Testimony in Asa D. Kelly et al., v. M. S. Page et al.
Author: King, Martin Luther, Jr., Defendant
Date: August 8, 1962
Location: Albany, Ga.
Genre: Legal
Topic: Albany Movement
Civil Disobedience
Martin Luther King, Jr. - Arrests
Details
Still detained after his 27 July arrest, King was escorted from the Albany jail to Judge J. Robert Elliott’s courtroom to testify about his involvement in the Albany Movement.1 Since 30 July Elliott had been hearing testimony from approximately thirty witnesses on the plaintiffs’ case to make permanent the injunction against Albany Movement demonstrations.2 In his testimony, King recalls the night of 24 July when violence erupted at an unplanned Albany Movement march. When asked by defense attorney Donald Hollowell if the entire community of Albany should assume some responsibility for the violence, King agreed, stating that “all of these accumulated injustices and indignities and the many brutal and inhuman things that have been inflicted upon many Negroes, have naturally brought about deep-seated resentment, which can develop in violent responses at times.”3 Under cross examination by E. Freeman Leverett, counsel for the plaintiffs, a calm King explains civil disobedience: “The individual is to decide in his own conscience whether the law is right; and, if he violates it, he must accept the penalty. He must not try to run from it, he must not seek to evade it, he must not seek to violate it in some sense of subverting the law. He must do it openly and in a non-violent spirit; and this becomes civil disobedience and not uncivil disobedience which we too often see by those who seek to take the law in their hands.”4 After King’s testimony, attorneys for the Albany Movement and for the City of Albany rested their cases.5 Judge Elliott concluded the hearing without setting a date for adjudication, saying: “I am not sure whether it might be in a couple of days, a week or a month.”6
Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.
a party Defendant, and called in behalf of Defendants, being first duly sworn, testified
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HOLLOWELL:
| Q | You haven’t been on the stand before during this trial, have you? |
| A | No sir. |
| Q | Would you give your full name for the record? |
| A | Martin Luther King, Jr. |
| Q | Rev. King, I believe you are the President of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, is that correct? |
| A | Yes sir, that’s correct. |
| Q | In connection with your official capacity, did you have the occasion to be in Albany, Georgia, during the month of December, 1961? |
| A | Yes sir, I did. |
| Q | How did you happen to come? |
| A | Well, I came at the invitation of the Albany Movement. I received a telephone call as well as a telegram from leaders of the Albany Movement, inviting me to come in an advisory capacity on the whole question of non-violence and also to join the movement.7 I think the telegram stated in specific language that they were desirous of having me to join the non-violent movement in Albany. |
| Q | When did you arrive, sir? |
| A | As I recall, I arrived on the 15th of December, the afternoon of the 15th.8 |
| Q | Now, on the day of the 16th of December, ’61, between the hours of noon and 6 o’clock in the evening, did you have the occasion to be at the Shiloh Baptist Church in this City? |
| A | Yes sir, I was there. |
| Q | What were you there for? |
| A | Well, in the morning we had a prayer meeting and then around noon we had a regular worship service, and Dr. Abernathy preached at that service; and we had a regular worship service and mass meeting. |
| Q | Did you hear Rev. Abernathy or did you yourself make any suggestion as to the use of violence on the part of yourself or anybody in the sound of your voice or anybody in the community? |
| A | No, all of our statements were centered in the whole philosophy of non-violence. Every time I spoke to the group I stressed the importance of adhering absolutely to the principles of non-violence. |
| Q | Did you at any time have the occasion to address the City Commission of the City of Albany; that is, individually or in conference with any other persons? |
| A | Yes sir, I did have an opportunity, I think at that period. It was through a letter or through a telegram urging them to negotiate.9 |
| Q | But face to face; did you ever have any face to face contact? |
| A | No sir, I did not have any face to face contact. |
| Q | Do you know whether any was sought? |
| A | Whether I sought this? |
| Q | Or the Albany Movement itself or the leaders of the Movement? |
| A | Oh yes sir, over and over again, this request was mde. |
| Q | Now, you’ve heard the testimony concerning the group that left the church on that day and moved on toward the City Hall; you were a part of that group, were you not?10 |
| A | Yes sir. |
| Q | You were at the head of the line of walking and walking with whom? |
| A | Dr. Anderson. |
| Q | Now, I will ask you whether or not you at any time made any statement to anybody from the time that you left the church uhtil the time that you were arrested, to the effect “Strike me first”? |
| A | No sir, absolutely not. I have made no such statement in Albany or anywhere else concerning “strike me first”. |
| Q | Did you hear such a statement made? |
| A | Yes sir, I did hear the statement made. |
| Q | Who made it? |
| A | Dr. Anderson.11 |
| Q | How long were you in Albany on that occasion? |
| A | Well, I came in on Friday afternoon and I was arrested Saturday, and I was here until Monday; through Monday, the following Monday.12 |
| Q | Of the succeeding week? |
| A | That’s right. |
| Q | After you got out, did you have occasion to remain in the City? |
| A | Yes, I remained through the evening meeting. There was a mass meeting that Monday night, as I recall; and I believe I remained for that mass meeting.13 |
| Q | Would you indicate whether or not during the process of your walking with this group from the church in the direction of the City Hall by way of Whitney and then Jackson Street, you noticed any violence in any way whatsoever on the part of anybody? |
| A | No sir, I didn’t notice any violence at all. |
| Q | Would you indicate what your reactions were at the time that you arrived at the corner of [strikeout illegible] Highland and South Jackson, insofar as whether you moved directly across the street or whether you stopped? |
