M.I.A.S., entitled "Brainwashed” 
and over the name of M.I.A.S. This document the re­
cord shows the plaintiff, I believe, denied partici­
pation in its preparation.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We object to the admission of that



290 333

on the ground that the plaintiff testified he had 
never seen that document, never participated in its 
preparation, and on the ground it is not relevant 
or material to the issues in this case. It is not 
certified as to who got it out or anything of that 
kind.
BY MR. SHAKOS: In response, my best recollection is
that the plaintiff denied participating in its pre­
paration but admitted that he had seen it. Further­
more, it is a document bearing the letters M. I. A. S., 
which letters are on each of the two immediately 
prior introduced documents.
BY THE COURT: My recollection of his testimony is
that he did not participate in it but that he appro­
ved the contents of it.
BY MS. MOTLEY: I think he said he did not.
BY THE COURT: Well, sustain the objection to that.
BY MR. SHARDS: That, of course, may be a part of the
record?
BY THE COURT: Yes, part of the record but will be
excluded from consideration in reaching a judgment. 
And I might say further that if the record should 
show that, while he did not participate in its pre­
paration, he was in accord with its contents, then 
I will let you re-argue the admissibility of it.
For the time being, it is excluded.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I'd like to say that I recall speci­



291 334

fically that he testified that he did not approve of 
the contents of that. I think he testified more 
than once and I think the record should show that.
BY THE COURT: If it does, I will exclude it from
consideration.

(Defendants Exhibit 9 for Identification received in evi­
dence, which exhibit is not copied here as the original will 
be sent up with original record.)

BY MR. SHAKOS: We will call Mr. McLeod.

J. R. McLEOD, called as a witness and having been duly sworn, 
testified as follows:
BY MR. SHAKOS:

Q. You are Mr. J. R. McLeod?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. "Where do you live, Mr. McLeod?
A. Live in Jackson, Mississippi.
Q. How long have you lived here?
A. Thirty-one years.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. At the time I am employed in the circuit clerk's office 

as a deputy circuit clerk of Hinds County.
In that capacity are you a deputy registrar of elections

in Hinds County, Mississippi?
A. I am.



291 & 292 335

q, Mr. McLeod, do you have in your possession the applica­
tion of one J. H. Meredith made on February 2, 1961, 
as his application for registration?

A. I do.
Q, May I see it?
A. Yes, Sir. (Hands to counsel)
Q, Mr. McLeod, I hand you what purports to be a photostat or 

some mechanical reporduction of that original appli­
cation and I ask you to compare them and see if they 
are the same.

A. Yes, sir, they are the same.
Q. How long have you been deputy circuit clerk of Hinds 

County, Mississippi?
A. Since the first Monday of September, 1959.
Q. 1959?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Mr, McLeod, were you such a deputy registrar —

Strike that,
Q. I ask you to look at the signature on the reverse page 

of that, the signature in the affidavit. Is that 
your signature? Does that read "H. T. Ashford,Jr.,by 
J. R. McLeod"?

A* Yes, sir.

BY MR. SHARDS: I will ask the plaintiff, James
Meredith, to stand.
(The plaintiff stands)



292 & 293 336

q, Mr. McLeod, do you have any recollection of ever having 
seen the plaintiff, J. H. Meredith?

A. No, sir, not individually, I don't.
Q, Not individually?
A, No, sir.
Q. On the day of February 2, 1961, was this application, the 

original of which you have in your hand, filled 
out by a person reporting to be J. H. Meredith?

A. It was.
Q, Did you see him sign the affidavit, registration affida­

vit, on the reverse side of that application?
A. As a rule, and at all times we see these signed. However 

I have no independent recollection of him as an indi­
vidual.

Q. I see.
A. We had hundreds of people registering that day.
Q. Do you take affidavits of people that don't sign before 

you?
A. No, sir.
0* Mr. McLeod, on February 2, 1961, did the person who fill­

ed out that application and whose oath you took accor­
ding to the terms of that application tell you that 
he was not then and had not been a resident citizen 
of Hinds County, Mississippi?

A. No, sir.

BY MRS. MOTLEY: Tills is Mr. Shands* witness. I



295 & 294 557

don't think he can lead the witness like that in 
asking questions like that, asking him whether the 
man said he was not a resident of Hinds County.
That is a direct leading question of his own witness. 
BY THE COURT: Well, I will overrule the objection
because it is impeachment. There are two schools of 
thought on how impeachment questions should be re­
peated, and the general rule is to repeat ait with 
substantially the language of the witness he is 
seeking to impeach. So I will overrule the objection.

Q. If the applicant, J. H. Meredith, had told you that he 
was not a resident of Hinds County, Mississippi, 
would you have registered him?

A. Ho, sir.
Q. Why wouldn't you?
A. For the simple reason he wouldn't have been qualified to 

vote in Hinds County, and we have to ascertain to a 
degree whether they are qualified or not.

Q. Did you fill out this application form or did he fill it 
out?

A* He filled it out. I have never filled one out.
Q. He did? look at the third question on that application. 

Read the question and answer.
"State your age and date of birth." He says he is "27# 

b o m  25 June, *55.”
Q* Read the question and answer Number 8.



294 & 295 358

A. "How long have you resided in Mississippi?” He says,
"17 years."

q. Read the question and answer Number 9*
A, "Where is your place of residence in the district?" He 

said, "1129 Maple Street."
Q. Read the question and answer of Number 10.
A. "Specify the date when such residence began." "September ,/ 

'60."
Q, Read the question and answer of Number 11.
A. "State your prior place of residence if any." And he 

says, "Kosciusko, Mississippi."
Q. Well, Mr. McLeod, did this person tell you that he had 

been a resident of Kosciusko, for the past 17 years?
A. I don't know. The only thing I've got to go by is what 

is on this piece of paper. Now, he had moved into 
Hinds County in time to have been qualified to have 
voted in the 1961, since he moved In prior to the 
general elections in i960, which is Tuesday after 
the first Monday in November, and on that basis is 
the way I registered him.

I hand you here affidavit and certificate of poll tax 
exemption, service men and women, Number 2556, which 
appears to have been marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 
28, Defendant's Exhibit for Identification Number 1, 
and I ask you what that is.

A. That is the ordinary exemption that we give men and wo­
men that have been in the service for the time that



©

295 & 296 339

they were in service, because of the poll tax law 
in Mississippi which says without exemption they 
have to have two consecutive poll tax receipts be­
fore they can vote, and the laws of the state per­
mits this to be given in lieu of that to people 
living in Mississippi are —  or in the county that 
register to vote, while they are in the service.

q. Read that, beginning with "State of Mississippi."
A. (Reading) "State of Mississippi, County of Hinds,

Jackson, Mississippi. Personally appeared before 
me the circuit clerk of said county and state J. H. 
Meredith, 1129 Maple Street, who states on oath 
that he is a resident of and is entitled to vote in \  
Ward 26, 26th Precinct of said county, and that he is 
not liable for poll tax on account of being in the 
Armed Services of the United States and has not had 
opportunity to pay poll tax. Date of enlistment, 
October 5, 1955. Date of Discharge, July 31> I960." 
Signed, "J. H. Meredith." Then at the bottom, "Sworn 
to and subscribed before me this the 2nd day of Feb­
ruary, 1961. H. J. Ashford, Jr., Circuit Clerk.
J. R. McLeod, Deputy Circuit Clerk. This certificate 
issued to the above named persons as provided for in 
House Bill 69, Session 1952. Fiscal years.." —  the 
time hefs been exempted —  "..1959 and I960."

^ Did he swear to that before you?
^ ¥es, slr>



296 & 297 5^0

Q. Mr. McLeod, you give exemptions to people who are resi­
dents of Hinds County only?

A, Yes, sir.
Q. Prom poll tax?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Well, for what years did you give him an exemption?
A. I gave him an exemption for two years in order to allow 

him to vote.
Q. In order for that, was it necessary that he have been 

living and residing in Hinds County on January 1, 
1959? Otherwise, he wouldn't have been liable for 
poll tax here, would he?

A, No, sir, he wouldn't have been liable for one here.
Q. Are you authorized to give exemptions only from poll

taxes for which people are liable for in this county? 
A. That is a question that I can't answer because I haven't 

been into it. It is the general rule that we go by
in the office. If he came out of the service —_

Q* I'll put it this way: Would you have given him that
exemption from poll tax in Hinds County, Mississippi, 
if you had known he lived in another county since 
January or any other county than Hinds County?

A* No* sir. If he was living in another county at the time, 
I would not.

If he was living in another county, the place to have
gotten his exemption was in that county?

A- Yes, sir.



297 & 298 y \ i

BY MR. SHANDS: We wish to introduce the original
application with leave to withdraw and introduce the 
copy that has been identified.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: The copy has already been intro­
duced in evidence. The copy is already in evidence. 
BY THE COURT: If the copy has already been intro­
duced, it is in evidence.
BY MR. SHAKES: That suits me fine. I just didn’t
want the objection that the original hadn’t been 
offered.
BY THE COURT: The record shows the copy has been
introduced in evidence. Very well.

Q. Mr. McLeod, I show you page 84 of the plaintiff’s testi­
mony taken at Biloxi, Mississippi, in this cause, and 
ask you to begin at line 4 of that page and read 
through line 10 and tell me whether or not you made 
that statement to the plaintiff on February 2, 1961, 
in the course of his registration proceeding.

A. (Reading)
"Q. Go ahead then.
"A. And so with these things I just —  I just told 
him I had been in service, and. he told me in this 
court —  he told me to fill out the papers and then 
he told me to go out and tell all the niggers they 
can register and vote in this court, all they got to 
do is pass the test. And I didn’t have much to say. 
"Q. Who was that?



298 & 299 342

"A, This was the clerk."
Q. Mr. McLeod, did you make that statement to James H. 

Meredith, the plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A. I never made a statement like that to anybody.
Q. Did you make it to him?
A. No, sir.
Q, I ask you at the same page, 84 of the transcript men­

tioned a moment ago, I ask you to begin at the third 
line from the bottom of that page and read the last 
three lines on page 84,

A. (Reading)
"Yes, sir, and I told him that I had been in the 
service. I told him I had never lived in Hinds 
County, I told him I had always lived in Attala 
County."

Q. Did the man J. H. Meredith whose application you were
handling and in the process of passing on make that 
statement to you on February 2, 1961, in the 1st 
Judicial District of Hinds County, City of Jackson, 
Mississippi?

A. No, sir. If he had, he wouldn’t have registered.
Did all of the proceedings you have testified about here 

as between you and Meredith occur in the 1st Judicial 
District, City of Jackson, Hinds County, Mississippi?

A* Yes, sir.
And did all of your dealings with him on that day take 

Place in the office of the circuit clerk and regis-



299 & 500 5^5

trar of elections in Hinds County, Mississippi, in 
the courthouse?

A. Yes, sir,
Q, You are one of the custodians of the voting records, regi­

stration records?
A. I work with them all the time, yes, sir. Mr. Ashford is 

custodian, hut we all work with the records and keep 
them up.

Q, You are a deputy circuit clerk and registrar?
A. Yes, sir.

BY MR. SHMEDS: Wo further questions from Mr. McLeod.
BY THE COURT: Cross examine, Mrs. Motley.

CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MRS. MOTLEY:
Q. Mr. McLeod, did I understand you to say that you did not 

recall the plaintiff, Meredith?
A. I do not. We had hundreds to look at every day and I 

don * t remember one from the other.
You say you see hundreds of people every day?

A. Back when they were registering. We were registering 
up to 1500 a day.

Speak louder. I can't hear you.
A. We were registering up to 1500 a day at the time, and I 

don't remember him from anyone else.
Q* Would you explain to me how you remember what he said to



300 & 301 3̂ 4

you?
A. The only thing I know is what is in the record.
Q, What record?
A, In the application that he made.
Q. Didn’t you testify a minute ago that he said certain 

things to you, or didn’t say certain things to you 
about where he was a resident?

A, I know if he had said those things he would not have 
registered.

Q. But you don’t know whether he said them or not, do you, 
having seen 1500 people that day?

A. If he did, I didn’t understand him at all. If he had
made those statements, he would not have registered.

Q. Now, let me understand your testimony. Your testimony is 
that you don’t remember whether he told you that he 
was a permanent resident of Attala County? Is that 
right?

A. The only time I ever saw that Meredith to know who he was 
was when I came in this courtroom.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: (To reporter) Read the question.
(The last question was read)

A. You want me to answer?
Q* Yes.
A' I do know if he had told me he was a permanent resident 

of Attala County he would not have registered.
I understand that, but I am asking you whether he said 

that to you and whether you remember he said that to



301 & 302 3^5

you, "I am a permanent resident of Attala County."
A, No, I don't remember anything he said, just straight out 

from him, but I do know he wouldn't have registered 
if he had made that statement.

Q. Tell me what else he said to you when he was there.
A. I don't know what he said.
Q. You don't know what he said?
A. I don’t know anything about what he said. The only thing 

I can go by is that piece of paper.
Q, Didn't you testify a few minutes ago about what he didn't 

say to you and what you didn't say to him?
A, I said I didn’t make those statements that are in there 

because I don't make that kind of statements to 
people.

Q, Do you remember what you did say to him?
A. I don't know that I said anything to him.
Q* Do you know what he said to you?
A. I do not. I don't know, but I do know that the statement 

in that testimony, if they had been said to me, he 
would not have registered.

^ Let me ask you this: Do you recall anything he said to
you?

A* I do not, not straight out.
Now, would you tell me what your duties are as deputy 

circuit clerk of Hinds County?
A* You want all the duties?

Yes, sir.



302 & 305 346

A. Well —

BY MR. SHAKOS: What was that question?
BY THE COURT: All of his duties.

A. Well, I’m a court clerk for the circuit and county court.
I record lawsuits, issue cost bills, write marriage 
licenses, register voters, and numerous other duties 
that come up in the office.

Q. What are your duties with respect to the registration of 
voters?

A. My duties is to locate the ward they live in, check the 
applications that they make, grade the papers, pass 
on whether or not they are qualified from educational 
point of view, then allow them to register, sign their 
name on the book, fill in this line, issue them any 
exemptions that they have, and give them a certifi­
cate that they are registered in Hinds County in order 
they might register and vote in the City of Jackson.

Q* Did you give 14?. Meredith a certificate?
4* I did.
^ Is this the certificate here? (indicating)
A. Um-hum. I gave him that.
Q. Do your duties include answering questions of prospective 

voters if they have any questions?
4* Yes.

one of your duties to advise prospective voters of the



505 & 304 347

requirements to be eligible to vote?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you advise Mr. Meredith of what the requirements were 

in order that he might vote?
A. I don't know if I gave him that application to start with 

or not. There was about six or seven of us in there 
that gave these applications, and they would maybe 
bring it back to another one of the deputies that 
would actually pass on it and register it.

Q. Are you saying somebody else helped you with these appli­
cations?

A. I don't know that they did or did not. I'm not the only 
one that gives them over there.

Q. Does your name appear on here as having witnessed the 
signature?

A. Yes.
Q. Are you now saying somebody else probably assisted in the 

preparation and execution of this document?
A. Somebody else might have given him this application. I 

do not know.
But it is one of your duties to explain to prospective 

voters the eligibility requirements for voting, 
isn't it?

4- It is.
Did you explain that to Mr. Meredith?
 ̂ not know. I don't know whether I talked to him 

before he got that paper ornot.



504

q. So you don't know whether you fulfilled that duty in his 
case or not, do you?

A. 1 do not. No, I don't know. I have never talked to him 
that I know of.

Q. But it is your duty to explain to prospective voters the 
eligibility requirement for voting, isn’t it?

A, That's right.
Q. That is your job?
A. Right.
Q. No question about that?
A. No.
Q. Did you bring that record book with you?
A, I did not.
Q. Do you know whether Mr. Meredith's name is signed in the 

record book?
A. It is.
Q. What other information does it contain next to his name? 
A. It contains his address, his age, and so forth.
0.. Does it contain his race and color?
A. No.
Q* Isn’t there a number 3 under the column "Color" next to 

Meredith's name?
4* There is. —  I presume.
^ What does that 3 mean?

BY MR. SHANDS: We don't think that has anything to
do whatever with this lawsuit.

348



305 349

BY THE COURT; I’ll overrule the objection if he 
knows.

A. That means a colored male.
Q. Are you permitted to record the race and color of a 

prospective applicant?
A, We all do.
Q. On this affidavit and certificate for poll tax exemption, 

which is Plaintiff’s Exhibit 28, there is an oath 
signed by Mr. Meredith. I think you read it a minute 
ago. And on his application for registration, which 
is Plaintiff’s Exhibit 29, there is another oath 
which he signed. Would you tell me whether those 
oaths are identical or whether they are different?

A. They are not the same wording.
Q. Do you want to read the one on his application for regis­

tration?
A* (Reading) i!l do solemnly swear or affirm that I am

twenty-one years old or will be by the next election 
in this county and that I have resided in the state 
two years, Ward 26 Election District of this county 
one year next preceding the ensuing election, or I 
am a minister of the gospel in charge of an organized 
church or such minister’s wife, and that after two 
years residence in the state and six months in said 
election district I am now in good faith a resident 
of the same and that I am not disqualified from voting



505 & 306 350

by reasons of having been convicted of any crime 
named in the constitution of this state as a dis­
qualification to be an elector, that I have truly 
answered all questions propounded to me so far as 
they relate to my right to vote and also to my resi­
dence before my citizenship in this district, and 
I will faithfully support the Constitution of the 
United States and the State of Mississippi and will 
bear true faith and allegiance to the same, so help 
me God."

Q. In reading this, let me ask you if you read these words: 
"and six months in said election district"?

A. Yes.
Q. Did you omit those words in the reading of that?
A. No, I did not. That is for a minister or a minister’s 

wife.
Q. You say you read that out?
A. I did.

BY THE COURT: You can have it read back if you want
to, but I remember his having read that.

Q* Is that the same oath as appears on that certificate 
there?

A* No, it is not.
Would you explain to me what the qualifications for 

voting in Hinds County are?



306 & 307 351

A. There is a literacy test, they have to be a person
of 21 years of age, and reside in the county at 
least through one general election or for one year. 
That is if they have lived in the state two years 
or more.

Q. Do those two years have to precede the ensuing election? 
A, Urn-hum. Has to be in the state preceding the ensuing 

election.
Q» Where is that? Is that contained in the law?
A. Yes.
Q. What section of the law?
A. I don’t know. I’m not a lawyer.
Q* What are the other qualifications for registering to 

vote?
A. That is about all.

BY MR. SHARDS: We think this has no relevancy. We
realize it Is cross examination, but it has no rele­
vancy.
THE COURT: I’ll overrule the objection.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Would you read the last answer?
(To reporter)
(The last question and answer were read)
(The fifth preceding question and answer were then 
read)

Isn’t it a fact that people who are not able to read 
under certain circumstances can vote?



307 & 508 552

BY MR. SHANDS: We object to that.
BY THE COURT: Yes, sustain the objection to that.
It is a matter of law.

Q. Now, let me call your attention to questions 9 and. 10,
where the applicant gives his residence and the length 
of time, I believe.

A. Where is your place of residence in the district"?
Q. Yes.
A. "1129 Maple Street."
Q. The next question?
A, "Specify the date when such residence began." Be said, 

"September «60."
Q. Now, tell me when is the next ensuing election following 

September *60? When was the next ensuing election?
A. It would depend —  The Tuesday after the first Monday of 

November.
Q. Did you read the application before you attested to it?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you read his statement that he had been there since 

September f60?
A. Yes.
Q.* And you determined he was qualified to vote?
^ He had stayed there past--

Pardon?
He had stayed there past the general election on Tuesday 

after the first Monday of November, which put him



508 & 309 353

past one general election, and then he would have 
lived there a year before the next ensuing general 
election, which would be Tuesday after the first 
Monday in November of ’6l.

Q, So he was qualified to vote in Hinds County then, wasn’t 
he?

A. Yes, he was qualified to vote in Hinds County.

BY MRS. MOTLEY: That is all.
BY THE COURT: Any redirect?
BY MR. SHANDS: I have furtherquestions. Your Honor. 

REDIRECT EXAMINATION
El MR. SHANDS:
Q. Counsel didn’t ask you in what election he would have been 

qualified to vote in Hinds County. It would have 
been an election subsequent to February 2, 1961, 
would it not?

