Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1860-01-14

school fund should be d idel between them IL
proportion to their numbo s.
This act Of 1853, unlike some of the preceding
legislation, looks to and makes provision for th'
education of all the cbil lren within the State
(sec. 63 children of all races aud shades o
color. But in doing, divides them into tw,
classes, white and 'colored,' and imposes the du
ty of providing schools for both classes, thougl
under different teachers, upon the same Bnard o
Education. The law then is one of classjfcatio,
and not OF erciusion. All the youth, within ,h
prescribed ages, must fall within the one class
the other All are to be instructed anL to partc
ipate equally in the public fund, and the shnre 0
one class, can never be diverted to the instruction
Of the other. 1t is true that where the numbe
OF cOlored youth is too small to Justify the organ
ization or the continuance o. school for colore;
youth, such school must be temporarily delayed
or suspended; but this is no more thaH might oc
cur with the other class under similar circumstan
ces In determining what is to be understood BY
the terms white and 'colored as used 10 this act
we msy look to the state OF things existing at The
time, the evils complained of and the remede.
sought to be applied. For nearly two genera
tons, blacks and mulattoes had been prescribed
and degraded race in Ohio. They were debarred
from the elective franchise and prohibited from
immi grafton and settlement within our borders
except under severe restrictions. They were al.
so excluded from our common schools and al
means OF public instruction Inca pacitaed from
serving upon juries and denied the privilege OF
testi!ying in cases where a white person was a
party. 1t would be strange indeed if such state
uE had no ina al - 81
alton, the natural repugnance of the white race to
communion and fellowship with them. Whether
consistent with true philanthropy or not, it is
nevertheless true, that in many portions, if not
throughout the State, there was and still is, an
almost invinciblo repugnance to such communion
and fellowship. 1t is also to be borne in mind.
thata class had grown up among US, which,
though partly black, had still preponderance of
white blood in their veins and that the Courts in
huenced in some degree by the severe and some
what penal character of the restrictions as to blacks
and mulattoes, had held that such persons were
not only entitled to vote at elections snd testify in
our Courts of Justice but we're also admissible in
to the schools for white children. 1t is notorious
that these decisions, especially the last, did not
receive the hearty approval Of the State at large
The prejudice of ages could not be dissipated by
one or more judicial decisions and the frequent
suite brought to enforce such admission evidence
such feeling on the part Of young and old.
Under !his state of things the act of 1853 was
enacted Three objects seem to have been cspeci-
ally in view. TO divide nll the youth of the State
for educational purposes, into two classes to pro-
vide more effectually for the education Of both
classes,an to require both classes to be separately
instructed. To which of these classes do the chill.
dren of the plaintiff in error belong-"white" or
"colored?' They are not in the ordinary if they
are in legal sense white. The demurrer admits
that they are in fact, if not in law, coloyed chill
dren Our standard philoogist, Webster defines
"colored people" to be-"black people-Alricans
or their descendants, mired or unmired" Such is
also the common understanding of the term. A
person who has any perceptible admixture of AT.
Tican blood is. generally, called colored person.
In affxing the epithet "colored," we d. not ordi-
narly stop to estimate the precise shade, whether
light or dark, though where precision is desired,
they are sometimes called eight colored" or
dark colored' as the case may lie. If we look at
the evils the law was intended to remedy, we shall
%as, the repugnance felt by many of the
white youths and their parents to mingling social
ly and on equal terms, with those who had any
perceptible admixture of African blood. This
feeling pref judice, if it be one, had been foster
ed by long years Of hostile legislation and social
exclusion. The General Assembly, lesislating
for the people as they were rather than as, per-
haps, they ough. to have been, whilo providing
for the education and consequent ultimate eleva-
tion of long degraded class, yielded for tho time
to deep seated prejudice, which could not be
eradicaed suddenly, if at all. Such an arrange
ment, in the present state Of public feeling is far
better for both parties.-for the colored youth as
we'll as those entirely white. If those shade
more white than black, were to be forced upon the
white youth againsttheir consent, the whole policy
of the law would be defeated. The prejudice and
of the whites would be aroused, bick-
erings and contentious become tho order of the
day, and the moral and mental improvement of
both classes retarded. 1t would seem then, from
this examination Of the law of 1858, and the cir.
cumstances under which it was PASSED, that the
words white" and "colored" as used in that act.
were both used in their ordinary and common ac-
ceptation and that any other construction would
do violence to the legislative intent and perpe,u-
ate the very evils that act intended to remedy
Such was also the construction, which the act upon
its passage received in many portions, if not
throughout the state. The eolored population,
whether more or less than mulatto, affiliated with
the blacks. Schools were organized and whole
some rivalry inaugurated between the two classes.
But it is claimed that the word white" before
it was used in the act of 1862 had, by series of
decisions of this court. been held to include all
persons, though in part Of African descent, who
are that half white, and that the Legislature
must be presumed to have used it in that enlarged
sense. The decisions referred to are Polly Gray
.. The State, 4 Ohio, Il, 353. Williams, o. School
Directors. &C., Wright II. $40, Lane. .. Baker,
et al. IL Ohio r. 237. Jeffries, o. Ankeny. et al.
IL Ohio r. 312. and Thacker. ., Hawk, ID. $40.
The case of Polly Gray arose under the law 10
force at the time, prohibiting blacks and mula,