Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1875-02-10
THE CONFLICT OF COURTS.
THE MIXED SCHOOL QUESTION.


THE MIXED SCHOOL QUESTION.
In many parts of the country great
antipathy undoubtedly exists 10 the
establishment OF what are called mixed
schools, in which provision is made
for the joint instruction of white and
colored children. Separate schools for
each race are maintained in most OF
the Northern States. The right to ex.
clude colored children from any but
the schools thus provided for their bene-
fit has repeatedly been questioned,
formerly under the several State Con
stitutions, and more recently under the
Constitution Of the United States
The latest case in which it has been
considered is that just decided in In
diana.
As long ago as lsl9, the city of Bos-
ton was sued in behalf of colorcd girl
who sought to recover damages by
reason OF her exclusion from one of the
primary schools of that city at which
white children received instruction
1t was shown that the city had estab-
lished and then maintained two prim-
ary schools for the exclusive use of
colored children. The plaintiff was
represented by Charles Sumner, who
argued the case in the Supreme Ju-
dicial Court of Massachusetts,, before
Chief Justice Shaw. He contended
that the exclusion of colored children
from the public schools which were
open TO white children was IN viola
tion Of the Constitution of Massachu-
sets, according TO which all men, with
out distinction Of color or race, are
equal before the law. The Court, how
ever directed non-suit, holding that
the regulation was Constitutional which
restricted the plaintiffs attendance to
the schools established for colored chill
dren.
A somewhat similar case was deter
mined by the General Term of the
Supreme Court Of New York at Buffalo
in 1869. There, provision in the
charter of that city requiring the cs-
tablishment of public schools exclusive
ly for colored children, was alleged to
be an Infringement of the State Con
stitution, and contrary to the act OF
Congress known as the Civil Rights
bill. Mr.. Justice Daniels, now of the
General Term of this judicial depart
ment, wrote the opinion of the Court,
which afiirms the power of the Legis-
lature to require the separation OF
schools for white and colored children.
1t went still further, and declared that
the right to be educated in the com
mon schools of the State is one derived
entirely from legislation, and is not
one Of those inherent and paramount
rights which the people by Constitu-
tional provisions have placed beyond
the control of legislation.
Probably the most careful and intel
ligent consideration which the ques-
ton has ever received in any Court,
however, was in case decided by the
Supreme Court of California in Janu-
AIRY last. 1t was an application for a
writ Of maDdamus commanding the
principal of a San Francisco grammar
school for white children to admit a
colored girl into the institution as a
pupil. He justified his refusal to re-
ceive her, by reference to the school
law OF the State which expressly cnacts
that "the education oi children oil Afrl.
can descent ana lndlan chlldren shall
be provided Tor IN separate schools,
under which statute two schools Tor
such children are maintained IN the
city OF San Francisco, where the sehol-
ars are afforded instruction IN all re-
spects equal to that provided Tor white
children at their schools. The peti-
toners counsel argued that this statu-
tory provision was null and void be-
cause IN contraventlon oil that clause
OF the Fourteenth Amendment 0i the
constitution OF the United states,
which prohibits any state from deny
ing to any person within Its Jurlsdlc-
ton the equal protection OF the laws.
The court, consisting ON this occas-
ION oil the Chici justice and two OF the
four Associate Justices, denied the ap-
plicatlon. The equal protection OF the
laws, guaranteed by the Fourteenth
Amendment was declared to be uni
iormlty and equality in the measure of
legal rights within the State, which
must be "the same for oil persons found
therein, according TO the respective
condition OF each--each child rs all
other chlldren-each adult as all other
adult persons twas held that every
child IN the State, OF whatever race or
color, was entitled to instruction in
the common schools, under the Consti-
tuition OF the United States and the
California School law and that this
right was not iniriDged by requiring
those Of African descent to attend sepa-
rate schools, provided such schools acl
tnally were maintained for their bene.
fit- But said the Court, sunless such
separate schools be in fact maintained,
all children OF the school district, wheth-
er white or colored, have an equal
aIaa