A. Yes, sir.
^  there had been an election on that day, he wasn’t 

qualified, was he?
A* No, sir, he was not.
Q* And when he got this exemption from you on February 2, 

I960, he got an exemption of poll tax for the year 
1959, didn’t he?

A. Yes, sir.
^ In order for him to have been liable for poll tax in



J09 & 310 354

Hinds County for the year 1959 he must have been a 
resident of Hinds County on January 1, 1959. Isn't 
that right?

A. Right.
Q. Now, we go to the exemption for the year i960. In order 

for him to have gotten an exemption of the poll tax 
in Hinds County for the year i960, hemust have been 
a bona fide resident citizen of Hinds County, Missis­
sippi, on January 1, i960. Isn't that true?

A. For him to be assessed with poll tax, that's right.
Q. You don't assess non-residents of Hinds County with poll 

tax?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you?
A. No, sir.
Q. Now, about this affidavit, did he swear to you that he 

was a resident of Hinds County on January 1, 1959# 
and on January 1, i960, in order to get the exemp­
tion? Would you have given him an exemption if he 
hadn't been a resident?

A. If he hadn't been a resident I would not. Now, under 
this exemption set-up, this is in lieu of poll tax 
receipts when people are in the service and cannot 
purchase the poll tax receipts. That is the reason 
it was dated like it is.

The poll tax receipt from the county of their residence.
4* Right.



310 & 311 355

Q, On February 2, 1961, was J. H. Meredith entitled to vote 
in an election if one had been held in Hinds County 
on February 2, 19ol?

A. No, sir.
Q, Mr. McLeod, if Janies Meredith, the plaintiff in this

case, had stated to you that he had been a resident 
of Attala County or any other county or was a resident 
of Attala County on February 2, 1961, would you have 
registered him?

BY ME. SHANDS: No further questions. I would like
the record to show one of my associates think I 
used the date of February 2, *60, instead of February 
2, *61. That is all.

RECROSS EXAMINATION
BY MRS. MOTLEY:
Q. Let me ask you this, Mr. McLeod: Did the plaintiff have

to be eligible to vote on the day he registered?
A. It would be impossible for plaintiff to vote in an elec­

tion on the date he registered because the law says 
he must be registered four months prior to a general 
election or a special election.

Q* So that when he said that he was eligible to vote in
Hinds County, that did not necessarily mean that he 
was eligible to vote on that date, did it?

A* He was making himself eligible to vote. Anyone that



311 & 512 356

registers has that waiting period.

(The last question was read by the reporter)

BY MR. SHAhDS: Ve object to that unless the witness
knows which affidavit he is talking about. If he is 
talking about the poll tax receipt, the poll tax 
exemption in which he says he is entitled to vote 
on the day he made it —  Is that the one you're 
asking about?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes. Ilm asking about the poll tax 
receipt, which is Plaintiff's Exhibit 28,

A. State the question again.
(The last question was read again.)
A. No.
Q* Now, does this poll tax exemption certificate show the 

date on which he was discharged from service?
A. It does.

What date does it give?
A- July 21, i960.

^ Now, as to this application for registration, which is 
Plaintiff's Exhibit 29, when Meredith said in that 
affi-a davit that he was eligible to vote in Hinds 
County, that did not necessarily mean he was eligible 
to vote on that day, did it, February 21, 196—



312 & 515 357

BY MR. SHARDS:— We object to that. The affidavit 
itself says in the poll tax exemption certificate 
that the affiant there is eligible to vote, which 
means that day. We think it speaks for itself.
BY THE COURT: It speaks for itself. Of course, it 
is a question of law, but I will overrule the objec­
tion and let her have an answer.

(The last question was read by the reporter)

A. I believe that meant he was eligible to vote but had not 
been registered long enough to qualify to vote in an 
election that had been held there.

BY MR. SHARDS: I don't think it is at all clear
whether they are talking about the application to 
register or the application for a poll tax receipt.
If they are talking about the application for regis­
tering, that's one thing.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We made that clear. I called the
number of the exhibit.
BY THE COURT: Yes, she is talking about the applica­
tion for registering.
BY MR. SHARDS: For registering.

^ Do you read over applications before you attest to 
them?



513 & 314 353

A. Yes.
Q, What date does that say in question number 1?
A. 2nd day of February, i960, is on there.
Q, What day did you attest to it on the back?
A. I attested to it the 2nd day of February, *Sl.
Q. There appears to be an error?
A, Evidently an error on his part.
Q, And an oversight on your part?
A. Perhaps.

BY MRS. MOTLEY: That is all.
BY THE COURT: Any redirect?
BY MR, SHANDS: Nofurther questions.
BY THE COURT: You may stand aside.

(Witness excused)
BY MR. SHANDS: Would the Court indulge us about
five minutes?
BY THE COURT: Very well. Take about a five minute
recess.

(The court was recessed for five minutes)

After Recess
ROBERT B. ELLIS, recalled as a witness and having been duly 
sworn, testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. SHANDS:

Mr. Ellis, how long —  Are you Mir. Robert B. Ellis?



314 & 515 559

A. Yes, sir, I am,
q. How long have you been registrar of the University of 

Mississippi?
A, Registrar since 1951* I believe.
q, What was your capacity with the University of Mississippi 

before that time?
A. I was an acting registrar, and prior to that time an

assistant registrar. Then during my days as a stu­
dent, I had various part-time responsibilities.

Q,. Are you an alumnus of Ole Miss?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. Is Ole Mss just another name for the University of 

Mssissippi?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. How long have you lived in the state of Mssissippi?
A. Since 1940.
Q. Were you ever connected with the Armed Forces of the 

United States Government?
A. I served three years active duty during World War II and 

I am in the active reserve now.
Q* Of what branch of the service?
A* The Air Force.
Q* In what capacity did you serve during the three years you 

mentioned?
A* I was a combat observer, navigator, in a night fighter 

squadron.
^ What rank did you go in at?



515 & 516 560

A, Well, I went in, in those days we had the classification 
of aviation student, which was the equivalent of a 
corporal, and I became an aviation cadet, became a 
flight officer, second lieutenant, first lieutenant, 
and so on.

Q. What was your rank when you got out?

BY MS. MOTLEY: All of this is very interesting, but
I fail to see the relevancy of this witness' Army 
service to this case.
BY THE COURT: I'll let him answer the last question,
and I think that will be sufficient.
BY MR. SHARDS: If the Court please, that is material
because, as shown by the answer, I think — —
BY THE COURT: —  Very well, I'll overrule the ob­
jection.
BY MR. SHARDS: We'll connect it up, we think, and 
if not, Your Honor, she has a reserved rule.
BY THE COURT: I'll overrule the objection.

A* When I went off active duty, I was a first lieutenant.
Q* During your Army service, did you have occasion to be­

come familiar with Army records and regulations?
^  Yes.

Q* During your period in the reserve —  What status do you 
hold in the Reserve and what is your connection with 
the Reserve?



316 & 317 361

A. I'm currently a major in the Reserve. I have held vari­
ous positions. I was the executive officer for an 
air base group in an active reserve unit in Memphis 
up until about ’58, Year before last I was the in­
structor of an officers class, commanding staff 
development, at the University. This year I don't 
have a position. The organization I belonged to last 
year has been deactivated and in the process of re­
organization.

Q* Mr. Ellis, have you ever had any connection with the ad­
ministrative office or any administration office in 
Air Force personnel?

A, I have served as a group adjutant during my period of
service as a reservist, and do have some familiarity 
with such matters.

Q. Mr. Ellis, what is the form known as DD2—  214 I mean, to 
which reference is made on the face of the plain­
tiff’s application in this case?

A. This is a Department of Defense form used by all of the 
military services to record — and it's entitled 
"Report of Separation from Service," and it’s used 
by all the services to record and certify the separa­
tion of service. —  Separation from service. Excuse 
me.

^ Does that form have anything to do with the GI Bill on 
Educational Benefits?

^Qs* It is the form required by the Veterans Administra-



517 362

tion, either that or an official discharge, for the 
establishment of GI or Public Law 550 benefits.

Q, In the course of your duties as registrar at the Univer­
sity of Mississippi, Bob, have you had occasion to 
deal with rules and regulations pertaining to GI 
educational benefits?

A. Yes, sir. I don't qualify as an expert on the Public 
Law 550 regulations and laws, but I do have some 
knowledge.

Q. Bob, what is the difference, if you assign any, as regis­
trar of the University, between an acceptable appli­
cation and an incomplete application, or an unaccep­
table application or acceptable application?

A. Well, an acceptable application to me is one that we
receive from a prospective student which —  it will 
be incomplete in the beginning stages but at least 
on the face of the application we are led to believe 
that the applicant is acting in good faith and will 
submit the remaining items needed to complete that 
file.

Now, that is an acceptable — ?
^ This is in the initial stages of an application, this 

is an acceptable application.
Q* Bob, i hand you a document which has been introduced in

evidence by plaintiff and is designated as Defendant's 
Exhibit 25 for Identification, which consists of a 
letter from the plaintiff James Meredith —  J. H.



317 & 318 363

Meredith, it is signed —  dated January 31, 1961, 
together with the application itself. Does that 
application — - Strike that.

Q. Is it a requirement that an application from transfer 
students seeking to transfer to the University of 
Mississippi during the year February, 1961, summer 
term of June, 1961, submit with their application 
the names of six alumni whom they think would recom­
mend them and to whom you would later write letters?

A. This is the requirement that we impose on those who will 
apply as resident students.

Q. Was any such list submitted with the application of the 
plaintiff in this suit?

A. No, there was not.
Q* Is there any statement in his letter concerning that list 

of six names?
A. Yes, there is a statement in his letter.
Q* Would you please read it?
A. This is the third paragraph: (Reading^ "I will not be

able to furnish you with the names of six University 
alumni because I am a Negro and .."---

Q. —  What is the date of that letter?
A* 31st of January, !6l.

'••because I am a Negro and all graduates of the school 
are white. Further, I do not know any graduate per­
sonally. However, as a substitute for this require­
ment, I am submitting certificates regarding my moral



318 & 519 564

character from Negro citizens of my state.”
Q,. Mr. Ellis, when was that application and that letter 

received, if you know?
A. The letter is dated 51st January. As I recollect, we 

received it February 1st.
Q. Is any reference made on the body of that application 

itself as to the six names?
A. On the form which we use, which we send to the applicant, 

and on which we ask that the applicant submit names 
of six alumni, there is noted in typewritten letters 
"See letter11 and then printed in pen and ink "and 
attached certificates" and the signature ”J. H. Mere­
dith. "

Q. Mr. Ellis, turn, please, to the certificates attached
to that application, and state whether or not any of 
those certificates contain any word recommending him 
as a student at Ole Miss or the University of Missis­
sippi for admission.

A. None of the recommendations do so.
Q* Bob, in the case of a non-resident transfer undergraduate 

student, what are the requirements as to how many 
letters of recommendation he get and from whom must 
they be secured? This is a non-resident.

A. We require five letters of recommendation. They may be
on a form which we provide the student or they may be 
typewritten or handwritten recommendations from 
citizens of the applicant's community who have known



519 & 520 365

him for two years and who will recommend him for ad­
mission to the University.

Cl, Do those certificates have any provisions as to good 
moral character?

A. Yes, they do.
Q. What must they contain, is what I am trying to get at.
A. The letters, the certifications must recommend the appli­

cant as a person of good moral character whom the 
certifier has known for at least two years, and the 
certifier must recommend the individual for admission 
to the university.

Q. Do any of the certificates attached to that application 
received by the University on February 1st comply 
with the requirements which existed as to non-resident 
applicants?

A. Wo, they do not.
Q. Wow, Bob, what permanent address is shown of the appli­

cant on that application?
A. The permanent address indicated is Route 2, Kosciusko, 

Mississippi.
Q* I ask you to turn to the student’s health record and

read, beginning with the name of the student through 
the home address in full, and read me what is on that 
application.
is "Name of student, Meredith, J. H.; Birthday,

June 25, 1933." The next line, "Parent or responsible 
relative," and typewritten in parenthesis is "(wife)",



520 & 321 366

parenthesis closed, "Mary June Meredith." On the 
third line, "Home address in full, 2552 Mams Street, 
Gary, Indiana." Phone, none."

Q. When received by the University of Mississippi on Feb­
ruary 1, 1961, was this an acceptable application?

A. It definitely was not.
BY MR, SHAKOS: Does the reporter have the five certi
ficates submitted at a later date which were intro­
duced during the first hearing at Biloxi?
(Off the record discussion)

Q. Bob, did you receive the letter dated March 26, 1961, 
which has been introduced, copy of which has been 
introduced, as Plaintiff’s Exhibit Number 12 which 
enclosed certificates mentioned in that letter?

A. Yes, I did.
Q. Do you recall the date of the receipt of that?
A. I don’t recall the exact date. I am sure it was a day or 

two after the date on this letter.
Q. Would you examine those certificates and state whether 

or not, if the plaintiff had been a resident of 
Attala County on January 31st or at the time that
was sent--- Did I say resident? Non-resident. Just
strike the entire question.

0* Would you examine those certificates and state whether 
or not the certificates there submitted would have 
been sufficient if they had been submitted by a non­
resident of the State of Mississippi? That is, if



521 & 522 567

Meredith were a non-resident of the State of Missis­
sippi at that time?

A. No, we wouldn't consider these as acceptable recommenda­
tions.

Q, Do your requirements require that they be from citizens 
who have known him in the community in which he lives 
outside of the State of Mississippi?

A. That is correct.
Q. Do you recall whether or not all of the correspondence

you received from the plaintiff Meredith was sent to 
you by registered mail or not by registered mail?

A. This is one of the unusual things about this application.
The first letter received was, as I recall from check­
ing, sent to us first class mail. This was an inquiry 
requesting forms. Every letter received after that 
time was sent to me with a return receipt requested, 
as I recall, registered mail. This is the only such 
application I can recall having been conducted this 
way.

Q. Bob, I hand you a letter dated April 12, 1961, a copy of 
which has been introduced as Plaintiff’s Exhibit Num­
ber 19, and I ask you to read the last paragraph on 
the first page.

^ (Reading) When I forwarded my application to Mr. Ellis 
on January 31, 1961, I stated in a letter to him and 
ih my application that I am a Negro citizen of Missis­
sippi. Because of my failure to hear from Mr. Ellis



522 & 323 568

since his telegram to me of February 4, 1961, I have 
concluded that Mr. ELlis has failed to act upon my 
application solely because of my race and color, 
especially since I have attempted to comply with all 
the admission requirements and have not been advised 
of any deficiencies with respect to same."

Q. Bob, is that paragraph consistent with having failed and 
refused to submit with the first application the list 
of six alumni?

A, I think it is in conflict. In the plaintiff's second 
letter, which was submitted with the application, 
he informed me that he would not or "I will not be 
able to" comply with the requirements and substitutes 
something else. And then in this letter he says, 
"especially since I have attempted to comply with 
all the admission requirements."

Q. Bob, what was your reaction to that charge against you 
of race?

A. Well, I thought it was rather insulting. I certainly 
had not given the plaintiff any basis for drawing 
such a conclusion, and I thought it was very much 
uncalled for.

Q* What attitude does that demonstrate, if any, to you?
^ Well, it confirms the suspicions that I had about the

application. By this time I was convinced that this 
man was looking for a lawsuit. He was trying to get 
into the University because he was a Negro and not



325 Sc 524 369

because he wanted an education.
Q, I show you a letter dated May 9, 1961, which has been

introduced as Plaintiff’s Exhibit Number 21, and ask 
you to read that letter in full, and which letter is 
made Exhibit L to your answer in this case.

A. This is a letter dated May 9, 1961, addressed to J. H. 
Meredith (Reading)
"Dear Sir: I have seen your letter of April 12,
1961, to Dr*. Arthur Beverly Lewis, Dean of the College 
of Liberal Arts. Of course, your application has 
been received and will receive proper attention. In 
connection with your inquiry as to receipt of trans­
cripts of credits from the colleges listed in your 
application, I have received the transcripts, each of 
which shows a certificate of honorable dismissal or 
certification of good standing. As to your request 
for an evaluation of your offered credits, I believe 
I should advise you at this preliminary stage that 
my evaluation of your credits indicates that under 
the standards of the University of Mississippi the 
maximum credit which could be allowed is forty-eight 
(48) semester hours, if your application for admis­
sion as a transfer student should be approved. By 
your transcripts you offer a total of ninety (90) 
semester hours credit.
"My evaluation of your credits is not in any way a 
determination or decision as to whether your applies-



k  325 370

tion for admission will be approved or disapproved 
or of its sufficiency. In view of the foregoing, 
please advise if you desire your application to be 
treated as a pending application. Yours truly,
Robert B. Ellis, Registrar.”

Q. Now, Bob, why did you give him a tentative evaluation?
A. Occasionally we have students, prospective students re­

quest some information concerning their records from 
previous colleges, and this was an attempt to advise 
the student, as we sometimes do; this was not a formal 
evaluation of his credits.

Q. Did the fact that your tentative evaluation of his cre­
dits materially reduced the number of offered credits 
have anything to do with your writing that letter?

A, Yes. At the time I wrote this letter, the plaintiff was 
attending Jackson State College. As I recall, his 
transcript from Jackson State showed only the credits 
through the —  I think the fall quarter. I'm not 
sure that they included the winter quarter. I don't 
think so. Since that time he, of course, has earned 
credits for two or three additional quarters. He has 
continued to be enrolled. And I have determined that 
he can —  that it would be a —  there would be a 
maximum of thirty-three hours that conceivably could 
be applied toward a degree at the University of Mis­
sissippi, and the man already has, according to the 
Jackson College catalogue, more than the total credits



325 & 526 571

required for a degree at that institution,
q. What effect, if any, would that reduction of credits

under your evaluation of May 15 have had as to his 
GI Bill of Rights, if you know or if you have any —

A. I had some strong suspicions that the plaintiff would
lose his remaining eligibility under Public Law 550.
In other words, he would lose any future benefits. 
Since that time I have confirmed those suspicions 
and I know that he will lose his GI Bill.

Q, Bob, state whether or not you were trying to be of help 
and of service to him in writing that letter?

A. Well, that was the intent when this letter was prepared.
Q. Did you at that time have his application showing his 

age?
A. Yes. His application does indicate the date of his birth, 

and I believe correspondence which we had received 
also provided that information.

Q« With the reduction of credits, even as set out in your 
letter of May 9th, which is Exhibit L to the com­
plaint, how many hours of credits would the plaintiff 
have lost as against what he claimed to have?

A* In this letter that I wrote?
Yes.

A. May 9th, there would have been —  Let’s see. Forty-two 
semester hours lost. This is the equivalent of more 
than one academic year.

^  you can compute it, roughly how many years would that



326 & 527 372

cause him to lose and thus delay his graduation under 
your evaluation?

A, Well, as of this day and as of these statements —
Q. —  Where would that have put him if his application had 

been approved?
A. Well, it would have lost, roughly, an academic year of 

two semesters and a full summer session.
Q, One year and a full summer session?
A. Yes, sir.
Q, On your evaluation —  Rather, in your prior testimony you 

mentioned something about thirty-three instead of 
forty-eight. What would that have caused him to lose 
over and above one year and one summer term?

A. It will cause him to lose the equivalent of a full aca­
demic year and two full summer sessions.

Q. Bob, on May 15th, if you will turn to the next letter, 
did you receive a letter from the plaintiff dated 
May 15, 1961?

A. I did.
Reporting to have been written in response to your letter 

to him of May 9, 19&1?
Yes, sir.

Q* Would you please read that letter?
A* This letter is headed "J. H. Meredith, 1129 Maple Street, 

Apartment 5D, Jackson, Mississippi, dated May 15, 
1961." ikid the inside address is "Mr. Robert B. 
Ellis, Registrar, University of Mississippi, Division



327 & 528 373

of Student Personnel, University, Mississippi." 
(Witness reads same)

Q, Is that all on that letter?
A, "Yours truly," and signed "J. H. Meredith."
Q. Does it have "thank you"?
A, There is an enclosure, letter of application to the 

Director of Men’s Housing.
Q. Does it have the words "thank you"?
A. No. —  Oh, I’m sorry, there are. "Thank you."
Q. Now, Boh, upon receipt of that letter and your tentative 

evaluation which you had given him of the total 
possible maximum hours if his application were appro­
ved, what did his willingness to sacrifice that many 
hours indicate to you as a registrar?

