# Transcript of Record — Mitchell v. United States > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386401_0404%3A01 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Transcript of Record - **Published:** January 1, 1941 - **Citation:** 313 U.S. 80 ## Text ; ~ . » - = e , ' p ° = T_- ‘ . , AP 0 se TIE FE AOD AAD, ATT SAE ATRL Gt le AAA tA NANNERL RES EEA ILA ASA Y a e « . : 4 bs an xf BLANK PAGE . OCTOBER TERM, 1940 77 e ‘ es vs. =, s ° ARTHUR W.-MITCHELL, APPELLANT: - "SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES | -, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION, FRANK 0. , ¥§T AL aus > - APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE’ NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ; 4 e . / ° i \ trom-D-O-U-8., Nortifern ied ay arent ee = Excerpts from complaint filed before Interstate Com- ON a 6g 06 60.6 86a eT OSPR REDO IAD Cie eS Excerpts from the answer of the Illinois Central.... Excerpts from the answer of the Rock Island...... Exhibit “A”—Proposed report of Examiner, Wm. A. DIGGERS . ccc iveicenesss Kevkveedetons bivodbuckes ‘ , Exhibit “B’—Report of Commissions............. Order of Commission dismisssing the complaint... . Exhibit “C”—Order’ of Commission denying petition for reliearing and reargument ..........+++++++: Summons and return soeeebeees (Omitted in printing) .. Answer of defendant, United States of America........ Se Pe ; mission veeiekeceweveevneeeuen avkbendessna va eae oA Sie as tec Sse ae a é Excerpts from the answer of the Pullman Company LOWDEN, - —_— Print —j-- —j - 1 . Cs Som } 7 2 13 7 13 7 Mo. ss 16-10 26 18 44 33 45 3 55 58 41 G = ae Proceedings ....+++s+++.- ebbaseqncees eecneces. oe - Testimony of Arthur W. Mitchell............. 157 Thomas J..Price .........0%%eeee Edward H. Carry ..........-... William Harrison svabcstecees - ee Sevecvevegee. , , Elias A.. Morris . kivecsesed wens Albert W. Jones .....c0...ce000s WB BORE sic cc cvcsvcgepsccens ad A. C. McGuife .....ccceccicccces Arthur W. Mitchell (recalled)... Exhibit No. 1—Railroad ticket ............. ‘ea ~ Exhibit No. 2—Pullman stub ........... revere way ©o., filed June 4, 1988, before Interstate Com- merce Commission COCSCHSHHHESCHHOTOSOHHTOSISGCAL CBOE 3 Print a 211 214 SaeegeeEe 3g a ef 88 @ \ es — hd Record from D. C. U. 8., “Northern District of Illinois—Con- tinued - ' Original - Print Deg gg oh Re EAE SAR 438 220° Caption and en sogexdeunsgavisetesevics Aa 220 Plaintiff's evidence ......ccdecccccccccecccscccccs ' Defendants’ evidence .........8......cceeeeeeeee, oa _ Argument by Mr Mcrae Argument by Mr. Westbrooks ......6.....-sese40+ e ¢ Sees ‘ ‘ Argument by Mr. Payne ..........seeseceeeeeeees “G11 . + Arguthent by Mr. Hughes .............+.....2+2-. 588 Defendants’ praecipe for transcript of record.......... 559 ~ Defendants’ Exhibit .No. 2—Exceptions. on behalf. of- plaintiff to report of examiner, filed. Mhya26, 1938, . ec ‘before Interstate Commerce Commission............ 562 259 - Clerk’s certificate seeeeeesees+s (omitted in printing) .. 598 Statement of points to be relied upon and destgnation of: — parts of record to be printed ..........sseeeeecceeeeeess 59O> 279 - = - ie; a. eS Sto, 6 os ‘* 6 ¥ ° ’ As / — ‘ ’ Z td bs s: ® 7 ~. ae Frey egg eae ee aS . * i GELS PELE DELI EEE BLES TIPS PO MALE I INN PTS ETE EOE ACA MITA Es OO RES OSS AUP ASN RMN he et FAD PRITAM } ° ; “ : . said; did directly and indirectly charge, demand, collect, and receive from’ this complainant a greater compensation for service rendered in transporting him as a passenger, than Beets was charged,.demanded, collected and received from other persons (whose names are to complainant unknown) for do- [fol. 9] ing for thenr a like and contemporaneops service, '. and did thereby unjustly discriminate against complainant; in this, that the defendants did charge this complainant-and received from him the price of first class accommodations; yet furnished to him: second class accommodations, while furnishing first class accommodations to all others who had purchased first class tickets for first class accommodations; ee . ‘and such action of the defendants did thereby unjustly dis- : criminate against complainant in violation of Section 2 of the Interstate Commerce Act. __ bad 2 V . f That the defendants, and each of them, in violation of Section 3, Clause 1 of the Interstate Commerce Act, on the date aforesaid, did give undue and unreasonable preference and advantage to certain white persons (whose names are to | _ this complainant unknown) in respect to transporting them v } . from Chicago to Hot Springs aforesaid; and did subject _ this*complainant to undue and unreasonable prejudice and disadvantage in respect to transporting him as aforesaid ; in this, that the aforesaid white persons holding first class tickets. siniilar identically to the first. class ticket held by this complainant, were transported in a first class car, said - car being equipped with clean towels, clean washbowls, ‘comfortable seats with upholstered backs and foot rests; clean smoking rooms, lounging rooms, observation space, writing desks; writing paper, pen and ink, magazines and other reading periodicals, regular and efficient porter serv- — ice, pressing and: shoe shining service, stenographic serv- ice, manicuring and barber shop service, bath service, valet ' service, radio, soap of high qaality, facilities for serving -- / _ Meals in the car or the option of having meals in the dining ie car; clean toilet facilities with running hot and cold water, ee ae _ and water for flushing purposes with disinfectant, all free of chargé to first class passengers, and many other services too numerous to mention or to particularize more definitely ; while this complainant, notwithstanding the fact that he possessed a first class ticket entitling him to ride in a first - * > “ ’ 3 / 3 e e - p 4 : . x 6 rs c F - ‘ = nt eZ ~ ee ene SRB SIE ESD CG EEO NS PRBS ~ P es Sata iy ez “5 Nha alg Saks tees SD ¢ a e ety = Pass EO os ay = . [fol. 10] class car possessing each and every one of the Jast named facilities, was compelled by the. defendants by and . . through their agents, servants, and employees and.ever pro- a: test of this complainant, to ride in a second class car which | - contrary said second class car did not contain clean. towels,y nor clean washbowls; nor compartments, berths, sections, drawingrooms, smoking rooms, lounging rooms, observation | -. space, writing desks, paper, pen, ink, magazines, and-other 4 Bs reading periodicals; nor porter service, soap, nor facilities _ for meals being served in said car; nor clean toilet facilities with running hot and cold water for flushing purpeses and disinfectant; and this complainant specifically charges that j the second class car in which he was forced to ride as afore- : a as : said did not contain the above facilities and. did not contain ; any one or either of thém; but on the contrary the said second class car was fil ¥ with filthy toilets, and so re- mained during the entire time this complainant was com- pelled to occupy it, which was for a period of more than four hours and over a journey of about 160 miles; beginning at a point just west of Memphis, Tennessee, and ne ei on into Hot Springs, Arkansas. And in this connection, complainant further tabi that the first class car oecupied by the aforesaid white persons holding tickets identically similar to the first class ticket held by this complainant was large, comfortable, free from Pager’ and odors, well ventilated, lighted, and air-condi- tioned ; and always clean and sanitary ; while the second class ear which this complainant was forced_to. complete his journey in as outlined in the Cosas manasa was di- vided by partitions and used jointly for carrying baggage, train crew, and passengers; that said car was small, poorly ventilated, filthy, filled with stafch and odors emitting from the toilet, and otherwise filthy and indescribably unsanitary. That said action of defendants in furnishing accommoda- tions to the aforesaid white persons holding first class a [ [fol. 11] tickets which were far superior to the accommoda- ; _ tions furnished to this complainant on his first class ticket, was unduly and u onably prejudicial to him,.and was | unduly and unreasonably preferential to said white persons — to the disadvantage of this complainant, in violation of Sec- ‘tion 3, Clause 1, aforesaid. , ope pips SSE TE BARES Baas ea 5 6 tA TR sy PER AHR, ee er AW Re, @ : Re ese ara Bs See a ' That-the defendants, claiming to act under authority of ‘ the Arkansas Statute (Kirby’s Arkansas Statute, Sections . 6622 to 6632), did force and cgmpel this complainant to ride in a second class car, notwithstanding the fact that complain- ant held a first class ticket; that the second class car was the _ car described in Paragraph Five hereof which by reference is made a part of this paragraph. That the action of defend- - ants was based on the fact that this complainant is a Colored . : fered in transporting hia in the s@cond class car re- ferred {6, while white persons holding identically similar first cldss tickets were permitted to ride in the first class car - described in Paragraph Five of this complaint, which by ‘ reference is made a part hereof, and said practice of the defendants in furnishing such unequal accommodations to * ~, persons holding similar first class tickets, under the afore- ; said Statute, causes undue and unreasonable advantage and preference to white persons; and causes undue ang unreas- onable prejudice to this complainant and all other Colored persons who in the fiture will use, as interstate passengers, the’ lines ofthe said defendants. | The said unreasonable and undue advantage and prefer- __ ence ‘to’ white persons aforesaid; and undue and unreason- _ able prejadice to this complainant and all other Colored persons who in the future will use defendant lines, only arises between persons in intrastate commerce on the one hand and persons-in interstate commerce on the other hand, in this, that said practice under said law only arises after. » Colored personS havegentered the State of Arkansas and did not exist while this éomplainant-was traveling in Illinois; [fol. 12] that said law’is not intended to and does ‘not operate of beyond the territorial boundaries of said State. - fhat said action, causing undue and unreasonable advan- tage to. white persons, and causing undue and unreasonable — prejudice to this complainant, being based on the State law aforesaid, is in violation of Section 13, Clause 4, of the Inter- ° state Commerce Act. VIL _ That by reason of the facts stated in the foregoing para- graph complainant has been subjected to the. payment of fares for transportation which were when exacted and still - are unjust and unreasonable in violation of Section 1 of the Interstate Commerce Act; and said complainant has, been ‘ * unjustly discriminated against in violation of Section 2 of the Interstate Commerce Act; that said defendants have - been unduly and unreasonably preferential to some persons while at the same time being unduly and unréasonably preju- diced against this complainant in violation of Section 3 of the Interstate Commerce Act; that the action of defendants- in operating under the Arkansas Law causes undue and un- reasonable preference to some persons and undue and tn- reasonable prejudice to complainant and other persons, in ‘violation of Section 13 of the Interstate Commerce Act, and tion in denying to petitioner equal protection of the laws. Wherefore, complainant prays that defendants and each of them may be required to answer the charges herein; that after due hearing and inyestigation an order be made com- _ the Fourteenth be ES of the United States Constitu- manding said defendants and each of them to cease and desist from the aforesaid violations.of said act, and estab- lish and put in force and apply in future to the transporta- | tion of persons between the origin and destination points named in paragraphs V and VI hereof, in lieu of the serv- ices and facilities named in said paragraphs V and VI, and such other services and facilities as the Commission may [fol. 13] deem reasonable and just; and that such other.and further order or orders be made as the Commission may consider proper in the premises.”’’ The defendant, Frank ©. Lowden, James E. Gorman and e \ _ Joseph B. Fleming, trustees of the estate of the Chicago, . Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Company, a corporation and hereinafter called and referred to as the ‘‘ Rock Island,”’ filed an answer to the complaint above set forth, (1) it admits that it was a common carrier engaged in the trans- portation of passengers and property by railroad in inter- state commerce on April 20, 1937, (2) it denies that the facts charged in Paragraph III of the complaint were un- just, unreasonable or unlawful and in violation of Sectién 1, Clause 5. of the Interstate Commerce Act; (3) it denies the _ charges contained in Paragraph IV Of the complaint and further denies said acts contained in the said paragraph vio- lated Section 2 of the Interstate Commerce Act; (4)st denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs V-VI of the complaint and denies that the acts charged in said para- — " * * phe aS i ee Ree ho BR OLE | PAN SRS SO 45 “Tyrerstatr COMMERCE Gakic : No. 27844 Pa eo Anravk W. Miron: v. i se Cuicaco, Rock Isuanp & Pactrtco Ritiwar Company, | : ek : : Trustees, et ad. : ee ; Submitted erties Decided May 5th; 1938 Present accommodations for colored passengers traveling _ in Arkansas over the lite of The Chicago, Rock Island and Hie . Pacific Railway Company on through journeys from Chi- e 8 Be cago, Ill., to Hot Springs, Ark., found not unjustly discri- minatory or unduly prejudicial. Complaint dismissed. Arthur W) Mitchell and Richard E. Westbrooks for com- = plainant. A Cag Me re = ohiee ae a Wallace 'T- Hughes, Daniel Taylor, E. A. Smith, Robert Mitten, H. J. Deany, Erwin W. Roemer, Charles S. Willis- ton, and-Lowell M. Greenlaw for defendants. Area ~ Report Proposed by Wm..A. Disque, Examiner Complainant, a negro resident of Chicago, IIl., and a mem- ber of the House of Representatives of the United States, | * by complaint filed September 2, 1937, alleges, in effect, that ass ° - defendants, in connection’ with their purported compliance 4 : with an Arkansas statute requiring.segregation of the races | during transportation, do not provide as desirable accom- modations for-colored as for white passengers traveling in [fol. 17] Arkansas over the line of The Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Company at first-class fares from Chi- __ cago, Tll., to Hot Springs, Ark., and that this results in un- reasonable charges and@“unjust discrimination against, and undue prejudice to, colored, passengers, in violation of sections 1, 2, 3, and 13 of the Interstate Commerce Act, and . _ the Fourteenth Amendment to the Cons itution of the United . States. However, the only relief so#ht is removal and | } avoidance in the future of thie alleged discrimination-and—— . 