New-York tribune., 1874-12-01
MIXED SCHOOLS.
IMPORTANT DECISION OF THE SUPREME
COURT OF IND'tI,NA.

CoIoRrp CHILDREN HELD TO BE ooNoiiiO
rIoNAL-ooLoaEp CHILDREN NOT ENliiltp ~
ADMISSION INTO COMMON e'iooA' INV
FOR WHITE CHILDREN ,,,
A highly important opinion, bearing ulrec.iJ
,non the problem OF mixed schools, has Just poo" Nv
,,aa in the Supreme Court Of Indanaby Chei-Jusuce
p,stirN The decision Of the Court was UNANIMOUS
although Judge Osborne did not concur ln ccl'' p W
tious OF the opinion. The case oelore 'uo NV".' -
entitled Samuel Cory, John Beaver ana "o.'"i"s w.
Craig agt. Cary Carter, snd was appeseu 1,' Ir,ns
Marion County Superior Court Corey NaI'oi, A'e
m D,s,rct No OF Lawrence township, Marion Counts
and having no school for colored children witnh IoS
claimed the right to send his children ana granuci'
who are OF full negro BLOOD to the district schov ~
xided for white children. They were denieu "u' '
nroceedncs were brought by Carter III 'Dc 0up'i'0
Conrt of the county against samuel Oory' trustee "
,or-orce ,owpship John Beaver, School director OF
Dstr,ct No O. and WOrthngton Craig teacher o ono VI
the schools The Court, at its special terin sust"eu
Carter holding that the children we're entleu u au
mission into the school, unless separate provision was
made for them This decision was based upon the oou-
mon School law OF May 49, 1862 providing for the educa
tion OF whito and colOred children OF the state III
separate schools having all the privileges ana IHhs Vi
other schools. law also provided that wheh 'ncc
were not sufficient number within attending uistanee
the several districts might be consolidated and form one
district: but II there were sufficient number 10 pe
fhus consolidated the trustees TO provide such
other means OF education for the cMlufeh "s
should use their proportion according 10 hum-
her Of the school revenue to the best advantage
The appellee, Carter made no allegation III his pc'F
lion that the trustee had refused TO provide separate
means OF education for his children but requested the
Court 10 declare their right OF admission into the schoo
and TO compel the appellants to admit them' Al
alternate writ was issued and the appellants appeared
and filed separate demurIers to the complaint upon the
ground that It did state facts sufficient to constutc
n cause OF action. The demurrers nonsuted and
the appellants refusing plead further, but eecng to
stand by exceptions 10 the rulings or the Court
Judgment for peremptory writ of mandate was gwen
The appellants appealed TO General Terin where lhe
Judgment OF the Special Term affirmed The ques-
top presented to the Supreme Court the opinion says
was whether the court below erred in overruing the
demurrer 20 the complaint. After referring 10 some
minor points of the appeal, the Court says:
1t very PLAIN and obvious to us that by the supp
mental act of MAY 49, 1C9 tho Legislature has provided
for the education OF the white ana e3.ofeu eIarcn VI
the state in separate schools ana the 9uT,uon ,iO %
conflict with Constitution Of this state or the Con
stitntion OF the United S1es 70 scfio0 % ~ Arce
and Section Of Article VIII. and they "section
29 The General Assembly shall not grant 10 any citizen
or class OF citizens privileges mmunities which upon
the terms, shall not equally belong to al citizens
learning, generally difused throughout community
being essential the preservation OF free government
II Shall be the duty OF the General Assembly to encour
age. by ali suitable MEANS moral, intellectual, seen
tie, and agricultural improvement, ana 10 prONde py
law for a general and uniform system OF common
schools wherein tuition shall be without charge an q
privileges and immunities secured by Section % Of
Article l. were n0t lnenueu LOT VI t nt
such privileges and mmunfties TO citizens ana at that
negroes neither citizens OF the United states
nor Of this state. 1t was held by this Court in Sears
agt Board Of Commissioners of wayne County (3O ma
26 that the privileges and lmmuntes secured Dy the
Quoted intended for citizens of this
State.
Discussing the bearing Of the Federal Constitution
upon the law May 49, 1862 the Court quotes decision
of the Ohio Supreme Court which held that the Four
teenth Amendment only additional guarantee
of equality the colOred people and equality Of rights
does involve the necessity or educating whte auu
eolored persons In the school any moro than it
does that OF educating children Of both sexes In the
same school, or that different grades of scholars must
be kept IN the school In TO the question
OF how far these affect the Constitution or
sovereign powers OF tho state. the Court says;
l. The State cannot 10 the future, while q member OF
the Federal Unon change her Constitution 50 as to
create establish slavery involuntary servltude ex
cept as punishment for crimes whereof the party
shall have been cOnvicted-thus protecting the new
class OF citizens, e. negroes and muatloes from Do
2 The state cannot deny to nor deprive citizen OF
the United States. l. any negro or muatto or those
national rights privileges, or mmunlues WHICH belong
10 him such citizen. IT..
of the United States l. any negro mulato, who is
or becomes a bona flde resident therein.
give such, I. C., to sucn negro or
Inulatto is or who becomes d bonahde resident
iherein the same rights prvileges and immunes Sc
cured Constitution and laws to her other c. TO
her white citizens
From the concluding portions of the opinions the FOL
lowing points are takeu;
The Legislature, under State Constitution it
existed without the limitation imposed upon the
eign power of the by the Fourteenth Amendment
herenbefOe stated had the power to provide for the
education only OF the white children OF the State but
since its ratification system Of public schools would
be general uniform. and equally open ali which did
for the education OF the coOred children OF
State 1t being settled that the Legislature must
provide for the education of the colored children as
well for the white children, we are required TO deter
whether the Legislature may CLASSIFY such chll
dreD by color and and provide for their education
In separate schools. whether they must attend
he
polOr. 10 opinion, lac classification Of
scholars the basis OF race or color and their
education IN separate schools involve questions OF do
estiC policy VhiCn within the legislative discretion
aud control and not exclusion of
Glass II other words, the placing Of the white children
Df the state class and the negro chdlen OF the
Ese il another cas aud requiring these classes 10 be
taught arafe~. provision De.ug made FOR their edu
DraDCAas according 10 age, capacity
Uc-I1eI: win capable teachers. sLd u tue
tert Pc the school revenue does
u q GENIAL o: equal privileges 10 either,
eOlhci wIt1 IL open character u the syste REQUIRED
BY tAe Constitution. We ~ very clearly % TIE
opiuIon tuai The O: Nav y. ls Constitute La
aud tnat, willie Remains 10 ioFce cJOeG q 41reD
not entted 10 admission into tie conL.On schools
which are provided for the education Z gllte eli
ETen. 10 opinion the court Dr.ev erred Il Affirm
iUg action OF the court IN SPECIAL term. and
Judgment Is reversed. with costs, ana tie
maDded 20 the court below, with directions 70 tnsl
Overrule the judgment Of the 10 special
overruling the demurrer TO the petition for
date.
The attorney for the appellee excepted the opinion
aud Judgment OF the Supreme Court and announced his
intention appeal to the Supreme Court Of the United
States; first however asking the Supreme Court Of In
dana grant hun a hearing the The decision
has created much comment in Indianapolis and raised
considerable excitement among the cOlOrcd people.
They anrn that they will hght 1t to the bitter end