A, Well, it certainly indicated a very unreal approach on 
the part of a student who wants to finish his educa­
tion.

Q. Did the fact of his age of 27 years at that time have 
anything to do with that opinion of yours?

A» Yes, it did.
Q* Would you as a registrar normally expect a person of his 

years to be less ready to sacrifice time in college? 
A. Absolutely not.
Q* X say, would his age have anything to do with your deter­

mination as to what your reaction would be as to 
whether or not that was a normal attitude?

A* X would think a man of this age would not be willing to



328 & 529 374

suffer any loss of credits that he earned, and would 
seek admission where he could get full recognition 
of his credits.

q. Please turn, Mr. Ellis, to a letter dated May 21, 1961, 
from J. H. Meredith to you, which is raade Exhibit 0 
to your answer, and read that letter, please.

A, This Is another letter headed 11 J. H. Meredith, 1129 
Maple Street, Apartment 5D, Jackson, Mississippi, 
dated May 21st, 1961."

Q, Do you know when that letter was received?
A. Well, I don't have the original here, but I assume we 

received It a day or perhaps two later. Inside 
address, "Mr. Robert B. Ellis, Registrar, University 
of Mississippi, Division of Student Personnel, Uni­
versity, Mississippi," (Witness reads same.)

Q. Mr, Ellis, in your capacity as registrar, is there any 
way to reconcile the statements in the letter of 
May 21st with your statement in your letter to him 
of May 9th?

A. Well, I don't see how he could interpret the letter I 
sent to him on May 9th to be a statement that his 
application was complete and that all it lacked was 
a statement of admission from me.

0* Bob, as to the letter of April 12th from Meredith —
A* May 12th?
^ April 12th, 1961, from Meredith to you, in that letter 

does the charge of race indicate to you whether he



529 & 550 575

could and would be a normal student at the University 
of Mississippi with the proper respect for faculty 
and you?

A, This letter dated April 12th was addressed to Dr. Lewis 
and was referred to me some several days later, and 
my reaction upon reading it was, as indicated earl­
ier, I felt it was rather insulting, and I definitely 
came to the conclusion that a man who is ready to 
go off in all directions making charges of this 
serious nature is certainly not one who would be 
willing to abide by the regulations of the university 
and be an acceptable student.

Q. Bob, turn, please, to the letter dated May 25, 1961, 
which is Exhibit P to your answer, and read that 
letter, please.

A. This is a letter from my office dated May 25, 1961. The 
inside address is "Mr. J. H. Meredith, 1129 Maple 
Street, Apartment 5D, Jackson, Mississippi.
"Dear Mr. Meredith: I regret to inform you in ans­
wer to your recent letter, that your application for 
admission must be denied. The University cannot 
recognize the transfer of credits from the institu­
tion which you are now attending since it is not a 
member of the Southern Association of Colleges and 
Secondary Schools. Our policy permits the transfer 
of credits only from member institutions of regional 
associations. Furthermore, students may not be



330 & 351 376

accepted by the University from those institutions 
whose programs are not recognized. As I am sure 
you realize your application does not meet other re­
quirements for admission; your letters of recommen­
dation are not sufficient for either a resident or 
a non-resident applicant. I see no need for men­
tioning any other deficiencies. Your application 
file has been closed, and I am enclosing with this 
letter your money order for ten dollars and twenty- 
five dollars which you submitted me earlier. Sin­
cerely yours, Robert B. Ellis, Registrar."

BY THE COURT: At this point, I believe we will re­
cess until nine o’clock tomorrow morning.
BY MR. SHARDS: Would it be possible to make that
9:30?

(Whereupon the court was recessed until 9:30 A.M. the follow­
ing day.)

(WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 16, 1961, AT 9:30 A.M.:)
BY MR. SHARDS: I wish to make an announcement here,
and first I would make this request to counsel for 
the plaintiff. I hate tomake this request worse 
than anything I ever did. I am exhausted to the 
point where I do not feel that I can properly pro­
ceed with the examination of Mr. Ellis. I recognize 
that I started the examination, and I am asking



551 & 332 377

counsel for plaintiff if she would have objection 
to Mr. Clark picking up this examination and con­
tinuing with it.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: No, Mr. Shands, I don't have any
objection to that.
BY MR. SHANDS: I appreciate that very much. I am
very sorry to make that request, but I am in that 
shape of physical exhaustion. We don't ask that 
the case be recessed or passed on that account. .I 
will stay in the courtroom and take such part as my 
physical limitations will permit.
BY THE COURT: Very well. That will be satisfactory,
Mr. Shands.

MR. ROBERT B. ELLIS recalled to the witness stand for further 
direct examination by Mr. Clarke:)

FURTHER DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q. Mr. Ellis, it is my recollection when we adjourned yes­

terday afternoon that you had just read from a letter 
received from the plaintiff Meredith on the 25th day 
of May. Is that your recollection?
BY THE COURT: I think it was a letter from Mr. Ellis
to Meredith.
BY MR. CLARKE: Beg pardon. Your Honor is correct.
A letter from Mr. Ellis to the plaintiff.



552 & 333 378

Q, Is that correct? (Hands to witness)
A. This is the letter.
Q, In that letter, of course, Mr. Ellis, you have stated 

the reasons that you saw fit as registrar to deny 
the application that was pending at that time. Is 
that correct?

A, Yes, sir.
Q, What reference do you make in that letter to the plain­

tiff^ race or color or ethnic background?
A. There is no reference in this letter or in any of my 

correspondence with reference to race or color.
Q. What did the plaintiff’s race or color have to do with 

the action you took in ultimately denying his appli­
cation for admission as a resident undergraduate 
transfer student?

A. Absolutely none. The letter of May 25th speaks for it­
self.

Q. Now, I used the word "denied" with regard to Mr. Mere­
dith’s application. Is that correct, or was it re­
jected? Which was it, in the words of a registrar 
rather than in the words of a lawyer?

A- I’m not sure there’s a difference. The letter of May 
25th states that his application for admission must 
he denied. As far as I’m concerned, this also means 
that it was rejected.

Did. you ever get to a consideration on the entire merits 
of this application, or did you find it necessary



535 & ^ 379

to reject it because of failure on the part of the 
applicant to comply with the usual and regular re­
quirements of the University of Mississippi for 
application of this kind?

A. There was no consideration on the merits of his applica­
tion.

Q, Mr. Ellis, I hand to you a copy —  or rather, an excerpt 
from the minutes of the Board of Trustees, a meeting 
held November 18, 195^* reflecting certlan action 
by the Board. Are you and were you familiar with 
that action reflected in that certified copy of the 
Board’s minutes?

A. Yes, I was and am.
Q. This is dated what date? What date did this action take 

place?
A. The action, as indicated in this excerpt, was dated 

November 18, 195^.

BY MR. CLARKE: We offer this in evidence.
BY THE COURT: Let it be marked.

(Same received in evidence and marked as Defendant’s Exhibit 
N°. 27 and follows here below:)



380

"DEFENDANTS EXHIBIT NO. 27"
19^75

EXCERPT OP MINOTES OP BOARD OP TRUSTEES 
OP STATE INSTITUTIONS OP HIGHER LEARNING

November1 l8, 1954- EXHIBIT # Defendants ̂ 27....
witness!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!

AUG 16 1961
United States District Court 

Southern District Of Mississippi 
DENTON B. JORDAN, Reporter

Presidents* Council Report
"Recommendations from the Presidents* Council regarding 

the requirement of five letters for all new admissions at the 
several institutions were discussed. After motion duly made 
and seconded, the following policy was adopted:

1. State-supported Institutions of Higher Learning are 
not obligated to accept students who are not bona fide 
residents of Mississippi. The heads of these institu­
tions are authorized to accept or reject non-resident 
applicants without a stated reason.
After further discussion, the resolution requiring five 

letters was amended so as to read as follows:
It being brought to the attention of the Board that no 

general established or applied rule with reference to moral 
Qualifications of all persons applying for admission to any 

the State supported Institutions of Higher Learning, is 
now in existence, and the Board being of the opinion that 

welfare of all such Institutions would be better served 
b7 establishing a policy in that regard, and promulgating



581

rules to implement the same, it was on motion duly made and 
seconded, and by unanimous vote of the Board, ordered that 
all future applications by residents of this state for ad­
mission to any of the state-supported Institutions of Higher 
learning shall be supported by at least five (5) letters of 
recommendation as to good moral character from alumni of the 
institutions to which application is made. Such letters 
shall certify to the good moral character of the applicant, 
shall recommend his admission to the institution, and shall 
be based on not less than two years personal acquaintance 
with the applicant. Recommendations from alumni residing 
in counties other than that of the applicant shall not be 
considered unless the applicant himself has resided in the 
county from which he applies for less than two years, in 
which latter event, letters from the county of previous re­
sidence may be considered, and unless there are an insuffi­
cient number of alumni residing in the county of residence.

This order does not apply to applications for admission 
at the September 195^ term of such institution. Five letters 
of recommendation from reputable sources in communities in 
which they reside shall likewise be required of non-resident 
applicants. As to institutions which have not been in ope­
ration for ten years, five letters from reputable sources 
stall be required.

No application shall be considered by the institution 
Uhtil and unless such letters of recommendation as herein



38 2

required, shall have been filed with the admitting authori­
ties."

* * * * * * * * * * *

I, the undersigned, E, R. Jobe,. Executive Secretary of 
the Board of Trustees of Institutions of Higher Learning of 
the State of Mississippi do hereby certify that the above 
and foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of 
said Board in meeting on November 18, 195^ and the same 
appears of official record.

Witness my official signature this I5th day of August,
1961.

/s/ E. R. Jobe _________ _______E. R. Jobe,'Executive Secretary 
BOARD OP TRUSTEES OP STATE 
INSTITUTIONS OP HIGHER LEARNING 
STATE OP MISSISSIPPI

SEAL:

(SEAL)

* * * * * * *

BY MR. CLARKE: We next offer in evidence the deposi­
tion of James Howard Meredith taken by defendants 
in Meridian, Mississippi, on June 8, 1961, in evi­
dence for all purposes.
BY THE COURT: Let it be received and marked.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We‘d like to reserve our objections
as made in the deposition.
BY THE COURT: Very well. I will permit you to argue
the objections in the deposition at a later date in



354 583

the trial.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I just didn't want the objections
waived on the introduction of that.
BY THE COURT: Very well.

(Same received in evidence and marked as Defendant's Exhibit 
No. 28, which exhibit is not copied here because it is sub­
mitted in a separate volume.)

(Mr. Clarke continues:)
Q. Mr. Ellis, I next hand you an excerpt from the minutes

of the Board of Trustees dated February 7> 1961. Are 
you and were you familiar with the action of the 
Board of Trustees reflected in those minutes?

A. I was and am familiar with this.

BY MR, CLARKE: We offer this as Defendant's Exhibit
29.

(Same received in evidence and marked as Defendant's Exhibit 
No. 29 and follows here below:)

“DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NO. 29"
19475EXERPT OF MINUTES OF BOARD OF TRUSTEES 

OF STATE INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNINGEXHIBIT,
February 7, 1961 WITNESS..............

AUG 16 1961
United States District Court 
Southern District of Mississi­

ppiDENTON B. JORDAN, Reporter



384

"Transfer Students: Upon proper motion presented by Mr. E.
Ray Izard* seconded by Mr. S. R. Evans, the Board of Trustees 
unanimously voted to and do adopt the policy that all state 
supported Institutions of Higher Learning may accept trans­
fer students from other state supported Institutions of 
Higher Learning, private colleges, or denominational col­
leges, only when the previous program of the transferring 
college is acceptable to the receiving institution, and the 
program of studies completed by the student, and the quality 
of the student’s work in said transferring college is accep­
table to the receiving institution and to the Board of Trus­
tees,"

* * * * * * * * * *

I, the undersigned, E, R. Jobe. Executive Secretary of 
the Board of Trustees of Institutions of Higher Learning of 
the State of Mississippi do hereby certify that the above 
and foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of 
said Board in meeting on February 7. 1961, and the same 
appears of official record.

Witness my official signature this 10th day of June, 1961.

/s/ B. R. Jobe ___________________E. R. Jobe, Executive Secretary 
BOARD OF TRUSTEES

qp.T INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

(SEAL)
* * * * * * * * * * * *



^  & 555 585

Q, Mr. Ellis, do you have with you or available to you in
were

the courtroom today the original letters that/ re­
ceived from the plaintiff Meredith in your office?

A. That entire file is in the courtroom. Some of them have 
been entered into evidence, and I think perhaps the 
remainder of the file is here somewhere.

Q. Would you please step down from the stand long enough to 
find the remaining letters that are in your file 
that are not in evidence?

(Witness complies)
Q. Now, would you please turn to the letter of February 20, 

1961 and state if you can tell when your office 
actually received that letter?

A, This letter contains the date stamp February 21, 1961.
Q. Do you find in your file a letter from the plaintiff 

dated the 23rd clay of February, 1961?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. What date was that letter received by your office?
A. It has the date stamp stamped in our office February 25,

1961.

Q* 150 you find a letter of March 18, 1961?
A- A letter dated March l8th from the plaintiff? Yes, I do.
Q* What date was that letter received in your office, 

according to the date stamp?
A. According to the date stamp, March 20th, 1961.
Q* Do you see a letter dated March 26th from the plaintiff 

to you?



335 & 556 3 8 6

A. Yes, I do.
Q, When was that marked as received by your office?
A. It is marked received March 29th, 1961.
q, is the March 29th date also on the copies or the origi­

nals of the letters that the plaintiff submitted 
with his letter of March 26th?

A, It is in each case.
Q. And is March 29th the date that so appears?
A. That is correct.
Q. How many of those letters were there?
A. There are five.
Q. Mr. Ellis, what are the requirements of the University

of Mississippi and what were the requirements of the 
University of Mississippi as of January 311 1961, 
with regard to what was required for resident under­
graduate transfer students to submit to the Univer­
sity or to your office in connection with their 
applications for admission to the University, as 
regards the names of persons who would recommend them?

A. As a part of the application form, a resident, undergra­
duate, transfer student was required as of that date 
to submit a form provided to him by our office list­
ing the names and addresses of six alumni whose resi­
dences were or are in the same county, and whom the 
applicant thought would recommend him as a person of 
good moral character and for admission to the Univer­
sity of Mississippi.



336 & 557 587

q. Do you know of your own personal knowledge when Dr.
Arthur berry Lewis received the letter that the 
plaintiff addressed to him on April 12, 1961?

A. I do not.
Q, Do you know of your 01m  personal knowledge or your present 

recollection when you first saw that letter?
A. All I can recall is that it was some time later, several 

days later, than the date that appears on that letter.
Q, Now, turn to a letter from plaintiff to you dated May

15th, 1961, and tell us the date it was received in 
your office.

A. It contains the registrar’s date stanip May 16, 1961.
Q. Only one letter was sent to you on May 15th or was there 

more than one letter?
A. Mr. Clarke, I was trying to listen to the clerk--- Hold

on.
Q. Do you find only one or more than one letter written to 

your office by the plaintiff on the day of May 15# 
1961?

A. Well, actually, there are two letters dated May 15th; one 
with the inside address addressed to me, and the 
second, the inside address addressed to the Director 
of Men’s Housing. Both letters were included in the 
same envelope directed to me.

Q* And does this letter to the Director of Men’s Housing, 
which, I believe, is plaintiff’s Exhibit 25, bear a 
receipt stamp by your office?



557 & 358 588

A. Yes, it does. May 16, 1961.
q. Do you find a letter from the plaintiff Meredith toyou 

dated May 21, 1961?
A, Yes, I do.
Q. Is that letter date stamped?
A. No, this letter does not contain a date stamp.
Q. Do you recall any subsequent correspondence or written

communications between you and the plaintiff Meredith 
subsequent to the letter that you wrote to him on 
May 25, 1961?

A. Only an exchange of telegrams. We received a telegram
from the plaintiff on May 26th, according to the date 
stamp, and we sent him a telegram in response on the 
same date.

Q. What did his wire to you say?
A. His wire to me said, "Please advise whether my applica­

tion for admission for the summer session June 8, 
1961, has been approved."

0* Nhatdid your wire to him say?
A. "Letter advising action on your application mailed yester­

day. If not received, advise me by wire and copy of 
letter will be forwarded immediately."

Q* Did you ever receive any communication from him to the 
effect that he had not yet heard from you?

A. No,
Does that end the correspondence between you and the

plaintiff?



538 & 339 389

A. Yes, it does.
Q. Previously in your examination there have been a number 

of return receipts introduced in evidence, one of 
which is Plaintiffs Exhibit 7. I show you that 
exhibit and ask you if you know who H. ¥. G. Bryant, 
who apparently signed for the registrar of the Uni­
versity of Mississippi, is?

A, Yes, Hugh Bryant is the University's Director of Campus 
Mail Service. As such, he will receive such letters 
from the Federal Post Office at the University, and 
then he in turn requires the addressee to sign for 
such letters. If I may, Counsel, I think this ex­
plains the reason that the original file did not 
contain date stamps, because the original letter was 
out of channels from the beginning, since it was 
delivered to me personally by Mr. Bryant.

Q. There is one of these return receipts which is signed 
by a person named Roy Lee Gamer, G-a-r-n-e-r. Do 
you know who Roy Lee Garner is?

A. I am certain this is an assistant to Mr. Bryant.
Q* Was that particular letter which he receipted for on May 

23, 1961, handled in the same course that the others 
receipted for by Mr. Bryant had been handled?

A. Yes.
Nov, a moment ago in response to my question asking you 

about the requirements of recommendation by alumni, 
you mentioned that they must be persons whom the



559 & 3^0 390

applicant thinks will recommend him for admission to 
the University. I ask you if that requirement is 
made known to the applicant, or is he only instructed 
to obtain the names of persons who have known him for 
at least two years?

A. The instruction sheet makes the statement which is in­
tended to inform the applicant, "X have listed the 
names of six alumni of the University who reside in 
my county and who have known me for at least two 
years." There are additional instructions on the 
back of this form, I believe, which I would like to 
see if I may comment on it. It's offered in evidence 
with the original file.

Q. All right, I now hand you, Mr. Ellis, a group of papers 
that have been marked Defendant’s Exhibit 14 for 
Identification, Plaintiff’s Exhibit 30 in evidence, 
and I refer you to the same slip of paper that I just 
had showed you.

A. Now, the instructions on this form which is sent or given 
to the prospective applicant for admission —  the 
instructions read as follows: "To the applicant for
admission: Enclosed is a roster of the names of
some of the University alumni who live in your county. 
You are requested to select the names of six whom 
you have known for at least two years and who you 
believe will recommend you for admission to the 
University. Please enter the names and addresses on



391

the other side of this sheet. Pill in the other 
information needed and return the form with your 
application to the registrar. The alumni you select 
will be asked by the registrar to make a recommenda­
tion concerning your application. It will not be 
necessary for you to contact them. The registrar." 

ft, Now, as a matter of fact, the exact piece of paper you 
have just been reading from here is one that pre­
sumably went to this particular plaintiff in this 
cause, did it not?

A. Thatis correct.
ft. At least, this that you hold in your hand now is the

original of the form that he sent back to you, is it 
not?

A. That is correct.

BI MR, CLARKE: Would you indulge me just a moment?
Mr. Shands is out of the courtroom, and I would like 
the privilege of conferring with him for about a 
minute or two.
BY THE COURT: Take a ten minute recess.

(Court was recessed for ten minutes.)
After Recess

^  MR. CLARKE:

^ Mr. Ellis, when the first request letter was received 
from the plaintiff asking you for information with



541 392

regard to attendance at the University, ¥hat did you 
send to the plaintiff in reply to that request?

A, As in the normal processing, since the return address 
given in his letter was Jackson, Mississippi, we 
sent him an application for admission form, a form 
for listing the names of six alumni, and a roster 
of the names of active and some inactive alumni of 
Hinds County. In addition to that, under separate 
cover, we sent him a general information bulletin.