19 - [fol. 27] Report of the Commission By the Commission :° | ane Exceptions to the examiner’s report were filed by com- if plainant, to which the trustees of The Chicago, Rock Island . and Pacific Railway Company, hereinafter called the Rock — Island, replied. The proceeding was orally argued. Complainant, a negro resident of Chicago, Ill, and a 7s member of the House of Representatives of the United : 3 o* States, by eomplaint filed September 2, 1937, alleges, in effect, that defendants, in connection with their purported compliance with an Arkansas statute requirmg segrega- tion of the races during transportation; do not provide as desirable accommodations for colored as for white ‘passengers traveling in Arkansas over the line of the Rotk Island at first-class fares from Chicago, IIl., to Hot Springs, _ Ark., and that this results in unreasonable charges and unjust. discrimination against, and undue prejudice to, ; | colored passengers, in violation of sections 1, 2, 3, and 13 c_— of the Interstate Comm, ce Act, and the fourteenth amend- ment to the Constitafion of the United States, guarantee- Docket No. 27844—Sheet 2 4 ; | : ing due process of law and equal protection of the laws. However, the only relief sought is removal and avoidance in the future of the alleged discrimination and prejudice ’ in the furnishing of accOmmodations. — - Defendants question our jurisdiction to give the relief © sought, on the ground that the sections of the act invoked — ie relate only to rates and charges. They take the position . 7 that the only provisions which give this Commission power . over the. furnishing of equipment and facilities of trans- portation begin with section 1 (10); which says that\ the term ‘‘car service’’ as used in those provisions ‘‘shall \in- ; clude.the use, control, supply, movement, *.* * and return ns [fol. 28] of * * * cars * * * used in the transportation of» property.* * * "(italics ours.) However section 3 (1) | makes it unlawful “to subject any, particular person * * *,, or any particular description of” traffic to any undue or unreasonable prejudi ® or disadvantage in any respect whatsoever.’’ In view, of the conclusion reached the . ge ation raised is ipipprtant, but it appears’to be set at. Test by Interstate Conimerce Comfnission v. Illinois Cen- = be 5 ets e: iets Se Lard / PR eh EAU a Satie a ONE STS ee ¢ . 4 ° e ; ricci PRES AE PM AP NEES SL EAE AEB BE AYO ERIN ISITE COR RN EN A ONT ABEIN ES SMCS mh . ¢ ‘ 20 tral R.Co., 215 U. 8. 452, and Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Clark Bros. Coal Mining Co., 238 U.S. 456. Rew In, ‘The complaint mentions but a single incident of alleged discrimination ‘and prejudice, the one hereinafter de- “ seribed in’ which complainant was involved. Although there is an allegation that ‘‘said practice of the defendants in furnishing such unequal accommodations * * * causes *\*.* undue and unreasonable prejudice to this complain- ant and all other colored persons who in the future will ' Docket No. 27844—Sheet 3 ce use .* * * the lines of ‘said defendants,’’ defendants upon brief urge that the complaint .is insufficient to raise any issue as to practice, on the ground that one incident does not amount to a practice, and they move that all testi- _ mony that does not relate to. this particular incident be stricken. Plainly, however, the incident was mentioned as representative of an alleged practice that was expected to continue. The prayer is: that we require defendants to cease and desist from the alleged violations of the act and to provide lawful accommodations in the future for col- ored passengers from and to the points involved. Defend- ants are taking an unduly technical position. They have long understood that a complaint is not to be narrowly construed. They were well aware of the kind of accom- modations they were furnishing and were nat taken by surprise, but came to the hearing withgwitnesses adequately informed respecting all the facts. hey objected at the hearing to the receipt of any testimony not confined to (fol. 29] the incident mentioned, but their objections were properly overruled by the examiner. 7 At the hearing,’complainant moved that the Rock Island’s answer be-stricken, contending that it violated rule IV (d), (e) of the Rules of Practice, because it did not state fully, completely, and with particularity the nature and grounds . of the defense nor deny specifically and in detail éaeh material allegation of the complaint. However, there is no indication that complainant was put to any material disadvantage by defendant ’s failure; and striking the -an- . Swer would avail nothing, for the proceeding would never- thelesg be-atissue. Rule IV (b) and Smokeless Fuel Co. v. Norfolk & W: Ry. Co., 85 L.C.C. 395. | 4 ’ & > — h pe ae ee teen eter art , pe Docket No. 27844—-Sheet 4 \ m The case is built mainly on an unpleasant experience im complainant had about 18 months ago. On the evening of April 20, 1937, he left Chicago for Hot Springs, over the lines of the Illinois Central Railroad Company to - Memphis, Tenn., and the Rock Island beyogd, traveling on a round-trip ticket he had purchased at 3-cents per mile from the initial carrier’s ticket agent in Chicago. He had requested a bedroom on defendants’ through Chicago-Hot Springs Pullman sleeping car, but none being available, the ticket agent provided him with & compartment as far as Memphis in the sleeper destined to New Orlear¢, La. Just before the train reached Memphis, on the morning after leaving Chicago, he had a Pullman porter transfer him, together with his hand baggage and other personal effects, to the Chicago-Hot Springs sleeper then on the same train, but which was to leave Memphis at 8:30 a.m., on Rock Island train no. 45, and reach Hot Springs, 193 miles west, at 1:05 p.m., the same day. Space was avail- able and the-porter assigned him a particular seat in that ear, for which he was to pay the established fare, 90 cents. / Shortly after leaving Memphis and crossing the Mississippi [fol. 30] River into Arkansas the train conductor took up the Memphis-Hot Springs portion of his ticket, but refused to accept payment for the Pullman seat from Memphis, and in accordance with custom, compelled him, over, his protest and finally under threat of arrest, to move into the car provided for colored passengers, in purported compliance with an Arkansas statute requiring se; ‘ga- tion of colored from white persons by the use of cars or partitioned sections thereof providing “equal, but separate’ and sufficient accommodations”’, for both races. Complain- ant’s begs gage and other. personal effects were allowed to go ; Docket No. 27844—Sheet 5 on to destination in the Pullman car. Later the conductor returned the portion of the ticket he had taken up and correctly advised complainant that he could get a refund on the basis of the coach fare of 2 cents per mile from Mem- phis; The refund was never claimed from defendants. and is not here séught, but defendants stand ready to make it upon application, Complainant has an action at - iat Oo ais > ‘s + a ies ” ™ " ew - Witenes ene aga — ogee reece ae ERECTOR YS eOP AL EM PS RET he SLSR ON re wt I NR IE EEN EIS EE GRIN ETRE SIT IIS PUREE D8 SERN NTAIY AEA RE Be aE Me URN . ‘ 22 law pending against defendants in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Ill., for damages incident to this’ transfer. The Pullman car contained 10 sections of berths and 2. compartment-drawing rooms. The use of one of the draw- ing rooms would have amounted to segregation under the State law and ordinarily such accommodations are avail- able to colored passengers upon demand, the 90-cent seat fare being applicable. Occasionally they are used ‘by col? ored passengers, but in this instance‘both drawing rooms were already occupied by white passengers. The car was of modern design and had all the usual faeilities and cow. veniences found in standard sleeping cars. It contained smoking room for men and a dressing room for®women. « It was air conditioned, had hot and cold running water, tables, carpet, mirrors, wash basins with good soap,/clean linen towels, and separate flushable toilets for mé women. It was in excellent condition throughou _ [fol 31] class white passengers ‘had, in additi s Pullman sleeper, the exclusive use of the train’s orily din- ing car and only observation-parlor car, the latter having “somewhat the same accommodations for. day use as the ‘Pullman car and, in addition, a writing desk and perhaps a radio. j The coach for colored passengers was,jn the rear of the baggage car. Behind it were a day coach for white pas- sengers, the dining car, the sleeper and, nally, the observa- ‘ Docket No. 27844—Sheet 6 tion-parlor car, all. being Rock Isla sleeper. The colored-passenger bach, though of standard ~ ‘size and steel construction, was An old combinatiqn affair, not air conditioned. It was divided by partitions into three main parts, one for colored smokers, one for white smokers, and one, in the center, for ¢olored men and Women, but primarfly the latter‘and known as the women’s section, each ° section having seats for abéut 20 passengers.’ Complainant Sat in the women’s section. There was a toilet in each sec- tion, but only the one in/the women’s section was equipped for flushing and it was/for the exclusive use of the colored - without wash basins, soap, towels, or running water, except in the women’s section. According to‘ complainant, the ear was filthy and foul smelling, but the testimony of defey dants,as we-shaltater see, is to the con- d equipment, except the trary. The car csidinad. besides complainant, several other colored passengers, including women. Two pairs of _ seats in.the colored men’s section were used as an office by the conductor and the flagman, who were white. These con- ditions had prevailed for at least 25 years. _ The above facts are gathered principally from complain- ‘aut’s testimony, but several other colored persons, who had traveled from Memphis to Hot Springs over the Rock Is- land at times during the above-mentioned period, gave simi- ‘_ lar testimony as to the condition of the cars in which they [fol. 32] rode. . They also told of colored coaches between these points that had common toilets for men and women. -and ofsthe absence of carpets and foot rests, while much more desirable accommodations were provided for white passengers traveling in coaches. Docket No. 27844-—Sheet 7 Defendant’s witnesses, nately the conductor and flagman of the train and the superinténdent who had charge of clean- ing the equipment at Memphis, testified that they. noticed no dirt, filth, or obnoxious odors in the car; that in accord- ance with the usual practice it was thoroughly cleaned, dis- infected, equipped ‘with newly laundered seat and seat-back | linen covers, and inspected at Memphis before being put into the train. Each section of the car contained a cooler of ice water and a 12-inch electric fan. Incidentally, the Rock Island employs eight men af Memphis preparing equipment for 13 or 14 trains per day. Since the early part of July, 1937, when the coach above described was taken out of service, the Rock Island has operated a modern combination coach between Memphis and Hot Springs. It is of all-steel construction, with six- wheel trucks. It is divided by a partition into two sections, | one for colored and the other for white passengers. It has comfortable seats, finoleum floor covering, and is air condi- tioned. In each section there are wash basis, running hot and cold water, free paper towels and drinking cups, and ' — separate flush toilets for men and women. There is no’ smoker section, as smoking nowadays is generally permitted - in all coaches and sections thereof, and even in some in- stances, or to some extent, in Pullman, cars. The ¢imbina- tion coach is as fully desirable in all its appointments as -the coach used entirely by white passengers traveling at © second-class fares. One of the evsiipletnant’ 8 ‘witudintes testified that as late as September, 1937, he found condi- tions in the colored-passenger coach hetween Memphis and Hot Springs ‘‘very bad’’, but evidently he was not riding | [fol. 33] the train that carried the new oy — same toilet. - | Docket No. 27844—Sheet 8 ¢ Only about 1 negro to 20 white passengers rides this train from and to points on the line between Memphis and . Hot Springs, and there is hardly ever a demand from a. colored passenger, for Pulanan accommodations; the con- ductor recalled but 10 or 12 instances, in the past 32 years of his service on the train, wherein colored passengers who had entered Pullman cars were required by him to move into the. colored-passenger coach. He estimated that the demand for Pullman accommodations did not. amount to - ore per year.- What demand there may have been at ticket offices does not appear. The present coach properly takes care of colored second-— : ‘class*passengers, and the drawing rooms and compartments in the sleepexgrovide proper Pullman accommodations for ' eolored-first-class passengers, but there are no dining-car nor observation-parlor car accommodations for the latter and they can not lawfully range through the train. — Various previous proceedings akin ‘to this are Councill v. Western & A. R. Co., 1 I. C. C. 339; 1 I. C. R. 638; Heard 5 } Dhere etrr 110. C. 428;1 1. 0. R. 719; Edwards v. ashville, C. & St. L. Co., 12 I. C. C. 247; and Crosby v. St. uis-S, F. Ry. Co., 112 I. C. O. 239. In the first four pro- ings affirmative findings and orders were entered re- quiring the removal ‘of unjust discrimination and undue prejudice to colored passengers, but not in the last cited case. Hach rested on its own facts. None présented the same situation as the instent proceeding. - Several decisions of the Supreme Court are referreé to. In Louisville, N. O. & T.