| A | As I recall, I guess it was Highland and Jackson, we stopped for the red light. There was a light there and we stopped and after that, we went right on. |
| Q | Now, do you agree that the testimony which you have heard, indicating that the group proceed on up South Jackson to Oglethorpe and at that point you were stopped; now, would you indicate by whom and what the occasion was? |
| A | We were stopped at that corner of Oglethorpe, I think, and we were stopped by Chief Pritchett. He came up to the front of the group, along with several policemen and maybe some State Troopers, I don’t recall; and his question to me was, “Do you have a permit to parade?” |
| Q | Was this the first time that you had the occasion to be addressed by any officer along the line of walking? |
| A | Yes sir, that was the first time. |
| Q | Was this the first time that you had made any statement other than in conversation perhaps with Dr. Anderson? |
| A | Yes sir, that’s correct, the first time that I made any statement. |
| Q | Now, when you left, you say the following day after your arrest or the following Monday, you made a speech that night and then you left the City? |
| A | Yes, that’s right. |
| Q | When, if ever, did you return? |
| A | I did not return to Albany until the date of the trial, I don’t recall the exact date, but it was in July, on a Tuesday. It was about the 13th or 14th, I guess. No, excuse me— |
| Q | Was that the trial or was that the sentence? |
| A | No, I’m sorry. I did return for the trial in February, February I believe.14 |
| Q | How long were you here on that occasion? |
| A | Just a few hours. I came in that morning and went right out in the afternoon.15 |
| Q | And then, the next time you returned to the City? |
| A | Was for the sentencing in July. |
| Q | That was about the 10th of July or thereabout? |
| A | That’s correct, about that time. |
| Q | And after you were sentenced what, if anything, happened to you? |
| A | Well, after I was sentenced, I decided on the basis of conscience to serve the time, which turned out to be 45 days instead of paying the fine of $178.16 |
| Q | Now, did you serve the time? |
| A | Well, I served about two days of the time. |
| Q | And then, what happened? |
| A | Well, we were called in Chief Pritchett’s office on Thursday of that same week; again, I don’t remember the date.17 |
| Q | Now, who is “we”? |
| A | Rev. Abernathy was with me. |
| Q | Two of you? |
| A | The two of us. And we felt, in fact, they told us about 7 o’clock in the morning to get dressed, that the Chief wanted to see us; and we just assumed that we were being transferred to another jail. But when we got to Chief Pritchett’s office, he talked with us a while and finally said that our fines had been paid and that we were now to leave. |
| Q | Did you inquire as to who paid them? |
| A | Yes, we did. We asked over and over again and Chief Pritchett said that he didn’t know who paid the fines. |
| Q | Do you know now who paid them? |
| A | No, I don’t. We still have no knowledge of who paid the fines. |
| Q | Was it paid at your behest? |
| A | No sir, I made it very clear to my family and to the leaders of the Albany Movement and anybody else that I had any close connections with that I did not want the fine paid, and Dr. Abernathy did the same.18 |
| Q | Allright, now after you got out, did you leave the City on that occasion? |
| A | No sir, I didn’t leave until, oh 4 or 5 days later.19 |
| Q | Now, during that period of time, you had the occasion to make some speeches, did you not? |
| A | Yes sir, that’s correct, in mass meetings. |
| Q | Did you attend ‘most all of the mass meetings during the time you were here? |
| A | Yes sir, I think I made all of the mass meetings during that period. |
| Q | Did you yourself or did you hear any one who had the occasion to speak on the rostrum address themselves to the matter of violence? |
| A | Yes, over and over again. |
| Q | Did you—I’m sorry? |
| A | Yes, I said over and over again speakers addressed themselves to the question of violence and always discouraged it in the most vigorous and forthright terms. |
| Q | Now, there has been statement—excuse me just one moment—you heard the Chief’s testimony a moment ago, did you not?20 |
| A | Yes sir, I did. |
| Q | Would you indicate what you did say in connection with any assumption of responsibility for some alleged violence that, I believe, Is supposed to have occurred either on the 21st or the 24th of July; the 24th, I guess it was? |
| A | Yes, I made the statement that I was sure that none of the persons involved in the pilgrimage or in the line participated in any act of violence on that evening, and that I was also sure that no one connected with the Albany Movement participated in any violence; but that in this non-violent movement, we abhor violence so much that we felt a spiritual need of accepting some responsibility for the violence that occurred. This was the substance of my statement.21 |
| Q | What did you mean by “spiritual”? I believe you said “a spiritual need to accept”; wasn’t that your language, sir? |
| A | That’s right. |
| Q | What did you mean by that? |
| A | Well, I meant that as long as there is any violence, as I have said on many occasions, taking place in a non-violent movement, even though the persons involved are not in any way connected with the movement, in order to make it a pure and spiritually rooted movement, it is necessary for the leaders of that movement always to take some step in the direction of making it clear that they are absolutely opposed to violence in any form. |
| Q | Did you mean to exclude any other part of the Albany community? |
| A | I’m sorry, I don’t think I quite understand. |
| Q | In your statement about assuming of some spiritual responsibility, I asked you did you mean to exclude any other portion of the community from having some responsibility in connection with it? |
| A | Oh no, not at all. |
| Q | I’ll ask you whether or not you feel that there is some responsibility on the part of the full community for anything that happened? |
| A | Yes sir, I do. I think the presence of injustice in society is always the presence in a potential sense of violence; and I think the long night of injustices, indignities and brutality, and all of the things that have been inflicted— |
MR. LEVERETT: May it please the Court, I object again to this going into a speech and harangue.