Q. What return address did the plaintiff show on his appli­
cation form?

A. On the application form, as I recall it, he listed his 
present address as something Maple Street —  1129 
Maple Street, Apartment 5D, Jackson, Mississippi.
He listed as his permanent address Route 2, Kosciusko, 
Mississippi.

Q. Did you send him the Hinds County alumni list because
you thought that he knew these alumni or because you 
thought he could get these alumni certifications in 
Hinds County?

A. The only reason we sent the listing of Hinds County alum­
ni was because the initial letter had a return address 
in Jackson, Mississippi.

Did he ever request you to send to him any alumni list or 
alumni names from Attala County, Mississippi?

A* No, he did not.
Q* If you had received such a request, would you have



& 3^2 393

complied with it?
A. Yes, I would.
Q. Mr. Ellis, on the basis of all of the information that 

came to you with regard to where this man lived or 
where he claimed to live and other indications that 
you got of where he had been, were you in your capa­
city as registrar able to make any determination or 
come to any conclusion of your own as to whether this 
man was a resident or a non-resident of the State of 
Mississippi?

A. In the initial application papers that were submitted, 
there was an indication that this man might well be 
a resident of another state. I call attention to 
the address listed for his wife on the student health 
record that was submitted, "Gary, Indiana." Then, 
as the transcripts of credits arrived, there was a 
transcript from Washburn Municipal University, which 
the applicant had attended during his enlistment, 
his service in the Air Force, and which of his own 
free will when he registered —  I’m sure it was his 
free will —  listed the home address in Detroit, 
Michigan. Then in the deposition later in Meridian, 
when he admitted that he had attended Wayne State 
University at Detroit, I then and am now convinced 
that this man in terms of the University regulations 
is a non-resident.

0f the State of Mississippi?



542 & 343 394

A. And I might say, in terms of the non-resident regulations 
as published in the catalogue.

Q, You mean a non-resident of the State of Mississippi?
A. That is correct.
Q, But, Mr. Ellis, your first indication, based upon this 

application form, was that he lived in Jackson, 
Mississippi? Is that right?

A. The indication in the initial letter sent to us indicated 
that he lived in Jackson, Mississippi.

Q. And this was the reason, of course, that you sent him 
Hinds County alumni?

A. That is correct.
Q. —  as a resident transfer student, undergraduate student, 

should receive?
A, That is correct.

BY MR. CLARKE: I have nothing further at this time.
BY THE COURT: Cross examine, Mrs. Motley.

CROSS EXAMINATION
BX MRS. MOTLEY:
0* Mr. Ellis, do you have the file of the letters between 

yourself and Mr. Merdith there?
4* I have what is left of the original file.
Q. Let me give you this letter. (Hands to witness) Ifd 

like to direct your attention to the very first 
letter there, which is not dated, addressed to the



343 & 5 ^ 395

registrar of the University of Mississippi, reques­
ting an application for admission. You see that let­
ter?

A. Yes, I do.
Q, Signed by the plaintiff?
A. I assume it is —

BY MR, CLARKE: Let us note in objection, the wit­
ness is testifying from photostatic copies which are 
probably accurate, but the original exhibits are here 
in court. If counsel is going to question the wit­
ness about the exhibit, I think she should use the 
original exhibits which are here in court.
BY THE COURT: Very well.

Q. Do you see Plaintiff1s Exhibit 1 before you?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. When you received that letter from the plaintiff Meredith, 

did you know that he was a Negro?
A. No.
0* ^ou had no way of knowing that, did you?
A. That's right.
Q- Would you turn to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 2, which is dated 

January 26th, a letter from you to the plaintiff 
Meredith in which you sent him an application form 
and instructions. Do you see that?

A. Yes.
When you sent that letter to the plaintiff, you didn't



3W & 3^5 396

know he was a Negro?
A, No, As you well know, this is the formal letter that we 

send to all inquirers.
Q, But you didn't know he was a Negro when you sent that?
A, I didn't know what he was.
Q, That is what I'm asking you,

BY MR. CLARKE; Did counsel ask if he knows he was a 
Negro or was not?
BY MRS, MOTLEY: He said he didn't know who he was.

Q. Look at Plaintiff's Exhibit 3* which is a letter from
the plaintiff to you dated January 31, 1961, to which 
he attached his application. Is that right? Is that 
the letter to which he attached his application?

A, Yes, that is correct.
Q. And in that letter he said that he was a Negro, didn't 

he?
A, There are four paragraphs here. He informed me that he 

was not a white person in three of them.
Q. Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 30, which is the

plaintiff's application. The picture of the plain­
tiff is on there, isn't it?

A* Yes, it is.

BY MR. CLARKE; Counsel is on cross examination and 
I realize that, but she is asking him now to read 
off to the Court the contents of written documents



5̂ 5 & 3^6 397

that are in evidence. We submit the documents them­
selves contain the best evidence of what they show 
or don't show, and we object to the questions on 
that basis.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

Q. Is there a picture of the plaintiff on that application? 
A. Yes, there is.
Q. That was the first time you knew the applicant was a 

Negro, wasn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. Does the application ask for the plaintiff's race?
A. Yes, it does.
Q. Did he say Negro on there?
A. He certainly did.
Q* What is the reason for asking the applicant's race?
A. Well, we feel we have a right to know as much about the

student who wishes to entdr the university as we can, 
and this is a matter of information that we feel is
desirable to have.

Q* Do you take race into consideration in passing upon the 
application?

A. No.
Q* What is the point of it then?

As a matter of information.
Q* For what? What purpose is this information?

BY MR. CLARKE: We object to this witness answering



346 & yw 398

why the application is conposed as it is unless this 
witness composed the application and made up the 
regulations about how the application blank was to 
be composed,
BY THE COURT: I111 overrule the objection.
BY MR, CLARKE: If it please the Court, we'd like to 
amplify our objection for the record with this fur­
ther comment: The testimony of the witness on direct
and cross examination is that not only was this man 
not denied admission to the university solely on the 
grounds of his race or color, but even further that 
he did not only take into consideration the factor 
of face. So if it forms no portion of the lawsuit, 
we do not see how it could be competent or material. 
BY THE COURT: I'll overrule the objection, if he
knows.
(The last question was read by the reporter)

A. Well, the university is made of —  Its student body i; 
made up of many diverse kinds of students, and we 
feel that we need as much information about all of 
our students for statistical purposes, for 
purposes, and any number of reasons.

Q* What statistics do you have on race?
A. Offhand, I don't know of any.

How does race affect your counseling service?
A. You'll have to ask the counseling service. I don’t know.



347 & 54-8 399

q. Now, in Mr. Meredith’s letter to you of January J>1,
1961, he pointed out to you he would not be able to 
furnish you with the names of six university alumni 
because he is a Negro and all graduates of the school 
are white. Do you know any alumni of the University 
of Mississippi who are Negro?

BY MR. CLARKE: We object to that unless he knows the
lineage of every alumni and personally knows every 
alumni of the University since the University was 
first incorporated, back when I don't know.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

A. Counsel, I just don’t think I am in a position to answer 
that question. I don’t know.

Q. Mr. Ellis, how long did you say you had lived in Missis­
sippi?

A. Since 194-0.
Q. Do you know any public institution in Mississippi which 

is not segregated?

BY MR. CLARKE: Object to that, Your Honor, because
this is restricted to —
BY THE COURT: —  Yes, sustain the objection.

Q* Do you know any educational institution of higher learn­
ing in the State of Mississippi which is not segre­
gated?



548 & 5̂ 9 400

BY MR* CLARKE: Sam© objection.
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection.

Q. Ho you know any private institution of higher learning in 
the State of Mississippi which is not segregated?

BY MR. CATES: Object.
BY MR. CLARKE: We object on the same ground.
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection.

Q. Do you know of any public elementary, junior high or high 
school in the State of Mississippi which is not 
segregated?

BY MR. CLARKE: To which we have the same objection.
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection.

Q. Do you know any Negro alumni of any institution of higher 
learning in the State of Mississippi —  any white 
institution of higher learning of the State of Mis­
sissippi?

BY MR, CLARKE: We object to the question on two
grounds: first, that she has posed it as "any white
institution," which we think is objectionable; and 
secondly, on the ground that unless this man knows 
the lineage of every person known to him, he is not 
in the position to answer the question.
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection.



3̂9 & 550 401

q, Don't you know of your own knowledge that it is the
policy and custom and usage in the State of Missis­
sippi for Negroes and whites to attend separate 
public educational institutions?

BY MR, CLARES: We object to that on the same ground
previously addressed on other questions, and again on 
the ground of knowledge by this witness or some shown 
knowledge by this witness of the custom, practice and 
policy of the State of Mississippi and the lineage of 
the people involved.
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection.

Q. Don't you know of your own knowledge that there are many 
laws in the State of Mississippi requiring separate 
institutions for Negroes and whites?

BY MR, CLARKE: We object for the same reason pre­
viously assigned to the last question.
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection.
BY MR, CLARKE: And unless this witness has some
legal training and background.

Don't you know of your own knowledge as a matter of po­
licy, custom and usage, all public institutions of 
learning in the State of Mississippi are segregated?

BY MR. CLARKE: Same objection. May Your Honor permit
us a continuing objection on the same ground to all



350 & 351 402

questions to this witness addressed to him about 
general conditions in the State of Mississippi and 
not limited to the University of Mississippi, which 
is the subject matter of this lawsuit, for all rea­
sons assigned to the previous objections?
BY THE COURT: Yes. I sustain the objection and will
give you a standing objection to all questions so 
asked. %  conception of the issues here is that 
would be res inter alios acto; in other words, for­
eign to the issues here. And it would unduly pro­
long without any benefit to the trial of this case.
So I sustain the objection.

Q. Now, after the plaintiff sent in his application, I
think you said you received it on February 1st, did 
you not?

4. I believe that is true.
Q* Let me direct your attention to Plaintiff*s Exhibit 5# 

which is a telegram which you sent to the plaintiff, 
dated February 4th. You have it there. You sent 
the plaintiff that telegram saying that you had 
discontinued consideration of all applications for 
admission or registration for the second semester 
which were received after January 25# 1961. Mow, why 
had you discontinued consideration of those applica­
tions at that point?

BY MR, CLARICE: As to this question, we believe



551 & 552 403

counsel is now reopening her case in chief. She has 
made her case and has rested, and while she is given 
broad grounds on cross examination of this witness,
I think that it should be limited to the subject 
matter of the direct examination of this witness or 
within the bounds of the direct examination. I 
don't think it entitles her to reopen her principal 
case. For that reason, we object to that question, 
and we think if there is any issue about the esta­
blishment of a cut-off for applications submitted 
at the first spring term of the University of Missis­
sippi in the year 1961, that matter has been waived 
by the plaintiff by asking on his own voluntary 
accord that his application be considered for the 
summer term.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

A. During the past three years the enrollment of the uni­
versity has increased tremendously. I know in the 
past two years each fall the enrollment has jumped 
16 to 18 percent over the enrollment of the preceding 
year. In October of i960 the Committee on Admissions 
reviewed what had been happening in the area of ad­
missions, and at that time established a cut-off 
date for September, 1961, applications. Later in 
the year the division heads of the university, which 
is the top echelon of admissions, reviewed the



;52 & 553

actions of the Committee on Admissions. They re­
viewed, the situation in the University Housing, 
where all of our students were housed three in dor­
mitory rooms that were built for two. There were 
some 120, as I recall, rooms in the women's dormi­
tory that housed four women students. Our —  The 
situation in our classrooms, our faculty-student 
ratio had increased to the point where they felt 
that we needed to do something to maintain the pre­
sent quality of the instruction in the laboratories 
and in the classrooms of the University] and conse­
quently, they decided to go even further than the 
Committee on .Admissions and establish a cut-off date 
for the second semester. So that, with the loss of 
students from graduation and for other reasons, we 
would be able to relieve to some extent the housing, 
crowded housing and academic environment that we 
have.

Q* Do you have any written memoranda on this cut-off busi­
ness?

A. No, I was informed verbally by my superiors.
Q* Who is that?
A« Dr. L. L. Love.

Love?
A. Yes.

How many such telegrams did you send at that time?
A* Offhand, I don't know. I think probably there were

404



553 & 354 405

thirteen or fourteen telegrams sent, probably as 
many as fifty to a hundred students subsequently 
not permitted to submit applications.

Q, Do you have the files that we had here yesterday that 
we had inspected?

A. No, I do not.

BY MRS, MOTLEY: The files we had subpoenaed, are
they here?

Q, While she is getting that, let me ask you some other
questions. What happened to these fourteen or fif­
teen students to whom you sent wires? Did they just 
forget about it and not bother with coming anymore?

A. I call your attention to this telegram. We discontinued 
consideration. I don't know what happened to them.

Q. You don't? You didn't tell them to apply for the spring 
term or —  I mean the summer term?

A. This telegram was sent to all of these people at that 
time. We told them nothing else. Now, if those 
people inquired, it is quite possible they were told 
something about re-applying or coming into the 
university at another time. I do not know.

Q* Were they required to file new applications?
A. No, if they came back in —  I can recall one file, that 

you saw, and as you and I both know, that was not a 
new application.

Is that a requirement, if you are told that the applies-



A06354

tions for a particular semester are filled, that you 
have to file another application all over again?

A. As I have told you, we did not require any students whose 
applications were discontinued consideration to file 
new applications. We did require that they reopen 
the matter.

Q. Generally, once a student files an application and he 
doesn't get into the particular semester involved 
for some reason, do you require him to file a new 
application, or don't you hold his application for a 
year?

BY MR, CLARKE; To which question we object unless 
the question is limited to undergraduate resident 
transfer students of the State of Mississippi. We 
think the question as posed to the witness is too 
broad.
BY THE COURT; Yes, sustain the objection to that 
extent because I have limited it to the transfer stu­
dents, undergraduate, of the State of Mississippi.

Do you require transfer undergraduate students to file a 
new application if they for some reason don't get 
into the present semester for which they have ap­
plied?

BY MR, CLARKE; As to that question, we would like 
to have the same understanding as the Court ruled



&  & 555 407

yesterday, that whatever answer the witness gives is 
of course limited to what he personally knows.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: This is the registrar of the univer­
sity, I am asking him questions as to what the po­
licy is with respect to renewing applications, and I 
don't think a valid objection to what the policy is 
with respect to reapplying is —  Well, I just don't 
think there is a valid objection.
BY THE COURT: I will overrule the objection if he
knows or if there is any policy.
BY MR. CLARKE: May we say this, in regard to coun­
sel's amplification of the intention of her question, 
we would like to broaden our objection to include the 
objection that the catalogue of the university and 
the regulations governing the university would be the 
best evidence of policy established by the university, 
because certainly this witness has not qualified 
himself as the policymaker of the University of 
Mississippi.
BY THE COURT: I will adhere to my ruling: if he
knows, I will let him answer.

A* I would like to qualify your statement to some extent.
It depends upon the reason for a student not enter­
ing the university. Now, If a student was admitted 
and due to some personal emergency was unable to 
attend, if he would later write us or contact us,



355 & 556 408

we would re-enter this Inactive application file for 
a succeeding period. If he were denied admission, 
we would not accept a new application unless there 
were additional facts which we were unable to con­
sider at the time the decision was made.

Q. What about people who can't get in for some university- 
regulation, such as overcrowding at that particular 
point? Do you require those people to file a new 
application when It is not their fault that they 
didn't get in?

BY MR. CLARKE: Do I understand counsel's question Is
limited to the type of students involved in this law­
suit?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: My question isn't, but if the Court
rules it, then it is limited to that.
BY THE COURT: I am going to confine it as made, and
that is to confine it to transfer students, under­
graduate residents of Mississippi. I think that is 
the issue before the Court. So I will adhere to my 
ruling on that.

Q. Do you require undergraduate transfer students who
couldn’t get in because of overcrowding in a parti­
cular semester to make a new application for the 
following semester?

A. Counsel, I have told you earlier that we permitted all 
of these students whose applications were discon­



356 & 357 409

tinued to reapply and utilize the applications that 
they had submitted earlier, but we did require them 
to initiate the action.

BY MRS, MOTLEY: We subpoenaed certain records to
this hearing, which I understand are not now here, 
and it is my understanding the documents subpoenaed 
for the hearing are to remain here until the hearing 
is over.
BY MR. CLARKE: If it please the Court, we certainly
bad no intention of violating the Court’s order for 
the command of the subpoena. I did clearly under­
stand when this witness was excused from the stand 
and the plaintiff rested her case that she was through 
with the file, and I received the files with the 
thought that counsel was through with the files; and, 
as I told her, they are £ either in my possession or 
in the possession of the Attorney-General of the 
State of Mississippi or they have been re-transmitted 
to the university. I am not exactly sure this 
morning what their position is. They are active 
files of the University of Mississippi.
BY THE COURT: Well, I will require them to be pro­
duced. If they are here, you can have them at the 
afternoon session. If they have been forwarded back,
I want you to get them back just as soon as you can. 
BY MR. CLARKE: Would you permit me a momentary



357 & 358 410

recess to call the AttorneyHleneral1s office to 
head them off if they have not been mailed?
BY THE COURT: I wonder if Mr. Shands couldn't do
that, and proceed with the trial of this case.

q, l direct your attention to Plaintiff's Exhibit 6, which
is a letter from Meredith to you, in which he says —

BY MR. CLARKE): What is the date of that?
BY MS. MOTLEY: February 20th. Plaintiff's Exhibit
6.

Q, Do you want to read that letter, please.
A. The inside heading on that---
Q. Just read the body of the letter.
A. (Witness reads Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 6)
Q. Did you reply to that letter?
A. Not immediately.
Q. Why not?
A. I think I can only answer that by saying that I wasn't 

in the position of being a day to day correspondent 
with this applicant, that I attempted to provide him 
with the information that I felt he needed and in the 
good and sufficient time that he needed it.

Q. Had you received these transcripts at that time?
I think I would have to refer to those transcripts and 

to tell you. I don't recall the date of receipt of 
all of them.

Here’s one from the University of Kansas dated January



358 & 559 411

31, 1961.
BY MR. CLARKE: May I see that.
BY MS. MOTLEY: - which is Plaintiff's Exhibit 48.
BY MR. CLARKE: For Identification?
BY MS. MOTLEY: For Identification. I'm sorry.
BY MR. CLARKE: This is an instrument that has not
been offered or admitted in evidence here but has 
been rather expressly excluded from evidence, and we 
object to the witness testifying from this instru­
ment into the record on this hearing, and additionally 
we object to this line of cross examination for the 
reason that the plaintiff himself stated in his pre­
vious correspondence with this registrar that he 
himself knew and recognized that his application was 
incomplete.
BY THE COURT: I sustain the objection for the reason
the documents haven't been substantiated, and I ex­
cluded them from consideration yesterday because 
proper proof had not been made of their authenticity, 
and it would be objectionable to examine the regis­
trar about those.

Q. Let me ask you this, Mr. Ellis: What do you require by
way of authenticity of the transcript from a univer­
sity previously attended by an applicant seeking 
transfer? What kind of authentication do you require? 

4. We require a record submitted directly from the ins tit u-



359 & ?6o 412

tion bearing the signature of the registrar or whom­
ever he delegates to authenticate such records, and 
the seal of that institution.

Q. Let me show you Plaintiff’s 46 for Identification again 
and ask you if that doesn’t have the seal and the 
signature of the registrar?

BY ME. CLARKE: To which we object for the same rea­
sons. It is not an instrument in evidence.*>
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We can offer it again, Your Honor.
BY THE COURT: I’ll overrule the objection.

A. Your question?
Q. Doesn’t that have the seal and the registrar’s signature? 
A. For the purposes of the office of the registrar, this is 

an acceptable transfer.
Q. Let me show you Plaintiff’s 45 for Identification and 

ask you if that doesn't have the signature of the 
registrar of Washburn University ana the seal?

BY MR. CLARKE: We'd like the record to show the
same objection is made to this as the previous one.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

A. This record contains a written inscription of Gladys 
Finney. It's by somebody in that office. But it 
does contain an acceptable signature and seal.

Let me show you Plaintiff's 48 for Identification and 
ask you if that doesn’t have the signature of the



360 & ?6l 413

registrar of the University of Kansas and the seal?

BY MR, CLARKE: May we have the record show the same
objection as previously made?
BY THE COURT: Yes, and the objection is overruled.

