The Richmond climax. (Richmond, Ky.) 1897-1914, 1905-02-22

the Utah court said: "IhOugn TedSOn-
able doubts may exist as to the pow
: err of the legislature to pass law,
or as to whether the law is calculated
or adapted to promote the health,
safety, or comfort of the people, or 10
secure good order, or promote the
general welfare, we must resolve
J them in favor of the right Of that de-
partment of government"
Judge Cooley says: "The judiciary
can only arrest the execution of a
statute when it conflicts with the
Constitution. 1t can not run race
of opinions upon the points OF rights,
reason and expediency with the law
making power"
Judge DuRelle in his separate opin-
ion in Ohio Valley Railways Rec. VS..
Lander etc, 20 Ky. L. r. 913, said in
discussing the separate coach law OF
this state: "The policy OF such law,
its ultimate purpose, or the reasons
which led to its enactment are not
matters for our consideration. Wheth-
er the law is a justi1able exercise OF
the police power does not depend upon
those considerations. That judge
differs with the legislature upon a
! question of policy does not authorize
him to say that law in pursuance of
such a policy is not a legitimate ex-
/ ercise Of the police powers, Of the
state. For example, judge may dis
| agree entirely with the reasons which
induce a legislature to adopt quar-
antine law. He may believe
that the disorder, whose spread
is thereby sought to be prevent
ed, is not infections or contagious.
Such belief, however, would not
justify Kim in holding that the
law was not within the police power
of the government. And so vita re-
gard to the laws for the suppression
of lotteries Illustrations might be
multiplied" Judge DuRelle here has
very clearly defined the function Of
the courts when called upon to deter
mine the validity of acts of the legfs-
lature passed in pursuan ce Of the
police power of the aIe.
The Supreme Cour. in Missouri
Pac. r. Co. VS.. Humes 70 u. S. 512, |
says: 1T is hardly necess airy to say
that the hardship, impolicy, or in5us- |
tice Of state laws is not necessarily |
an objection to their CONSTITUTIONAL |
validity; and that the remedy for |
evils of that character is to be. soaght |
from the state legislatures"
The same court in Sinking Fund |
Cases, 80 U. s., us, says: every pos
sible presumption is in favor of the |
validity of a statute, and this eontin- |
ues until the contrary is shown be-
yOnd a reasonable doubt. The safety |
of our institutions depends in no |
small degree on strict observance |
of this salutary rule"
ut is only when a law amounts to |
an arbitrary and unwarranted inter
ference with the right of the citizen |
to pursue any lawful business that ii |
must be declared unconstitutional
State VS.. Chicago, ETC., Rwy. Co., Ga |
A. S. R., 1872
This question of the separation of |
the races, in some of it's phases has |
been rather frequently before the !
courts, and those cases acquaint us
with the general policy of the law
on the question.
| Judge Bannin in his work on the
Fourteenth Amendment when REFER
ing to laws based upon racial diff
| ferences says: "Such legislation, il
the state regards it best for the har-
mony and comfort of the two races,
and conduc i've to public order, would
seem to find full warrant under the
police power"
The Supreme Court in Plessy VS.
Ferguson 1853 U. S. 256, one of the
separate coach cases, says Laws
permitting and even requiring their
separation in places where they are
liable to be brought into contact do
not necessarily imply the inferiority
of either race to the other, and have
been generally, if not universally, rec
OgniZed as within the competency of
the state legislatures in the exercise
of their police power. The most com
mon instance of this is connected
with the establishment of separate
schools for white and colored chill
dren, which have been held to be a
valid exercise of the legislative power
=sen by courts OF states where tn,
%Sccliticai rights Of the colored race
have been longest and most earnest.
enforced"
Chief Justice Shaw of Niassachc
sets in the case of Roberts VS.. Bos
ton, 5 Cush., 1913, said: "Concedine.
therefore, in the fullest manner. that
colored persons, descendants of Afri.
cans, are entitled by law to equal
rights, constitutional and political.
civil and social the question then
arises whether the regulation in ques-
ton, which provides separate schools
for colored children, is violation of
any of these rights. . 1t is urged
that this maintenance of separate
schools tends to deepen and perpet-
uate the odius distinction of caste.
founded in a deep rooted prejudice
in public opinion. This prejudice, if
1t exists. is not created by law.
Whether this distinction and preiu
dice, existing in the opinions and
feelings of the community, would not
as effectually be fostered by COMPEL
ing colored and white children to as
sociate together may wen be doubted
At all events. it is fair and proper
question for the committee to consid-
er and decide upon, having in view
the best interests of both classes. of
children placed under their superin-
tendence; and we can not say that
their decision upon it is not founded
on just grouds of reason and exper-
fence, and is the result of a discrimi-
mating and honest Judgment"
In an opinion of the Supreme Court
of Pennsylvania in the case OF the
Phil. & Westchester R. r. Co, VS..
Miles, SO A. d. 744, is found the full
est and strongest statement of the
reasons which justify a separation of
the races.
That court says: "The right to
separate being clear in proper cases,
and it being the subject of sound reg
ulation, the question remaining to be
considered is, whether there is such
a difference between the white and
black races within this state, result
ing from nature, law and custom, as
makes it a reasonable ground of sep
aration. The question is one of diff
ference. not of superiority or inferior
ity. Why the Creator made one black
and the other white we do not know.
but the fact is apparent and the races
are distinct, each producing it's own
kind and following the peculiar law of
its constitution. Conceding equality
with natures as perfect and rights as
sacred. yet God has made them dis
similar, with those natural instincts
! and feelings which He always i'm
|