MR. HOLLOWELL: May it please the Court—
THE COURT: Let’s let him complete his statement and ask him to abbreviate it as much as possible.
| A | The Witness: Yes sir, I was about to say that all of these accumulated injustices and indignities and the many brutal and inhuman things that have been inflicted upon many Negroes, have naturally brought about deep-seated resentment, which can develop in violent responses at times. |
| Q | Mr. Hollowell: Do you think that this responsibility that you are mentioning is a responsibility to be shared only by the spiritual association that you made with those who were the actual perpetrators or do you feel that there are broader connotations as relate to other people? |
| A | Yes sir, I definitely feel that there are broad connotations. I think it would have been a marvelous act of spiritual discipline and commitment for the whole community to take some part of the responsibility; but I felt that I could not and the leaders of the Albany Movement could not afford to wait for others to do this, feeling that they wouldn’t do it. And so, we were willing to take this spiritual plunge, so to speak, and assume the responsibility, even though we knew we had nothing to do with it. |
| Q | I think, Doctor, you will recall on earlier testimony that there has been some considerable time spent upon your approach to unjust laws; I believe you heard the Chief’s statement: I would like for you to indicate for the Court what you mean by an unwillingness to adhere to unjust laws? |
| A | Well, this could be a very long philosophical discussion, but in terms of this context, I would say that we are dealing or referring mainly to laws upholding the system of segregation. |
MR. HOLLOWELL: I think we have no further questions for this witness.
THE COURT: Any questions for this witness?
MR. LEVERETT: Yes sir.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. LEVERETT:
| Q | Dr. King, when did you say was the first occasion that you came into Albany since the formation of the Albany Movement? What was the date on that? |
| A | December 14, I believe. |
| Q | Now, prior to the time that you received a telegram, had you been in communication with Dr. Anderson or any other leads of the Albany Movement? |
| A | Yes sir, I think I had talked with Dr. Anderson several times. In fact, I have known Dr. Anderson for a number of years and almost every time he came to Atlanta, he stopped by the office or called. |
| Q | You aren’t saying, are you Doctor King, that the first occasion in which you discussed with any member of the Albany Movement the possibility of your participation was just the incident that you referred to as having occurred a day or two before you came down? |
| A | Yes sir, that was the first time that an invitation was extended and the first time that I ever considered coming to Albany. |
| Q | Assuming that was the first time an invitation had ever been extended, had you on any prior occasion volunteered your services? |
| A | No sir, I had not on any prior occasion, as I recall, volunteered my services. |
| Q | I believe you said that you arrived here on the afternoon of December 15? |
| A | I think it was the 14th, I believe. It was on a Friday. It may have been the 15th. |
| Q | And that you stayed over through Monday? What was the following Monday, what was the date, do you recall? |
| A | It was the 18th, I believe. |
| Q | Now, did you speak at the Shiloh Church on the night of the 16th? |
| A | On the night of the 16th? No sir, I think that was the night I was in jail, the 16th. |
| Q | Excuse me, go ahead? |
| A | That was the night I was in jail. |
| Q | Dr. King, do you know how many times you have actually spoken either at Shiloh or Mt. Zion Baptist Church? Shiloh Methodist, I believe and Mt. Zion Baptist? |
| A | Baptist. No sir, I don’t recall the exact number of times. I’ve spoken there many times since the Movement started, especially this last period that I’ve been back. |
| Q | In fact, in your speeches you have encouraged the people to march and to protest, haven’t you? |
| A | Yes sir, I have encouraged the people to protest, as I have done over and over again all over the South and the Nation. |
| Q | Also, Dr. King, did you on one, at least one occasion, I don’t know the exact date, address the crowd and tell them to come and bring their walking shoes?22 |
| A | I may have. I don’t recall this particular statement. It’s altogether possible. |
| Q | Now, is it your testimony that you were here only on this occasion in December for a period of several days and that the next occasion that you returned to Albany was in February, when the trial was held; is that right? |
| A | Yes sir, I think it was February or early March. I don’t recall the date. |
| Q | You were tried in February? |
| A | That’s correct. |
| Q | And you commenced serving your sentence when? |
| A | In July. |
| Q | You did not commence serving it in February when the trial was held? |
| A | No sir, at that time the Judge ruled or stated that, since there were several legal questions involved and since several motions were made that he had not had a chance to study, he would have both sides to file briefs and then he would render his decision after that period; and I think he said that would be a 60-day period. |
| Q | Was there any appeal ever instituted by way of certiorari or any other legal proceedings that are available to review decisions of Recorder’s Court? |
| A | No sir, I don’t recall. I don’t know of any. |
| Q | Did you request that your attorney appeal it? |
| A | Appeal, you mean—? |
| Q | Of your conviction? |
| A | In July? |
| Q | Whenever you were convicted; I believe you stated that you had the trial in February and the determination of the Court was made in July, is that right? |
| A | That’s right, that’s right, yes. |
| Q | The question was, did you ever request that your attorneys appeal? |
| A | No sir, I didn’t make a request for them to appeal. I knew that one case was being appealed, which would test the legality of the arrests themselves; and I didn’t make a request for an appeal to be made on my behalf. |
| Q | Now, Dr. King, a few minutes ago you drew some distinction between the people who were the actual marchers and the other groups who followed along behind or who were engaged in some of this violent activity: Did you hear—were you hear when the witness, Slater King, testified that the Albany Movement represented all of the Negroes in Albany?23 |
| A | I didn’t hear, I don’t recall this particular statement, but I’m sure that it does represent all of the Negroes of Albany, in the sense that it is seeking to achieve justice and first-class citizenship for all of the citizens of Albany. |