-R. Co. v. Mississippi, 133 U. & 587, and Chesapeake & O: Ry. Co. v. Kentucky, 179 U. S. 388, statutes of the States of Mississippi and Kentucky re- » a complainant for rehearing and reargument: ‘ ; x It is ordered, That the said petition be, and it is hereby, : S denied. | ‘ By the Commission, ee f W. P. Bartel, Secretary. (Seal) fk he | XXII. | , r) } or j All of the various steps in the above recited proceedings : a ‘were taken in accordance with the said Act of Congress : and the rules of the Interstate Commerce Commission. i : rates ae * \ XXIiT Plaintiff avers that he has been damaged and injured ; by the order of the Interstate Commerce Commission é entered Nevember 7, 1938 and the order of the said Com- mission entered March 6, 1939 as aforesaid. ee That the said order entered November 7, 1938 dismiss- ing the complaint is inconsistent with the evidence pro-— ' duced by the defendant, Rock Island and with the findings contained in the proposed srg Na of the Examiner and ¥. the report i the ne: % eine anh = $2 wa othe. (7 ea ge Rares soettees Git ns Hee == Its qoarsnaipoatiles — mene he one — ‘- 36 . | ; / ne j | ee > f That the undisputed and uncontfadicted testimony of the chief witness, Albert W. Jones, a conductor on the [fol. 47} Rock Island for thirty-two years,. offered by the defendant, Rock Island, fully sustains the allegations con- tained in the complaint filed before the Commission, an ‘vexcerpt from the abstract of his testimony as contained in the initial brief of the complainant and which was before — the Commission is as follows: . ‘The only provision that the Rock Island has for carry- ing all colored passengers is in that part of the Jim Crow ear.’’ A colored person .who has a first class ticket is compelled to ride in the Jim Crow car with all- cther colored "persons who have second-class tickets or ‘‘two- cent-per-mile’’ tickets. ‘‘A white person with a first-class ticket is entitled to use the Pullman, the diner and ob- servation car, which provide first class accommodations. (Ree. 148.)”’ p. 44: ‘*Thee Rock Island Railroad Company has no such first- class accommodations for negroes, although the negroes may have first-class tickets on the Rock Island Railway or ‘three-cent-per-ntile’ tickets. During. the thirty-two ‘years I have worked over there in Arkansas,®or the Rock Island Railroad Company it has never had any first-class © accommodations for Negroes (Rec. 149). And they haven’t any first-class accommodations in the sleeping cars for Negroes now.’’ **The Rock Island Railroad Company does not at this time have any first-class accommodations for colored pas- sengers paying the ‘three-cent-a-mile’ fare permitting them to use the observation car which. belongs to the Rock Island. They cannot use the dining car, nor sleeping car, although they may hold first-class tickets.’’ eh 's p. 45: ; ‘Congressman Mitchell was sitting in Section 3 of the Pullman car alone (Ree. 154). I do not-knew-if anyone occupied Section 3 from 8 to Hot Springs on April 21st, but whether the space been sold or not. I would [fol. 48] not have sold a seat Section 3 or any other space % +4. 37 2 ; : in\Xhat Pullman var to Congressman Mitchell, because hey =~ i was ed persoh. J know he had a first-class inter» state round-trip ticket from Chicago, Illinois, to Hot Springs, Arkansas.”’ : =. ‘“The accommodations furnished to Negro passengers -in the Jim Crow car where Congressman Mitchell -was ‘ compelled to ride are not equal to%the accommodations furnished in the observation car by the Rock Island Rail, way to white passengers holding first-class tickets’’ (Ree. - 155). 3 \ _ There is porter service furnished to the passengers in the observation car but no porter*service furnished to - the’colored passengers in the Jim Crow cars’’ (Ree. 157). ‘‘The Jim Crow car which all colored passengers were compelled to ride ih i April, 1937, had three compart- ments (Rec. 158). There was no. running water, no wash - basins or towels. There were only paper towels furnished in the compartment of the Jim Crow car but linen and paper towels were furnished in the’ observation car (Rec. 160). There was only one toilet in the compartment where J- Congressman Mitchell was riding in the Jim Crow car, which was ‘for women’. There was none for men who were riding in that compartment’’ (Ree. 161). p. 46: oi g ‘‘T have never sold any colored person any space or é accommodations in the Pullman car during my entire service.”’ “But I had charge of the train as the conductor for the company and having charge of the train for the com- pany I felt it was my-duty to put the congressman out of the sleeping car into the Jim Crow car (Ree. 168). The congressman did complain and protest beiiig put out of the Pullman car. He showed me his ticket aid offered to pay for the accommodations. But I told him he was: a colored man and couldn’t ride in those first-class"ac- ~ a commodations. If there had been a white passenger’.with a first-class ticket wko had boarded 4ife train at Memphis, (fol. 49] for Hot Springs, and had asked for a berth-or \_ x a seat in that Pullman car, where there were vacant seats.” '. or had asked for a seat.in the observation car, I would. have sold it to him. I.do not know how many colored -/ ~~ people apply for Pullman tickets in Het Springs, for ~* ,— Zz: Chicago, and are refused (Rec. 169).' If the compartments Fes ° a) sere aot, 38 : ? ° ‘ #19 + rb or stateroom are occupied, no colored person can ridé in © ‘the ;body of the sleeping car. No colored persons are allowed to ride in the observation car which belongs to ag the Rock Island, even if they -have first-class tickets. Those are the rules of the railway company and I follow the rules.”’ . - nf Sahara 7 ' aX “I sell space on that train for seats in’ the observation . car but would‘ not sell a colored person any accommoda- ~ * tions in the observation car, although he had a first-class ' ticket (Rec. 171). The white people and colored people are chorged the same fare for the ‘three-cent-per-nile’ ticket, or the>‘first-class_ tickets’ ‘(R. 172). There is no diffarence in the charge for the ticket because of color. \ : The, Pullman car -is-better equipped than the Jim Crow ee car. Ifa white passenger with g first-class ticket was put . Bhi . out of the Jim Crow car he could receive the first-class ““ accommodations of the Pullman car, and would not be °* . .@vidence in“the record before th. said Commission in the _ proceedings in which they are made. | o i ee igs are contrary: to and: a law, and may have relief only 3 in a court of equity, a eee ‘ prays: 1. That the petition be received and filed. ~*~ 2. That writs of subpoena be issued ‘by the clerk of the court, as provided by law, commanding the United States of America, Frank O. Lowden, James E. Gorman, and Joseph _B. Fleming, Trustees of the estate of the Chicago, Rock Isiand & Pacific Railway Company, a corporation; Illinois Central Company, a corporation, defendants herein, to appear and defend this action. * [fol. 52]; 3. That notice hereof be given to the shia of the/U nited States and all other persons required by law to be notified. 4. That upon the Gling of this petition the Judge of this court shall .call to his termination thereof two other J udges, one of whom shall be | a Cirguit Judge, as provided by law. - , 5. That upon final hearing of this cause, this Setiecsiite’ 3 Court will enter its decree that said order of the said Inter- state, Commerce Commission as aforesaid is null and void .. and further decree that said order be set aside, annulled and vacated. 7 : ‘ general 6. That a decree be entered sidiltees to the plaintiff the ' relief prayed for in his complaint filed before the said Commission— ° 7. And that any and all odie and farther relief may be~ “granted to the plaintiff as shall seem mont and just. pa Arthur W. Mitchell, , By Richard E. Westhrooks, * Richard E: Westbrooks, . and | fe Arthur W. Mitchell, Pro Se, : ° 417 East 47th Street, Chicago, Illinois, | .2 ... Attorneys for the Plaintiff. eu - [fals. 53-57] Dily sworn tF by Richard E> Westbrook Jurat omitted in noe y / Railway Company, a corporation, and Pullman assistance in the hearing and de- - Plaintiff, Solicitor for Plaintiff — aoe re hat 3000” South State Street, Oticago, Mllinois : / NAAN Aw wrk tle a ee, — - . 41 [fol. 58] In Untrep Srates District Court ‘. [Title omitted] Awswer or Uniteb States. or ecanuccaine* June 9, 1939 ° a United States of America, one of the defendants named | é in the petition filed in, the above entitled cause, answersand ways: oe net * United States admits the truth of the facts alleged in ‘paragraphs numbered I[ to XXII, both inclusive, of the pe- tition, except that, with respect to. Paragraph XII, if denies _ that a transcript of the evidence before the Intersta Com- 3 Pe merce Commission was attached to, or made a part of, the, me ia. copy of the petition served upon this defendant and United — J States has no knowledge ‘whether plaintN¥ will offer such ot transcript upon the hearing im this cage. ‘ Ii United States dehios the matters, things, and conclusions = alleged in Péragraphs XXIII to XXVIII, both inclusive, of Sere the petition, except that it admits that Paragraph XXV of — -— the petition quotes a part. of,the evidence of record before eee [fols. 59°60] the Commission, but dentes that the testimony’ ra & as quoted ‘in paragraph constitutes all the evidence submitted to andtonsidered by the Commission. = | ; : Further answering the petition, United States denies that ¢ ‘the facts therein alleged are sufficient to constitute a cause = _ of action against the United States or to entitle plaintiff to the relief prayed or to any, other relief. ‘ew Wherefore, having fully answered, United States prays ‘ that the relief sought by the petition be denied’ and that the . _petition be denied at the cost of the plaintiff, and that it ~ have the benefit of such other and further orders, decrees, % ne or relief as may be just and proper., F ee & Elmer B. Collins, Special Assistant to the Attorney Be / iF , General. Thurman Arnold, Assistant ‘Attorney ~~ ZZ General. William. J. Onrapbell vanpee States At. a | Bo torney. / , ies peo” : PR Pe Sith aise ibe ana Ghar oo id [fol.61] | In Unrrep Srates District Courr ° - [Title omitted] " ; eee INTERVENTION oF InTEKSTATE COMMERCE Commission—Filed b) | June 19, 1939 i 3 To the Honorably Fndges of Said Court: ° 7s : | ‘Tn accordance with the provisions of section 212 of the a Judicial Code (36 Stat. L 1150, U.S. C., tit. 28, sec. 45a), we > ; hereby enter the appearance of the Interstate Commeree- ar Commission as a party defendant in the above-entitled case, and of ourselves as its counsel. / oe z Daniel W: Knewlton, Chief Counsel. J. Stagjey Payne, Assistant Chief Counsel. Washington, D. C., June 15, 1939. o..- Sd re fs ; p 14) | ; [fol.62] - In Untrep Srares Disfficr Courr : Re oe a a * | | [Title omitted] | "i pe Answer or Inrerstate ComMERcE Commission—Filed June zi } 3 - 7,1 cise ‘ ie The Interstate Commerce ission, hereinafter called : the Commission, intervenin fendant in the above-en- Pie il) > titled action; Shemp, and wees | Ley Smead : i: Answering paragraphs I to XXII, both inclusive, of the. 5 i petition, the Commission admits, for the purposes of. this ‘ i _ suit, that the allegations contained therein are true... The ey report of the Commission; in:its Docket No. 27844, ‘Arthur te _ W. Mitchell v. Chicago; Rock Island & Pacific Railway Com- © «A _ pany. et al., referred to in paragraph XVIII of the petition, sie. _ is officially rs a in-2291.C.C.703. : v, ; | ’ | s ‘ 1 : » ; a I 5s, . : a : ' 4 | te het paragraphs XXII, XXII, and XIV, of the « tel petition, the Commission denies the allegations contained ( therein. ee ee Ree a x . eer _ [fol. 63] : II 43 Answering paragraph XXV of the petition, the Commis- - sion denies the allegations coritained therein, with the fol- . lowing exceptions: ‘It admits that Albert W. J ones testified in the proceeding before the Commission entitled No. 27844, Arthur W. Mitchell v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company. et al., but denies that the excerpt from the abstract of his testimény as quoted on pages 43-45 of the petition is a full, accurate and complete statement of his testimony, and the Commission respectfully refers the Court to the testimony itself, appearing at pages 99-181 of - the official transcript of the testimony before the Commis- sion, a complete copy of which, itis alleged in paragraph XII of the petition,-will be offered on behalf of the plain- tiff at the hearing on his petition before this Court. The ‘Commission respectfully calls the Court’s attention to the fact that other-evidence tha that of the above-mentioned * witness was introduéed at: the hearing -before the Com- mission. IV ; Answering paragraphs XXVI to XXVIM, both inclusive, of the petition, the Commission denies the’allegations con- tained theréin. V Ma ~ Further answering paragraph XXVI of the petition, the Commission alleges that the gravamen of plaintiff’s com- _plaint to tht- Commission was that he was subjected to un- cahe discrimination and undue prejudice, in violation of ctions 2 and 3 (1), of the Interstate Commerce Act, in , connection with.accommodations furnished to him on a journey from Chicago, Ill., to Hot Springs, Ark., April’20- ~ 21 1937; that in the proceedings before the Commission | plaintiff was aceorded the full hearing pravided for in - . [fol. 64-65] and by the Interstate Commerce Act; that at the -hearing on his complaint to the Commission a large volume of testimony and other evidence bearing upon the subjggt matter of the complaint was submitted-to the Commission for consideration, including testimony and other evidence submitted on behalf of plaintiff by his counsel; that in briefs © ' filed fn) gaid proceeding and inoral argument questions. | sdiating % said matters we ere fully argued and submitted to-the a ccamrensnse for sna i on seit of the _ ¥ e e / ‘ ° : : REDE REE ELIT BIEL TT A RTE ISN BS LEE” NESE LEER AL PNG ATT I ADOT eee y - a e ° i. ® “}s : s 44 a by their respective counsel, and the Commission determined said matters and entered and served upon the plaintiff and other interested parties its said report and order, in which the Commission found that plaintiff-had not been asnbjected to unjust discrimination or undue prejudice, and entered an order dismissing the complaint. a Wherefore, having fullyganswered, the Commission prays | that the relief sought by the petition be denied and that, the petition be dismissed. . vai . Interstate Commerce Commission, By J. Stanley Payne. Assistant Chief Counsel. Daniel W. Knowlton, Chief Counsel, of Counsel. 4 - (fol. 66] Iw Unrrep Srares Districr Court . [Title omitted] | Separate Answer or Frank O. Lowpen, James E. Gorman a AND JosepH B, Fiemine, Trustees or THE Estate oF THE Cuicaco, Rock Isuanp aXp _Paciric Ratiway, A Corpora- tion.