Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1867-11-13
NEGRO EQUALITY.
Decision OF Ghe Supreme Coura OF
PennsyIVarta.
Prom the Pittsburg Post, Norember sth.

EeAAsyAtHuAb.
Prom the Pittsburg Post, November sth
On Monday, in the Supreme Court, nov
in session 10 this city, a most important
decision was rendered, relating TO negroes
forcing themselves into the company Of
white people in railroad cars, prior to the
passage of the act Of Assembly Of March
last, granting them that privilege. The
case in which the question originated was
that Of negro woman, who had taken a
seat in one Of the cars in Philadelphia and
Westchester railway set apart for white
people, and upon the conductor requesting
her to take position elsewhere, allotted
TO negroes, she refused, remarEing that
she had a right TO sit where she pleased,
Whereupon she was removed, and soon
after brought suit for damages, alleged to
have been sustained by being compelled
TO occupy different seat. She obtained
verdict in the lower court, but the defend.
ants appealed, and the case was fully ar
gued before the Supreme Court in Phias
delphia, which announced its decision on
Monday, reversing the Judgment Of the
court below, and ordering a new trial.
The opinion OF the court was delivered
by Judge Agnew, which was sustained by
Chief Justice Woodward, Judges Thomp-
son and Strong, Justice Reed alone dis
seniing.
The following is the conclusion of the
opinion:
Ii is clear, therefore, that under the con.
stltution and laws, the white and black races
stand IN a separate relation to each other.
We find the same differences in the insti.
tutions and customs of the State. Never
has there been an intermixture Of the two
races, socially, religiously, civilly or politi-
cally. BY uninterrupted usage the blacks
live apart, visit and entertain among them
selves, occupy separate places of public
worship and amusement, and lill no civil
or political stations, not even sitting to de-
eide their own causes. In fact, there is not
an institution of the State in which they
have mingled indiscriminately with the
whites. Even the common school law pro-
vides for separate schools when their num-
bers are adequate. In the military service,
also, they were not intermixed with the
white soldiers, but were separated into
companies and regiments Of color, and this
not by way of disparagement, but from
motives of wisdom and prudence, to
avoid the antagonisms of variant and
unmixable races. Law and custom hav-
ing sanctioned a separation of races. it is
not the province of the Judiciary to legis-
late 1t away. We cannot say there was no
difference in fact, when the law and the
voice of the people had said there was.
The laws Of the State are found in its con-
stitution, statutes, institutions and general
customs. 1t is to these sources Judges must
resort to discover them. If they abandon
these guides they pronounce their own
opinions, not the laws of those whose of
ficers they are. Following these guides.
we are compelledto to declare that at the time
Of the alleged injury there was that natu-
raj, legal and customary difference between
the white and black races in this State,
which made their separation as passengers
IN public conveyance the subject Of sound
regulation TO secure order, promote COM
fort, preserve the peace, and maintain the
rights both of carriers and passengers. The
defendants were therefore entitled to an
Affirmative answer TO the point recited at
the beginning Of this opinion.
II only remains to add that this callse
arose before the passage Of the act of 22d
March, 1867, declaring it an offense for
railroad companies 10 make any distinc>
tion between passengers on account of race
or color, and our decision pronounces the
law only as il stood when the case arose,
leaving the act to operate upon such cases
as shall fall within its provisions. Indeed,
the act itself is an indication of the Iegis-
lative understanding of how the law stood
before.
Judgment reversed and centre faciGs de
moro awarded.