| Q | Also, Dr. King, do you know whether or not Dr. Anderson has stated on occasions that he estimated that the Albany Movement represented approximately 10,000 people in the Albany area: are you familiar with his statement to that effect? |
| A | No sir, I don’t know about that particular statement. In fact, I don’t know the actual membership of the Albany Movement. I don’t think there is a membership list, in the sense that you would have in some incorporated bodies. |
| Q | Now Dr. King, you stated on direct that in referring to your right to violate unjust laws, you had reference mainly to segregation laws, is that right? |
| A | In this particular context, yes sir. |
| Q | By the use of the word “mainly”, I presume you meant you were not necessarily limiting it to segregation laws, is that right? |
| A | Well, in this particular situation, yes. |
| Q | Would that include court decrees as well as laws, if you felt a court decree was unjust, do you think that you would have a right to violate it or to advocate violating it? |
| A | Well, it’s difficult to give a yes or no answer to that. I think it is so general and it involves so many philosophical complexities that it would take me a few minutes to really explain this. |
| Q | Now, in making this statement about violating the laws, have you ever made that statement at any of these meetings that you had a Shiloh or Mt. Zion churches? |
| A | No sir, I don’t think I have gone into a discussion of unjust laws or the whole question of civil disobedience at any of the mass meetings. |
| Q | Now Dr. King, when you made these statements, I believe before the Press Club on one occasion, is that correct, about the unjust law situation? |
| A | Yes sir. Well, that was in a question that came up when I was addressing the National Press Club.24 |
| Q | Now, of course, when you made those statements, you didn’t undertake to elaborate upon any of these philosophical or metaphysical insights or reservations that you now have just expressed, did you? |
| A | Yes sir, I took at least eight minutes to explain that. |
| Q | Now Dr. King, do you think that the masses of people that have been involved in the Albany Movement are capable of comprehending and appreciating all of this philosophical insight that you’ve referred to? |
| A | Many would. I think it can be broken down to the point that it can be understood by almost anybody. I have in the past tried to explain the meaning of civil disobedience and just and unjust laws to people who may not have had a great deal of formal training, but who had intelligence; and this can’t be measured by the number of years that an individual has been to school; and I think it can be broken down to the point that people who are not well trained in the formal sense can understand it. |
| Q | In fact, Dr. King, isn’t it true that such a statement as that could very easily be interpreted by some peoplle as an open invitation to go out and violate the law generally? |
| A | No sir, I have never said it when I did not explain exactly what I meant because I have always argued that anarchy is much worse in the final analysis than some other things; and what we seek is to create a society where men will live together as brothers and to correct and point out the deficiencies of the law and not to develop a situation where people will disobey the law generally when it is a just law. |
| Q | Now, Dr. King, let me ask you this question: A lot of people, conscientious people, disagree with certain Supreme Court decisions, do you think those people are justified, if their conscience tells them, do you think they are justified in going out and violating those decrees and advocating to others that they violate them? |
| A | I think—yes sir, I think that they have that right if they will do it openly, if they will willingly accept the penalty, if they will do it in loving, non-violent spirit and not curse and use terms that deal with Negroes as if they are dogs; if they are willing to accept the penalty, if they do it openly, fine; but if they seek to subvert, if they seek to evade the law, I think that’s wrong; and I think that this is what they’ve done. |
| Q | In other words, you think that an open defiance of the law is all right but that if a person tries to, as you say, evade or circumvent, that that’s wrong? |
| A | No sir, I don’t think an open—I would not like to see them defy, evade or seek to circumvent the law. I would say that it becomes right when conscience tells them it is unjust and they openly, non-violently, lovingly break that law and willingly accept the penalty by staying in jail, if necessary, to point out the deficiencies of the law and arouse the conscience of the community so that it will see that it is wrong. |
| Q | In other words, you’re saying that it’s a state of mind and motivation of the individual that’s the determining factor? |
| A | I’m sorry, I don’t think I understand your question. |
| Q | As I understand what you’re saying, you are saying that it’s in effect a subjective question, that it’s a state of mind, whether it is lovingly, as you say, violation; is that the determining factor, the mental attitude of the person doing it, is that what you’re saying? |
| A | Well, no sir, I don’t think it’s the state of mind only, but only if that state of mind is coupled with a deep-seated moral conviction and that moral conviction takes one to the point of seeking to secure the moral end which is in the mind through moral means. Now, what often happens is that people seek to secure what they think are moral ends through immoral means, and I think this is wrong because the end is pre-existent in the means. |
| Q | Right there, who is going to determine whether it is a moral or immoral end, Dr. King? Are you going to make that determination or is somebody else going to make it and, if so, who would it be? |
| A | Well, I = would hope that the community and the Nation and the people of good will would make it as a result of the self-inflicted suffering that people who move out on a moral principle are willing to undertake. I’m not saying that they take the law in their hands, but they believe so much in the sacredness of the law when it is a right law that they are willing to suffer in order to see that those laws which are not right are somehow made or re-made to square with that which is morally right. |
| Q | I follow your explanation, I understand your explanation, but I am still not certain who you are saying is to make this determination as to whether it’s right or wrong? |
| A | Well, the individuals involved are the ones, the individual conscience is the issue at that point. |