A. This is a transcript of* record of work done at Forbes
Air Force Base. It contains a signature purporting 
to be that of James G. Hitt, the registrar, and the 
university seal.

Q. Is that an acceptable transfer?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. I show you the transcript which is Plaintiff's Exhibit 4? 

for Identification, the transcript from Jackson State 
College, and ask you if that doesn't contain the 
signature of the acting registrar and the seal of the 
college.

BY MR. CLARKE: To which we make the same objection
as previously made to the other exhibits.
BY THE COURT: Objection overruled.

A. This is a transcript from Jackson State College which 
shows a comp3e te record through the 1960-61 fall 
quarter only and indicates that the student is cur­
rently in attendance during the 1960-61 winter quar­
ter.

Does it have the seal?
4. It does contain a seal and acceptable signature —  Well,



351 & 362 4l4

this is a stanp, but it would be acceptable.

BY MRS. MOTLEY: We'd like to offer these in evi­
dence, Your Honor, Plaintiff's Exhibits 47, 48, 45 
and 46 for Identification.
BY MR. CLARKE: Your Honor, our objection to their
admission in evidence is limited to this: We do not
object to the admission of these instruments in evi­
dence as being instruments received by this regis­
trar, because of course those are facts that he 
knows. We do object to all of the information con­
tained in the instruments themselves because this 
man has chosen to bring a suit at law and these 
instruments cannot be admitted for the purpose in 
a court of law of proving the correctness or the 
authenticity of their contents. So we make a limited 
objection and wish that the Court would rule that 
they are received for the limited purpose of proving 
that they were instruments received in his office by 
him.
BY THE COURT: I will let them be received in evi­
dence and will reserve ruling upon the other ques­
tion, as to the truthfulness of the contents; but I 
will let them be received in evidence and overrule 
the objection with that reservation.

(Plaintiff's Exhibits 45, 46, 47,and 48 for Identification,
respectively, were received in evidence, which exhibits are



562 & 363 415

not copied here as the originals will be sent up with origi­
nal record.)

Q. Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 47, which is the
transcript from Jackson State College, and ask you 
if that has a date on there which is stamped for the 
date you received that.

A. It contains a date stamp from my office, February 7,1961.
Q, Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 4-5, which is the 

transcript from Washburn University, and ask when 
your office received that, according to the stamp?

A. According to this, the transcript from the Washburn
Municipal University was received on February 2, 1961.

Q. Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 48, which Is the 
transcript from the University of Kansas, and ask 
you when your office received that. It's on the back.

A. This is a transcript from the University of Kansas, Uni­
versity Extension, received February 2, 1961.

Q. Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 46, a transcript
from the University of Maryland, and ask you when you 
received that.

A. This is a University of Maryland transcript which con­
tains the date stamp "received March 3, 1961."

Q* In the plaintiff's letter to you of February 20, 1961, he 
asked you whether you had received these transcripts 
from the University of Maryland, University of Kan­
sas, Washburn University, and Jackson State College,



& 364 4l6

didn't he?
A. What was the letter?
Q, Plaintiff’s Exhibit 6.

BY If?. CLARKE: Again we’d like for the witness to
use the original exhibit. I’m positive these are 
correct photostatic copies, but they sometimes blur. 
BY MRS, MOTLEY: If you are positive, why do you keep
objecting to our using them?
BY MR, CLARKE: Because the original exhibit is here
in the courtroom, and I think that is what counsel 
should use, and I make my objection on that ground.
BY THE COURT: Is the original In evidence?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We asked the clerk to copy all the
exhibits for us and she sent them to us.
BY THE COURT: I believe I will let counsel for de­
fendant have the original exhibits and permit her to 
read the copies furnished bythe clerk of the court.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, sir.
BY THE COURT: And you can check with the original
unless the witness wanted to see the original or 
anything like that.

4. In the letter dated February 20th from J. H. Meredith, 
there is the question, "Did you receive transcripts 
from the University of Kansas, Washburn University, 
the University of Maryland, and Jackson State Col­
lege, complete with a certificate of honorable dis­



564 & 365 417

missal or a certificate of good standing?”
Q. Would you look at these transcripts and tell me whether 

each has a certificate of honorable dismissal or a 
certificate of good standing?

BY MR, CLARKS: We object. The record itself is the
best evidence of what it contains, and, as Your Honor 
knows, we have an objection to the contents of the 
documents. We did not object to their admission 
showing they had been received in the registrar's 
office because that is something this man knows, but 
he does not know the authenticity or the correctness 
of the contents of the document, and as to the 
balance of it, it would be hearsay evidence.
BY THE COURT: I overrule the objection and will let
him answer that question.

A. As a matter of fact, Counsel, they all contain a certifi­
cate of good standing or honorable dismissal except 
the transcript from the University of Kansas, Uni­
versity Extension.

Q. Why didn’t you reply to the plaintiff’s question as to 
whether you had received all of these?

BY MR, CLARKE: We object to that. The record shows
he did reply.
BY THE WITNESS: We did reply on May 9th.
BY THE COURT: I’ll overrule the objection.



565 & 366 418

A. On May 9th I wrote the plaintiff the following letter:
-and I'm extracting, If I may —  "In connection with 
your inquiry as to the receipt of transcript of 
credits to the colleges listed in your application,
I have received the transcripts, each of which shows 
a certificate of honorable dismissal or certification 
of good standing."

Q* You told him that each contained that certificate, didn't 
you?

A. Yes, I did, and I'd like to say that I have already tes­
tified the Extension transcript from the University 
of Kansas was acceptable; all of that credit earned 
while he was in service was of an extension nature - 
it was not as a regular full time student, and it 
was acceptable.

Q. You advised him that each certificate contained —  each 
transcript contained a certificate of good standing 
in that letter.

BY MR. CLARKE: Your Honor, this is exactly what our
objection goes to. The document is here. The wit­
ness has just on detailed examination of one of the 
documents stated into the record —  and the document 
is here to verify whether he read it wrong or not —  
that one of these didn't have the certificate of good 
standing. Now, he evidently made a mistake in this 
letter. I think the question and his answer and his



366 & 367 419

letter would, not be the best proof available to this 
court when we are sitting right here with the docu­
ment itself in the courtroom, and if there is any 
question about whether it contains a certificate of 
good standing, the document can so state.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Your Honor, that is not the question
I'm asking him. I'm not asking him what the document 
contained; I’m asking him what he advised the plain­
tiff in the letter of May 9th.
BY MR. CLARKS: And the letter is here in the court. 
BY THE COURT: Yes, the letter itself speaks for it­
self, but since the witness is on cross examination 
I will overrule the objection and let her have read 
into the transcript any part of the letter that she 
desires.

Q. Why did you wait until May 9th to answer that question
which the plaintiff put to you in his letter of Febr­
uary 20 th?

BY MR. CLARKE: We object because the transcript
itself shows that one transcript was not received 
from Maryland until March 3rd, which was some time 
after the letter of February 20th which the plaintiff 
sent, and the defendant has further answered that he 
has answered these in entirety in the letter of 
May 9th.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.



567 & 368 420

BY MR, CLARKE: May the record show the additional 
ground that there is no proof here in this record 
as to whether this registrar at this moment had one 
application pending before him or a thousand applica­
tions pending before him or what his work load was or 
why he couldn't answer it.
BY THE COURT: I'll overrule the objection. It Is a
competent question. SIf he has any reasonable infor­
mation, he could give it, of course.

A, Normally, routine problems can be handled by the staff in 
my office expeditiously. When an Individual poses 
peculiar problems that I have to answer individually, 
sometimes he does not get as prompt a reply. The 
mail on my desk at the moment is about a foot high.
It is quite possible, it often happens, that I'm 
not able to answer a letter every time somebody wants 
an immediate answer. We do have a tremendously 
heavy work load at this particular period of time; 
there are other requirements besides admissions im­
posed on the registrar, and it simply is not possible 
to sit down and write a letter every time a man feels 
like he has to have an answer.

Q. You mean that you personally would have to reply to the 
question, "Did you receive certain transcripts with 
certificates of good standing"? You mean that would 
require your special knowledge?



568 & 369 421

A. No, I don’t mean that at all, but I do mean that the
numerous letters received from this particular indi­
vidual and the numerous questions and the numerous 
statements or claims that he made did make it a pro­
blem case which I had to consider.

Q, We are talking about the letter of February 20th.
A. I'm talking about all of the letters that I answered when 

I finally answered his letter on May 9th.
Q, Let me direct your attention to the letter dated February 

20th and not any subsequent letter. I want to know 
why you did not reply to his question "Did you re­
ceive transcripts..." et cetera?

A. And I just told you.

BY MR. CATES: We object to that. He has already
told her.
BY THE COURT: Yes, sustain the objection.

Q. Let me direct your attention to the first paragraph of 
that letter of February 20th inwhich the plaintiff 
says in the third sentence, "In view of this fact, I 
am requesting that you consider my application for 
admission to your school a continuing application for 
admission during the summer session beginning June 8, 
1961." Did you reply to him and let him know that 
you were going to consider his application for June 
8, 1961?

4. I'd like to remind you, Counsel, that this was still an



369 & 370 422

unacceptable application because he did not meet our 
requirements and indicated that he would not be able 
to meet them.

Q. That has to do with alumni certificates: Is that what
you have reference to?

A. That is right.
Q. Why didn't you write him and tell him that at that point? 

Why didn't you say, "Mr. Meredith, since you can't 
meet this requirement, I can't consider your applica­
tion"?

A. I thought I answered the reason for not answering all this 
volume of correspondence from Meredith. I ---

Q. I'm talking about February 20th now. I'm talking about 
February 20th. I want to know why at that time —
You only had a couple of letters at that point from 
him - you didn't have the voluminous file at that 
point, so let's don't go into that.

BY MR. CLARKE: If Your Honor please —
BY THE COURT: Very well, I sustain the objection
to that —  You interrupted the witness, because you 
asked him why and then didn't give him time to ans­
wer, so I will permit him to answer in his own way 
and you can cross examine him further after he has 
answered.

Q* Why didn't you reply to his —  I'm sorry, I've lost 
the question.



370

(The last question was read by the reporter)
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I believe it was the previous ques­
tion.
BY THE COURT: You were asking about "In view of this 
fact, I am requesting that you consider my application 
for admission to your school a continuing application 
for admission during the summer session beginning 
June 8, 1961." You were asking him why he didn't 
reply to that.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes. Thank you.

A. As I recall it from the file, on the very same day that
this letter was received in my office, we had already 
mailed a letter dated February 21st to Meredith, 
returning his room deposit. Then on February 23rd 
he returned that deposit, and then we get into March, 
with other letters. And my answer to the question 
is exactly the same answer I gave you a while ago.
I do have other responsibilities. I simply didn't 
get around to writing all of the answers that I had to 
write to all of the applicants at this particular 
period of time.

Q. Let me direct your attention to Plaintiff's Exhibit 8, 
which is your letter to him of February 21, 1961.

A. That's right.
Q. In that letter you didn't tell him anything about his

failure to meet the alumni certificate requirements,

423



570 & 571 424

did you?
A, Ho, this is a letter that was prepared for me, returning 

his money.
Q, Why didn't you in that letter at that time tell him

that his application was incomplete and could not be 
considered because he could not meet the alumni cer­
tificate requirement?

BY MR. CATES: We object because, first, this is re­
petitious; secondly, the counsel has not shown to the 
witness that at the time of the writing of the letter 
of February 20th he had that letter in his hand at 
the time he wrote the letter of the 21st, so I don't 
believe that is a proper question unless she esta­
blishes that he had the letter in his hands and 
which he could answer on February 21st.

BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

A. Well, at the time this letter was prepared and mailed, 
the only other correspondence from this man was the 
telegram which we had sent to him, I believe, on 
February 4th.

Q. When did you receive that letter of February 20th?
A. I received this on the 21st.
Q* Did you ever tell him at any time after the 21st, any 

time in the month of February, March or April, that 
he failed to meet the alumni certificate requirement



571 & 372 425

and for this reason he could not be admitted to the 
university?

BY MR. CLARICE: The plaintiff himself has stated In
his correspondence that he knows that he had failed 
to meet or even attempt to meet the requirements of 
the university with regard to recommendations as to 
his moral character and for his admission to the 
university, and I don't think it is a proper subject 
for cross examination when the plaintiff himself has 
so stated in previous correspondence.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection. I'll let the
witness answer as to why he didn't tell him.

A, What was the question?
Q. Why didn't you tell him when you got that letter on the 

21st, this letter of the 20th, why didn't you tell 
him then that since he couldn't meet the alumni cer­
tificate requirement you couldn’t consider his appli­
cation for admission?

A. Well, I think I made this reply twice now. At the begin­
ning of a semester and before and after, the office 
of the registrar is in the middle of a very heavy 
work load, and this was a case which did at that 
time require my personal attention. I simply did 
not have the time to give attention to it that it 
deserved.

Q* Why did this case require your personal attention?



572 & 573 426

A, Well, the plaintiff himself required it by sending the 
things to me registered mail and making me sign 
receipts for them.

Q, That required your personal attention?
A. I had to sign for them.
Q. Oh, I thought you meant that this particular application 

required your personal attention. You are just 
talking about signing your name. Is that it?

A. After the applicant submitted the application on February 
1st when it was an incomplete application, admittedly 
so by the applicant himself, and where it indicated 
that he would not be able to comply with our require­
ments and where he indicated that he was going to 
substitute his own procedure, it became a problem 
application on that day.

Q. The plaintiff sent you some certificates, didn't he,
with that letter of January 31st that purported to 
comply with this or attempted to comply? Let me 
direct your attention to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 3# in 
which he attached his application, and as he tells 
you there, letters from five Negro citizens of Mis­
sissippi. Did you inform him that did not comply 
with the requirement?

we
BY MR. CLARKE: May/“have the same objection made
before?
BY THE COURT: Yes. I sustain the objection to that



575 & 574 427

now because it has been fully covered, and of course 
he already knew because of his own statement in the 
letter, when he so stated that he was not complying.
I think that has been sufficiently covered.

Q, Let me direct your attention to Plaintiff's Exhibit 9» a 
letter from the plaintiff to you dated February 23rd, 
and ask you whether you replied to that letter of the 
plaintiff. In that letter he returned his ten dollars 
room deposit. Did you reply to that letter?

A. I don't recall replying to this particular letter. All 
it was was a cover letter accompanying a ten dollar 
money order shich we accepted, and I didn't feel that 
it called for a reply.

Q. You kept his money. You don't think that calls for a 
reply? To keep a man's ten dollars?

A. A man submits a money order, he has a —

BY MR. CLARICE: Your Honor, this is a money order.
This man has information available to him as to 
whether or not his money order has been received or 
used.
BY THE COURT: Yes, sustain the objection to that.
BY MR. CLARKE: I believe the record already shows,
in addition to that, if I may be permitted to amplify 
the objection, that this man was returned by United 
States mail a return receipt showing that the regis­
trar through hismall agent had received this letter



57̂  & 375 428

with this ten dollars enclosed.
BY THE COURT: Yes. Sustain the objection.

Q, How long did you keep that ten dollars before you re­
turned it?

A. Offhand, I don’t know.
Q, Do you want to look at the file and determine that?

BY THE COURT: Counsel, doesn’t the correspondence
show that? I don’t want to cut your cross examina­
tion off and I am not going to, if you want an answer 
to it, but the correspondence does show it.
BY MR. CLARKE: We will stipulate that the record in
court now does show in his letter of May 25th he 
wrote, "Your application file has been closed and I 
am enclosing money orders of ten dollars and twenty- 
five dollars which you submitted to me earlier."
I believe those are the same, and if they are not 
the witness can clear it up.

Q, Why did you wait until May 25th to return the ten dollars?
A, I’m not sure there is a particular reason for waiting.

It simply was a matter of collecting his application, 
and if the applicant wanted to complete his applica­
tion, then it might be considered. So it was just a 
matter of collecting a money order and holding it, 
waiting to see if he would complete his file.

Q* Waiting to see if he would complete his file?



575 & 576 429

A. That's right.
Q. I thought you said that his application was non-acceptable 

because he couldn't meet the alumni certificate re­
quirements.

A. It was unacceptable because it was incomplete.
Q. Yet you were waiting to see if he was going to complete 

his file?
A. Well, that's the only way he can be admitted.
Q, Let me direct your attention to plaintiff's Exhibit 10, 

a letter to you from the plaintiff dated March 18, 
1961, and ask you to read the first part of the 
second paragraph up to the semicolon.

BY THE COURT: What is the date of that?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: This is Plaintiff's 10.
BY THE COURT: The date?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: March 18, 1961.

Q. The second paragraph, the first part of that sentence 
up to the semicolon.

A. (Reading) "I am requesting that my application be con­
sidered as a continuing one for the summer session 
and the fall session, 1961."

Q. Yesterday when you were testifying about letters received 
from the plaintiff later, you didn't point out, did 
you, that he had also asked you to consider his appli­
cation for the fall session, 1961?



376 & 377 430

BY MR. CLARKE: The record is clear on that. The
plaintiff himself —  while in this letter counsel is 
now requesting the witness to testify about —  the 
plaintiff himself in later correspondence withdrew 
that and requested his application be considered only 
for admission at the summer session, and we believe 
that this gets back into the still pending question 
of what we are trying! and for that reason we object 
to the question as phrased to the witness, as though 
this were the letter he referred to, when he had re­
ference to another letter by the plaintiff at a later 
date asking that his application be considered for 
the summer term only.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: That is one of the issues in this
case, and the plaintiff did not withdraw his request 
for consideration of his application for tie fall 
term. That is Mr. Clarke's suggestion in the answer, 
but he didn't withdraw that application. None of 
those letters say, "I withdraw my application."
BY THE COURT: No, the only thing, there is a later
letter of May 15, 1961, wherein the plaintiff, re­
sponding to Mr. Ellis' letter of May 9th, the second 
paragraph, said, !iIn answer to your question as to 
whether I desire to have my application treated as 
a pending application, it is my desire that my appli­
cation be treated as a continuing application for 
admission to the summer session beginning with the



577 & 578 431

first term of June, 1961. Please advise me if there 
is anything further I should do in order to complete 
my application.11 That is the letter of May 15th.
Now, the one you are asking about is the one of 
March l8thj so it ultimately probably would be a 
question for the Court to determine whether that 
amounted to a withdrawal or not, and I believe I 
will let her cross examine on it.
BY MR. CLARKS: May the record be clear, Your Honor.
I believe I made the point, but just as counsel with 
me pointed out, I believe the documents speak for 
themselves, and we object to this line of cross 
examination on what the documents state, because 
they have to tell the Court what is intended.
BY THE COURT: Certainly, the documents speak for
themselves and their contents are controlling, but 
it frequently becomes necessary to call attention to 
the witness or read parts of a document in order to 
frame another questionj so in view of that, I will 
overrule the objection.

A. I'd like to know what the question was.
Q. The question is: Yesterday when you were testifying

regarding the plaintiff's letter of May 20th, or a 
later date, you pointed out that he wanted his appli­
cation considered for the summer session, but you 
didn't point out to the Court that he had also re­



578 & 379 432

quested you to consider it earlier for the fall 
session.

A. I recall making some comments on the subject yesterday,
but my exact words, I don't know exactly what I said.

Q, Did You reply to the plaintiff’s letter of March l8th
and tell him you would consider his application for 
the fall session, 1961?

A. I replied to all of the applicant’s previous correspon­
dence in my letter of May 9th.

Q. Did youmention the fall session in your letter of May 
9th?

A. I beg pardon?
Q. Do you want to look at the letter of May 9th and see if 

you even mentioned the fall session?
A. I want to correct the satatement and say that I answered 

all of his letters and made the final decision in my 
letter of May 25th, at which time his application for 
admission was denied.

Q, Then in your letter of May 25th, did you mention the fall 
session?

A, Well, it seems to me it is rather pointless to mention 
any session if the application is denied.

Q. Don’t you have a policy of holding applications for at 
least a year?

BY MR. CLARKE: We object, if Your Honor please, to
the policy of the university unless it is shown that



379 & 3 8 0

this man is the policymaker of the university. If 
he would have to refer to some records to prove 
what the policy is, then we say those records are 
the best evidence.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: This man is the registrar. He
administers the policy with respect to applications. 
I’m asking whether it is not the policy to hold the 
application for atleast a year, every application, 
to see whether the student will renew it or whether 
he actually comes in, and so forth.
BY THE COURT: I will sustain the objection as to
the form of the question. Now, if it is the policy 
to hold an application that has been rejected for a 
year, it would be competent. The application of 
this plaintiff was rejected on May 25th. If it is 
the policy to still hold them open, of all students, 
where they have been rejected, it would be competent.

