Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1883-09-07

lSee Sonsutuuonal i'epates, Vol. III, pages
Gil and 8lp,1
The proposition referred to was defeated,
and in its stead the following was adopted
''SEc. Q. The General Assembly shall. by
suitable enactments, require all such apph-
ancos and means TO be provided and used as
may bo necessary to secure, ns far as possi-
BILE, the lives, health, and safety of all per-
sons to be employed in any mine or mines
in this State; and shall, moreover, enforce
penalties"
This proposition was adopted by a vote OF
"a yeas TO 6 nays. Among those voting
"nay" was Judge Hoadly. [See page 1869,
Volume 2, Part 8, Constitutional Debates.]
}2 RIGHTS! CASE. n-.s
Hon. THOMAS q. PntSeEr, eI,state Senator
from the Springfield District, was one of the
attorneys for the colored girl, Eva Gazaway, in
the celebrated Springfield school case, and In
answer to the charges made against Judge For
aker for the part he took in that case as the
attorney for Prof. w. ]. White, Mr.. Pringle
wrote the editor OF the Commercial Gazette as
follows:
To the Editor Of the Commercial Gazette,
was quite surprised TO see in your issue OF
June 18th ult., that an attack has been made
(of course, by the Democratic press the great
champion of equal rights in the past, and al
ways so Jealous OF the rights of colored men)
for defending w. J. White, of this city, in the
fusal to admit her into the public schools of
this city. This attack is so utterly without
foundation, so unjustifable, and so entirely
inexcusable, that it ought to, and 1 believe
boomerang, as you properly characterized it.
II is true the Judge did appear, with Mr.. o. T.
Martin, ESQ, of this city, for the defendant,
and Mr. +. NJ Hagan, Democratic lawyer of
this city; Mr.. w. $. Newberry, Esq, Graham
plaintiff. am certain that counsel for the
plaintiff will all agree, "without regard to
color or political proclivities," that not one
word fell from the lips of Judge Foraker that
could possibly be tortured into any reflection
upon the colored race or any disregard of their
rights. The facts in the case were agreed upon,
and the Judge in an exceedingly kind and
courteous address, presented the law of the
case, as he understood it to have been declared
by statute in Ohio and the Supreme Court of
the State, and did not, am sure, go so far
even as to express any approval of the wisdom
or correctness of the law, The plaintiff and
her counsel 1.-TWO of whom were colorcd)
were duly advised of the holding of the
Supreme Court of this State upon the ques-
tion ''of the right to establish and maintain
separate schools for colored children" and for
that reason did not bring suit IN the State
Court as the shortest and quickest route to the
Supreme Court of the United States. The
plaintiff sought to raise the question as to the
right of discrimination against colored chill
dren under the name, tgort, or pretert of "cldsSi
fcation" and desired to test it as speedily
and with as little expense as possible. In this
it is but fair to say that we were greatly aided
by Judge Foraker and the defendant himself,
they permitting plaintiff s counsel to write out
q statement OF facts showing the state of
things Us they existed here, in relation to the
public schools, accompanied by a map, show
ing the number of white and colored schools
their location, &C., which was agreed to by
them, thus saving great amount of expense
and trouble to the plaintiff in taking q
large number of witnesses to Cincinnati to
prove them, in order to get the opinion of the
Court upon the questions of law applicable to
her case. The record of the case will show
this to be correct. Again, in making up the
bill Of exceptions in the case, Judge Foraker
was very courteous fair and Just, and put no
obstacles in the way of the plaintiff, saving in
| the record all the questions of law she sought
to make for final review in the Supreme Court
of the United States, where the case will soon
be taken. The plaintiff and her counsel were
of the opinion that the statutes Of Ohio and
the decision of the Supreme Court OF Ohio
were in conflict with the spirit and letter
OF the amendments to the Constitution of
the United States and the laws of Congress
passed in pursuance thereof and it was to test
the correctness or incorrectness OF this
|
that plaintiff brought her suit. And by
reason largely OF the Judges courtesy and
fairness, she, with little expense, will soon
have that opportunity. 1t was upon tho mo-
ton of Judge Foraker at the time of the trial,
that one of the attorneys (colored) was admit
ted to practice in that Court. 1 am confident
all of the counsel ON both sides, and the Judge
(Ba1ter) who tried the case, will confirm what
Mr.. Hagan so tersely says, "The attack is O
small game. Judge Foraker only did his duty
as G. lawyer"
We think it will soon be about as difficult to
| find the author OF this malicious attack, as it
was to find the writer Of the "Morey Letter" !"
| The same spirit that invented the one, prom pied
the other Count us all, except Mr.. Hagan,
who is Democrat land we will wrestle with
him until October) for Foraker, red hot
| THos. J. PRINaLE
SPRINGFIELD, O., June IA, 1888.
| Mr.. GRAHAM DEwELl, a colored man and one
of Eva Gazaway's attorneys in the same case
wrote as follows:
To the Editor Of the Commercial Gazette;
Mr.. Prngle has called my attention to an at
| tack made upon Judge Foraker by the Dem
ocratic press, charging him with making some
| discourteous remarks in the trial of the GAIA
way case at the October term, 1882, in the U. s
Circuit Court, Cincinnati, o. l cheerfully
unite with Mr.. Pringle as one of plaintiffs at
torneys, in saying that while Mr. Foraker
with his colleague, represented the defense in
opposition to the principles that we were seek
ing 10 maintain, viz: that the law of separate
schools for colored youth contravened tho
amendments to the Constitution of the United
States and while l believe that it is unjust, 6
great wrong TO prescribe and discriminate
against any people because of race or national
ity under our Government and laws, ano
that these petty prejudices in public affairs
should be wiped out, and all should be per
mitted to walk together the paths OF prog
ress, working out each his own destiny, in jus
tice to Mr.. Foraker, can recall no remark
made by him in his argument that was unkint
or discourteous to the plaintiff or her race, ant
say that he did no more than would be ex
pected of dutiful, faithful lawyer to his client
Republicans Of all classes, let's stand by th
nominations made at Columbus, by our party
are without truth or foundation. Let's clos
up the ranks and battle for the achievement o
O victory for the principles of our party, 81
that in the ides Of October we shall have it
prestige to help us to q more signal victory il
the coming National campaign. Let's not b.
nor swerve from the right. believe that al
these questions which are SO offensive to u
will pass away in time, and as the masses o
our race become educated, worthy, capable, up
right honest and good citizens.
Yours, for Foraker, GRAHAM DEwELI,
Attorney, Springfield, o.
Also Mr.. W. 8. NEwBERRY, colored man ant
prominent attorney OF Springfield wrote a
follows:
To the Editor Of the Commercial Gazette:
: have heard read the letter OF Mr.. Pringle
} and heartily concur in its statements. me
Judge Foraker for the first time in the trial o
the Gazaway case. He very kindly moved m,
admission TO practice in the u. s. Circuit Court
and afterwards came to me and congratulate,
me on my admission, and spoke some friendl,
words OF encouragement. am perhaps a