| Q | The individual is to decide in his own conscience whether or not he will violate the law, is that right? |
| A | The individual is to decide in his own conscience whether the law is right; and, if he violates it, he must accept the penalty. He must not try to run from it, he must not seek to evade it, he must not seek to violate it in some sense of subverting the law. He must do it openly and in a non-violent spirit; and this becomes civil disobedience and not uncivil disobedience which we too often see by those who seek to take the law in their hands. |
| Q | Now, Dr. King, you stated that your method was method of non-violence? |
| A | Yes sir. |
| Q | The fact of the matter is though that you anticipated violence, didn’t you? |
| A | Well, I had rather put it another way. I hoped and I still hope that there will be no violence in our struggle for first-class citizenship. I came to Albany when I came and joined the Movement, hoping that there would be no violence; and when I say that I mean violence from either side. However, in a non-violent movement, the one thing that you say is that you as a person committed to non-violence will never inflict violence upon another, but you will willingly accept it upon yourself. And it may be that before freedom is achieved in some places in the South some blood will flow, but I’ve always insisted that it must be our blood and not the blood of our white brothers. |
| Q | Back in that connection, Doctor, you are familiar with these clinics that have been held, are you not, in Albany, at which the participants in the Albany Movement are given instruction in how to receive acts of violence against them? |
| A | In the clinics here in Albany? |
| Q | Right? |
| A | I haven’t attended; no, I haven’t had a chance to attend any of them. |
| Q | You have had instruction along those lines yourself, have you not? |
| A | Yes sir, I have been in clinics. |
| Q | In fact, you have attended clinics at the Highland Folk School in Tennessee, have you not? |
| A | No sir, I never attended a clinic there. |
| Q | Have you ever attended any meetings there? |
| A | Yes, I addressed the 25th—I gave one of the addresses at the 25th Anniversary of the Highlander Folk School.25 |
| Q | Was Mr. Miles Horton there? |
| A | Yes sir, he was a director. |
| Q | Did you go there at his invitation? |
| A | As I recall, the invitation came from—I really don’t remember. I don’t know if Mr. Horton extended it or somebody else on the Board.26 |
| Q | Did you address the group there on the subject of non-violent protests? |
| A | I’m sure in the course of my lecture, as I always do in all of my speeches, I dealt a great deal with non-violent protests; but I don’t recall the subject and how much time I spent on it. |
MR. HOLLOWELL: May it please the Court, I cannot see where some speech that has been made in some years previous at some place outside of Albany, which has nothing to do and had nothing to do with any of the activities which are here, could have in any way have any relevancy or materiality to this particular issue, unless counsel is seeking to show that this particular witness, Defendant and party, has at some time made a speech in which he recommended violence or something other than this which he is submitting here now. I would submit it would have absolutely no materiality.
MR. LEVERETT: May it please the Court, this witness has testified of his advocacy of non-violent protests, and I am going into the question of what preparation which he and other members of his group may have had for violence.
MR. HOLLOWELL: I would submit that it wouldn’t matter what his preparation was, as long as this has been the advocation that has been made here in this suit pertaining to all matters which are related to the subject case, this and this only. What preparation, I think unless he was going to the original preparation from the standpoint of his background, study and so forth, I think would be of no moment and would have no materiality.
THE COURT: I think that’s what, as I understood counsel’s statement, that’s what he intends to do, is to show what training he’s had in connection with the very thing we’re talking about. That’s what I understood counsel to say.
MR. LEVERETT: Yes sir.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Training, if this is what it relates to, that’s one thing; if it merely relates to a matter of some speech which has been made at some prior time and did not relate to this, then I don’t think it is relevant.
THE COURT: Then, that would only go to possible impeachment to contradict some other testimony which he has given; but, as I understood counsel, he said he was going into the matter of training. So, I will allow the question.
| Q | Mr. Leverett: Dr. King, the matter of these protests and the procedures to be utilized and the anticipation of violence, all of these things were in fact discussed or there was instruction given at this Highlander Folk School, isn’t that true? |
| A | I really couldn’t say. I was only at the Highland Folk School one time and that was the time that I went in for that address, and I was there only 3 or 4 hours; I had to go right out; so, I don’t know too many of the details. I do know that Highland Folk School has worked in the area of race relations across the years, but how much emphasis they place on training non-violent leaders, I don’t know. |
| Q | Is it your testimony that you went there to speak or to attend other addresses that were made? |
| A | My testimony is that I went there to speak. I didn’t hear any of the other addresses. I went in and made my speech and left, oh an hour or two after that. |
| Q | Dr. King, I hand you a document— |
MR. HOLLOWELL: May we see that?
MR. LEVERETT: I want to present him with the pictures [strikeout illegible] not with the writing in the paper, but the pictures.
(Document tendered to counsel for Defendants)
MR. HOLLOWELL: May it please the Court, I will object to this particular document, which is P-22, on the ground that there is nothing in it which would show the source from which it came, or the name of the editors or publishers of it. There is no certificate of any kind attached to it. There is nothing to indicate that these photographs which are even on it were actually taken of the particular scene which they purport to have been taken of; or that any of the identifications that are attributed here are in fact true; and on the further ground that there is nothing here which would suggest anything dealing with the Albany Movement or with any preparation which this witness has at any time made, which would go to the development of a theory of non-violence and a philosophy dealing with the matter of unjust laws.