—Filed June 16, 1939 ~ Frank O. Lowden, James E. Gorman and Joseph B. Flem- ing, Trustees of The Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Rail- way Company, a corporation, by Wallace T. Hughes and - Dan#] Taylor, their attorneys, answering the petition of the plaintiff, say: eas BET EPO et OT Ee, = ae : eee > i They admit the facts,alleged in paragraphs I to XXf, inclusive, of the petition, except (a) as to the allegations in paragraph II of fhe petition, these defendants deny that ‘they are a corporation, but on the contrary say that they / are Trustees having charge, control and possession of The Chicago, Back Island and Pacific Railroad under and by virtue of their appointment as such by the District Court of _ the United States for the Northern District of Illinois, | . Eastern Division, in a certain proceeding, therein pending, _for the reorganization of a railroad under Section 77 of the © Bankruptcy Act of the United States;.and, (b) except as [fol. 67] to paragraph XII, they deny that a transcript of the evidence before the Interstate Commerce Commission was attached to, or made a part of, the copy of the petition ~ . . . . d PRU ne 8 te to ve , RR ee TE ae oo wtr~ " caves ‘ LS OL TE TONS NAR EARLE Lt LORELEI , . . * > e ‘ ' served upon these defendants, and defendants have: no _— knowledge whether plaintiff will offer such, transcript upon the hearing in this case. ‘si $ : ‘ I *. These defendants deny the matters, things and conclu- sions alleged in paragraphs XXiII to XXVII, both in clusive of the petition, except that they state that paragra XXV of the petition quotes a part only of the evidence pf record before the Commission, and they deny thag, the testi- mony so quoted in said paragraph constitutes all of the ‘testimony of Witness Albert W. Jones, or all of the evi- oy submitted to the Interstate Commerce Commission cont which that body made its findings and = its con usions. Itt ; ; s - These defendants deny that the facts, matters and things . * alleged in the petition are sufficient to constitute a cause of action against these defendants or to entitle the plaintiff to : the relief prayed in his petition or to any other relief. . ae Wherefore, having fully. answered, these defendants, : Frank 0. Lowden, James E, Gormah and Joseph B. -Flem- , ° ing, Trustees of the Estate of The Chicago, Rock Island . : : and Pacific Railway Company, pray that the relief sought by the petition be denied and that the petition be dismissed . / | at the cost of the plaintiff. | ons Frank O. Lowden, James E. Gorman and Joseph B. oe - - Fleming, Trustees of the Estate of The hicago, — : Rock Island and Pacifie Railway Company, a cor-° * poration. By: Wallace T. Hughes, Daniel Taylor. Their - Attorneys, 1025 LaSalle Street Station, - Chicago, Ill. \ ay i a oe [fols. 68-69] : pn or Serivce f I hereby certify that copies of this answer hits been - served this day upon plaintiff and other defendants by mail- / ing the same to their respective attorneys in envelopes . properly addressed. ; Danie! Taylor, Attorney for Defendants, Frank 0. Lowden, James E. Gorman and Joseph B. Fleming, an Trustees of the Estate of The Chicago, Rock Is- ; land and Pacifie Railway Company, a cnrporation. Chicago, Ill, June 16, 1939. ms | | | f os 3 ) PAE NAH is RN Rat UR TAS cabo : A fe Renan oat me a. on) . 4 . 4 ; ’ , ‘ ° \ : ‘ - : SOON: Rts SP ROTH TN FST ey eae - — SAG ANE 2 ae RAE AT eae aaNet gn NR IRR A. A AANA aa sr PALS SIS as PONE RE: ? ” VPA TRG RE TES pf Reh ated BS pe ee, oe ute ce wihgal ei ewe. ia ge SRST RRR ST ATP es te Sg Sete SRA BNL fe r= 2. The Commission, after the hearing, found the facts . ~ ve: 4 . {fols-80-81] ( Crrtiricats or SzRvice 7 ; I hereby certify that I have this day served a copy of the 3 foregoing upon the attorneys of all- parties of record by = mailing a copy thereof to each party, properly addressed. : aoe Dated, at Chicago, Illinois, this 17th day of Jutie, 1939. ~ ; rs oe V. W. Foster, of Counsel. 2 : ‘ >is ¢ ‘[fols. 82-83] In Unrrap Saves Disratcr Court : | 7 Wie onitied] Orper Sertie CavUsE FOR HeantwaJ ril 23, 1940 % On motion of Plaintiff’s Attorney - a that this cause be an@the same is hereby set for hearing before three® - judges May 27, A.D. 1940: ; e \ ’ / — 7: [fols. 84-85] Ix Unrrep Srares Disraicr Corr ate | 3 [Title omitted] ear Tite cee ? : } z Findings of Fact end Conclusfons of Law—June 27; 1940 ia P a Pursuant to Federal Equity Rule 703, and Rule 52 of the * . Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, we find the facts to be as follows: z Ay Finvines or Fuct ~*~ 1. The order here in question was thade by the Interstate ° Commerce Commission after a full hearing. “4 . Specially, and stated separately its conclusions of law there- on, and they are made a part of these findings and con- a clusions respectively by reference. : 3. ‘The Commission’s findings of facts were all supported by substantial evidence. : ene a , ConcLusions or Law 1, The findings of the. Commission are not erroneous. 2. The order of the Commission is-not contrary to law. ; ; e ‘ea Ye mF ty provision ; 4 ¥ be ~ a: er eee ~ t $ o ; . *. ts 7 ° ? a . © @ _ - Loe. Saas MS e ? Wallace . of Hughes and Daniel Taylor, Esquires, General 3 ; - ’ , 2 St is SPE Ss Res Sane o , a0 a ner: . ie . : he 3 _ Attorneys for Frank O. Lowden, James E. Gorman and - 1 | Joseph B. Fleming, Trustees of the Estate of the. Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Company, Suzy: - = EEN Bre reg Ro cake ss a C. S. Williston, Esq., Solicitor for the Pullman Company, Pullman Building, 79 East Adams ‘Street, Chicago, Illinois. | : Robert Mitten, Esq., Commerce Attorney for the IlMnois ~ __ Central Railway Company, a corporation, 135 Hast 11 Place, Chicago, Illinois. Pere You and each of you are hereby, notified that on the-23rd - day of August, 1940, at ten o’clock a. m., or as soon there- after as counsel can be hgard, we shall present to the Hon- _ orable William M. Sparks, United States Circuit Judge, . and the Honorable Charles E. Woodward and Honorable . Michael L. Igoe, United States District Judges, the petition - of the petitioner hérein for an appeal from the final orders and decree made and entered in the District Court in the : above entitled cause on the 27th day of June,.1940, to the Supreme Court of the United States, a copy of said petition P for appeal and Assignment of Errors therein referred to being aftached hereto; and ask that an order be entered mm herein allowing said «peal and making same returnable . | [fol. 89] within thirty (30) days from August 23rd, 1940, . > a copy of said order being also attached hereto. _. Richard E. Wéstbrooks, Arthur W. Mitchell, pro se., ‘Solicitors for Petitioner. ‘ Mss ajch bag ee SS ESS ee ee ee cee ¢ * - eter sees a | | 4 wit» STATE. QF Iuurors, - ||. - ‘County of Cook, ss. : ; y . ; _” Avrrpavit or Service : a Hattie Mae Salone, first being duly sworn, deposes and * *. says that at the request of the attorneys for the petitioner she served tNe above and foregoing Notice of Appeal, the Petition for Appeal and Assignment of Errors hereto at- - taehed upon the attorneys for all parties of record and who are named in the foregoing Notice of Appeal by placing | a copy of the same in a sealed envelope with the proper Bl") 7 amount of postage attached to said envelope and addressed s | to each of the attorneys for the parties of record in this - G@ause as the names and addresses appear in the foregoing _ Notice of Appeal, and depositing each of the said envelopes al in the United States maikbox at 30th and State’ Street, Chicago, Tljinois, on i the 18th day of August, 1940. : ! Hattie Mae Salone, Affiant. ’ Subseribed and sworn-to before me this 18th day of August, A. D.,-1940.. Birdie Lee James, Notary . Public. (Seal.) pe ' d “*[fol. 90] In ‘Untrep States Dwraior: Court » *. [Title omitted] - | ” Pgririon FoR Appzaps—Filed August 23, 1940 To: Honorable William, M. Starks, United ‘States Circuit: Judge. - Honorable Charles E. Woodward and Honorable Michael . L. Igoe, United States District Judges. Now comes Arthur W. Mitchell, petitioner, by his solici- tors and feeling aggrieved by the final order and decree of the District Court made and entered herein on- to-wit, June 27, 1940, does hereby appeal therefrom to the Supreme Court of the United States and prays that his appeal be allowed and that citations be issued as provided by law. The particulars wherein he considers the final order and decree erroneous are set forth i in the Assignment of Errors on file, to which reference is made. He prays that a tran- script of-the record, proceedings-and papers on which the find] order and decree was made and entered, duly authenti- cated, may be transmitted to the Supreme Court of the United States, and he further prays that a proper order - granting to him an appeal to the Supreme Court of the - United Statés and relating to the security to ‘be required of him be made. ‘Richard E. Westbrooks, Arthur W. Mine pre . . 8e, Solicitors for Petitioner. Dated the 18th day of August, 1940. [fol. 91] Ins Unrrep Stars District Court | [Title omitted] 7 ’ Assignment or Exrors—Filed Aug. 23, 1940 Now comes Arthur W. Mitchell, petitioner herein, and pregents with his -petition for appeal herein this assign- ze SES sy FAST ART > Lins Bose: ae Ree SY Meee rf raat eee EDs IRN pee OS ate Nard ae pins abegigy ks gay wes ESTs St a ‘ . ikon Shashi ELI EAI RK Patong rata tae SRA SII SC ee et 8 ee ae ee eee Sarat a ele Me eae eS, OE ee eae ee eage l y ‘ ‘ = ee ar iG? ewe gore = g ~ - is soa Le Sty, sh, ee RI "> gis supported by findings. ~ 56 : “ment of errors and says that in the above entitled cause and the decree made and entered against him therein on athe 27th day of June, 1940, there is error in the particulars hereinafter set forth. SRG is RS aa ee _ _, The District Court for the Northern District of Iinois, — Eastern Division, erred in making the frral i and-decree in this cause and in dismissing the petition herein for lack of jurisdiction at the cogts of the émplain-t in the following respects: , Bae gaat ee 1. It erred in finding that the Commissicn’s findings of ‘fact were all supported by substantial evidence. 2. It erred-in finding that the finding- of the Commission are not erroneous. - yy 3. It erred in finding that the order of the Commission is not contrary to law. .; putt | vanities | 4, It erred in-finding that the order of the Commission . contravenes no provisions of the Federal Constitution. 5.°It erred in finding that the order of the Commission [fol.92] 6. It erred in finding that the court was without * jurisdiction to grant the relief sought in the complaifit or’ any part thereof and that the complaint should be dismissed. 7. It erred in dismissing the cause for lack of jurisdiction ~ at-the costs of the complainant. a f 8. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that the plaintiff was an interstate passenger on the Rock ‘Is- land Railroad, holding a first-class: round trip ticket for which he had paid a first-class fare from Chicago, Illinois, to Hot Springs, Arkansas. = 9. It erred in failing to find; as it should have done, that as such first-class passenger, making a continuous inter- state journey and travelling in interstate commerce, that he was entitled to equal first-class accommodations and com- forts identical with the first-class accommodations and com- forts furnished all other white passengers holding first- class tickets and travelling in interstate commerce. ° - 10. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that _ it was the lawful duty of the Rock Island to furnish to the _ plaintiff, as a first-class interstate passenger, ‘such equal 4 as - — : | sce | ee —Y | : 57 / accommodations and comforts as were furnished to first- — -’ class white passengers travelling on the sare trgin as inter- state passengers. — boeken 11. It erréd in failing to find, as it should have done, that the Rock Island failed to furnish to the plaintiff such equal accommodations and comforts as was its lawful duty - to sa furnish but —.the contrary, compelled the plaintiff to . occupy, during a part of his interstate: journey, second- glass accommodations. nae eae | 12.-It erred in failing to find, as it should have. done, that such conduct on the partiof the Rock Island was in | violation of the Interstate Commerce Act. 13. It erred in failing to find,-as it should have done, _ that the Rock Island received from the plaintiff a first- class fare dw compelled him to occupy ‘second-class ac- commodatidhs in violation of the Interstate Commeree Act. [fol:93] 14. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, tha} the conductor of the Rock Island, i furnishing | _ first-clasé accommodations to all white passengers holding first-class tickets and travelling as jpterstate sengers, and refusing to furnish the same to. the plainjjgf who held a first-class ticket and was travelling as an j senger, was unduly and unreasonably pr ' and was unduly and unreasonably pref tial to the white passengers to the disadvantage of t intiff and violated the Interstate Commerce Act. i’ 52 15. It erred in failing @ find, as it should have done, that the Rock Island; in charging and receiving a ‘greater compensation for services rendered in transporting ‘the ‘plaintiff as a first-class interstate passenger, than - was charged and collected. from other persons for doing -for them a like and contemporaneous service, did unjustly dis- triminate against the plaintiff in violation of the Interstate Commerce Act. : i i 7 : ; 16. It erred in, failing to find, as it should have done, | that the Rock Island, in receiving a charge from the plain- - tiff and contracting to furnish first-class accommodations and comforts during the entire interstate trip of the plaintiff from Chicago, Illinois, to Hot Springs, Arkansas, and in , failing and in refusing to furnish such first-class accommo- dations, although such first-class accommodations were 7~J EON ERE pronay res aN" GET IO PRE ENTS Sys cee Go8 Sse ee ESE aoe = 3 A : A . : - available, was unjust, unreasonable, unlawful and in viola- tion of the Interstate Commerce Act.-— Diss : ‘17. It erred in, failing te, find,.as it should have done, « _ that the conductor of the Rock Island, in having practiced unjust discrimination agaiust colored pérsons travelling - in interstate commerce for the'past 32 years has caused, is causing and wil cause undue and mreasonable advantage to white persons and undue and unreasonable prejudice . do the plaintiff and all colored persons travelling in inter- stata commerce and is in violation of the Interstate Com-. ‘ merce Act. : eel Shee 18. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that the conduct of the Rock Island tqwards the plaintiff as above.set-forth, is in Violation of the 14th Amendment of AE the United States Constitution in denying to the plaintiff . .° ; DA, the equal protection of the law. | Se ee 19. It eyred in failing to find, as it should have done, | that the conduct of the Rock Island towards the plaintiff aS as above set forth, is in violation of the statutes and laws enacted by the Congress of the United States, known as the Enforcement Act or Civil Rights Act. ie 20. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, He | that it is a lawful duty which the Rock Island owes to white ? _. and colored passengers on this line, im interstate travel, Ai to make them equal in comforts, accommodations, and. equip- (fol. $4] ‘ment, without any discrimination where the same price is charged. oe : : ee _ 21. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that it is the lawful duty, which the Rock Island owes to the 2 Be travelling public over its line, engaged in interstate travel, igri ‘ that its train officers should refrain from practices against Pi all such passengers without regard to race, color or sex, _which result in undue prejudice and disadv ntage. ae 22, It’ erred’ in failing to find, as it should\have done, eon that there is no equality of service, when the money of ) bai white first-class interstate passengers purchases\luxurious accommodations and comforts and the same ax money purchases for colored first-class interstate 4 inferior quarters on the same interstate journey. Pi ae 23. It erred in failing to find, .as it should have done, '“. +.» ‘that contmon carriers are bound to provide for colored ount of Nee tot Baht ng at - ? ‘ . a pM... a = Quimenimanplee bene a Phe ee interstate passengers, holding first-class tickets, aecommoda- ee OF tions and comforts precisely equal in all respects to those ’ provided for white interstate passengers holding a similar ticket. gine Lina’. 24. It erred in failing to find, as it should have doné, that common‘carriers are bound to prayide first-class accommo- dations and comforts to interstate passengers without regard to race or color as first-class interstate pagsengers have’con- tracted and paid for. os ‘25. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, ~ that-the- separate coach law of the State of Arkansas has 3 no application to interstate passengers making a continuous journey in interstate commerce. Saipan essen eee 96. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that the plaintiff, as a native born citizen of the United Poe States, was entitled to all privileges and immunities of citi- zens in the several States and a denial to the plaintiff carol solely'on account of his color and race by the Rock“Island, —- under ‘a claim of custom or local State law, while all other = ‘white citizens under like conditions are granted the ‘same - = _—_—_.. privileges and immunity, is in violation of the Constitution: : 3 of the United States. . ey . t | 27... It erredgin failing to find, as it should have done, * that the order entered by the Interstate Commerce Cont- mission dismissing the ‘proceedings filed by the plaintiff . before the Interstate Commerce Commission and the find- — ings upon, which said order is based, are arbitrary and unjust... die nies [fol. 95] 28. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that said order and findings are contrary to the evi- ' dence of record. — ° 09. It érred in failing to find,-as it should have done, that said order and findings are without support of any | substantial evidence in the record. ea 30. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that said order and findings are without support of any. - eviden€e in the recofd before the said Commission in the proceedings in which they were made. | 31. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that said order and findings are against the indisputable. character of and the manifest weight of the evidence. — ; wy ze w - $2. It erred in failing to find, as it should -have ‘done, that in making the order and findings the Commission dis- regarded the undisputed and uncontradicted evidence. con- tained in the record. 33. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that there are not findings of facts to support fhe order - of the Commission. qe 3 34. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that the Commission proceeded under erroneous construc- tions of law and misapprehensions in respect of its powers. 35. It erred in failing to find, as it should: have done, that said order and findings are contrary to the laws of the United States of America. at 36. It- erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that said order and findings conflict with the fornier deci- sions of the Interstate Commerce Commission in cases in- ‘volving the.identical situation as the case at bar. 37. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that said orders and findings are contrary to and conflict with the United States Constitution and all amendments thereto. 38. It erred in failing to find, as it should have dotie, ..° that the order and findings of the Commission conflicts with and. is contrary to the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, the-United States Circuit Courts of Appeal and the United States District Courts, in cases involving the identical situation as shown by the undisputed 4nd uncontradicted evidence appearing in the record, [fols. 96-97] 39. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that said order and findings are contrary to and in conflict with the Enforcement*Act or Civil Rights Act of the United States. . 7 / 40. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that said order and findings are a denial of. the plaintiff of the due process of law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amend- ment of the United State’s Constitution. ia 41. It erred in failing to find, as it should have done, that said order and findings are a denial of the.equal protection of the laws to the plaintiff as guaranteed by the Fourteenth. Amendment of the United-States Constitution. e bs 43. That the order of the Interstate Commerce Commis- sion and the judgment of the United States District Court are contrary to the basic principles upon which this govern- ment was founded and judicially approves unjust discrimi- nation against a native born American citizen, solely on — account of his race and color and said order and judgment is unjust and unamerican. Wherefore, petitioner prays that the said order and de- eree entered herein on the 27th day of June, 1940, be re- versed, and that the said District Court of the nited States for the Northern District of Illinois, Easter Divi- sion, be directed to enter a decree granting the prayer of the petition of the petitioner and that the said order of the Interstate Commission be declared void and perpetually set aside, suspended and annulled and that your petitioner may have such other and further relief-4s may be appro- priate. pice se 3 | . “id ea Richard E.gV estbrooks, Arthur W.-Mitchell, Pro Se., Solicitors for Petitioner, 3000 S. .State Street, Chicago, [llinois. . | . a ( [fols. 98-99] ~ In Unrrep SraTEs District Court [Tite omitted] 4 7 -Orver Grantine PETITIONER AN APPEAL 10 THE ‘Unrrep ‘ Srares Supreme Court anp Fixine THE AMOYNT OF THE Bonp—Aug. 23, 1940: ng Upon the entering of the final decree in this cause came Richard E. Westbrooks and Arthur W. Mitchell, pro'se., solicitors for petitioner, and filed their Assignment of Er- rors and Petition for Appeal and itis hereby — ' Ordered that an appeal by. the petitioner in the above entitled cause to the Supreme Court of the United States — from the final order and decree heretofore filed and entered on June 27th, 1940,.be and the same is hereby allowed, and that a certified transcript of the record, testimony, exhibits, stipulations and all proceedings be forthwith transmitted if ‘to the Supreme Court of the United States, said appeal be hereby made returnable thirty (30) days from the date hereof, ee §: > . : it Is Hereby Further Ordered that the bond of appeal be; and the same is hereby fixed in the sum of $300.00 Dollars. Entered: | William M. Sparks, United States Lircuit Judge; — —— —, United States District J udge. Dated August 23, 1940. a ~ [fols. 100-106] Citation in usual form showing service on Daniel W. Knowlton, et al., filed Sépt. 17, 1940, omitted in ‘printing. — . ie ° ; | [fols. 107-129] In Unrrep Srares Drricr Court. De [Title omitted] . Orper Approvinc APPEAL Bonp—Aug. 24, 1940 This cause coming on to be heard upon the motion of ‘Richard E. Westbrooks and Arthur W. Mitchell, pro se, . Solicitors for petitioner for an order approving the Appeal Bond heretofore ordered in this cause, August 23rd, 1940, and it appearing to the court that. the petitioner presents ‘im open court a certified check dated August 23rd, 1940, drawn on the American National Bank & Trust Company of » Chicago, payable to Hoyt King, Clerk of the United States District Court, in the sum of Three Hundred ($300.00) Dol- lars as security ; 3 Y It Is Hereby Ordered that the Appeal Bond of Arthur W. Mitchell, be and the same is hereby approved and ordered filed ; s - It Is Further Ordered that the Clark of this court, accept and receive the above mentioned certified check, which is to be cashed by the said clerk of ‘this court and held as security under the terms and conditions contained in the said Appeal Bond of Arthur W. Mitchell, petitioner, antil the furthe? order of this court. 7 “Entered: : wren ke 4 -————, United States Circuit Judge; Holly, United ° States District Judge; —— —, United States. ‘Distriet Judge. . ’ y Dated August 24th, 1940. 7 ut » eause, all original e » (fole. 130-131] In Galil Srargs Disrrict Court ~ [Title omitted] - OrpER EXTENDING Time—Sept. 21,1940 » - On motion of the plaintiff and for satisfactory reasons ‘appearing to the court, it is hereby ordered that, iat The time for the docketing of this cause in the Supreme Court of the United States, pursuant to the appeal sued out; to present for approval the Narrative Statement of Evidence and to complete the preparation of the Transcript | of Record for certification by the Clerk of this court, — be and is hacks extended to and including the 21st day of November, A.D. satnet \ Entered: I, © - ae, United States Circuit Judge; >, United States District Judge; Igoe, United States District Judge. Dated this 21st day of September, A.D. 1940. [fols. 132-133] In Unrrep States District Court [Title omitted] Oxper re Onictwa Exurerrs—Nov. 14, 1940 On motion of the plaintiff and for satisfactory reasons appearing to the court, It Is Hereby Ordered that, a. The Clerk of this court include in the transcript of record, which is being prepared for use in the proceedings on appeal to the re Courtgf the United States in this hibits which were introduced in the” \. ~ United States District Court on the hearing of this cause. b. That Plaintft Exhibit No. 1, (a), (b); (c), (d)s (e)y and Defen ’s Exhibit No. 1, stand i in lieu of a Narrative Statement of the Evidence and be so certified to the Su- . __preme Court of thagppited States by. Olerk of this court... Entered: , — ——, United States Circuit Jadge;.: — -—, United States District J udge ; Igoe, United States ‘District Judge. ~ a Dated this 14th day of Mevesioee; A.D. 1940. a ) | | fe. rs nee | « 64 [fols. 194185) In Untrep Sraires Distaicr Cousr: [Title omitted ] OrpER RE Transcript or Testimony—Nov. 14, 1940 Good cause appearing, it is ordered that a transcript of . oral ar ent in this cause, presented before this Court on May 2%, 1940, by counsel for the respéctive parties, be sent as original exhibit to the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States and be included as part of the record herein on appeal. * Entered: e Igoe, Judge United States District Court. - Dated this 14th day of November, 1940. {fol 136] In Usrrep Srarzs District Court ¢ ; [Title omitted] Ducts FoR TRANSCRIPT OF ‘Recorp—Filed Sept. 3, 1940 To the Honorable Hoyt King, Clerk of thé District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division: y 3 _ )¥ou are hereby yequested to make a Ke ranscript of ay : to be filed in the Supreme Court of the United States pur- \suant to a Notice of Appeal heretofore filed August 23; 1940 and to include in such franscript of record the following, © and no other papers, to-wit: (1) The process. (2) The pleadings. ' (3) Copy of petition,- which shall include so anak of the exhibits in accordance with the rules of the United. States Supreme Court. (4) Answer of'United States of America. - (5) Answer of the Interstate Commerce Commission. (6) Answer of Frank O. Lowden, James E. Gorman and James B. Fleming, Trustees of the Estate of the Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Company, a corporation. (7) Answer of Pullman Company, a corporation. (8) Answer of Illinois Central Railway Company. ~ co i Order allow of. * (9) Order setting capse for hearing. ‘ [fols. 1387-138] (10) Narrative statement evidence .or agreed statement of fact. (See Order 11-14-40) (11) Findings of fact, conclusions of law and Final De- cree entered by the court June 27, 1940. ; (12) Order approving narrative statement of evidence or agreed statement of fact. (See Order 11-14-40) (13) Notice of Application for order allowing appeal. ° (14) Petition for Appeal. 2 ; * (15) Assignment of errors. pak g appeal. . Ree 17) Citation on appeal. (18) Bond on appeal. (19) All orders, enlarging time for docketing cause in the United States Supreme Court and extending time to have approved the narrative statement of evidence in condensed . form. | (20) Praecipe for record on appeal. and proof of service thereof. : , (21) Jurisdictional statement’and proof of service there- ( 22) Order certifying record to United States Supreme’ Court. ; roe _ (23) All stipulations filed in said cause. , ‘(24) All orders of the court entered subsequent to the . entry’ of the decree and not heretofore requested herein. Richard E. Westbrooks, Arthur W. Mitchell pro se, Solicitors for Plaintiff. [fol. 139] Puantirr’s Exutsrr No. 1 Interstate Commerce Commission | Washington , : I, W. P. Bartel, Secretary of the Interstate Comnterce Commission, do hereby certify that the attached are true _eopies of the following: | Se Complaint filed September 2, 1937 ; Paton Transcript of the stenographer’s notes of thé hearing held March 7, 1938, at Chicago, Ill., before Examiner W. A. Disque, and exhibits filed at said hearingy ~ | 5577 66 sp Report proposed by Wm. A. Disque, Examiner, filed May — 5, 1938; | : Report and order of the CommjSion filed and entered November 7, 1938; and =—t-s 3 . Order of the Commission entered March 6, 1939, . in Docket N 0. 27844, Arthur W. Mitchell v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company ét al., the originals of A. which are now on file and of record in the office of this Commission. . . -. In Witness Whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of said Commission this 15th day of Sep- tember, A. D. 1939. W. P. Bartel, Secretary of the Interstate Commerce Commission. (Seal.) : oy [fols. 140-149] Comp! int omitted. “Printed side page 7 ante. wee “ge . e [fol. 150] Bevorz Interstate Commerce ComMIssIon Doeket’ No. 27844 _ Arraur W. Mrrcneu pe vs. Tae Cuicaco, Rock Istanp AND Pactric Ratuway Company, . (F. O. Lowden, J. E. Gorman and J. B. Fleming, Trus- - tees), et al. r Chicago, Illinois, March 7, 1938. 10 a. m. Before W. A. Disque, Examiner Met pursuant to notice. 7 Appearances : : »__ Richard E. Westbrooks, 3000 South State Street, Chicago, . Illinois, appearing for complainant. 