New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-05-24

=
ageFof all persons, without distinction or
discrimination ON account of race or color
Z. Article 100 of the constitution pro-
vIdes that the members of the General
Assembly, and all other officers, before
they enter upon the duties of their Office
shall take the following oath:
do sOlemnly swear that l accept the
civil and political equality of all men, and
agree not to attempt to deprive any person
or persons. on account of race. color or pre-
vious condition, of any political or civil
right, privilege or. immunity enjoyed by
any other class of men that l will support
the constitution Of the United States and
the constitution and laws OF the State of
Louisiana" etc.
8. The civil rights bill passed by Congress
on the ninth of April. 1866, expressly pro-
vides that the colored people shall have
the same equal rights with the white
people, and shall enjoy the tull equal bene-
tits of all laws and proceedings for the
by white citizens, and shall be subject to
the like penalties, and none other, any
law, statute or ordinance, regulations or
customs to the contrary Notwithstanding.
Civil rights bill, article l.
g. On the twenty-third of February. 1869,
the Legislature passed the act No. 81, en-
titled IAN act to enforce the thirteenth ar
ticle Of the constitution OF this State, and to
regulate the licenses mentioned in the said
thirteenth article" 1t is necessary to
transcribe, as bearing on this case, the third
section of said act which provides: That
all licenses hereafter granted by this State,
and by all parishes and municipal cities
therein, to persons engaged in business. or
keeping places of public resort shall con-
tain tie express condition that the place of
business or public resort shall be opened to
the accommodation and patronage of all
persons, without distinction or discrimIna-
ton on account OF race 'Or color, and any
person who shall violate the condition of
such license shall, on conviction thereof, be
punished by forfeiture OF his license and.
moreover, shall be liable at the suit of the
person aggrieved, to such damages as he
shall sustain thereby. before any court of
competent jurisdiction
10. The section three of act No 60 OF
1870 provides that the thirteenth article of
the constitution shall be printed on the
face OF all State licenses issued to tax
collectors.
H. The act No. % of 1871, entitled ian
act to regulate the mode of trying cases
arising under the provisions of article
thirteen of the constitution of Louisiana,
or under any acts of the Legislature to
enforce the said article thirteen Of the said
constitution, and to regulate the licenses
therein mentioned" provides that all cases
brought for the purpose of indicating
asserting or maintaining the rights, privi-
leges and immunities guaranteed to all
persons under the provisions OF the thir-
teenth article OF the constitution of Loui-
siana, or under the provisions of any
act of the Legislature to enforce the
said thirteenth article, and to regulate
the licenses therein mentioned, or for
the purpose of recovering damages for the
violation of said rights and immuni-
ties, shall be tried by the court or by
Jury. If the jury does not agree, or fails
to render verdict, either for the plaintiffs
or defendants, the jury shall be discharged
and the case shall be Immediately submit
ted to the judge upon the pleadIngs and
evidence already on tile, as if the case had
been originally tried, without any further
proceedings, arguments. continuation or
delay; each party having the right to ap-
peal to the Supreme Court in all cases
where an appeal is allowed by law.
From the Importance of this case, affect
ing as it does not alone the interests of a
citizen, but of all our colOred fellow citizens
in the State of Louisiana, and testing their
right to frequent all places of public resort
in common with white people without
violence, outrage or insult, have quoted
carefully all the laws which secure the
rights. the franchises and the privileges of
the colored people of this State. and place
them on footing Of perfect equality with
any other class of citizens of the United
States.
Bv the laws of the State and of the city
of New Orleans, the defendant could keep
no theatre or other place Of public resort
without obtaining license from the State
and city, and agreeing to obey the condi-
tons imposed by the law-maker, to wit:
First-To open the establishment freely for
the accommodation and patronage OF any
person. without distinction of race, color
or previous condition. Second-To subject
himself to an action in damages by the
party injured by refusal to comply with
the terms on which he received his license.
The defendant was free to accept or reject !
those terms, but after applying for and ac-
cepting the license ne became bound. |
Plaintiff, under article thirteen of the con-
stitution of Louisiana, had the right to en-.
ter the theatre ON the evening in question, |
aud if he did not renounce or fOrego that |
right by special contract with the pro-
prietor or his representative, the refusal to |
admit him, which is proven beyond contra
dictiOn, was deprivation of constitu- |
tional right, tor which, under act No. 80. |
session acts of 1869. the defendant would |
be liable to him in damages. Here it be-
comes necessary to inquire what effect is
to be given to the manual acceptance of |
the ticket by the plaintiff. Did its manual
create contract between the
parties by which the defendant had the
right to refuse admission to the holder
upon returning the regular price
Of the ticket. The inscription on the ticket
was only proposition emanating from the
defendant; to make it q contract its accept
ance by the plaintiff and his consent to it
must be shown. Such acceptance and con-
sent may be shown either expressly, or by |
implication. There was no evidence what
ever expressly-by words either written or
spOken-tO show the acceptance of the afOre
said proposition by plaintiff, or his assent
thereto. Neither was there an implied ac-
ceptance or consent manifested by the &C
tons of the plaintiff at the time; he was
neither silent nor inactive, but Outspoken
and persistent in the rejection of defend
ants proposition, and the assertion OF his
right to enter the Academy of Music. The
ticket does not establish a contract as
claimed by defendant to have taken place
between HIM and plaintiff. On the face of
the ticket in large capitals are the words
Admission Ticket" 1t was an admission
ticket as its name implies. 1t could not be
1t the same time evidence of the right of adj
mission and also evidence of the right to
prevent admission as claimed for it by de-
endant. But the proposition printed on the
ticket, while not evidence of a contract be-
.ween a holder and the proprietor of the
Academy of Music, is evidence OF the
assumption of the latter to
exercise the power $40 refuse admission 20
The holder, upon returning the regular price
If the ticket In other words. 1t Is an as
sumption OF the defendant that he could
override the law and the rights of certain
members of the community by resorting to
he stratagem of printing the aforesaid
proposition on his tickets of admission.
The plaintiff did not renounce or fOrego
lis right to enter the Academy of Music on
he evening OF the seventh OF March, 1874,
Tor did he consent to make that right de-
,end on the sutferance or ODtion of the de- |