Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-11-11

the United States Constitution.
After a full hearing. the court
granted the Petition of the
Committee to require the Wit
ness to testify, and refused to
stay the execution of its order
pending an appeal. Thereupon,
1.-THE next day, counsel for Mr..
Scull appeared before the Su-
preme Court of Appeals of Vir-
ginia and moved for a stay of
the order of the Circuit Court
of Arlington County. which
motion was opposed by the
chief counsel for the commit
tee, and was denied.
Subsequently, on october 81.
1857. counsel for Mr.. Scull filed
an application with the Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court of
the United States for a stay of
said order. which application
was likewise opposed by the
chief counsel for the commit
tee. On October %, 1857. the
duplication for stay was denied
by Chief Justice Warren. On
October %, pursuant to the Or
der Of the Circuit Court of Ar
lington County, Mr.. Soul APP
peared before the committee
|, with counsel. After making a
brief statement to the effect
, that he still believed that the
committee was illegally conSti-
tuted and was acting illegally,
he categorically refused to an
swer any questions put to him
. by the committee.
October "a, 1857, counsel
. for the committee obtained
from the Circuit Court of Ar
lington County a rule against
, Mr.. Scull to require him to
, show cause on october 30 why
, he should not be held in con-
tempt of court and punished
. accordingly. The COMMITTEES
] believes that if it had been able
to obtain testimony from this
witness, such testimony would
have been very helpful to the
committee in making its report
Claim Justification
AS was pointed out in the re-
port with regard to the Norfolk
case, the attorneys for the
NAACP have repeatedly assert
ed that the reason they and the
NAACP organizations felt JUS
titled in carrying onethe school
| indignation cases was that the
individual plaintiffs were not
financially able to bear the eX-
. pense of attorneys fees and
court costs in such cases. In
view of this contention. the
committee felt that it would he
, wise to ascertain something
, with regard to the financial
status of the various individuals
involved. When the suit in Ar
, lington County was originally
commenced most of the plain
tiffs were Negroes, the excep-
, tons being three white plain
tiffs. When two of the white
5 plaintiffs Withdrew, a number
/ of other parties were allowed tt
intervene as plaintiffs. With
out exception. those interven-
, ing we're all white.
The committee had its in
: vestigators make a check of the
records to obtain information
7 bearing on the financial worth
= of the plaintiffs in this suit
The results of this check points
to the fact that practically
S every one of the plaintiffs in
J, this suit was of such standing
r as would warrant the infer
1 ence that he or she was in tht
4 category of a person who coulc
S afford the services of an attor'
y ney and could bear some par
t of the cost of litigation. AS in
x stances justifying this conclu
: sion, the following informa
] ton is of interest.
!. One plaintiff is a magazin,
;. editor for. McGraw Hill Pub
s fishing Company. The famil.
: lives in a high-ciass whit
o neighborhood in Arlington ant
: owns a recent model automo
d bile. Another, a Negro. is al
n electrical contractor. and ha
: three motor vehicles listed il
: his name, as well as being tn
: owner of his home. Anothe
h is a white physician with Of
e fees in Washington. and ha
two motor vehicles in tn
family.
: Realty Holdings Cited
a One white woman, who's
e husband is an economist wit
= the United States Department
: of Agriculture. lives in a yer
S respectable Arlington neighbor
= hood; there are two motor We
n hicles in the family: and tn
: land records show two parcel
II of improved real estate havin
!, an estimated total value of ap
t proximately $4,000.
: Another plaintiff is an cleo
is trical engineer with the Blu
!, reau of Ships Navy, and tn
a family owns its own home. An
= other is craftsman who work
n for Mills, Petticord & MILL
i and two late model automo
d biles. with no recorded lien
i are in the family. as well a
a home valued at $1,000.
/ Another woman and husban
le have two automobiles, as we
: as real estate. One origins
l. white plaintiff has two automo
n biles. on which no liens ar
'e recorded. and real estate est
al mated to be worth in tn
neighborhood Of $35. 900. as we
'e as income by way of alimon
q and support in the amount {
Is $4,000 per annum or two-fiftt
e. Of her husbands annual In
n come, whichever is greater.
Or Another plaintiff and vii
ri ss,,,.. -. .,,to,,, 1t.tl1 o,,I laat.a