7 _ Arthur W. Mitchell, 3000 South State Street, Chicago, ‘® Illinois, complainant, appearing pro se. . Daniel Taylor and Wallace T. Hughes, 1025 LaSalle Street Station, Chicago, Illinois; appearing for the Chi- » cago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Company (Frank s g ©. Lowden, James E. Gorman, and Joseph P. Fleming, Trustee). e | ’ Erwin W. Roemer, Charles 8. Williston, and Lowell M. | Greenlaw, 79 East Adams Street, Chicago, Illinois, appear- ing for The Pullman Company. ee [fol. 151] H.J. Deany and.R. Mitten, 135 East 11th Place, ~ Qhicago, Illinois, appearing for Illinois Central Railroad - Company. 5 Sets % ; - . ee [fols. 152-153] PRocEEDINGS _ Exam. Disque: Come to order, please. The Interstate Commerce Commission has assigned for - hearing at this time and place, Docket No. 27844, Arthur W. Mitchell against Frank O. Lowden, et al., Trustees of The Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company, and other carriers. ee : ' _~ Who appears for complainant? Mr. Westbrooks: Richard E. Westbrooks, for the com- plainant; and Arthur W. Mitchell, pro se. | Exam. Disque: Who appears for defendants? - Mees, ° Mr. Hughes: Daniel Taylor and Wallace T. Hughes, 1025 LaSalle Street Station, Chicago, for The Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company, Frank O. Lowden, James E. Gorman, and Joseplf B. Fleming, Trustees. Mr. ay we W. Roemer, Lowell M. Greenlaw, and Charles 8S. Wi n, Chicago, Illinois, appearing for The Pullman Company. ; Mr. Deany: H. J. Deany, and Robert Mitten, Chicago, Illinois, appearing for the Illinois Central Railroad Com-, ' pany. . | Exam. Disque:’Does anyone else appear? _(No response.) 7 ge '’ Exam. Disque: You may proceed, Mr. Westbrooks. Mr. Westbrooks: First, before we proceed, if the Exam- iner please, I presume that it is proper andafitting, for the purpose of the record if nothing more, that I call your (fol: 154] attention to the fact that I have received for the 5 Vira first time a copy of the answer of The Pullman Company, and we are making no objection on account of receiving it © now for the first time. 2 eet I want the record to show that. yey ; « Exam. Disque: You mean, you just received it toflay? oy . 68 “3 : ; ; Mr. Westbrooks: Just received it today. - Exam. Disque: All right. ae » Mr. Westbfooks: At the hearing here. With respect to the answer of Frank O. Lowden, James | E. Gorman, and Joseph B. Fleming, as Trustees of the estate of The Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Company, I want to make a motion to strike their answer. Now, I appreciate that these hearings are not to a great degree, technical, but that they are somewhat informal. _ However, under the pleadifigs prescribed by this Commis- sion, I think that they have failed to conform. I particularly refer to: page 43 of the rules of the Com- mission, promulgated and revised April 1, 1936,—that is, page 23, paragraph (d)swhich says: . : ‘All answers should be so drawn as fully and completely ; to advise the parties and the Commission of the nature of the defense, and should admit or deny specifically and itt detail each material allegation of the pleading answered.”’ . ia » © Section (e) which should be read in connection with Sec- , [fol. 155] tion (d), concerning answers, of the rules of practice, is entitled ‘‘Denials of violations of Section 2 or 3’’—that is, of the act. It provides: ‘‘An answer denying that an alleged discrimination is unjust, under Section 2 of the act, or that an alleged preference or prejudice is undue, or unreasonable, under . Section 3 of the act, should state fully the grounds relied - upon in making such denial.’’ : _ _ Now, as I said, it is not merely for technical reasons, bat I do not think that the Lowden answer complies, or ‘attempts to comply with fully giving their defense. ‘ Now, the answer, of course, speaks for itself, and I presume that rather than to—it is only for the purpose of saving that point, that is, as to the insufficiency of the -answer, that I desire to make that motion. Exam. Disque: All right. x _Mr. Westbrooks: Our motion is noted on the record. Exam. Disque: Your motion will ke given consideration. We will proceed with the first witness. : Mr. Greenlaw: If the Examiner please, may I state, if Hs, you please, in answer to the statement of the attorney for the complainant, concerning the answer of The Pullman ° ‘ ry alae 69 : Company; tat fot in my hand our file copy of my letter of September 22nd, addressed to Mr: Arthur W.-Mitchell,, — and Mr. Richard E. Westbrooks, 417 East 47th Street, Chi- [fol. 156] cago, stating that I am rt a copy to each of _them of the answer. That was the same date that the answer was filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission. In our letter to the - Commission, I stated that copies were being served upon other. parties. © Possibly it may have gone astray in the mails, but I just wanted the record to show that the answer had been sent in due form. | Exam. Disque: All right. | : Mr. Westbrooks: Now, I think that the issues here are very ‘simple, as to whether or not the acts which we have alleged in our complaint, violated the sections*of the Inter- state Commerce act which we have alleged i in our complaint. I do not think that there are any Money demands asked, _ ‘or any reparation for the violations; that is, the violation of the excess fare, charging a fare for first class service, and then the complainant only receiving that first class service,a part of the way, and being compelled té receive - second class service from Memphis, Tennessee to Hot - Springs, Arkansas, after having paid the first elass fare. _ The second glass. accommodations, I believe, we have specifically described, as to the condition of the second class car, commonly Zalled a Jim Crow car. in the south. s The issue here is as to whether or not they can compel a passenger who has paid the first class fare for accommo- [fol. 157] dations in interstate commerce to be—well, put out, thrown out, asked out, or removéd, either way we want to put it, oat of the first class accommodations, before he reaches the end of, his journey, over his protests and against his will;. and be compelled to continue to the end of his journey in second class accommodations and facilities. Now, we will proceed with the evidence. T think these _are the issues, briefly stated. Call Congressman Mitchell. Exam, Disque: Be louse, at Congressman Mitchell AEN Y ts 70 Artuur W. MircHELL was sworn and testified as follows: . Direct examination. By Mr. Westbrooks : Q. State : your name, please. A. Arthur W. Mitchell. b Q. Your address? A-$806 South Parkway, Chicago, i is my home address. ‘Q. What is your business, sir? . A. I am a lawyer; at, the present time ‘member of the Congress of the United States. Q. And you have been a member of the Congress of the United States for how long, sir? A. Since—I took a se&t in the Congress on the 3rd of , 1935, and I have been a member since, . I am now serving my second term in Congress.: [fol. 158] Q. Calling your attention, sir, to April the 20th, 1937, did you have-occasion to see, or were you in Chicago at that time? - A. I was in Chicago ‘on April 20th, 1937. I left Chicago the evening of April 20th on a trip to Hot Springs, Arkansas. Q. And did you make arrangements for th@trip, sir, ’ yourself in person? ° A. I did. * Q. What arrangements did you make for’ the ae to , Hot Springs? A. Durin the day of the 20th I pitting lbs the 19th, I called the ois Central ofliee and made a reservation for the trip. ‘I tried to get a Getesien, and thay did not have a bed- room that was goin the way to Hot Springs, that was not then engaged; but they did provide me with 4 bedroom over the Illinois Central to Memphis, Tennessee. I bought a first class ticket, a part of which ticket is » here now, that I did not use, the return part of the ticket, , after this thing happened. ‘I have here the return part of the ticket that I bought to Hot Springs, Arkansas, from. Q. Now-ni mic | A. (Confinuing) Then ught the bedroom from here’ to Memplfis, and I have the stub for that bedroom. , - Before I got to — i'inew that the car that I was ~ aes | -in would not go to Hot Springs, but there was a car at- — , tached to that train that I was informed would go to Hot _ Springs. [fol. 159] I had the porter of the sucticular car that was - ‘ - to go—-that I was informed would go to Hot Springs, come ~ back to my reservation on the car in which I had traveled to Memphis—or, I was at that time perhaps 8 or 10 miles out from Memphis; and he took my baggage, consisting of two suit cases, a large handbag, brief case and.a smal] hand- bag, raincoat, topcoat, and umbrella, and. conveyed them - up to a seat in the car that would go to Hot Springs, and ~ assigned me to that cat. aie Q, Now, may I ask you this question at this point, - sir: you paid for your railroad ticket, did you? A. Yes. - Q. How much did you pay for your ratlroad ticket? -~ A. I have the-figdes here. | Q. What did it cost you? — A. I find, taking the memorandum I Rae a I called up, that I paid $27.70 for the railroad ticket. ; Q. And did the Illinois Central agent from whom you purchased the ticket in: Chicago here _to Hot Springs, Ar- . kansas, inform you whether that was a first class or ond clase ticket, sir? — ”* _A. I called for a first-class ticket, and this is what he gave me, and it is marked that way, ‘‘First Class.” Q. That was a first class round trip ticket? ~ A. Yes, sir. Q. From Chicago, Illinois, to Hot Springs, Arkansas? A. Yes, sir. [fol. 160)” Q. And return. fA. Yes. Q. By.way of Memphis, Tennessee; is that correct? A. Yes, sir,—returning over the Rock Island and Illinois Central to Chicago. _ Mr. Westbrooks: I ask that the ticket be masked as exhibit No..1¥or be complainant. : has het Disque: He has never turned that i in, for a —— me. S37 ' Mr. Westbrooks: No, he has not. We are still entitled ' toa refund. _ + The Witpess: I thought it was worth more in a hearing. like this than it would be to turn it in. 3 ——————- ae es c Exam. Disque; Mark it Complainant’ ~ Exhibit No. 1 for identification at this time. * (Complainant’s Exhibit No. 1 marked for identification.) — Mr. Westbrooks: Is there any ‘objection? I show it to counsel. + Is there any objection? ~ Mr. Taylor: No objection. Mr. Westbrooks: If there is no objection, if the Exam- iner please, I offer in evidence Complainant’s Exhibit 1. The Witness: I have a photostatic copy of that. S. Mr. Westbrooks: I will ask leave to file a photostatic copy in lieu of the original, ond withdraw the original at this time. [fol. 161] The Witness: This is a photostatic copy. _ Exam. Disque: Let us put the photostatic copy in, as the one for the record. Then you can keep your own ticket. Mr. Westbrooks : As there’ any objection to the ee copy? * Mr. Hughes: No. _ . ‘ F Exam. Disque: It is received as -Coniplainant s Exhibit No. 1. mt Complainant 8 Exhibit No. 1, witness Mitehen, received in evidence. ) e | 2 Mr. Westbrooks: This original having Nae admitted, I ask leave to withdraw it and substitute a photostatic copy therefor. . Exam. Disque: No, you have offered the copy now, as I understand it. Mr. Westbrooks: Yes. Exam. Disque: That will be the one that will go into the record, By Mr. Westbrooks: _Q. Now, then, the Pullman ticket: referring to the Pull- ‘ man ticket, which you purchased, sir, do you recall what you paid for that ticket? . A. I paid for the Pullman ticket, $7.50, and then I had to — pay an additional $1.65 because I occupied this room alone. . Q. I see. Now, then, that was 8 paid also ot the Illinois Central station—— [fol. 162] You can see it is marked Compartment C, Cir 277, Illinois Central Railroad.”’’ ‘Then, they charged me $1.65, and the round trip ticket “of $27.70. This i is the memorandum I made 7 the telephone. By Mr. Greenlaw: Q. That is, the railroad ticket? [fol. 164] A. Yes, sir. Those. figures were made before I came down to pick up my reservation; made in my office ; here. By Mr. Westbrooks : ‘ Q. Now, sir, aft& you had paid, at the Illinois Central Railroad station here, fgr your Pullman accommodation and your railroad ticket, did you occupy that Rullman— - you oceupied that compartment you said as far as Mémphis —or as far as near Memphis, Tennessee? . A. Yes. I would say I occupied it to within 5 or 6 miles, maybe 10 miles, of Memphis. Q. Were other first class pas sengers riding in that Pull- . Man? A. Oh, yes, there were other passengers who had apace in the same car./ Q. Now, then, you sai@ that just before you reached ) Memphis, I believe, something happened. What did/you say happened? y A. I had the porter of this car—I talked with 1, and I knew this car wa8 not going through to Hot Springs, but. there was a car that would go through attached to this train; : T asked him to get the porter of that. car that would go - through to Hot Springs, and have him come back and let ' me make a reservation, He told me that car would be in gharge of that porter; + _ there was no Pullman conductor that would go through "angen this train. This porter did come eartiger I should say anyway y 7 or 8 or maybe 10 miles out from Memphis, and he said + [fol. 165] iy had plenty of space in the car; he made two or three trips and conveyed all of my baggage to this car ; and then took me to the car and assigned me space which he told me I could ocefipy ; and he said he would pick up the fare as soon as we left Memphis. Q. Now, then, you left Chicago what time on that date. sir? A. 6:05, T believe was the time. That is the time I have designated here. I am not sure about the time. Q. 6:05? A. In the afternoon. Q. On Train No. 3, leaving here at 6.05 p. m. 7 A. Yes, sir. Q. And you arrived at Memphis, Teaneiaes, the next morning about when? — A. Somewhere aroune8 00 o telock. Q. About 8:00 or 8:20 on train daily No. 3, called the Louisiane? A. Yes, sir. : Mr. ‘Westbrooks : Mr. Repeeiar please. mark this ae plainAnt’s Exhibit No. 3 for identification. : (Complainant’ s Exhibit No. 3, marked for identification. ) e a By Mr. Westbrooks : Q. I will show’ you, Complainant’s Exhibit No.. 3 for identification. Is that one of the folders which you received at the Illinois Central Station at the time you bought your tickets? . [fol. £86] A. I received a folder like this. i did not mark it. TI-could not designate it as being exaetly the one, butt received one that was given me, -” time table that was given me at-that time. Q. A time table? A. Yes, gir. Q. And this is for. December 31, 1936. a A. Yes, sir. 76 Mr. Wailirocks: I will ask to have this marked in evi-' dence as Complainant’s Exhibit No. 3, for the purpose of © | _ Showing train daily No. 3, called the Louisiane, as the train leaving Chicago, that has been referred to. Mr. Taylor: No objection. “~~ Mr. Roemer: No objection. | ‘ Mr. Westbrooks: I offer in evidence Complainant’s Ex- - hibit No. 3, to show that this is the time table, issued Decem- ber 31, 1936, of the Illinois