MR. LEVERETT: May it please the Court, I wanted to the show the witness the paper, there are some pictures on here, and I wanted to ask him about if this is his picture there and this is his picture here; and he appears to be sitting here, and he just testified that he didn’t hear any speeches but that he went there and spoke only. And I wanted to question him about these pictures.
MR. HOLLOWELL: The wording under it, Your Honor, I mean the wording itself, I think that again is objectionable as no evidence has been offered about the authenticity of it.
THE COURT: Mr. Hollowell, he hasn’t offered it in evidence, the document hasn’t been offered in evidence; and I’m going to proceed the same way that I did on a previous occasion when counsel was questioning the witness about a newspaper article, whether that was correctly represented, and the same rule would apply here. I will allow counsel to ask him questions about the pictures on cross-examination. Now, if it comes to the question of introduction of the document, then I will rule when we get to that.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Allright.
| Q | Mr. Leverett: Dr. King, I ask you whether this picture in the top left-hand corner, is that your picture there? |
| A | Yes sir, that’s my picture. |
| Q | Is that a true representation of you as you appeared at the Highlander Folk School?27 |
| A | Yes sir, that’s correct. |
| Q | Now, I call your attention to the picture over here in the top right-hand corner and ask you if that is you sitting |
| A | Yes sir. |
| Q | And you’re sitting down there, are you not? |
| A | That’s correct. |
| Q | Who was speaking at the time that you were sitting there? |
| A | I don’t recall. As I recall, and this is vague in my memory, someone was leading a devotional period, and I think it was Dr. Thompson of the University of Chicago, because he was up when I came in; and I spoke immediately after him.28 |
| Q | Is this picture on the right, the one where you’re sitting down, is that a true representation of you as you sat there on the occasion in question? |
| A | On the—? |
| Q | Is this a true picture? |
| A | Yes, that’s my picture. |
| Q | Who is this party right here sitting, looking at the picture, to the right? |
| A | I don’t know him. |
| Q | What about this party? |
| A | That’s Mr. Aubrey Williams.29 |
| Q | And what about this gentleman here? |
| A | I don’t believe I know him; no, I don’t know him. |
THE COURT: Is that Aubrey Williams from Alabama?
The Witness: From Montgomery, Alabama; that’s right.
| Q | Mr. Leverett: Dr. King, I ask you whether or not a Miss or Mrs. Grace Lorch was also at that meeting?30 |
| A | I don’t know her, so I couldn’t say. |
| Q | Now, getting back to the question that I asked you a few minutes ago, it is true, is it not Dr. King, that in this movement that you have engaged in, that you did anticipate that violence might be committed? |
| A | In Albany or the over-all? |
| Q | In Albany specifically? |
MR. HOLLOWELL: May it please the Court, I think this is now about the third time that he has asked that and the witness has already answered the question.
THE COURT: I think so. I think we’ve been over that and I don’t see any use in going over that again. Let’s move on to something else.
| Q | Mr. Leverett: Dr. King, are you a member of CORE? |
| A | I’m a member of the advisory board, the National Advistory Board. |
| Q | Are you affiliated with the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee? |
| A | Yes sir, I am. |
| Q | In what capacity? |
| A | Adviser. |
| Q | As an adviser or are you on some board or committee? |
| A | Yes sir, it is called, I think, advisory board. |
| Q | Advisory board? |
| A | Yes sir. |
| Q | Is that the governing body of that group? |
| A | No sir, the governing body is another body altogether. |
MR. LEVERETTS: That’s all at this time.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Now, if it please the Court, I would respectfully request the Court to rule on our motion now pertaining to all of his testimony relative to this Highlander School, insofar as it is not relevant and it is immaterial and there is no way that it has been in any wise associated with anything that is the subject-matter of this particular case; and, therefore, I again move that it be stricken. It was not tied in in any way whatsoever.
THE COURT: I think your motion is too broad. Certainly the fact that he attended and so and testified that these matters were discussed there, I think that would be pertinent. Now, the question of whether the testimony given about these particular pictures, I don’t see how that adds anything to the case; and I sustain the motion insofar as it relates to these pictures in question.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Thank you, sir.
MR. LEVERETT: May it please the Court, before the Court rules, my point on the pictures was that the witness testified that he went there only to make a speech, that he was not present when any other speeches were made; and I believe this picture shows him sitting down listening to some sort of speech, certainly something was going on.
THE COURT: I’m going to sustain the motion and exclude the reference to the pictures. I admit all of the other testimony about the Highlander School.
Anything further from this witness?
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HOLLOWELL:
| Q | One question, did you or did you not know who was to be present at the meeting just referred to? |
MR. LEVERETT: May it please the Court, now if I can’t go into it, I think that counsel certainly has no right to go into it.
THE COURT: I think his question only relates to the general meeting.
MR. HOLLOWELL: That is correct.
THE COURT: Go ahead.
| Q | Mr. Hollowell: Did you or did you not know who was to be present? |
| A | No sir, I did not know who was to be present, only some of the people. I would say 4 or 5; but the vast majority I didn’t know. |
| Q | No further questions. |
RECROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. LEVERETT:
| Q | Dr. King, in fact, several people there were acknowledged Communists, isn’t that true? |
| A | I did not know any. In fact, all of the people I came in contact with and the people that I know who were there are not Communists and never have been. Now, if there were communists there, I knew nothing about it. |
| Q | You are disclaiming though any knowing association with those people now? |
| A | Any knowing association with the people at the Conference? |
| Q | Right? |
| A | I don’t quite understand. You mean all of the people there? |
| Q | You’ve just stated that you did not know who was going to be there, which I presume was by means of ameliorating or explaining the fact that some people were there who apparently you were little unconcerned about? |
MR. HOLLOWELL: May it please the Court, that’s a matter, I think, of testimony and conclusion made by counsel and I would submit that it would be improper and ought to be stricken as a conclusion on his part.
