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

'Vee 'roh tesiliylng In cases where white person
was Party. The cases in Wright and 10 10 Ohio
were cases arising under toe school laws in force
prior 10 1913, and the two cases In llth Ohio are
cases where persons. Of more than half white
blood, had been dobarrci from voting at elections.
The opinions are very brief, and in none save the
two hrs' 90 the Court assign any reason for the
'piniJn except the authority of the decision in the
Folly uray case. The statutes and the constitu-
icnal proe ion as to voters, under which the
que'ticns arose, are disabling and exclusive in
character, and it is apparent from what is said.
that the tendency and effect Of the provisions
sreat,y Influenced the decisions. In the case OF
Polly Gray the Court remarked that tho statute
iefnes only three classes of persons, whites and
blacks and mulattoes, and say that they nre not
willing to make third class nor define the degree
OF darkness that should exclude, and in the Viii
liams case they speak of the shabby meanness' Of
taxing them for the support Of common schools,
and excluding their children from the benefits :;
and also say that color is very unreliable, and that
1t is blood and color that incapacitates. 1t is OBJ
vous that if the statutes in those cases had exclu
ded colored persons children, as well as blacks
and mulattoes, a different result would have been
muattoes they might we'll limit the disability to
the mulatto; but if color ed had been used then ali
less that white would have been excluded There
is no margin between white and coored all that
are not white are colored and in such case the
Court would have been required to DO what they |
10 the Williams case. refused, to consider color as
well as blood. Not mplexion alone, but COM
plexion and blood combined. The test of eyclu-
sion would have been-is the applicant Of mixed
blood, and is that admixturo apparent? If the |
word white in the law of 1858, was used in the !
same connerion in the laws under which those de-
csions made it would be fair to presume that
the legislature intended it to bear the same eatice
Specification but where they drop the words
blacks and mulsttoes," and place. in opposition
to white, term which embraces all less than pure
white, such presumption can fairly or properly |
arise. That the Legislature intended that the
word colpred, in the law Of 1858, should bear its
ordinary and popular Specification, is also appar-
ent from the fact that in section of the law of
l849, they qualified and restricted its Specification
for the purpose of that oct; but in the law Of 1858
which repealed the Law of 1919 and relates to col
ored youth, they did not re-enact the restriction,
though the necessity still existed, if the limitation
was intended to apply thereafter These decisions
in regard 10 the right of persons more than half
white to testify, and to attend the common schools
have had their day, and accomplished their pur-
I ose, and we 90 not seek to disturb them. The
statutes to which they apply have been repealed
and the construction we place upon the act of 1858
does not conflict with them. II is law Of CLASH
ication and not of exclusion, intended and de-
signed to place in one school all the white youth,
and in the other, all who have any visible taint Of
African blood. That the Legislature have the
power thus to classify the scholars, even when all
are undoniaby white, one will question. 1t
might, perhaps, have been batter if some further
and more definite provision had been mado for the |
education Of colored youth, in districts in which
the number is SO very limited. as it appears to be
in the village Of Logan. That, however, is mat
ter for the consideration of the legislature and
NOS for the Judiciary. We do not undertake to de-
eide whether the decisions as to the right to vote
under the old constitution above referred to- apply
to similar cases arising under the new. 1t will
be time enough to determine their applicability to
the new constitution, when the question is before
us. There is no nee ssary connection between
the two questions nor is there such an incOngru-
i,y in excluding light mulattoes from the white
schools. and permitting them to.particlpae in cleo
tions, as the counsel for the plaintiff seem to SUP
pose. II the law excluded them altogether, from
the means Of education, it ght be somewhat in
congruous to permit them to participate in the
elections, but when their education is enjuined
and the means provided though in separate schools
no such incongruty arise. A majority of
the Court then hold that colored youth of the des-
cription stated in the of the defendants, are
not as of right, entitled to admission into the
schools, organized und set apart under the act of
March 14th, 1858, for the instruction Of white
youth. Judgment affirmed.
BRlNKERHorF, G. j., and SuTLIFF, S., dissent
ed.