Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1848-12-15
Is it Constitutional ?

The recent expulsion Of several colored
children from a public school in a neighbor.
ing county, has called our attention p~articu-
larry to the Black school law OF 1881, and we
have asked ourselves the question, Is it con.
stitutional
Article 9Th, Section 25th, Of the Constitu.
ton of Ohio, declares,
"Ihat no hws shall be passed to prevent
the poor of every township and county in this
State from an equal participation in the
schools. academies, colleges and universities
in this State, which are endowed in whole or
in part, from the revenue arising from dona-
tlons made by the United States for the sup
port OF colleges and schools-and the doors
OF said schools, academies and universities
shall be open for the reception OF scholars,
students, and teachers Of every grade, with
out any distinction or preference Whaterer."
This would seem 10 settle the question,
whether the Legislature has a right to pass a
law by which thousands of the youth OF Ohio
are debarred the advantages of a common
school education because of their dark COM
plexion. The language is explicit and to
the point; and unless the Legislature has au-
thority TO violate the Constitution when so
disposed, or unless there is a United States
law, or a provision of the National Constitu.
ton with which the section quoted conflicts,
we see not how any can avoid the conclusion
that colored children of this State have as
good a right to the benefit of the general
school fund as any others, and that the man
or men who withhold from them this right.
are guilty Of robbery and gross outrage.
1t will not be pretended that the enact
ments of the Legislature are of superior au-
thoTity to the provisions of the State Consti-
tuition, and when the former declares,
San WHITE youth, over four and under
twenty-one years of age, shall have equal
privileges in al! the common schools of this
State,"
that body has clearly overstepped its bounds
has established a distinction, has expressed
a preference, and denied an equal participation
in the benefits Of the common schools; all
Of which are so clearly forbidden by Section
25th of Article 9th, that il would seem as
though the trainers Of the Constitution had
feared an attempt would be made TO keep the
colored children Of the State uneducated, and
thus to degrade them, and had endeayored to
provide against it.
Let US now turn TO the act of Congress
granting the school lands TO the State, and
see whether there is anything in that which
conflicts with the quoted section of the State
Constitution, and %justlies the Legislature in
its palpable violation of the latter. Here is
; the language:
"Section number sixteen in every town
ship, and where such section has been grant
ed, sold, or disposed of, other lands e%quiva-
lent thereto, and most contiguous to the same,
shall be granted to The inhabitants Of such
townships for the use Of schools"
Nothing about color in this, no distinction
made, no preference expressed; and if they
who enacted it, expected the States to be par
tial in the distribution of the funds thus do.
mated, they were wise enough to say nothing
about it when it was "vested in the Legis.
%lature, in trust for The use aforesaid" Ger.
tain it is they did not expect the Legislature
to be guilty of a clearly unconstitutional ACT
in order to express it's hatred of the colored
man.
The abolitionists, and many not claiming
to be abolitionists have year after year peti'
toned for a repeal of this, and other equally
iniqui,ous, though not SO p~alpably u%nconsii
t~utional laws with what result, is wei
known. 1t is now time, that in regard to III,
school law at least, their mode of proceeding
should be changed, and tina. instead Of psu