Central’ System, showing that there was a train leaving at 6:05 called the daily Louisiaxt, Chicago to Little Rock and Hot S rings. Yen Exam. Disque: Just a momentJ Exhibit 3 is received in evidence. PAY 5 - hoe ss Ss \ (Complainant’s Exhibit No. 3, witness Mitchell, received in evidence.) \ Mr. Westbrooks (Continuing): Tt is mentioned on page 2, of this Complairiant’s Exhibit 3, showing that it leaves, _ [fol. 167] 6:05, Chicago, Illinois, and arrives in Memphis, Tennessee at 8:20, arid that it connects with the Chicago, — Rock Island & Pacific at Memphis, Tennessee, train 45, at 8:30 a. m., due in Hot Springs, Arkansas at 1:05 p.m. tN ow, it also shows, and I am particularly calling-atfn tion to page 5 of this Louisiane time table, which shows the passenger train «quipment... ea , It shows that there were sleepers, Chicago to New Orleans and Houston, Texas; a 10-section drawjng room, connecting with S. P. No. 3, New Orleans to Houston; Chicago to Hot Springs, Arkangas,” a 10-section, 2-compartment drawing , room which connects with Rock Island No. 45 at. Memphis, Tennessee, to Hot Springs, Arkansas; also Cincinnati & Louisville to New Orleans, a 10-sectaon, 2-compartment drawing room, connecting with B. & O. No. 63 at Cincinnati, to Louisville, and 103, Louisville to Memphis, No. 3 to New Orleans; Louisville to Paducah, Kentucky, a 12-section drawing room. *» | It also shows that this train had diners, air-conditioned, and that the regularly-assigned cars as described in this train, were air-conditioned; diners from Chicago to Carbon- dale, Illinois, and Fulton, Kentucky to New Orleans. _ There was a buffet-lounge car, air-conditioned, radio, Chicago to New Orleans; chair cars, air-conditioned, Chi- cago to New Orleans; and coaches, air-conditioned. Ye a SA) FR ale! Be ae a 2 OY. AA ities amt hd 2) Wigton yt ete RAG Sarl a TI Ba Satie ne By es he ne sca MCSE) ee apa MRA sy PO CASO ie Rg Gp bie t a2 Wey ohn Sw vk ea) ioe wets ete 0 Me Eee Ns toes x vie eee VAS ee i a TENTED ROPES SIS SN lan TES a ‘ Q ire 2 By Mr. Westbrooks : {fol. 168] Q. Well, now, you said you were in one of these cars, these Pullman cars, first class aceommodation, out of Chicago, in accordance with the ticket which you had? 5 _A. Yes,-sir. Q. (Continuing :) ‘And thg extra fare which you paid, to occupy that compartment as one passenger? A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, then, after the porter—you said the porter moved your luggage? F . A. Yes, sir. Q. From the Pullman car in which you were riding, 6 -another Pullman car on that train? A. Yes, sir. Q. Which was going to Hot Springs, Arkansas. A. Yes, sir. Q. The Pullman which your baggage was moved into just before you reached Memphis: will you describe that, sir? A. Describe the car? . Q. Yes, describe the car. \ : A. Well, it was just an ordinary Pullman car. I think #ou read a description of the cars, a moment ago, when you were reading from the booklet. It had several sections, and a drawing room, I know; I don’t know how many, hut I know it had one. It had a smoker for the men; running water. I-went into the smoker, and smoked, and it had all of the’ [fol. 169] accommodations, it seemed to me that a Pullman ear, any Pullman car ordinarily has, except I don’t think it had bedrooms, except it had sections. Q. I see. Now, what about the upholstery in the two b ' Pullman cars in which you rode? A. The upholstering ip the Pullman car to which I was transferred compared fatorabiy with the upholstering of the Pullman car that I was transferred from. Q. Was the uphgjstering clean? A. It was. It had clean linen, and everything in the way of accommodations that Pt!Iman cars ordinarily carry. Q. Porter: service? 20 A: yates eta ara A. Yes, sir, * « ee both of the Pullmans? . v A. Both had Porter service, and were—both air-condi- tioned. ‘ ; ‘ - Q. Both air-conditioned. A. Yes, sir.. Q. And with soap—what kind of osant- A. They were equipped with soap, as Pullman cars ordi- narily are. _Q. Of high quality? ‘A. High quality. I don’t think the Pullman Company uses other than that. Q. And*was there—— — é Mr. Taylor: Unless he is an expert on soap, your Honor, [fol. 170] how does he know? Mr. Roemer: We do not ebject, your Honor; the Pull- man Company is not objecting. ‘By Mr, Westbrooks: Q. Now, the toilets were clean? — A. Yes, sir. ‘ Q. Running water? A. The toilets were clean, and had running water, yes, i: Q. What-about the wash bowls? A. They were supplied—those Pullman. cars were both ° equipped with washbowls and clean towels. ~ Q. Hot and cold water? A. Mirrors; hot and cold water. Q. What about the flushing, théwater for flushing pur- poses in the toilets of the two Pullman cars in which you were? ° A. Why, I would say that they both were properly equipped for that purpose. Q. With plenty of water for flushing ilies A. I use Pullman cars quite often, and they were equipped _ the same as all Pullman cars I have had occasion to use. Q. What about disinfectant in the toilets? A. Well, there were no obnoxious odors ;.they were prop- erly disinfected, if I were to judge from the absence of obnoxious odors. Q. Now, you said you changed into this Pullman car, énli you rode into Memphis, Tennessee, in this Pullman car, the [fel. 171] car designated for Hot Springs, Arkansas? A. Yes, sir. | a - Q. Then, what happened, if anything? A. Well, nothing happened until after we left Memphiry ' . a \ a All right. : A, After we left Memphis, and had gotten a little dis- tance, the conductor, the train conductor and the Pullman porter came to me together; and when I offered my ticket, the train conductor took my ticket and tore off a piece of it, ~ but told me at that time that I couldn’t ride in that car, He first spoke to the Pullman porter; he said, ‘‘This nan can’t ride in this car.’’ Q. That i is, the train conductor on the Rock Island? A. Yes, sir. Q. That is, leaving Memphis? © A. Yes, sir. — Q. Having left settee Tennessep, you crossed into ~~ Arkansas? A. Yes, we were in Arkansas; we had Ina the river, - I believe, when this took place. — Q., Yes. » A. (Continuing) We had gone maybe a Sates of 4 or 5, or maybe 6 or 7 miles; about the time for him to come on and pick up tickets. We had quite a little controversy about it, and when he said I couldn’t ride there I thought it might do some good for me to tell him who I was. I said, [fol. 172] ‘‘I am Mr. Mitchell, serving in the Congress of. the United States.’’ He said it didn’t make a damn bit of difference who I ‘was, that as long as L-was a nigger I couldn ’t ride in that car. . Q. Did you say, the porter was in charget A! The porter—the Pullman porter was doing all he - could to make it so that I could ride in the car. He even went—after the conductor and I had had a squabble that lasted I would say three or four, or mayhe.five minutes; in a very arrogant and nasty manner, and he told me that I had better get out of that car, and had ‘better be gone when he came back, for a moment I decided that I wouldn’t go, that I would let them put me in jail down there and see how the thing would finally come out. ‘But I happened to think that. I was in -Arkansas, and ‘ sometimes they don’t keep them in jail for trial down there, but they take them out and lynch them after they put them | in jail; so I thought maybe I had better not; being the only negro in Congress, Set I had better not be lynched on that. trip.. So I then held my seat until the perter came back: again, and I said to the porter, ‘“W: ell, suppose you go up and talk — "Agie [ _ ’ with the conductor, and see if you can’t. arrange for me to my topcoat, my raincoat, my umbrella, my brief case and 80 ride in the smoking car. There is nobody occupying it,”’ Q. In the Pullman car, do you mean? ~ A. In the smoker pe the Pullman“car; that there was nobody in it. And ‘there was at least several places—I would say there were at least four or five sections,—that [fol. 173]. meant, the seats turning oe and back—that nobody occupied. | | Q. With no passengers in them? A. No passengers,—-except the baggage. ‘Q. Yes. . A. And one or two other people. There w@& a white man to the right of me, and in front of me, riding ‘there, who gave some attention to this little fracas, but he didn’t say anything about it. Q. And it was in the presence of tise other passengers that this conductor used that language? A. Yes. The other passengers heard and saw the little controversy that was going on, and they were watching, looking on with interest; but the car was not crowded. . — And'then I-rode until we got, I -would say, 10 or 15 miles, probably, up the road; and the Pullman porter came back and said, ‘‘ Well, I just can’t do anytbing with this man. He says, you can’t ride’’—— Q. Referring to the scidantert A. Yes, sir. ‘‘He says you can’t ride in, the smoker. dg And he said, ‘‘I know who you are, and I hate to do it, but I am helpless.’’ And I told him,—L said, ‘‘I think I should let them put mein jail’’—the conductor had told me, ‘‘¥n Arkansas, they will’ put both of us ih jail and fine us $50 apiece. ”’ I said to him, ‘‘I have my $50, and I hope you | have yours, because I don’t mind going to jail abowt a jnctter £5 this, [fo}. 174] if you insist I must go.”’ ; _Now, when I went out of this car, after we had” ‘gone ees: certain distance, and the Pullman porter was terribly ex- — cited himself about it, I decided that I would go up into the Jim Crow car, and I did; Pia my baggage went to Hot Springs i in this Pullman car. = \ I couldn’t go in it, but my np ON my ‘overcoat—that i is, all of my baggage : a on to Hot Springs in | Sits car. Q. Now—— A. It wasn’t transfered at all. \ : K . ° % ROGES aso ected Yat Sei ART . sai mac cal iy ci ay alt a Rien ie Sale Te RPE RR: Biot, a b ey £365, pr pO Wy ie, Rav geatoay Bh TROT PMNS CRN Mee ae BON TLE SK ANP Ny Oy ere, ee arenes eae : ui ‘ ; o . 'Q. Now, djd the train conductor who had taken up part ae of your first class ticket, at any time offer to refund you. . ee any of the fare that you had paid for first class accom- kee modations? pie : od, fete _ A. No. He kept—he had no business tu take the ticket; Py * he should have punched the ticket and left it with me; but _ he was excited, and tore a piece off of ‘the ticket and kept -it until we got half way, I would say, maybe half way to ae Little Rock. Seg CER, oe '°* ie Then he came back and-asked to see my ticket again, and , eae with some hesitancy I showed it to him, and what he did was te pin back on my ticket the piece that he had torn off; » and he told me that I could get a refund on it. He said, ‘‘Of course, this ticket entitles you td have first - es ; class accommodations, but under the: law of the state of ae [fol. 175] Arkansas, you can’t have them, and they have the ee right to gtve you back the @ifference between the price of 3 ‘ oo - the ticket and a regular coach ticket.” And that piece of the ticket which he tore off, was taken up; they changed crews at Little iRock, and that piece of a fe ticket which he had torn off was again taken up after I left —| Little Rock. \ bie ave Q. Now, then, did you offer to pay for the extra, accdm- age modations, that is, the seat and the use of-the Pullman car? A. Yes. I had the money in my hand when I offered the ticket, to pay for this Pullman accommodation, on to Hot Springs. | . 4 : Q. And they refused to accept it? A. Yes, sir. sh a | Eas Q. Now, then, after he told you that there weré no first ae class accommodations, but that it was a’ first class ticket, i ak and you were entitled to first class accommodations, after you came into the state of Arkansas, what kind of accom- modations did he.tall you you could get,—the only kind? A. He didn’t tell me; he didn’t say anything about it. He told me that I would have to ride in the Jim Crow car.. Q. Now—— PepiatE A: (Continuing) He told*me that before I left, before I left that Pullman, De: = Q. Yes. Now, Shen, you protested about being put out of there, did you not? — : ; eee , (fol. 176] A. Yes, sir, and he‘ threatened to have me-ar——— rested. ' . a. 6—577. ’ ‘ ee _@ * . your journey in? that was set aside for.smokers, but the part that was set 4 Q. Now, what about the ventilation in the Jim: Crow car? were compelled to'ride? ° off a terrible odor. 82 Q. Now, then, will you describe this Jim Crow car that you have referred to, that you were compelled to complete ‘A. Yes. The Jim Crow car was an old car up next to the engine, in front of all the other passengér cars. As I re- member it, was divided into three, or into ‘two—eithgr two _ or three compartments. ) _ A part of it was used for smoking passengers, a small section of it; separated by partitions, and by a door,—I don’t remember whether it was a swinging door, or just an ordinary door; and a sep#rate section of this car was used ‘for nonsmoking passengers, men and women. * The car was in filthy condition. It was old and poorly: ventilated ; no linen of any kind; no running water; a filthy toilet that emitted obnoxions odors ; ne washbowl or any convenience where a man or woman could wash their hands ; no towels of linen of any-kind;-and no soap. - . Q. And did you have-—— ved A. (Continuing) And offensive-smelling spittoons. Part of this Jim Crow car was used by the conductor; he used two seats of it for his office. In fact he and hi — his white flagman, used two seats of that part—not the part ° aside for the nonsmoking passengers. He rode just across . (fol. 177] the aisle from where I sat all the way into—this same conductor, all the way to J.ittle Rock. A. Well, the ventilation was the type that they had in the old-fashioned cars. You could get ventilation—they had some arrangement for ventilation at the top. Q. Well, was it well-ventilated; was it air-conditioned? “A. Oh, no. : Q. Well, was there—— ay A. (Continuing) It wasn’t air-conditioned at all. It was merely—- uilt before they céw anything-about air-conditioned cars, I think. | Q. Now, then, was there any hot and cold water for use in that part of the car, in the Jim Crow car, where you A. No, sir, there was not. . ch Q. Was there any water for flushing the toilet? A. If there was, the toilet was out of-commission, and it could not be flushed that morning, begaéuse it was giving . It might have been due to something caught up above, | I don’t want to say it wasn’t; my recollection isn’t clear ~ | on that, but I know it wasn’t possible to flush it that morn-' , . ing. , cee _ Q. Well, ean’you state what was the condition—after you ° . entered this Jim Crow car, was the toilet flushed ‘or cleaned [fol. 178] out at all, from thg time you went in there? ’ A. It was not. | es, Q. And it was filled with offal, was it? A. Yes, sir. ; : oy Q. Were there ladies in that portion of the Jim Crow car where you were? - “4 A. There was,one or two ladies who got on at diferent Thar points, got on and off that train. This little Jim Crow sec- i tion wasn’t ¢rowded at any time. Z ee ae Q. Well, did they have any Ogee toilets for men and car, fur women in Jim Crow which colored ladies and colored Ane eF por use? iH A. I believe in thié one they did. Ordinarily they do not. - a In a great many of them, in the south, they do not have them separated. I was down south two weeks ago-— Mr. Taylor: If the Examiner please, I object. ' Exam. Disque: Yes. - * te te Mr. Taylor: Let him confine himself to this transacti Exam. Disque: Tell us about this one. ‘ t é Mr. Westbrooks: Yes. i . A. (Continuing) As to this éne, I'am not certain whether there were two toilets, or one. I know there was only one . in the compartment where I was riding. ae By Mr. Westbrook: Q..One. . | A. There might have been one in the little section set off _--[fol. 179] for smoking passengers. ies : ~ Q, I mean in this/compartment where ladies were‘riding. A. There was only one toilet in that compartment. — eee - Q. Now, this smoking compartment, this other compart- Se ment, you say, of this same car—that part of this car, you Png od stated, was used as a smoker? fie . Be hee: A. Yes, sir. a, ° mei ‘ : Bet tere Q. For white or colored passengers?, _&. Colored.s ©. ip oe 4 eo - Bea ? ‘ . aa ra) Q. ands you were-—— ene © A. Of course there were white in it, too, but I think the _ purpose of it was—it was designated for colored, but there were white riding in it. Q. Did they have any signs in this portion of the car that he ™ you were riding in‘‘For Colored”’ or ‘‘For Negroes’’? — A. I think they had a sign ‘‘For Colored.’’ $3 ‘Q. I see. Now, then, you said that this train conductor had charge of that train? : A. Yes. . Q.: From Memphis to—— ee A. LittleRock, - _- Q. —to Little Rock. A. Yes, sir. . Mr. ‘Westbrooks: Mr. Reporter, please mark this Com- plainant’s Exhibit 4 for identification. , [fol. 180] (Complainant’ s Exhibit No. 4 marked for iden-’ tification. ) By Mr. Westbrooks: Q. Now, then, showing ygu Complainant’s Exhibit 4 for identification, purporting to be a time table, Rock Island time table, corrected January 24th, 1937; I will ask you if that is one of the Rock Island folders which you used, or which you received from the Rock Island? _A. Yes, sir. "Q. Covering that train service? A. Yes, sir. > Mr. Westbrooks: Is there any objection to this Rock Is- land folder? mae Mr. Taylor: No, none. Mr. Westbrooks: There being no objection, I offer in evi- dence as Complainant’s Exhibit No. 4, Rock Island time table.* The exhibit shows on page 6, equipment of through cars. | Exam. Disque: Oonigibiiiant's ti Exhibit No. 4 is : received | in evidence. (Complainant’s Exhibit No. 4, witness Mitchell, received ~ in evidence:) _ ~~ a. By Mr. Westbrook: oh Q. Calling your attention to page 6 of this_exhibit,— - equipment, through | onre- it shows on this train % called © é, ¢ the Chicago-Hot Springs Limited, whi th was elie to in exhibit 3, of ‘the Illinois Central, daily observation parlor ear. It shows observation parlor car from Memphis to Hot [fol. 181] Springs. Were you permitted to ride in that, observation perier car, sir? A. I was not. | - Q. You had the fare? - iam Bs A. Yes, sir: - eo” ' Q. And you were ready td pay for it, were you, sir? — A. I was ready to Pi \y for it, yes, sir;-I offered to pay . for it. ‘Q. You were ready, willing and able to pay? A. Yes, sif. Q. To yide-in the first-class coaches or cars? A. Yes, sir. : - Q. You saw other first-class passengers riding in therp, did you? , A. Yes; sir. Q. What were they, colored, or white? A. White. - Q. Did you see any’ colored people at all riding 1 in that observation car as passengers? A. I did not, Q. Now, they have a sleeping car, sacaahte to Hot Spring's, 10 sections, one drawing r and two compart- - ments, from Chicago, Illinois Central ‘Np. 3. That was the car you were ae by the conduetor, to move from; is that correct? {fol. 182}. A. That i is the ear I was ejected from. . Q. Did you see any colored 2 riding as passengers in that car, sir? A; No, sir, I was told by the conductor that they could not -- ride in it, and because I was colored, I could not tide in a#. Q. And was that ‘the only reason he told you you could | not ride in there? A. Yes, sir. : e Q. Because you were colored? A. Absolutely. Q. Now, then—— . A. (Gontinuing) Well, = said this; he said ‘““The law of Arkansas has made it a crime for a negro tg ride in a car of that type, in the presence of white people’’; and that they: would have to ride in compagtments, or in drawing rooms; ¢ Fo = \e %. (oO RG : : ‘ that they couldn’t ride in the ear. This car that I was in, as a further description of it—— ; Q. You mean, the sleeping car,now? - wv A. Yes. | : | Q. Yes. * A. From which I was ejected. - > «- Q Yeu, pee ede ig eae cee See ' A. (Continuing) —was of the modern type, with those separations between the sections. It was not. the old type, whirs they used to put up ordinary wooden boards between (fol. 183] the sections when they got ready to make down the berths. It was one of the modern steel cars, with these sec- ' tions that stay permanently fixed, with these separations, or those partitions, that are permangntly fixed between the sections; and I alyays rode in a section. I"was trying ., to buy a section at the time when. they- ejected me, so I_ wouldn’t have contact with anybody else. ' | Q. Now, after you said you told, him that you were ready » to pay the difference for #@# accommodations in the smoker of this particular car—— . ke ee: Pe “faylor: If the Examiner please, I hate to annoy . 1, hut I woutd like to suggest, it appears to me that a doing a good deal of testifying as we go along. I think it would he better, if he would put his questicus in questidh form, and let the witness answer them. Mr. Westbrooks: I agree with ob there will be no objection to that. wih By Mr. Westbrooks: Q. Now, then, as to the coach from Chicago to Memphis, on the Illinois Central, No. 3, and from Memphis to Hot — Springs; that was on car 45, equipment on éar 45? Be A. Train 46, you mean. Q. Train 45. % at A. Yes, sir. & "Q. Yes. Now, calling your attention to page 12 of .Com- plainant’s Exhibit No. 4, I wish to—that is, page 12, which is 7 [fol. 184] entitled, ‘‘Changing class of tickets’’, it says: e > “Passengers holding coach-tickets (not special coach) ' who desire to use sleeping car or parlor car may have their rail tickets made valid for passage in sleeping cars or % 87 . .- parlor cars, on payment of difference between the one way first-class rail fare and the one way coach fare applying between the points between which steeping or parlor car service is available of. ~ : ; ‘‘ Approximately the same charge will be made on in- ‘termediate class tickets,*when standard sleeping cars, or parlor cars are used. = f-»- ities _ “Tn addition, passengers will be charged the sleeping car or parlor car rate for the space occupied. ¢ hoe “Tick ts designated ‘special coach’ will not be honored in sleeping cars or parlor cars, under any circumstances.’’ Calling your attention to page 24, of this table No. 5, @omplainant’s Exhibit No.:4, it shows this train that left Memphis at 8:30 in the morning 45-51, advertised as ‘‘Route of the Memphis-Califorhian’’ was, a through train-from _ Memphis, Tennessee, through Little Rock, Oklahoma City/ Amarillo, Tucumcari,, El] Paso, Los Angeles. You reached—you arrived at Hot Springs about what © time that next day, sir? A. Sometime around 1:00 o’clock in the afterfioon. -Q. About 1:05, was it? a : _[fol. 185] A. Yes, sir. ‘ Q. This exhibit Nor 4 shows this train leaving Memphis at 8:30 a. m., arriving at 1:05 at Hot Springs, Arkansas. ; Now, calling your attention to page 32 of your exhibit _No. 4 of the complainant, it also again mentions changing the’class of tickets from a-coach ticket to a first class ticket by paying the difference in fare, and reads as follows : ‘‘Changing class of tickets. . , ‘ ‘‘Passengers holding coach tickets (not special coach) who desire to use sleeping ear’’—I believe that is the same as was read heretofore. . I am calling attention to that to show the two different classes of titkets“used at that time. + A. Also on page 33—may I interrupt? Exam. Disque: Yes. . | Mr. Westbrooks: Just a moment, please. The Witngss : I-beg your pardon, By Mr. Westbrooks: - Q. (Continuing) Now, calling your attention to Pullman car rates on page 33, it provides that if a person has only fas / 4 bf - . , 7 : * : 2 a a rere et eee wd as meee - ee ona - . . . se phen A aes MR enOin e ez tS te Ain BA arate aha Pen Wple. fate Ree UN oes WG re ee Ne 5 Seer Pais ag eed aT Sip vgeh s See Ri eS hay a Se Oe BE Sy reread f JA ME MDs Pelee Rye 2 Rg” Coes, Oe ne! 2 txt! ieeses ee ipenes eee ae PRL ae we RR aeES sok Bi Pe A Dek A Speis Wr eee Seat ES Ta Re . 7 a oot eet St ee: fae ee oe eae a a ; . z 2 ’ f / > > = ¢ * : ¥ * ‘. : : é . * ret 5 y,. - 94 Pe Hag ; : POISE ROG EET Vga, tee ad ae pl pee ns fy 3 or a ed ie a ae RE pip ne 28 Sg es ‘ - ms NS Pgs es Sew O62, preps pene gi ns «a. Sas FABER Sarge SA Sek 88 _ one ticket, there is an extra fare, or that is, an additional . charge for the occupancy of a compartment. ! _ The sleeping car fares on page 33, that I call attention to, are advertised in this complainant’s exhibit'4. . Now, sir, state what was the conditigh.of your health at : that time, that you were ejected from this sleeping car, ~ [fol. 186] this first-class coach. —_—- eis * Mr. Taylor: Just a moment. That is objected to as im- material, incompetent and irrelevant. ‘ i) Mr. Westbrooks: Well, it is all competent, material and ‘M, clevant, if the Examiner please, in showing the Qder dis- regard of the rights of passengers. —— It is the duty under the law of common carriers to pro- 3 ” tect equal facilities and comforts for their passengers—or rather to provide equal facilities and comforts for their passengers. fo This was an interstate passenger, in a very } oor condition ‘ of health at that time, which was known to* he*conductor, . who ejected him out of this comfortable first-class car and -put him in this Jim Crow car, coach, where coach fares were paid,—as has been testified to by the witness. Exam. Disque: You are not going into it in any detail, are you? fe f ot Mr. Westbrooks: No, no. - Exam. Disque: He may answer that question. '. A. Well, I was sick. I had'been advised by my physician , + that I was suffering frém low blood pressure; and we had béen in a terrible fight in ‘Washington, over the passage of the anti-lynching bill, and I had asked to-go away, to build up ’ my health, and I was going to Hot Springs for that purpose. I was sick at the time, when I left Washington, and the [fol. 187] records there will show that I*was excused 7 Washington because of illness. ' : : | . By Mr. Westbrooks: -- : Q. Now did you inform the conductor at the time he told you fo leave the car— A. Yes, sir. Q. —of your illness?” A. Yes, sir. a7 Q. Now, after you arrived in Hot Springs in the Jim Crow car, second-class, after you had paid your first-class fare, aid b ° . ® * «¢ OO _———$— did you have occasion sail to the station at any. other time and see this particular train, that 5 is, this iroke ie, 45% -« A. ‘I did. Q. (Contiming) Arrive there? A. I was in Hot Springs for — 16 or 17 days, and I : a half a dozé times or went down and looked at that tr more during the time that I was in Hot Springs. I would see it come in—it was sort of a custom to go down, of the patients at the Hotel, and the bath house where I was stopping,—and to spend part of the time by going dowrf to meet this train, and see who else came in, and that sort of thing ; and I did it along with the rest. Q. Now, then, will you deseribe—you saw the Pullman cars, first-class cars as they came in on that train, did yout A. Yes, sir. Q. And did you see any colored people riding os ini: . [fol. 188] gers in those first-class cars, Pullman cars? -” A. I did not. I not see any colored people riding as , “passengers onthe Rock Island. They refused me a ticket over the Rock™island, to go back. That is why this ticket was not used. I came back over the Missouri Pacific.. I tried to get Pullman accommodations in Hot Springs, to come back here, so that I would not—I had this ticket photo- stated, and wanted to use the ticket, but they would not sell me accommodations oyt of Hot Springs to Chicago, Pull- man accommodations, when I got ready to return. | -Q. Was that at the Rock island. station? A. Well—— Q. Now, there is a suit pendin ¢ |} one that I de- ° A. Why; it was about the same as the ] scribed, the car which I spoke of, which was a small section of—what I would call an antiquated railroad car, used for a diversity of purposes. Q. Now, about the upholstering? Did you describe the ~ upholstering? A. I would dqscribe the upholstering as being poor and worn; and no towels. core | In the first-class caNthey have white towels that are on the back of the seats; they havé them in all of the Pullmans that I have ever used, and they have them in some of the coaches ; _ mt they don’t have anything like that in the Jim Crow cars. In fact, there is no effort made by the railroad to give the - negroes equal accomodations. ~~ Q. And you saw that same Jim Crow car,—that is, the same kind of a Jim Crow car, coming in on that train. A. Yes, sir. * ~ Q. During each day? ‘ A. I have been seeing it for 25 years, and there has been no change worth speaking of in it. ‘ ’ And not only have I been there and seen it, but I have [fol. 190] been riding in it for that length of time; I rode in it two weeks ago. Mr. Westbrooks: Now, there is a difference in the coach fare and the Yirst-class fare. I am sure the Commission takes judicial notice of the difference. in the coach fare and the first-class fare. Rates ft “4 That is what you take judicial notice of, beqause you fix . the rates, and it needs no proof. By. Mr. Westbrooks: in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, against | these defendants, Mr. Witness, is there not? : A. Yes, sir; - Q. That is, you filed a suit? A. Yes; sir, I filed suit againgt these defendants in the Circuit Court of Cook County, before this petition was filed. Q. Yes, and answers—that was before the petition. A. Yes. , Q. And answers have been fildd? ~ A. They have. ; Q. By each of the parties?” ieee “S| Ae _ Q. Now, then, callink your attention to the answer, the separate answer of Frank O. Lowden, James EyGorman and ‘Joseph B. Fleming, Trustees of the estate of The Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company, a corporation, in- the suit of Arthur W. Mitchell, piaintif#f, versus Frank O. [fol. 191] Lowden, James E. Gorman, and Joseph B. Flem- ing, Trustees of the estate of The Chicago Rock Island & . Pacific Railway Company, a corporation; Illinois Central Railroad Company, a corporation; and The [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386401_0404%3A01. Public record. Not legal advice.