Q. What is the policy, Mr. Registrar? To hold the applica­
tions even when they have been rejected at least a 
year or throw these out?

BY MR. CLARKE: Do I understand your Honor's limita­
tion is imposed upon the question asked by counsel? 
If not, I object to the question as phrased.
BY THE COURT: I'll overrule the objection to that
extent. I’ll overrule it to the extent that I will 
let him answer.

^33



p80 & 381

A, Let1 s not dignify this thing with the term "policy."
We keep inactive files for a year before destroying 
them. How, if we deny an application, it's denied. 
There is no such thing as reopening an application.

Q. But you keep the file for a year, an inactive file?

BY MR. CLARKE: Just a minute. Had the witness com­
pleted his answer to the previous question?
BY THE WITNESS: I think so.

Q. Didn't you produce a box of inactive files here the other 
day?

A. This is exactly what I am telling you, that we keep in­
active files for approximately a year before des­
troying them.

Q. Did you keep this application in the inactive file?
A. Yes, I did. —  Wait, let me qualify that. We put it in 

the inactive file after the telegram of February 4th, 
and then it was out in the office for a good part of 
the time in between because of the correspondence 
coming in.

Q. Let me direct your attention to Plaintiff's Exhibit 12, 
which is a letter from the Plaintiff toyou dated 
March 26th, in which he sent you five new certificates 
from citizens of the State of Mississippi who live in 
Attala County who had known him for two years and 
who attested to his good moral character and recom­
mended his admission to the university. I believe

434



581 & 582

you testified earlier that those applications were 
not acceptable —

A. —  Those recommendations.
Q. —  I mean those certificates, were not acceptable.

Explain to me why they are not.
A. If the applicant is or was applying to the university as 

a resident, they do not meet the requirement of 
coming from university alumni.

Q, And that is the only reason you rejected those?

BY MR. CLARKE: Was counsel’s question to the witness 
directed to the five letters that accompanied Exhi­
bit 12 or to the first five letters submitted?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: No, the second, Mr. Clarke. The
letters which accompanied Exhibit 12, I said that 
and gave the date of the letter.
BY MR. CLARKE: I’m sorry. I just didn’t understand.
I was asking for clarification.

Q. You say the only reason these certificates dated March
26th are not acceptable is because they are not from 
alumni?

BY MR. CLARKE: Do I understand counsel’s question
to have the implicit limitation not stated by her, 
that it is directed to a resident transfer under­
graduate student, or to a non-resident transfer

435



582 & 583 436

undergraduate student? Because non-residents of the 
State of Mississippi, I believe, under the regulations 
approved here are not required to submit letters from 
alumni, but only from five citizens of the community 
in which they reside; and I think counsel should 
have to qualify the question to this witness as to 
what category she speaks of.
BY THE COURT: Yes, sustain the objection.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I speak of the category of resident
students.
BY MR. CLARKE: Are they undergraduate transfer stu­
dents?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Undergraduate transfer students.

A. Well, I assume there is still a question pending before 
the house. Would you read —

(The last question was read by the reporter.)
A. Well, I affirm the fact that these are unacceptable be­

cause they do not meet the requirements that we im­
pose. They are not from alumni of the university.

Q. In the case of non-resident students, what do you require 
by way of letters of recommendation?

BY MR. CLARKE: To which we object for the reason
that it is outside the issues presented by this case. 
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.



385 & 584

A, In the case of non-resident applicants, we require that 
five letters of recommendation be submitted from 
citizens of the same community as the applicant who 
have known him for at least two years who will re­
commend him as a person of good moral character and 
will recommend him for admission to the university.

Q. Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 50, which is a letter 
from Harry C. Johnson to you with regard to the appli­
cation of Carol Leonard Collins. You want to read 
that? —  Just the body of the letter.

A. (Reading) "I have known Carol Leonard Collins, Mrs.
Robert ¥. Collins, for more than ten years and 
highly recommend her for admission to the University 
of Mississippi."

Q. Does that say anything about her good moral character?
A, No, it doesn't.
Q. Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 51t which is a letter 

from Mrs. Robert E. Lucas regarding the same applica­
tion, and ask you to read the body of that letter.

A. (Reading) "I have known Carol Leonard Collins, Mrs.
Robert ¥. Collins, for more than two years and highly 
recommend her for admission to the University of 
Mississippi."

Q. Does that say anything about her good moral character?
A. No, it doesn’t. I’d like to add, I don't believe you 

will find an admission certificate issued to Mrs. 
Collins either.

457



384 & 385 438

Q, Excuse me. What was that?
A. I would like to add that I don't believe you will find 

that Mrs. Collins has been issued a certificate of 
admission.

Q, She is attending the university, isn't she? You testified 
to that yesterday.

A. X think she is registered and in classes, but I don't be­
lieve there is a certificate of admission issued to 
her.

Q. Let me direct your attention to Plaintiff's Exhibit 19, 
which is a letter from the plaintiff to the Dean of 
the College of Liberal Arts. Did you discuss this 
letter with the dean?

A. Very briefly. The dean said he had received a letter 
from Meredith complaining of things I had done or 
not done concerning an application for admission, and 
I said, "Fine. Send it to me." And he did,

Q. Did you discuss with the dean the applicant's statement
here that he felt you had denied his admission solely 
because of race?

A. I did not.

BY MR. CLARKE: We object to that.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

Q. Did you discuss--- I'll withdraw that.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: (To reporter) Would you read the



^85 & 386 439

last question.
(The last question was read by the reporter.)
BY MR. CLARKE: May it please the Court, at this par­
ticular point, may we have the record show that we 
object to the question and the answer on behalf of all 
the other defendants other than the defendant Robert 
B. Ellis and the defendant Lewis on the grounds that 
conversation between them constituted pure and simple 
hearsay, and for that reason we object to the ques­
tion and move to strike the answer now in the record. 
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection, and overrule
the motion.

Q. Did you discuss any of the plaintiff*s letters to you 
with the chancellor of the university?

A, No, I did not.
Q. Did the chancellor of the university ever contact you 

about plaintiff's application?
A. Only after we had received notice of a lawsuit.

He contacted you. What did he say?

BY MR. CLARKS: Again, may we have that objection — ? 
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection to that.
BY MR. CLARKE: —  as to hearsay.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: As to the other defendants or this
defendant?
BY MR. CLARKE: We object on the ground that whatever



586 & 387 440

you are now asking him to repeat in this court that 
was told to him by the chancellor is hearsay evi­
dence.
BY THE COURT: Well, I will sustain the objection on
account of its irrelevancy to the issues in this case, 
what discussions he had after the lawsuit notice.

Q. But you never discussed before the lawsuit anything with 
the chancellor about the admission of this Negro 
applicant to the university? Is that what you are 
saying?

A. That Is correct.
Q. Let me direct your attention to Plaintiff's Exhibit 21,

your letter to him dated May 9th in which you advised
him that he would-- - Let's see. You say this:
"I should advise you at this preliminary stage that 
my evaluation of your credits indicates that under 
the standards of the University of Mississippi the 
maximum credit which could be allowed is forty-eight 
semester hours if your application for admission as 
a transfer student should be approved.” Now, what 
forty-eight hours are you talking about?

A. Counsel, if you want me to pick out forty-eight hours of 
courses in his transcripts that will apply for a 
degree at the University, I'm unable to do that.
What I have undertaken to provide the applicant with 
in this letter of May 9th is a tentative estimate of



587 & J88 44l

the total of his£ credits that I think would apply 
toward a degree at the University of Mississippi.

Q. I want to know what you were talking about in your letter 
of May 9th. I want to know what forty-eight hours 
you have reference to.

A. He would be able, as of this time, to submit a maximum 
of thirty-three semester hours —

Q. —  Mr. ELlis, I'm asking you as of May 9th.
A. That’s what I’m trying to tell you, Counsel.
Q. What forty-eight hours were you referring to here?
A. Would you let me finish?

BY THE COURT: Very well. I believe we will take a
recess until two o'clock.

(Whereupon the court was recessed until 2:00 P.M.) 

After Recess
BY MR. CLARKE: May it please the Court, I would like
the record to show that we have secured the univer­
sity records of students, that were previously sub­
poenaed by plaintiff. We have produced these in the 
courtroom and they are here now for plaintiff. I'd 
like the record to show that it was due to a mis­
understanding on my part that they were removed. I 
was under the impression that at the point the plain­
tiff rested its case she was then through with the



588 442

records, and on that understanding I had started the 
process to return them to the files of the univer­
sity. They are now back in the court and here for 
plaintifffs use in whatever way she cares to use 
them.
BY THE COURT: Very well.

(CROSS EXAMINATION OP MR. ELLIS continues;)
BY MRS. MOTELY:
(The last question was read by the reporter)
A. I was referring to the maximum of thirty-three hours 

which we allow from correspondence and extension 
sources, as reflected in the transcript of credits 
from Washburn University, the University of Kansas, 
and the University of Maryland, plus an estimate of 
the credits on record from the Jackson College trans­
cript of record.

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge whether the University 
of Kansas, Washburn University and the University of 
Maryland are members of their respective regionalac- 
creditlng associations?

A. I know of my own knowledge that Washburn University and 
the University of Kansas are members of their res­
pective regional accrediting associations. I know 
that the University of Maryland is now a member in 
good standing; it has been on probation.

Q* When was it on probation?



589 & 390 443

A. Well, I'm not in a position to tell you the years.
Q. Was that recently?
A. It has been fairly recently, yes.
Q, Would you say within the last five years?
A, I think so.
Q, But it is now a member of its regional accrediting asso­

ciation?
A. It has always been a member —  or at least, during this 

period of time it has been a member, but it was on 
probation.

Q. I see. A member, but on probation.
A, That is correct.
Q, Let me call your attention to the last paragraph of your 

letter to the plaintiff of May 9# 1961.
A. Which paragraph?
Q. The last paragraph. You asked the plaintiff in that

last paragraph the following: "In view of the fore­
going, please advise me if you desire your applica­
tion to be treated as a pending application." Do 
you limit that to your summer session?

A. I didn't limit it one way or the other. This is a state 
ment without reference to a time.

Q. Let me call your attention to Plaintiff's Exhibit 27# 
which is your letter to the plaintiff of May 25, 
1961. In the second paragraph, you say, "The Univer 
sity cannot recognize the transfer of credits from 
the institution which you are now attending since



390 & 591 m

it is not a member of the Southern Association of 
Colleges and Secondary Schools." I want to ask you 
when did the university determine that it would not 
recognize credits from non-member schools?

BY MR. CLARKE: We object to that unless the witness
knows and also the records are the best evidence of 
this particular subject here before the Court.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection if he knows.

A. At this moment I am not sure of the exact date. It was 
the result of a policy recommended by the Committee 
on Admissions and subsequently approved by the chan­
cellor in the spring —  it may have been as late as 
May, f6l,

Q. Wasn’t it right after this plaintiff applied?
A. Well, you know when the plaintiff applied. This was re­

ceived on February 1, 1961.
Q. I show you Defendant’s Exhibit 29 and ask you if that is 

the policy that you are referring to.
A. No.
Q.* There is another policy?
A. That is not the policy that concerns this paragraph which 

you just read.
Q* Where is that policy?
A. Well, the policy you have shown me is a policy that was 

established by the Board of Trustees.



591 445

Q. I want to know where is this policy that you refer to in 
your letter of May 25th, where you say, "The Univer­
sity cannot recognize the transfer of credits from 
the institution you are now attending, since it is 
not a member of the Southern Association of Colleges 
and Secondary Schools," Where is that?

A, I think it was submitted —  Now, I have a copy of the
original minutes in my files. Now, if we can't find 
what has been submitted, I can get my copy.

Q, All right. Would you get your copy?
,fWitness does same)
Q. Do you want to read the portion of the minutes of May 15, 

1961, which is applicable, into the record?

BY MR. CLARKE: To keep our record consistent, she is
asking the witness to read from an instrument not 
offered in evidence,
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Oh, yes. I'll have it marked.
(To reporter) Would you please mark it for identifi­
cation?

(Same was marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 55 for Identification)

Q. I show you Plaintiff's 55 for Identification, which is 
the minutes of the meeting of the Committee on Ad­
missions dated Monday, May 15, 1961, Office of the 
Registrar, and ask you to read the part which is 
applicable.



592 446

BY MR. CLARKE: Our objection goes to the witness'
testifying as to the contents of any document which 
has not been admitted in evidence. This has been 
identified as Plaintiff's Exhibit 55 for Identifi­
cation, but there has been no tender of the document 
into evidence.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We offer this into evidence.
BY THE COURT: Let it be received.
BY MR. CLARKE: I'd like to make an objection to
the minutes of this meeting unless this witness 
identifies them as being true and correct copies of 
the proceedings that were there taken and unless and 
until this Committee on Admissions Is established 
as a body that speaks through its minutes; then we 
would make the additional objection that as to these 
other defendants in this case that the minutes are 
hearsay even though they are in written form.
BY THE COURT: I will reserve ruling upon the objec­
tion as to the defendants other than this particular 
defendant; and of course, unless he can identify this 
as being a true and accurate copy and unless he can 
testify it is a true and correct copy, that objection 
would be sustained; but I will let you question on 
It.
BY MR. CLARKE: It purports to be an original, so
we make no objection that it is not the original; 
but we just don’t have it established as to what



592 & 393

type of a body this Committee oh Admissions Is, and 
I think that would determine whether or not It would 
speak through Its members or Its minutes, and this 
is what my objection applies to at this time.
BY THE COURT; Let me see it.
BY MRS. MOTLEY; (Handing same to Court) It is 
signed by Mr. Ellis, Your Honor, as a member of the 
committee. He wrote the minutes.
BY THE COURT; Overrule the objection,

(Plaintiff’s Exhibit No. 55 for Identification was received 
in evidence and follows here below;)

"PLAINTIFF’S EXHIBIT NO, 55"
19475MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE ON ADMISSIONS 

Monday, May 15, 196l, Office of the Registrar 
Present; The Registrar, the Deans of the College of Liberal 

Arts, Deans of the Schools of Commerce and Business Ad­
ministration, Education, Pharmacy, Division of Stu­
dent Personnel, Dean of Women, and Mr. Stallworth 
for the Dean of the School of Engineering 

Absent: None

The Committee met to discuss the items on the agenda 
which was mailed to the members earlier. The following are 
the subjects discussed and on two items the actions taken:

1. Progress report on admissions for the first semester 
1961-1Q62.

447



448

The Chairman distributed copies of the application data 
prepared as of May 1, (See Exhibits I, II, and III attached.) 
He called attention to Exhibit I and the total of 1316 ap­
plications. This number represents an increase of 17.3$ 
over the applications reported May 1, i960. Of particular 
concern was the geographical distribution (Exhibit II.) Mr. 
Ellis reported that applications from Mississippians had 
increased 9.5$ and at the same time nonresident applications 
had increased 26.2$ over the last year. The Proportion of 
nonresident applications (50.1$ of the total applications) 
will very likely drop 10 to 15$ since many Mississippi stu­
dents tend to file applications later. However, it is appa­
rent that additional means for limiting nonresidents must be 
considered for the fall of 1962.

Mr, Ellis called attention to the report on applications 
denied (Exhibit III.) He also pointed out the large number 
of applications on file from foreign students and reported 
that no further applications from this group were being con­
sidered for September, 1961.

2. Our Policies for the award of credit for military 
training.

The Professor of Naval Science had submitted £ memoranda 
requesting that our policies awarding credit for military 
training be made available to service men and former service 
nen who entered on active duty after January 3-1# 1955* At 
the present time this is the cut-off date and those who 
entered service after that date cannot receive credit for



449

military training.
The Chairman reviewed the policies and the procedures for 

awarding credit for military training. The Committee in 
separate motions approved the policies for the awarding of 
credit (See page 84 of the University Catalog, 1961,) The 
Committee also approved a motion to eliminate the cut-off 
date so that our policies will apply to all service men or 
former service men. (Captain Howe1s memoranda attached as 
part of these minutes.)

3. Acceptance of credits from institutions which are not 
regionally accredited.

Mr. Ellis reported that there were nine applicants for 
both the summer session and the first semester who submitted 
credits from institutions that are not accredited by one of 
the regional accrediting associations. Most of the applica­
tions of this kind, he indicated, are submitted by students 
who live outside the State of Mississippi,

The University’s present policies were briefly reviewed 
by the Chairman, A motion was then approved to accept cre­
dits only from institutions which are members of a regional 
accrediting association or a recognized professional accredi­
ting association,

4. Problems connected with high school credits.
The Committee next discussed some of the developments in 

high schools which will require further study and possibly 
action.

a. Recognition of college level coursework. It was



450

noted thatprogress is now being made in our area to give 
students advanced coursework while in high school. It was 
further noted that programs had been developed in some insti­
tutions of higher learning to recognize this advanced work. 
Doctor Lewis agreed to conduct a poll of some of the institu­
tions in the Mississippi-Valley to determine specifically 
what they are currently doing and to report back to the 
Committee.

b. Reporting ninth-grade record from three-year senior 
high schools. Mr. Ellis read a letter from the Florida State 
Department of Education concerning their study of transcripts 
from three-year senior high schools. Since the trend seems 
to be toward a three-year senior high school replacing the 
traditional four-year school there is some argument for 
colleges to consider admission on the basis of a three-year 
record (10th, 11th and 12th grades.) Doctor Moorhead stated 
that there has been some discussion of this possibility on 
the part of high school administrators in Mississippi. It 
was agreed that action on the matter is not necessary at 
this time.

The meeting was then adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Robert B. Ellis
Robert B. Ellis
Chairman

APPROVED:
/s/ J. D. Williams 5-25-61 

Chancellor Date



393 451

exhibit, m m u t i ?. £s.#55.....
WITNESS..........................

AUG 16 1961
United States District Court 
Southern District of Mississippi 
DENTON B. JORDAN, Reporter

* * * * *
Q. The question was whether you would read that part of the 

minutes applicable to the situation described in your 
letter of May 25th Indicating that transfer credits 
are limited to member institutions of the Southern 
Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools.

A. Yes, Counsel, I will be glad to read this. I would like 
to point out that the entire minutes are a part of 
the continuing study and acting by the Committee on 
Admissions on the admissions program of the univer­
sity. This is a continuing process, and in this 
meeting we did consider, first, a progress report on 
admissions for the first semester, 1961-62. --

Q. Please just read the part which is applicable, which is 
the last paragraph.

A. Counsel, I think it is all applicable.
Q. The whole thing?
A. I certainly do. —  Two, our policy for the award of

credit for military training. Three, the acceptance 
of credits from Institutions which are not regionally 
accredited. And four, problems connected with high 
school credits. And now, specifically, in terms of 
your question, I will read the minutes applicable to



394 & 395 452

the question you asked, (Reading) "Mr. Ellis re­
ported that there were nine applicants for both the 
summer session and the first semester who submitted 
credits from institutions that are not accredited 
by one of the regional accrediting associations.
Most of the applications of this kind, he indicated, 
are submitted by students who live outside the State 
of Mississippi. The University's present policies 
were briefly reviewed by the chairman. A motion was 
then approved to accept credits only from institu­
tions which are members of a regional accrediting 
association or a recognized professional accrediting 
association."

Q. Was the plaintiff among those nine?
A, Beg pardon?
Q. Was the plaintiff among those nine referred to in there?
A. I don't think he was ---

BY MR. CLARKE: We object to what he thinks,
BY THE COURT: Sustain the objection as to what he
thinks. If he knows —

A, I do know this: that there were no applications consi­
dered by the Committee in adopting this policy, and 
I know for a fact that there were not more than two 
men on this eight person committee who had any 
awareness of the application of the plaintiff. I 
also know that there was no discussion which included



395 & 396 ^53

the names of particular institutions. This was a 
policy that was considered in terms of the quality 
of students who transferred to the university and 
was adopted as means of improving that quality.