THE COURT: Yes, that’s simply a statement made by counsel and not a question. I strike that.
THE COURT: Now, do you want to ask the question over?
MR. LEVERETT: No further questions.
MR. HOLLOWELL: Come down.
THE COURT: We’ll take a recess at this time for 10 minutes.
1. Asa D. Kelley’s name was misspelled in the published case.
2. Transcript of Trial Testimony, Kelly v. Page, 335 F.2d 114 (5th Cir. 1964), 30 July–26 September 1962.
3. In addition to Hollowell, the legal team consisted of C. B. King, Constance Baker Motley, Frank D. Reeves, Howard Moore, Jr., Carl Rachlin, William M. Kunstler, Clarence B. Jones, Horace T. Ward, and Norman Amaker. Donald Lee Hollowell (1917–2004), born in Wichita, Kansas, earned his high school diploma over six years while serving in the 10th Cavalry Regiment of the United States Army. He received his B.A. from Lane College (1947) and J.D. from Loyola University in Chicago (1951). During the 1950s and 1960s, Hollowell earned a reputation as an influential civil rights attorney, counseling student activists in Atlanta and successfully litigating the 1961 case which integrated the University of Georgia. In 1966, President Johnson appointed him the southeast regional director of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a position he held until 1985. Hollowell also served as chairman of the board for the Voter Education Project from 1971 until 1986.
4. Ernest Freeman Leverett (1929–1997), born in Fort Valley, Georgia, earned a B.S. from Indiana Technical College in 1949 and an LL.B. from Emory University School of Law in 1951. Leverett began practicing law in 1951. When Georgia governor S. Ernest Vandiver requested Leverett’s help defending the city of Albany against the Albany Movement, Leverett was in his third year as deputy assistant attorney general of Georgia, a position he held until 1966. That same year, Leverett co-argued the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 before the U.S. Supreme Court. He was a member of several organizations, including the National and Georgia School Boards Associations and the Disciplinary Board of the State of Georgia.
5. Just prior to the conclusion of the case, the U.S. Justice Department filed a “friend of the court” brief opposing the Albany city officials’ request to halt any further demonstrations (“Justice Dept. Enters Case in Court in Albany,” Atlanta Daily World, 9 August 1962).
6. “Justice Dept. Enters Case in Court in Albany,” 9 August 1962. Four days after Kelley filed an injunction against mass demonstrations and protests in Albany, the Albany Movement filed two class action lawsuits asking the court to end racial discrimination in public facilities in Albany and to prohibit Albany city officials from interfering with Albany residents’ right to protest peacefully (W. G. Anderson et al., v. Asa D. Kelly et al., 32 F.R.D. 355 [M.D. Ga. 1963]; W. G. Anderson et al., v. City of Albany et al., 321 F.2d 649 [5th Cir. 1963]). In response, the City of Albany filed a counter-claim, asking the court to institute a permanent injunction against demonstrations in Albany. Due to the similarity of the four cases and the large number of witnesses, they were consolidated for the purpose of trial, and the hearings were conducted in stages, beginning 30 July 1962 and ending 26 September 1962. In 1963, Anderson v. Kelly (M.D. Ga. 1963) was dismissed after Judge Elliott found that the suit was not a proper class action claim. The three remaining cases, Kelly v. Page, Anderson v. City of Albany, and City of Albany v. Anderson, were decided together in 1963. Finding that race relations had improved since the cases were first filed in 1962, Elliott denied all parties’ applications for permanent injunctions. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals later affirmed Elliott’s decision to deny a permanent injunction to Albany city officials, but remanded the Albany Movement’s case back to district court. In 1964, Elliott enjoined the City of Albany and its officials from preventing anti-segregation protests or retaliating against protesters and from enforcing segregation in publicly owned or operated facilities and privately owned recreational and travel services open to the public (Kelly v. Page, 335 F.2d 114 [5th Cir. 1964]).
7. King received a call from Albany Movement president William G. Anderson. The telegram inviting King to Albany has not been located.
8. See King, Address Delivered at Albany Movement Mass Meeting at Mt. Zion Baptist Church, 15 December 1961, pp. 342–344 in this volume.
9. On 16 December 1961, Anderson and Albany Movement secretary Marion Page sent a telegram to Kelley and the City Commission requesting negotiations. In response, Kelley wrote: “Since you have elected not to use the medium of the negotiating committee to submit your grievances and demands and since you apparently have no intention of living up to the truce and encouraging your people to avoid the occasion of the violation of valid ordinances and statutes, we feel that you are not acting in good faith and until you can do so we can give no response to your demand” (Vic Smith, “City Officials Reject Negro Group’s Demands,” Albany Herald, 16 December 1961; Kelley to Anderson and Page, 16 December 1961).
10. Other witnesses called to testify about the protest on 16 December 1961 included Albany police chief Laurie Pritchett, Albany city manager Stephen A. Roos, William G. Anderson, Slater King, and Ralph Abernathy (Transcript of Trial Testimony, Kelly v. Page, 335 F.2d 114 [5th Cir. 1964], 30 July–26 September 1962).
