Race Distinctions in American LawStephenson, Gilbert Thomas
History
Race Distinctions in American Law
Stephenson, Gilbert Thomas
African Americans -- Politics and government; Law -- United States -- History; United States -- Race relations
Before considering the “Jim Crow” laws of the Southern States, it will
be instructive to look into some of the court decisions between 1865 and
1881, the latter being the date of adoption of the first “Jim Crow” law
of the second period, to see what steps the railroad, street car, and
steamboat companies had taken to separate the races, in the absence of
State legislation upon the subject.
In 1865, a colored woman ejected from a street car in Philadelphia[529]
brought action against the conductor, who pleaded that there was a rule
established by the road superintendent that Negroes should be excluded
from the cars. The court held that the conductor had no right to eject a
passenger on account of race or color, and that a regulation of the
company would not be a defence to the action.
Just a few days after the Pennsylvania legislature passed the act
prohibiting discriminations against persons of color in public
conveyances, to which reference has been made, the Supreme Court of the
State ruled[530] that it was not an unreasonable regulation of the
railroad company to separate the passengers so as to promote personal
comfort and convenience. This is interesting because it is the earliest
case found supporting the legality of the separation of races in public
conveyances. Since the case arose before the Civil Rights Bill of the
Commonwealth was adopted, it does not purport to rule upon the
constitutionality of that act.
In San Francisco,[531] in 1868, a street car conductor refused to stop
for a colored woman, saying, “We don’t take colored people in the cars,”
whereupon she brought an action against the company and was awarded
damages by the lower court. Here there is an implication that the
railroad company had a regulation excluding persons of color from street
cars.
In 1870, the Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company[532] refused to
admit a colored woman to the car set apart for ladies and gentlemen
accompanying them. Whereupon she brought an action and recovered two
hundred dollars damages. It does not appear from the case that the
railroad had set apart any car or part of a car for the exclusive
accommodation of colored persons.
A steamboat company in Iowa, in 1873, had a regulation that colored
passengers should not eat at the regular tables, but at a table on the
“guards” of the boat. The Supreme Court of that State held[533] that
this rule was unreasonable and, therefore, illegal.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account