Q. Now, after that policy was adopted —  What is the date 
of the adoption?

A. May 15, 1961.
Q. After that, on May 25th, you wrote the plaintiff, didn't 

you?
A. That is correct.
Q. Let me direct your attention to the following sentence 

in the letter of May 25th, in the second paragraph.
In the third sentence you say, uFurthermore, students 
may not be accepted by the university from those in­
stitutions whose programs are not recognized." What 
institutions do you have reference to there?

A, To any institutions that would be affected, as stated in 
this sentence.

Q. Did you have reference to the University of Kansas?
A, No.
Q. University of Maryland?
A. No.
Q. Washburn?
A. No.
Q. Jackson State College?
A, Yes.
Q. As an institution whose programs are not recognized?



596 & 597

A. That’s right.
Q. What do you mean when you say "not recognized"?
A. Well, I mean this: —  And in terms of Jackson State

College, it all goes to the kind of accreditation 
that an institution enjoys. You have made some 
statements in terms of Jackson State College being 
an accredited institution, and it does have some ac­
creditation; but the Southern Association of Colleges 
and Secondary Schools, which is the association in 
this area that accredits institutions of higher 
learning, has from —  I’m not sure how far back —  
has two listings of institutions. One listing in­
cluded those institutions which are members of the 
Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary 
Schools. The other was originally set up as a list­
ing of approved institutions for Negro youth —  I 
believe that is the way it has been titled in the 
proceedings of the association. In the meeting of 
December, 1957 —  December, I believe —  of the 
Southern Association, the association decided that 
from that time on the institutions on the approved 
list which could meet the full requirements of all 
of the standards of the Southern Association would 
be placed on the roll of member institutions.

Q. Now, that approved list consisted of all Negro schools, 
didn’t it?

A. The list was originally set up for Negro institutions.



397 & 398

membership in the Southern Association? Isn't that a 
fact?

A. To my knowledge, that is a fact. Since 1957 any institu­
tion which could meet all of the standards was placed 
on the membership roll of the Southern Association 
of Colleges and Secondary Schools. Now, all of the 
institutions that are now on the approved list fail 
to meet one or more of the standards, and,further, 
they don't, in many cases, meet the standards, any 
of the standards, completely;and this is the reason 
for our distinction between approved institutions 
of the Southern Association and member institutions.

Q. What about Jackson State College, with reference to all 
you have said? How does that college stand?

A. Well, I don't know which specific standards Jackson
State College failed to meet of the Southern Asso­
ciation. All I do know is that it does not meet 
all of the standards of the Southern Association.

Q, But you don't know which ones?
A. I'm not on the commission or accreditation of the South­

ern Association.
Q. You don't know anything about its activities?
A. I know of its activities from reading the proceedings of 

the Southern Association, which annually includes a 
report from this commission.

455

Q. And Negro Institutions originally were not admitted to



598 456

BY MR. CLARKE: We certainly would, object to this 
witness giving any testimony based upon what he knows 
from having read some document, not only as to the 
other defendants in this case, but even as to this 
witness himself, on the grounds that this matter he 
has read is certainly inadmissible inand of itself, 
and his understanding based upon that reading would 
therefore be inadmissible.
BY THE COURT: I'll exclude that part from considera­
tion in reaching a judgment, but if he knows of his 
own personal knowledge of anything, he can testify 
to that.

Q. Do you know of your own personal knowledge the ground
on which Jackson State College is not a member of the 
Southern Association?

A. I do not know of my own personal knowledge the reasons.
Q, Do you know of your own personal knowledge that it is 

not a member of the association?
A. Well, Counsel, the only way an official of an institution 

can determine an accreditation is by reference to 
publications or reference to books.

Q. Let me show you then Plaintiff's Exhibit 44, which has
already been received in evidence, which is a publi­
cation of the United States Department of Health, 
Education and Welfare, Office of Education, entitled 
"Accredited Higher Institutions, i960," and ask you



399 457

to look at page 108, having to do ¥ith the State of 
Mississippi, and tell me whether Jackson State Col­
lege is not an accredited institution,

BY MR. CLARKE: Formy benefit, I would like to know
the limitations upon the admission of this document 
which is entitled "Accredited Institutions," I see 
that it is marked Plaintiff’s Number 44. I was under 
the impression that this document was not admitted 
in evidence.
BY THE COURT: It was admitted in evidence, but as
I recall, it was with the limitation that the Court 
put on there as to the truthfulness of the things 
contained, it was not proof, but the document was 
certified to by a certain custodian of the department 
and it was admitted in evidence.
BY MR. CLARKE: May I make this further objection
additionally in the record: This record which coun­
sel now tenders to the witness does not show upon 
what accreditation with the Southern Regional, to 
which the witness has testified to; so there is an 
entirely different basis upon the two different 
approved accreditations. This witness is talking 
about what the Southern Regional Association has done, 
not the Department of Welfare; so I think it is not 
a competent question and object for that reason.
BY THE COURT: I will overrule that objection on



599 & 400 458

that ground, but I will sustain the objection upon 
the ground the ground that it is a document already- 
introduced in evidence, and it speaks for itself as 
to whatever is shown there for whatever value and 
weight the Court conceives it is entitled to.

Q. Let me ask you to read the first paragraph there on Page
108.

BY MR. CLARKE: We object on the ground the docu­
ment, just as the Court has said, is the best evi­
dence of the contents. We do not think the record 
can be amplified or detracted from in any way by 
having this witness reading into the written trans­
cript what does appear in a document that Your Honor 
says is in evidence for a limited purpose.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I am going to ask a question about
that paragraph.
BY THE COURT: I will let him read that paragraph.

A, This is a paragraph found on Page 108 under a heading 
entitled "Mississippi." (Reading) "The College 
Accrediting Commission, which is a legal body, and 
the Counsel on Study and Accreditation of Institu­
tions of Higher Learning in Mississippi (an agency of 
the Mississippi Association of Colleges) are res­
ponsible for accrediting the institutions of higher 
learning in the State of Mississippi. A list of



401 & 402 459

accredited colleges follows:,..
Q. Is Jackson State College one of the accredited colleges 

which follows:

BY MR. CLARKE: We object. She is asking the ques­
tion, "Is Jackson State College one of the accredited 
colleges which follows?" The question would be sub­
stituting this witness’ understanding of what this 
thing says. Accreditation would be the key to the 
question that she is asking, and I don’t think it 
fair to ask the question on that point.
BY THE COURT: I will let him answer if Jackson State
College is listed on that document.

A. Jackson State College is listed in this roster.
Q. Now, this College Accrediting Commission —  are you 

familiar with that?
A. I have some knowledge.
Q, Isn’t Mr. Jobe, the Executive Secretary of the State

Institutions of Higher Learning, a defendant in this 
case, on that commission?

A. That I am not —  I don’t feel qualified to answer.
Q. You don't know anything about that?
A. I'm not sure.
Q, You don’t know anything about this state accrediting 

agency?
A. I said I have some knowledge of it.
Q. But you don’t know whether Mr. Jobe, of your own know­



402 460

ledge, Is a member, do you?
A. No, I do not.
Q, Let me direct your attention to Page 5 of this same

document entitled "Part I" and ask you to read that 
heading there.

BY MR. CLARKE: May we have for the record the same 
objection to this portion of the document as we did 
to the reading of the other?
BY THE COURT: Yes, and I overrule the objection and
will let him read it.

A. You want me to read?
Q. Just what it says this section contains.
A. It says, "Part I, Institutions of Higher Education accre­

dited by nationally recognized regional accrediting 
associations."

Q, Does it list the regional accrediting associations right 
after that?

A. Yes, it does.
Q. Is the Southern Association listed there?
A, That is correct.
Q,. Let me show you Page 17 of this document and ask you

whether under the State of Mississippi Jackson State 
College is listed as accredited by the Southern 
Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools, and 
give the date.



405 461

BY MR. CLARKE: Is the same objection applicable?
May we have the same objection?
BY THE COURT: Yes. I will overrule the objection,
but I am not taking the matters contained in there 
as proof of facts of what are asserted by it, but I 
will overrule the objection and let him read it,
BY MR. CLARKE: May we add to the record, if she
is going to prove or contend to prove by this wit­
ness by reading from this document what action the 
Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary 
Schools has or has not taken, then the minutes or 
officials of that particular organization would be 
the best evidence,
BY THE COURT: Yes, I sustain the objection to that.

Q. Do you want to read what it shows as to Mississippi and 
Jackson State College?

A. Yes, I would like to —

BY MR. CLARKE: —  Is Your Honor--
BY THE COURT: I am going to let him read what that
document shows, but of course I am not taking the 
contents of that as proof of any factsj but since 
it was certified to, I am of the opinion it is ad­
missible in evidence, though not proof of the con­
tents of it. The minutes of the association would 
be the best evidence of actual proof of facts.
BY MR. CLARKE: And I understand Your Honor is



405 & 404 462

permitting this reading to be accomplished in this 
court because counsel intends to base some examina­
tion of this witness upon the material that he reads? 
BY THE COURT: That is right. She is entitled to
have it read and propound any question she wants to.

A, I would like to preface the reading with a statement that 
this does not say anything about what kind of accredi­
tation, a_ and there are institutions in this list 
that are not even members or on the approved list of 
the Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary 
Schools.

Q. How do you know that?

BY MR. CLARKE: Please let the record further show
that the person or group of persons who wrote this 
book which is Plaintiff's Exhibit 44 are not present, 
are not shown to be in the jurisdiction of this 
court or subject or susceptible to subpoena or 
cross examination, and we add that to our objection.

Q. Do you want to read that first and then explain whatever 
you want to explain?

A. Now, in further answer to your question, Jackson State 
College is listed in this roster, and the date of 
1948 is listed.

Q. What does that date refer to? Date of what?
A. It says "Date of Initial Accrediation."



404 & 405 465

Q. By the Southern Regional Association of Colleges and 
Secondary Schools?

A. This I do not know.
Q. Didn’t you read Page 5?
A. I know that list includes institutions that are not

accredited in any way by the Southern Association,
Q. How do you know that?
A. Well, the name of Russ College appears on there. Russ is 

not either a member of the Southern Association nor 
does it appear on the approved list.

Q. Russ College? Where is that?
A. I beg your pardon —  I thought I had seen Russ College on 

here. Well, let me retract that.
Q, Let me just clarify what you have read. This says in the 

beginning here, as to Part I: "Institutions of
Higher Education accredited by nationally recognized 
regional accrediting associations." And then it says: 
"Regional accrediting institutions of higher educa­
tion— " — "Regional associations" rather —
"..accrediting institutions of higher education."
Then it lists the Southern Association as number five.

A» I am not familiar with this book.
Q. I am just asking you what the page says.
A. The page says the Southern Association of Colleges and 

Secondary Schools —
Q. —  And then follows ---



4-05 & 406 464

BY MR. CLARKE: —  ¥e object to counsel interrupting
the witness. We think we have a right to show the 
witness is entitled to complete every answer before 
she goes into the next question.
BY THE COURT: (To counsel opposite) Give the
witness time to answer the question.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: 1*11 do that, Your Honor.

Q. The question I want to get clear is whether this docu­
ment indicates that Jackson State College was ini­
tially accredited by the Southern Association of 
Colleges and Secondary Schools in 1948.

BY MR. CLARKE: We object to this question to the
witness. —
BY MR. GATES: We object. —
BY MRS. MOTLEY: We can object to both of these
lawyers objecting at the same time.
BY THE COURT: I'll hear from Mr. Clarke.
BY MR. CLARKE: If counsel please, we object to this
question on all the grounds listed in previous objec­
tions to comments from this book, and in addition it 
now appears that this book and whoever wrote this 
book has taken portions of still another book and 
incorporated them into this book, which simply doubles 
the loss of opportunity on our part to subject the 
persons who put this material out to cross examina­
tion, and we say that it further discourages the



406 & 407 465

Court putting any authenticity or reliability on the 
contents of the book, and we object to this witness 
testifying as to any conclusions on his part that 
might be based upon conclusions of someone who wrote 
this book that might be based on conclusions of some­
one who wrote another book, and we just think it 
goes out of the bounds of any proper proof to be 
made before this Court.
BY THE COURT: I will overrule the objection to this
extent: I will let him read that part of the docu­
ment she asked him to read, but as I heretofore 
stated, I think it is of no probative force because 
it is based upon documents or minutes obtained by 
those who prepared that book and who are not subject 
to cross examination, and the source of information 
from which they obtained that would be the best evi­
dence of the truthfulness of its contents.

A. I haven't had an opportunity to read the explanation of 
these dates. Now, over in the right hand column, at 
the heading of the column, there is a statement that 
says "Date of initial accreditation.Now, I have­
n ’t seen anything in here that tells me that that is 
the date of initial accreditation by the Southern 
Association. It may be. I just haven't seen it.

Q. Okay. I’ll show you that.
A, I thought you were referring to that listing you referred



407 & 408 466

to the other day on page 108, which does include 
Russ College.

BY MR. CLARKE: May we be permitted to amplify the
objection that pertains to all reading from Plain­
tiff's Exhibit 44 and all comments of this witness or 
any conclusions that this witness may draw in any 
wise based on facts or comments contained in this 
book, for the reason, as I previously stated, the 
book itself is based upon other booksj and as I 
understand it, the sole and only reason Your Honor 
has permitted Exhibit 44 to go into this record is 
because Exhibit 44 purports to be a duly authenti­
cated bulletin —  not book —  bulletin of the United 
States Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
It now turns out on examination of the contents that 
it is based upon other publications. Those publica­
tions are not authenticated. There is no way to 
test the fact that the writer or compiler of this 
bulletin had authentic information from these other 
source books, and in no way can the authentication of 
this copy substitute itself or carry further than 
the copy alone, and it cannot certify the authenti­
city of the books that this copy is based on, and 
we think it just simply compounds and confounds the 
unreliability of the evidence that would be obtained 
from the use of this bulletin, and we'd like to add



408 & 409 467

that to our objection,
BY THE COURT: Very well. The statement has been
made and made a part of the record. I think I have 
made my ruling clear on the matter, and certainly I 
would exclude from consideration any conclusions that 
the witness has stated, but anything that he made of 
his own personal knowledge will be considered as 
part of the evidence.

Q, Do you want to read where I pointed out what the Southern 
Association means by that date? Page 6 of this docu­
ment^

A, Well, this sentence says, "The Southern Association fur­
nishes a single date for each institution." That 
doesn't mean anything to me.

Q. And they are referring to the date here, after Jackson 
State College - which is 1948 - as the date of ini­
tial accreditation. Right?

BY MR. CATES: Objection, Your Honor. A treatise
from the Southern Association would be the best evi­
dence as to what happened in 1948. Counsel is testi­
fying as to what the Southern Regional Association 
has done. Once again, the best evidence of that 
would be what the Southern Regional Association it­
self, through its own individuals or through its 
own publications, did as opposed to the method here; 
and therefore we object.



409 & 410 468

BY THE COURT: I sustain the objection also, for the
further ground, that the document speaks for itself, 
and she is asking the witness to interpret the 
meaning of it. That is a question for the Court to 
determine.

Q. Let me ask you this question: You know of your own
knowledge that Jackson State College is accredited 
by this College Accrediting Commission in Mississippi, 
don’t you?

BY MR, CLARKS: Object to that, Your Honor.
BY THE COURT: If he knows of his own personal know­
ledge, I'll let him answer.

A. Yes, it is.
Q. I show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 47, which is his trans­

cript from Jackson State College. Tell me which of 
those credits you included in your forty-eight cre­
dits that you told him in your letter of May 9th you 
could give him credit for at the University of Missis­
sippi and which of these you don’t recognize.

BY MR. CLARKE: To which we object for the reason
that we understand this document is in evidence on a 
limited basis for the purpose of simply showing that 
it is a document that was received in the office of 
the registrar and not for the proof of any of the 
truth of its contents.



410 & 411 469

(The question was read by the reporter)
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.

A. The twelve semester hours from Jackson State College for 
the fall quarter of *60-'6l were considered accep­
table in that tentative evaluation,

Q. Mr. Ellis, I want to show you the file of Miss Anna Marie 
Barnes, which is one of the documents you were sub­
poenaed to bring to court and which we got out of the 
box there.
Before I go into the file of Miss Barnes, there is 
one other question I wanted to ask you about, your 
letter to the plaintiff of May 9th in which you point 
out that he offered or submitted ninety credits.
You say, "By your transcripts you offer a total of 
ninety semester hours credit." 1 will hand you 
Plaintiff's four transcripts and ask you to point 
out where those ninety hours are.

A. Counsel, it took me an hour or two in the privacy of my 
office to tabulate all of the credits from all of the 
sources and to convert quarter hours in terms of 
semester hours in order to arrive at this figure.
All I can say is that I took —  I tabulated all of 
the credits that I could find on all of the trans­
cripts without duplicating from any one source, and 
in those cases where credits were reported In terms 
of quarter hours, converted those to semester hours,



411 & 412 470

and at this time I came up with the total of ninety- 
semester hours credit,

Q* Wasn't that a mistake? Wasn't it only fifty-five seme­
ster hours?

A. I don't think so.
Q. You don't think so?
A. I have a summary which I'll be glad to get.
Q. Yes, I’d like to have that.
(Witness gets same)
A. In the tentative evaluation which I prepared, I listed 

from, first, the University of Kansas, which was 
extension work, nine quarter hours, which is the 
equivalent of six semester hours. Next, from Wash­
burn Municipal University, four and a half quarter 
hours, which is the equivalent of three semester 
hours. Prom the University of Maryland, extension, 
there was a total listing of forty-six and one-half 
hours, which due to —  Now, wait. I'm sorry, that's 
forty-six and one-half quarter hours, which is the 
equivalent, roughly, of thirty-one semester hours. 
Then, on his records at Jackson State College there 
are two listings giving General Educational Develop­
ment test score results. One dated May, 1956, on 
the Jackson State College transcript listed thirty 
quarter hours, which is the equivalent of twenty 
semester hours; and then, April, 1954, another 
listing of G.E.D. test, there is a listing of twenty-



412 & 413 471

seven quarter hours, which is the equivalent of 
eighteen semester hours. And then, as of this time, 
Jackson State College fall quarter, eighteen quarter 
hours, which is the equivalent of twelve semester 
hours. This is a total of 135 quarter hours or 
ninety semester hours, I'd like to add, the G.E.D. 
tests are examinations given to primarily people in 
service. There are a few institutions in the country 
that do grant college credit for them. We do not, 
never have.

Q. Most colleges don’t accept those G.E.D. credits? Isn’t 
that right?

A, I have seen a survey of that, and to my best recollection 
there is a minority, small minority, of the institu­
tions in the country that do recognize them.

Q. So that if Mr. Meredith transferred to any of these better 
colleges, he probably wouldn't get credit for those 
G.E.D.

BY I©. CLARKE: We object to what he probably would
get at some other college.
BY THE COURT: Yes, sustain the objection.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Your Honor, with respect to the last
question and objection, this man is the registrar, 
and it is his job. I think he is an expert in this 
area, evaluating credits and indicating or giving an 
opinion as to what credits would be accepted by the



413 & 4l4 472

better schools, and for that reason I think he is 
qualified to say whether the better schools would
have accepted these G.E.D. ---  Could we have what
G.E.D. stands for_
BY THE WITNESS: They are entitled---
BY MR. CLARKE: —  Just a moment. We object to
counsel using to this witness the term "better."
BY THE COURT: I sustain the objection on the ground
it is Irrelevant as to what other colleges have done. 
The question Is what the University of Mississippi 
does as an overall general picture without regard to 
race and color, so what the other colleges do or 
have done is immaterial. Sustain the objection.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I wanted the witness to explain what
this G.E.D. is, so the record will be clear. Can he 
do that?
BY THE COURT: Yes, if he knows.