11. Anderson corroborated King’s statement in his own testimony, explaining, “I made the statement in response to the action of one of the police officers. As he approached the line … he raised his nightstick and grasped it in both hands and held it up before him; and I said, ‘If you hit anybody, hit me first’” (Transcript of Trial Testimony, Kelly v. Page, 335 F.2d 114 [5th Cir. 1964], 30 July–26 September 1962).
12. After addressing a group of protesters at Shiloh Baptist Church on 16 December 1961, King, Anderson, Abernathy, and over 260 demonstrators marched toward Albany’s City Hall to pray. All were arrested for parading without a permit, obstructing traffic, and blocking sidewalks. King, Abernathy, and Anderson were taken to the Albany Jail but later transferred to the jail in Americus, Georgia (see Abernathy to King, 17 December 1961, pp. 346–347 in this volume).
13. After his release from jail on 18 December 1961, King addressed a mass meeting at Shiloh Baptist Church before leaving for Atlanta. He told the crowd that he did not want “to stand in the way of meaningful negotiations” between the Albany Movement and city officials by remaining in jail (Bill Shipp, “Albany, Negroes Seal Peace; Prisoners to Go Free on Bail,” Atlanta Constitution, 19 December 1961; “Dr. King Is Freed,” New York Times, 19 December 1961).
14. King came back to Albany on 27 February 1962 to stand trial before Judge A. N. Durden on charges stemming from his December 1961 arrest (see Introduction, p. 30 in this volume).
15. King was found guilty following the trial on 27 February, but Judge Durden postponed the verdict for sixty days. King returned to Atlanta after the trial (see Introduction, pp. 30–31 in this volume).
16. See Press Release, King and Abernathy Choose Jail Time over Fine, 10 July 1962, pp. 510–511 in this volume.
17. King was summoned to Pritchett’s office on 12 July 1962.
18. Police Chief Laurie Pritchett stated that an “unidentified ‘tall, well-dressed Negro’” paid the fine (Bill Shipp, “Freed by Mystery Fine Donor, Rev. King Meets Police Chief,” Atlanta Constitution, 13 July 1962).
19. King was released from jail on 12 July 1962. He went back to Atlanta on 14 July and returned to Albany on 16 July.
20. In his testimony given on 8 August 1962, Chief Pritchett said: “I have heard [King and other leaders] through my own contact with them state that they were responsible for part of the violence that has occurred here, because they were encouraging the people and inciting the people and they would have to take the responsibility of it; and that was the reason that Dr. Martin Luther King and Dr. Abernathy called a day of penitence.” He then asserted that King never explained exactly what he meant by “assuming a part of the responsibility” for the violence of 24 July 1962 (Transcript of Trial Testimony, Kelly v. Page, 335 F.2d 114 [5th Cir. 1964], 30 July–26 September 1962).
21. On the evening of 24 July 1962, violence erupted during an unplanned march led by members of the Albany Movement. The following day King denounced the violence and called for a day of penance (Press Conference Denouncing Violence in Albany, 25 July 1962, pp. 553–555 in this volume).
22. Leverett may have been referring to King’s speech on 20 July 1962 when he exhorted the crowd of over 1,200 to “get on your walking shoes. Live together children. Don’t you get weary! There’s a great camp meeting” (King, Address Delivered at Albany Movement Mass Meeting at Third Kiokee Baptist Church, 20 July 1962, p. 544 in this volume).
23. On 30 July 1962, Slater King testified: “We have no formal membership. We consider most of the Negro community members of the Albany Movement” (Transcript of Trial Testimony, Kelly v. Page, 335 F.2d 114 [5th Cir. 1964], 30 July–26 September 1962).
24. See King, Address Delivered to the National Press Club and Question and Answer Period, 19 July 1962, p. 536 in this volume.
25. See King, “A Look to the Future,” Address Delivered at Highlander Folk School’s Twenty-fifth Anniversary Meeting, 2 September 1957, in Papers 4:269–276. In 1959 Highlander came under scrutiny when the Tennessee government recommended its charter be revoked on charges that the school was being run for profit, which was a violation of its nonprofit requirements. Highlander closed in 1961 and reopened later that year as the Highlander Research and Education Center.
26. MIA activist and Highlander executive council member James E. Pierce invited King to attend the seminar (Myles Horton to King, 19 April 1957). King spoke on the last day of the seminar, which lasted four days.
27. Following his address, billboards featuring King at Highlander appeared throughout the South with the headline “King At Communist Training School” (King, “A Look to the Future,” 2 September 1957, in Papers 4:269–276; for a photograph of the billboard, see photographs in Papers 4).
28. John B. Thompson, one of Highlander’s first staff members and dean of the University of Chicago’s Rockefeller Memorial Chapel, introduced King.
29. Williams, president of the Southern Conference Education Fund, preceded King’s address at Highlander’s meeting in September 1957.
30. Grace Lorch, a former schoolteacher from Arkansas, first gained public attention in September 1957 when she defended fifteen-year-old Elizabeth Eckford against an angry mob after the girl had been turned away from all-white Central High School in Little Rock. The next month Mrs. Lorch was called before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee to answer questions about her alleged communist involvement. When Senators James O. Eastland (D-MS) and William Jenner (R-IN) questioned her, she answered with a prepared statement that began, “I am here under protest.” She was charged with contempt (“Little Rock Woman Defies Senate Unit,” New York Times, 30 October 1957).
Source: GEpNASR, United States National Archives and Records Administration, National Archives at Atlanta, Morrow, Ga.