Origins of the <cite>Hocutt</cite> case
Pearson discusses the rational and strategy behind the <cite>Hocutt</cite> case against segregation in higher education in North Carolina. Having just graduated from Howard Law School, Pearson was one of the leading attorneys in this case, along with Cecil McCoy. Pearson identifies their main goal as testing the courts willingness to uphold de facto segregation in higher education. Additionally, he describes how the court case evoked fear among some African Americans that racial violence would erupt as a result.
Citing this Excerpt
Oral History Interview with Conrad Odell Pearson, April 18, 1979. Interview H-0218. Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) in the Southern Oral History Program Collection, Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Full Text of the Excerpt
- WALTER WEARE:
-
Well, I'm interested, and they're interested in
this oral history program in kind of the background—and maybe
there are some things that people don't know, particularly
about the community. Do you know how the case began? Who made the first
move?
- CONRAD ODELL PEARSON:
-
Well, I conceived of the idea when I was in Howard Law School.
- WALTER WEARE:
-
And that would have been when?
- CONRAD ODELL PEARSON:
-
1932. I graduated in 1932, and I took the bar in December of
'31, and passed it. So I was lawyer in law school. So I
conceived of it, and came back to North Carolina and talked about it. I
had an associate by the name of Cecil A. McCoy.
- WALTER WEARE:
-
Where was he from?
- CONRAD ODELL PEARSON:
-
He was from Durham, but I think he finished Brooklyn Law School.
Somewhere in Long Island.
- WALTER WEARE:
-
How long had he been here?
- CONRAD ODELL PEARSON:
-
This was his home.
- WALTER WEARE:
-
But I mean, how long had he been in the law?
- CONRAD ODELL PEARSON:
-
I don't think he finished law school. I think he did enough to
comply with the requirements of the North Carolina bar at that time.
- WALTER WEARE:
-
But he was a practicing attorney in Durham when you got out of law
school?
- CONRAD ODELL PEARSON:
-
Yes. And I discussed it with him, and he was for it. The next thing we
had to do was find a plaintiff. And we went to the high schools and
talked with the principals and tried to find out who the brilliant
students were. And we went to all of their houses and they turned it
down. They were afraid of reprisals. And Hocutt had worked in the
drugstore for years. I don't know what his background was. I
don't think he had anybody to help him or anything. And in
the meantime he was going to school down here at the North Carolina
College, at that time—it's North Carolina Central
now. So he wanted to be a pharmacist. So we interested him in it, and we
drew the complaint. 'Course a complaint drawn back in those
days, lawyers would probably laugh at it now. The law has progressed so,
since from that time. And we made a cardinal mistake because we should
never have brought him [the case] in state court. Because the state
court, judicially at that time, was committed to the status quo, and
Jesus Christ couldn't have won the case if he had been the
lawyer on the case. Well, it was radical in that no one had ever
challenged the system of discriminating on the base of race in state
institutions. And we found out from this law suit that you
aren't going to win anything in the state courts. Because
they could tie you up, and they could write a decision, and keep it
balled up, and keep it from ever getting to the Supreme Court, you know.
So we went back to the drawing board, and we came up with the idea of
bringing all these cases under the Fourteenth Amendment in the federal
courts. And, of course, the federal courts are all
subject to review. In the district court, everything he does he has to
put it in writing. In the state court, what the judge does on the local
level is not in writing. He delivers his charge to the jury, which is in
writing. Then the thing caught fire. It made the national press and it
caught fire. And cases began to spring up all over the country. That was
the start of the Civil Rights Movement and desegregating the
state-controlled schools where Negroes had traditionally been
barred.
- WALTER WEARE:
-
Had you thought about other state institutions or public schools? What
made you focus on Chapel Hill?
- CONRAD ODELL PEARSON:
-
Well, I looked at, it was called Miche Statutes of North Carolina, and
looked at the constitution. And there was nothing in the constitution
that barred blacks from the University of North Carolina. It said that
the legislature is hereby empowered to constitute one or more
universities for the training of the youth of the land. It
didn't say anything about race or anything. But traditionally
no Negroes had ever applied. And that was the basis of it.
- WALTER WEARE:
-
So, in effect, there was no Jim Crow law for the University.
- CONRAD ODELL PEARSON:
-
It was custom and usage.
- WALTER WEARE:
-
Now, you had thought of this when you were in law school at Howard. And
then when you came to Durham you got in touch with Cecil McCoy?
- CONRAD ODELL PEARSON:
-
Cecil McCoy and I, we had adjoining offices. And we talked it over and he
was for it. None of the other lawyers in town had ever thought about it
or dreamed about it. After we started it, then they all wanted to get
into it. And, of course, we wouldn't let them in. And it
divided the town, because, you see, we were just emerging out of the
Reconstruction period. And there had been riots in this state. The
Wilmington Riot is well known. And the Red Shirt Movement was run by
Josephus Daniels the elder and Governor Aycock. Now
whether or not they intended it to go as far as it did, I really
don't know. But anyway, they used that issue to get control
of the Democratic Party—to get the Democratic Party in
control. And the Negro citizenry, who were close to the Reconstruction
period, figured it was going to end up in riots like they had in
Wilmington. So they tried to prevail to let the matter drop.