A. They are entitled General Educational Development tests,

BY MRS. MOTLEY: These are General Educational Deve­
lopment test credits, which he said, Your Honor, 
would not be recognized by the University of Missis­
sippi, and that is how the plaintiff would lose a 
large number of credits although they were recognized 
by Jackson State College. Now, the point is that 
this witness ----
BY MR. CLARKE: —  Excuse my interruption, Counsel,



4l4 & 415 473

but are you objecting to the witness1 answer or are 
you testifying or what — ?
BY THE COURT: No, she is arguing the admisslblity
of the question she asked after I ruled upon it. I 
will hear from her.
BY MS. MOTLEY: What I was telling Your Honor was
that this witness testified yesterday as to the great 
loss which the plaintiff would suffer by coming to 
the University of Mississippi, and what I am trying 
to point out is if he went to any other similar 
school like the University of Mississippi he would 
similarly lose those General Educational Development 
credits, which are Army test scores or whatever he 
called them. In other words, no great loss is in­
volved to the plaintiff because he couldn’t get cre­
dit anywhere for those except at Jackson State College 
or the minority of the colleges he testified to.
And I’m getting to his examination yesterday of the 
great loss the plaintiff would suffer by transfer to 
the University of Mississippi. The point is he 
wouldn’t because anywhere else he went they wouldn't 
recognize those credits either.
BY THE COURT: I will adhere to my ruling.
BY MR. CLARICE: May we have a little space to com­
ment on counsel’s observation? We’d like simply to 
state into the record that these are all conclusions 
of counsel without support of any fact whatsoever in



415 & 4l6

this record as to whether these things would be 
accepted by Jackson College, by the University of 
Mississippi, or the University of Washington or 
Texas or where-have-you,
BY MRS. MOTLEY: He testified they were received at
Jackson State College. That's where he got them 
from.
BY THE COURT: Very well. I will adhere to my ruling.

(Mrs. Motley continues:)
Q. Let me show you the file of Miss Anna Marie Barnes. I 

have taken from the file a telegram which you appa­
rently sent to her dated February 4, 1961, and ask 
you if that is similar to the telegram you sent to 
the plaintiff on the same date.

BY MR. CLARKE: We object to all questions with re­
gard to the application of the witness or the stu­
dent, Anna Marie Barnes, for the reason that counsel 
has already gone into this phase of the case on her 
direct case in chief; there has been no opening of 
that issue or reopening of that issue in any way in 
defendants* rebuttal case, and we do not think she 
has the right even under the broad limits of cross 
examination to now begin anew the proof of her case 
in chief at this point. It is not in rebuttal to 
anything offered by the defendants.
EY THE COURT: Counsel, did you inquire about that

474



4 l6  & 417 475

when you had him on cross examination?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: No, Your Honor. Whet I am bringing
out now is that yesterday, I believe, he testified 
that students had to make new applications once they 
applied for a particular term. —
BY MR. CLARKE: We would like reference to the record 
on that. We don't believe he testified to that.
BY MR. CATES: Pie said they would have to do some­
thing to reactivate, but not to initiate new appli­
cations.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Well, whatever that is. I want to
show what happened in a case similar to the plain­
tiff's, where the applicant was sent a telegram and 
whether that plaintiff had to do anything else but 
stand on the original application.
BY THE COURT: Overrule the objection.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: May I have that marked? I want to
offer this in evidence.
BY THE COURT: Very well.

(Same received in evidence and marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 
No. 56, which exhibit is not copied here as the original will 
be sent up with original record.)

BY MR. CLARKE: This file contains fifteen or twenty
different papers. I wonder if counsel for defendants 
might have a few moments to look at this?
BY THE COURT: Very well. Take a ten minute recess.



417 & 418

ed to ten minutes and not a half hour like we have 
been doing, so we can get through with this case, 
please?
BY THE COURT: Well, Counsel, sometimes when I take
a recess there are two or three people back there on 
regular business —
BY MRS. MOTLEY: —  I'm sorry. I didn't mean you.
I meant counsel for defendants. I wasn't directing 
my remarks to the Court. I meant counsel for the 
defendants. They ask for a ten minute recess and 
stay out a half hour, and I’m asking for them to 
come back. If the Court has something, naturally 
I am not objecting to the Court staying out. I am 
objecting to defendants’ counsel.
BY THE COURT: I see. All right. Will ten minutes
be sufficient?
BY MR, CLARKE: Let me say this: This record, of
course, will pass into the hands of persons not 
familiar with all the situation involved here. This 
morning I did ask the Court for a ten minute recess

BY THE COURT: —  And I might say for the record that
the time you needed this morning was justified. You 
have rather recently come into the trial of this 
case, and Mr. Shands came to me and requested per­
mission to let you take over, and there has been no

4?6

BY MRS, MOTLEY: May we ask that the recess be limit­



4l8 & 419 477

undue delay in this matter. It is an important 
lawsuit, and I am giving both sides as much time as 
they reasonably need.

(Whereupon the court was recessed for ten minutes.)

After Recess
(Mrs. Motley continues:)
Q. Mr. Ellis, before the recess I believe I was asking you 

whether this telegram, which is a part of Plaintiff's 
Exhibit 56, is similar to the one you sent the plain­
tiff on February 4, 1961.

A. This is a Thermo-Fax copy of the telegram, the identical 
telegram, that was sent to all such applicants.

Q. And it is like the one you sent to the plaintiff? Bight?
A. Exactly.
Q. According to this, this student was admitted to the first 

summer session on June 9t 19&1?
A. First term, yes. Counsel, I'd like to inform you that in 

this particular application, the mother of this appli­
cant, Mrs. Barnes, was on the university campus —
I'm not sure of the exact date, but it was in the 
spring some time —  attending a meeting that had 
something to do with a flower show in our extension 
division, and she came by to see me, and she indicated 
at that time that arrangements had been made to have 
this application continued in its consideration and 
the purpose of her visit was to come by and to deter­



419 & 420 478

mine if there were any further things that needed to 
be done to complete the file.

Q. Is that in the file there, what you are talking about?
A. There is no record of that In the file. That’s the 

reason I wanted to inform you.
Q. Let me show you the plaintiff’s application and the

health record attached hereto. I think you read this 
yesterday where it says "Parent or responsible rela­
tive." What does it say?

A. That is exactly what it says.
Q. And the plaintiff gave the name of his wife?
A. That is correct.
Q. And then it says "Permanent address"?
A. It says "Home address in full."
Q. Doesn’t that refer to the home address of the person he 

has just named?
A. Yes, it does.

BY MRS. MOTLEY: I believe that is all the questions
of this witness.
BY THE COURT: Any redirect?
BY MR. CLARKE: Yes, Your Honor, please.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. CLARKE:
Q. Mr. Ellis, let’s look at the documents that you were re­

quested to examine by counsel with regard to the 
correspondence between yourself and the plaintiff,



420 & 421

and I refer you first to Plaintiffls Exhibit Number 
3. In the second paragraph of this exhibit, plain­
tiff describes himself as an "American-Mississippi- 
Negro citizen," and I will ask you, Sir, if you have 
receive^ applications from students of other natio­
nalities and other races or any races where the cover 
letter with the application shows that the applicant 
is a member of a particular race, in addition to the 
showing made on the application form itself.

A, In the case of resident applications or inquiries, I can 
recall of none previously. The only non-residents 
that I can think of offhand is occasionally we will 
have a letter from an applicant from overseas who 
attempts to identify himself.

Q, Please understand that I limit all of my questions to
you to undergraduate transfer students. And if that 
would cause any qualification of your last answer, 
then I wish you would qualify it.

BY MRS, MOTLEY: We object to the question on the 
ground it is not shown that this witness individually, 
personally handled every application which comes into 
his office.
BY THE COURT: I111 overrule the objection because
the question was directed as to whether he had any 
knowledge of it or not. So I overrule the objection.

A. In terms of resident transfer undergraduate students, I

479



421 & 422 480

don't wish to qualify the answer.
Q. Is this a usual or an unusual paragraph insofar as your 

personal knowledge of applicants to the university 
is concerned?

A. It is a highly unusual letter and application to receive.
Q, Look at Exhibit 6 with regard to the first sentence of 

the third paragraph and tell me whether or not the 
applicant requested immediate action on his applica­
tion.

A. The statement says, "I am requesting that immediate
action be taken on my application and that I be noti­
fied of its status.”

BY MRS, MOTLEY: We object to the reading again into 
the record from these documents which are already in 
evidence.
EY THE COURT: Well, I will overrule the objection
upon the same ground I overruled objections of oppo­
sing counsel earlier in the case. However, I believe 
that was gone into on direct examination. If it has 
been gone into, it is not necessary, but if counsel 
has questions he has overlooked and is not sure about 
I will permit him to examine.
BY MR. CLARSE: I think I can conclude hastily.

Q,. I refer your attention to Exhibit 12 and ask you to look 
in the fifth paragraph of Exhibit 12 and particularly 
at the second sentence of that fifth paragraph begin­



422 & 423 481

ning "However."
A. You want me to read It?
Q. In other words, tell me if these things that I have

pointed out to you in this plaintiff's correspondence 
are usual and normal. What does this sentence say?

A. This sentence you refer to is an admission on the part of 
the applicant that he is not a usual applicant to 
the university.

Q,. Assertion —  not admission.
A. All right. Assertion.
Q. Me. Ellis, do you know of your own knowledge how many 

universities and colleges in the United States of 
America are members of regional accrediting associa­
tions or can you give us a reasonable approximation 
of the number of universities or colleges that are 
members of such associations?

A. No, I can't.
Q. Are there many or few?
A. There are many.
Q. Do you have any approximate idea of the number of colle­

ges or universities in the State of Mississippi that 
are members of regional accrediting associations?

A. No, I don't know how many there are.
Q, Do you know whether there are less than ten or more than 

ten?
A. There are more than ten.



423 & 424 482

BY MR. CLARKES: Would Your Honor Indulge us just a
minute?
BY THE COURT; Yes.
BY MR. CLARES: That is all of this witness.
BY THE COURT: You may stand aside, Mr. Ellis.

(Witness excused)

BY THE COURT; Whom will you have next?
BY MR. SHARDS: If the Court please, defendants rest.
BY THE COURT: Very well. Anything in rebuttal?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: No, Your Honor.
BY THE COURT: Very well. Do you want to start your
argument this afternoon?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, I'd like to.
BY THE COURT; How much time do you folks estimate? 
How much time do you think you need to argue the 
case? I'm not putting a limit on you, but am just 
inquiring for information.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I think we could argue in half an
hour, Your Honor.
BY THE COURT: I believe that is too short. I am
going to give an hour to a side, so if you need it 
you can have it, and if you don’t need it you don't 
have to use it.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Well, as long as we could finish 
this afternoon. I have a case in Pensacola I'd like 
to get to. I already spoke to Mr. Shands about it.



424 & 425 483

Is half an hour sufficient to your gentlemen?
BY MR. CLARKE: Your Honor, as you know--
BY THE COURT: I'm going to let you brief it, because
this case, of course, I have listened to since we 
started and I am going to have to do a lot of reading 
and reviewing, and I want to read a lot of authori­
ties. I'm not as familiar with the authorities as 
you folks are, I'm quite sure, because I have been so 
busy in the last six years I haven't had much time 
to do any outside reading; so I think I am going to 
let this case be briefed. So with that, I think you 
can finish in half an hour's time.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I'd like to point out also in sup­
port of this motion for a preliminary injunction, 
we have already submitted a brief, so that what I 
will say will just supplement the brief I have al­
ready submitted,
BY THE COURT: Do you want to file an original supple­
ment before they reply to that?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: No, I say we will stand on the brief
we have submitted. In the brief we submitted, we 
cited every case I think has been reported involving 
admissions of Negroes to graduate schools, so that 
we would not have anything additional on that. What 
I would say this afternoon would supplement the brief 
which I have already submitted.

BY THE COURT: Well, I'll let you finish it that way.



425 & 426 484

might say to counsel opposite that I am going to 
want a kind of resume of the facts, and you can reply 
to that.
BY MS. MOTLEY: Could I suggest this: that we sub­
mit proposed findings of fact. Would that help the 
Court?
BY THE COURT: Yes, that would help the Court. You
could do that if you desire. I guess that would be 
sufficient. What I really wanted was just a complete 
statement of facts, some relevant and some irrelevant 
probably, and then you can also submit the proposed 
findings of fact.
BY MRS, MOTLEY: We had a reporter, as you know, in
presenting this testimony, which we can use in pre­
paring the finding of facts.
BY THE COURT: Yes, and I think almost all of the
other testimony is transcribed. This that has gone 
in yesterday and today is fresh in my mind, and I 
have notes on it.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: I will use that testimony also
transcribed and prepare proposed findings of fact 
and conclusions of law for the plaintiff and send 
it to you. We can do that in another week or so.
You already have our brief, and we will add to our 
brief this afternoon just briefly.

BY THE COURT: All right. While waiting on that, I



426 & 427 485

(Mrs. Motley argued the case for the plaintiff.)
(Mr* Clarke argued the case for the defendants.)

BY THE COURT: Very well, Gentlemen. Mr. Shands, I
don't much think you ought to try to say anything 
because of the condition of your health and you 
have only ten minutes, and I don't believe it would 
enlighten the Court very much.

BY MR. SHANDS: I was merely going to rise and say
that, in view of the fact briefs were going to be 
submitted, as Your Honor has indicated. In view of 
what I have been forced to to do today, may I say 
that I think the gentlemen carrying on this case who 
stepped into the breach has done a xronderful job, 
and I am grateful to him for having done that: but 
I will not have any remarks to make, and we will put 
in our brief.
BY THE COURT: Yes, you will have time to extend
your remarks in your brief. I know that you have 
been an ill man, and that is the reason I suggested 
that I don’t think you should exert yourself any 
further at this time.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: May we set dates for the submission
of briefs and the receipt of transcript, and so 
forth? Your Honor knows we have been trying to get 
this case decided with reference to the applicant 
going in in September. We have been at this since



427 & 428 486

June, and I'd like Your Honor to set a time when we 
have to get in our brief and proposed statement of 
facts —  instead of brief, because we have submitted 
a brief —  but I would like Your Honor to set a time 
in which we have to get in our proposed statement 
of —  findings of fact and conclusions of law, and 
time for them to get in their brief and proposed 
findings.
BY THE COURT: As I understand you, you have already
filed your brief and are depending upon that now?
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, sir.
BY THE COURT: Very well. Mr. Clarke, how much time
do you think you all need to reply to her brief?
You have been served copies of it.
BY MR, SHARDS; I understood she was going to furnish 
something.
BY THE COURT: No, she is going to present a pro­
posed finding of fact before I decide the case. I 
won't put any necessary limit on that. She has filed 
her brief with me, and I assume she gave Mr. Shands 
a copy.
BY MRS. MOTLEY: Yes, we did.
BY THE COURT; So that is her brief.
BY MR. SHANDS: That is the reason I made that in­
quiry. Is she going to submit a proposed finding 
of fact before we file our brief? I don't know 
what her proposal is, but if she is going to submit



428 & 429 487

a proposed finding of fact in this case, I would 
think the normal procedure would be for her to submit 
that in advance of our briefing the matter.
BY THE COURT: Counsel, do you intend to submit a
proposed finding of fact before the briefs are con­
cluded?
BY MRS, MOTLEY: I didn't have any reference to brie£§
when I made that statement, Your Honor, but we planto 
get that in within the next week or so.
BY THE COURT: Well, of course, the facts are dis­
closed by the record, or rather are to be drawn from 
the record, and I don't always require a proposed 
finding of fact and do not in this case; but I will 
will permit a proposed finding of fact by either side. 
I think it comes down to the question of the filing 
of a brief. So, how much time do you think you need, 
Mr. Shands?
BY MR. SHANDS: If she is going to stand on her brief,
we will ask not less than thirty days because, among 
the reasons being that Mr. Cates, one of the assis­
tant attorney-generals who has been very active in 
this case and upon whom I rely and the entire office 
relies a great deal, is under orders as a member of 
the reserve to leave here for a period of two weeks.
I believe he has to leave Friday or Saturday, some­
thing like that, and has to be somewhere Sunday, on 
the 20th, Your Honor knows there are —



429 & 430 488

BY MR. SHARDS: Mr. Cates. Mr. Eel Cates.
BY THE COURT: You have to leave the 20th?
BY MR. CATES: I have to report on the 20th for a
period of active duty.
BY THE COURT: 20th of this month?
BY MR, CATES: Yes, sir, and will not return til
around the 3^d or 4th of September.
BY MR. SHARDS: We recognize this is an important 
case to everybody, because everybody that has liti­
gation thinks his is the most important.
BY THE COURT: X think, under the circumstances,
that thirty days is too much. Row, today is the
16th--- Of course, I am familiar with the facts.
The burden has shifted to Mr. Clarke now, who recent­
ly has been employed as an assistant attorney-general. 
Mr. Shands will be able to cooperate with him some, 
but I want to say to Mr. Shands now that I think,
Mr. Shands, you are going to have to slow down. I 
say that for your own good, and that is what I want 
you to do. You have been under a great strain, and 
I say it for the record. I know your condition 
could become serious. This case has been pending 
for some little while now and due to the fault of 
nobody, but I think about the 5th of September —  
that’s about three weeks —  that Mr. Clarke can 
familiarize himself sufficiently with this case to

BY THE COURT: Which one of the assistants is that?



430 & 431 489

prepare a brief. Mr. Clarke is a very able lawyer 
and a very industrious working man,* and by that time 
he can prepare his brief. I will give counsel oppo­
site ten days in which to reply to it if she wants 
that much. If she replies earlier, I’ll get to study 
it earlier. I realize the importance of the case and 
I realize it has been pending. I want to give coun­
sel an opportunity to reply, but anything she says 
will not change my mind as to what I’m doing, because 
I have listened to it all the way through and it is 
an important case and is going to take some time.
I’m impressed with counsel for plaintiff’s argument 
and one of the cases she cited, that an entire or a 
general reading will extend this case for whatever 
time the Court can reach and render a decision; so 
that if the petitioner is entitled to be admitted, 
he should be admitted if not for the first semester 
of the regular term, then it should be for the second 
semester. I take it that this case is of sufficient 
importance that regardless of how I may decide it, 
it will go on to a higher court; and it will proba­
bly be the second semester before he could be admit­
ted if he should be ordered to be admitted by this 
court. So I want some time to study this record and 
study the authorities. I’m not as familiar with all 
the authorities as you are because you all have been 
studying while I have been working on other matters.



431 & 432 490

And I think justice requires that I rule as I am 
ruling, so that I will allow counsel for the defen­
dants until September 5th in which to file their 
briefs and counsel for plaintiff ten days in which 
to reply thereto. Either side may submit proposed 
findings of fact. I'm not requiring that to be done, 
but they are helpful and I always give thorough con­
sideration to them, even though I am compelled to 
find as usual against one or the other. They are 
helpful, however, and I welcome them if you will do 
so. I don't think an order of the Court is necessary 
on that, if you are making memoranda, and of course 
it is of record that counsel for defendant has until 
the 5th of September in which to file briefs and 
counsel for plaintiff ten days in which to respond.
BY MR. SHAHDS: Does that include the 5th? On or
before the 5th?
BY THE COURT: On or before the 5th. While the 5th
is a holiday, if it be mailed to me, I don't take 
holidays.
BY MRS, MOTLEY: I assume the transcripts will be
ready before then? Could we discuss that matter?
We have some of it, and this man has the rest. Can 
we get the very first part of it?
BY THE COURT: I don't think so, unless the court re­
porter can get it for you. I know we have a busy 
term ahead of us. I'm not going to wait on the trans-



432 & 435 491

cript. The proceedings of today and yesterday are 
very fresh on ray mind.
(Off the record discussion)
BY THE COURT: Very well.

* * * * * * * *

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT 
OF MISSISSIPPI, JACKSON DIVISION

JAMES H, MEREDITH,

Vs.
Plaintiff Jackson 

3130 - Civil
CHARLES DICKSON FAIR, ET AL,Defendants

COURT REPORTER* S CERTIFICATE

I, D. B. JORDAN, hereby certify that the foregoing 
pages constitute a true and correct transcript of the testi­
mony and proceedings had in this cause at Jackson, Mississip­
pi, on the 10th day of August, 1961, and subsequent days, 
when the hearing of said cause was resumed after having been 
recessed at Biloxi, Mississippi, in the Southern Division 
of the Southern District of Mississippi.

I further certify that previous testimony and pro­
ceedings had in this cause at Biloxi, Mississippi, in the 
Southern Division, have previously been transcribed, furnish­
ed to counsel and filed with the clerk of this court.



433 492

WITNESS MI SIGNATURE, this the 16th day of Septem­
ber, 1961.

/a/ D. B. Jordan 
D. B. JORDANOfficial Court Reporter for the 
Southern District of Mississippi

* * * * * * * * * * *  * *