The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-03-26
rho school Co,or.Llnc In New York.

Tho school Color~Linc In New York
tvroRqANT DECISION BY JUDGE NELSON, oi
EHoOKLyN--wHEN COIoRED PUPILS suoJLI
,cr M ALLOWED ADMISSION 10 PrBI.f'
SCHOOLS Not SPECIALLY Reserved POI
fiIsE.
.rndce Nelson. In the Brooklyn CT,
Courf, Yesterday rendered an important
decision ~ 90 the rights Of colored appli
s.,nt~ for admission TO public schools mol
>,ccially SET apart for colorcd pupils. The
decision was rendered IN the case OF The
r,>aW. Il. King (colorcd), the daughter OF 9
well-to-do colorcd citizen of Brooklyn, who
vas refused admission TO Public School NO
In that city on the ground that the schoo
wa. used exclusively for white pupils. and
also lccause within few blocks OF tho
,,rl'. residence there Is n school set apart
ar colorod pupils. The Board OF Educa-
Ton sustained the action OF the principal
81 school No. and the father OF the girl
.,nnliod I'm the City Court for a m0nddaaS
=, .otnpcl the admission OF his daughter
in.sfhe society Of the white pupils. The
t.>t of Judge Nelson's decision i r. fol-
lows:
The question presented on this applica-
Ann for a 1.duddmuS il whether the Board
u. Tducation Of this city can legally refuse
., receive a colorcd girl Of suitable age
sos condition IN school set apart Tor
,-hifc children on the ground that schools
have been provided Cor colorcd children
,,clu.iycly. II appears that the father. y
,.,iyen and a taxpayer, moi willing that
t,uohter should attend the cOlored
.t,oi. made several applications to have
Dr. omitted 20 the school where white
.l9S,,n attended. which were refused.
. n,~efore inNOkcs the aid Of this court.
"a. ti.uk fine writ Of mG,dQmHS should not
~. -..,,ted for the following reasons:
r.r.i The legislature having provided
Ola. ,be Board Of Education should have
, e,ctrol md direction OF oil the public
.h,.i. nj the city. and also that schools
:.t, hc established Tor cOlor'd children.
,, po.,rd acting on the authority thus
.r'rr,1 have provided Tor the insiruc-
., "a ,,hitc and OF cOlOred children in
....-tc schools II appears from The
,...,.f. before me that the Schoo! which TINS
..t Th,ro.g. could attend is in every r.
...., ,i.itqilr: ;he teachers and tir means
10, DISTRACTION equally rs GOOD ~ those Of
r.., t,,r school. Il /, apparent that when
,. LEGISLATURE authorized the erection OF
.....,l. FOR colorcd childrcn L was intended
,..., ,..y should be- taught there, the scpa-
..f.9 II school, and the separation OF
..b.i,r- calling for the exercise @! the same
authority.
wutT TIE Foley HAS W'EN.
~...ud. fin several WCll-cOn>idercd cases
., .,.o conrt> Of hi, state and Of other
~i.,., lie policy Of having such separate
..I.sl. las been approved anG careful at-
t.t,.n given 10 the objections involved.
l,ffe case II the People CT ri. johnson
Walsh. opinion by Judge Gilbert, IL
e.. tdI that a colorcd child was not ent-
r.d 20 attend the school set apart for white
scholars. and maid0lptS was refused.
nh. sane doctrine, illustrated 10y varied
rufus OK reasoning, was applied in
other cases 90 Hon. Pr. H., 2i9;
u Ohio X. 1913; s Am. r., as;
q, .d.. l0j and 7GS; Is Abb. Pr. H.. n. =.
t.Y. in Robert, in the City 81 Boston, 30
Vr,s. T.. 1887 Mr.. Charles sumner, Of
eoi.n,ei. stated truly that the cOur.' OF that
-.re bod never admitted any discrimina-
iop founded on color or race IN the ad-
miai.tiaiion % the common schools. but
I4. recognized the equal rights ot all the
siallliianf,. The opinion In the ease wa
delivered by Chicf-)u,licc Shaw, who held
thf me General school Committee OF the
city had mower II make provision Tor the
n.ir.ction OF colorcd children in separate
schools established for them and 10 pro-
.ili. n,cir attendance upon the other
schools. In the several eases 10 which
xr have referred the courts recOg-
r,lc the authority Of the state 10
Ueo.afc 10 school trustees or boards
o.. ,duratiou the right to establish
operate schools and 10 provide ior the IN
.'r.c-ion of cOloTed apart from white clui-
lru. They do dispose 81 the suggestion
tet urh classification violates the four
zenith amendment Of the Constitution on
to United States. The exception 10 the
l.vtr TO exclude cOl0red children from The
Schools intended Tor white arises when
-0aute schools for the former have not
l.u provided. I'm such case the cNclu-
sion would be % denial al the right 10 ac-
lglc ou education, and therefore contrary
nilc policy Of the Law.
IMfd. The argument OF the learned
,o.u,1 f0r the relat0r assumes that there
la~ been in thi, instance discrimination
inst the colored racc. II the ease ap-
Hoarod 10 me in that light I should grant
fh.- application, regardless OF the cases
riDd, ;houeh OF great weight and author /
ut. Bot in my judgment Che di,crmina-
ION hl- been in favor Of thi. child. \
-.D1ol has been provided where ,hc can be /
Taught and where, In the social fel- /
i.W.hip Of her mates, size would T,
e what youth Away, craycs--sympa. |
IlY end encouragement. TN, question /, /
It % Dec treated as one 0i exclusion, /
.ua,l tAat may De- incidentally involved. !
"a, layc rather 10 maintain affirmative !
i..- gran "a and secured TO Ibis child, !
i.roicgnt policy adopted. with q tender /
% ard iog the welfare OF children ol every !
,H~.
ite application for a mQl40npts must Doe !
denied, but without c0.,s.-Neu lOrk /