1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mitchell.
DELEGATE MITCHELL: In the Belle case, in an
appendix to the decision, the Supreme Court, in the con-
curring opinions of Justices Goldberg, Warren and Douglas,
appended a list of the defendants -- rather the private
proprietors in these public accomodations who had dis-
criminated, and in .only one case was there a purely pri-
vate and non-corporate proprietor of a public accomoda-
tion. In all the rest of the cases that had flooded into
the Court after the student movement of 1960 to open up
places of public accomodation, all corporations, the Hot
Shoppes, the various restaurant chains and the ten cent
stores and the like, so that I would say it depends upon
the facts and circumstances of the case as to whether
corporate charter is involved.
If the corporation performs a service to the
general public and intends to profit from the general
public, and if it in fact admits members of the general
public who are white but excludes Negro citizens or Jewish
citizens, or Polish citizens or Indians or what not, then,
therefore, that action would fall under protection of the