The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1884-12-25
SOCIAL EQUALITY IN CARS.
An Awkward Issue Raised I'm Congress
Yesterday.

WASHINGTON, December l7.-In tn,
House this morning, on motion of Mr.
Bratton, Of Souta Carolina, Tuesday
January 20, was fixed for the considera
tion Of appropriate resolutions touching
the death of J. II. Evins, late member o.
the House.
The House then resumed the consider,
alton of the interstate commerce bill
the pending question on o motion to
table the motion to reconsider the vote
by which the House yesterday adopted
an amendment by Mr.. 'Hara, (colored)
of North Carolina, providing that any
person having purchased q ticket to be
"cc"eved FROM one State to another shall
| receive the same treatment and be afford.
ed the same facilities as those furnished
any other person holding ticket of the
same class.
The motion to recommit was tabled
yeas 149, nays l29 Mr.. Crisp, of Geor.
gia, offered an amendment providing
that nothiag in that Act contained shall
be 30 construed as to prevent any railroad
company from providing separate accom-.
modations for white and colored persons
without discrimination. He believed in
the equality of all men under the law.
He believed that every man should have
the right to demand at the hands of
common carriers as good service as any
other man. There was nothing in his
amendment controverting this doctrine,
but there was no good reason why white
| men or colored men should object to
separate accommodations. His amend
ment did not force railroad companies to
provide separate accommodations. Was
1t Objectionable that in response to public
sentiment railroad companies should
furnish separate accommodations7 Whom
did it injure? Why should Congress
propose q law which might he regarded
as requiring the admixture of the two
races in the public conveyances of the
land.
Dir. Smalls. (colored) of South Carroll.
ma, opposed the amendment and said that
he was glad that it was offered by
member from Georgia. Colored men and
women did have trouble in travelling
through that State. They had car in
Georgia which was called second class
car. A colored man travelling from
Washington to New Orleans when he
came to the State Of Georgia was com.
PEELED by persuasion or force to 20 into
this "Jim Crow" car. He thought that
the good sense of the members of the
House would vote down the amendment,
especially the good sense of those Demo.
Gratis who were saying 1--WE arc going to
be the best friend Of the colored man."
He hoped that the gentlemen who said
this great good man, Cleveland, vii! do
good to the colored man." would not
stand up for the "Jim Crow" car of
Georgia. (Applause on the Republican.
side.
Mr.. Herbert, of Alabama, advocated
the amendment. If adopted the whole
provision would mean exactly what the
amendment of the member from North
Carolina (O'Hara) would mean without
the words without discrimination"
These words had been inserted simply
for the purpose OF making the amend.
ment an excuse for exciting political
prejudice. He objected to any law
which required common carriers to put
colored end white people in the same
car What was proper was to give them
equal accommodation in separate cars.
There no disposition on the part of
Southern democrats to deny that all
men, without regard to race, color or
previous condition, were entitled to equal
facilities and equal accommodations
while travelling on the same class of
tickets as other men.
Mr.. O'Hara, colored, regretted that
the color question had arisen on this
debate. He held that no matter whether
man was black or white, he was an
American citizen and the egis of the
great republic ought to be spread over
him. Public sentiment aud the progress
of the 10Th century stared Congress in
the face. aud it was too late for Congress
to legislate on the question of color.
His amendment appealed to the good
sense and patriotism of Congress. All
it asked was that when the House was
protecting the property of men and
protecting dumb brutes 1t should give
voice and expression to the protection of
all American citizens. Applause on
Republican side. He did not believe
that there was single railroad in the
land which desired to foster any discrim.
ipation.
Mr.. Breckenridge, of Arkanaas, offered
as substitute for Mr.. Crisp's amendment
an amendment providing that nothing in
this Act shall be construed to deny to
railroads the right to provide separate
accommodations for passengers as they
may deem best for public comfort or
safety, or to make such regulations as
IciAtC W Ii6uopoIIhtluh UCLWCSu pOlulb
! wholly within the limits of one State.
Mr.. Breckenridge said that he did not
wish to see the rights of the colored man
limited or restricted in the slightest
degree. Ono objection that he had to
the amendment of the gentleman from
Georgia (Crisp) vas that it spoke of
colored people as contradistinguished
from white people. The gentlemen were
mistaken If they thought that Southern
people wished to abridge the rights of
the colored man under the law, but II
Congress prevented the asserting OF
passengers from the standpoint of public
convenience and safety it infused social
| question into commercial question.
Mr.. Reed, Of Maine, ironically ex-
pressed his pleasure at seeing the ques.
ton changed from one Of color into one
Of assortment. The House, which had
determined to pursue these robber barons
bad before It plain question whether
II would by enactment confer upon these
Same barops the privilege of asserting
their passengers. Certainly some treasu.
ry regulations must be adopted as to the
method Of assortment. Laughter or
the Republican side.] Were men TO be
assorted on the ground of size. or on the
mustache ground, or on the beard basis
| Laughter.l He objected to having
these robber barons assert passengers or
any fahcifnl basis they might undertake
to set up. Laughter. ,,a III
Mr.. Reagan said that the gentleman
from Maine Reed might make himsel
hupoorous- afSouE 0aseorf pooot ~ b,,t ~.