The Marlboro democrat. [volume] (Bennettsville, S.C.) 1882-1908, 1905-03-24
SOCIAL STATUS
Ofthe Races Legally Considered
by the Supreme Court.
A LIBEL DECISION.
1t is Defamatory to Publish a White
Man as Negro. Amendments
to Constitution Have No
Effect in Regard to So

/
Effect in Regard to So
cial Relations.
The Columbia Record says a very
interesting and important decision
was rendered by the supreme court
Wednesday morning. 1t is decided
that for newspaper to publish that
a white man Is ne. j. IL iefamatory
to the white man, aud the newspaper
making the publicati N Is liable to a
suit for damages. The case wss that
OF an appeal on the part Of Mr.. Au.
gustus M. Flood, Of Charleston, libel
slit having been Instituted by him
against The News and Courier aud
The Evening Post, OF Charleston, for
damages In the sum of $40 600 be-
cause he was referred to as being q
negro.
The case is stated as follows: Mr..
Flood is white man and citizen OF
Charleston, where, it was alleged, he
always enjoyed the respect and conf
nence of his fellow cit'z MS, the same
having been Of value in his bu,inass
and a source Of pride and pleasure to
him In his social life. The cumrl int
further alleges that the News AID
Courier and The Evening P St pub
lisned local Items in regal d to a suit
entered against tue Charleston elcc
trio street railway by Mr.. Flood Tor
damages for injuries aud referred u
him as colored man. BY reason OF
being published as being a negro, MIR.
Flood claimed that the statement
tended TO exclude him lIom society
and by reason of said false anu defa
matorY publication this plaintiff has
ben injured in his reputation AMI
hurt In his feelings to his damage
$40 OsOOO"
In answer to the complaint it was
denied that the publication was de-.
famatory or that any legal damage
was suffered therefrom, it being
claimed that under the prov SONS OF
XIII, XIV and XIV amendments TO
the constitution Of the United States
and of the provisions OF the constitu-
ton of South Carolina, the use of the
said word "colored" in application to
anSt9ns Is not libelous nor defamatory
'rleos. rsos. nyslegal damage or cause of
action arise from such applications.
This demurrer having been sustained
by the presiding judge, an appeal was
taken on the GROUNDS that the judge
erred in holding that the application
negro" or It's equivalent, 'colored," I"
when applied to white man Is not
libel ,us per Sc. That the law In this
state, before the adoption Of the XIII
XIV and Nv amendments to the
constitution OF the United States was
that the term negro" or "colored, F"
when applied to white person, was
libelous per SO, in that it tended t.
exclude him from society. HIS honor
erred In holding that this had been
changed and that the negrU's social
status has been changed by SAID
amendments, whereas it is Submitted
that only the negro's legal and politi-
cal status has been affected thereby.
The supreme court says. The only
question presented by this appeal is.
Is 1t libelouS per Sc to publish a white
man as a negro?" To call u whi.c
man a negro affects the social status
of any white man so referred to- !"
Authorities are quoted 'on this point
and the court continues: "Wnen VIZ
stop to think Of the racial distinction
subsiSting between the white man and
the black man, it must be apparent
that to i'm pute the condition OF Il ne
gro to q white man would affect his,
the white mans, social status, and in
case any one published white mau
to be a negro, 1t would not only be
calling to his pride, but would tend
to in erfere seriously with the Social
relation OF the white man with hi,
fellow white men; and TO protect the
white man from sucn publ C ,tiUn it is
necessary to bring such q charge to al
issue quickly"
In SJrauder VS.. West Virginia, the
cnurt held that these amend ntD $.
XIII, NV and Nv, were de, igned
accord members OF the negro acy IN
same protection la life libSrty an.
property which WIS already cuj yea
by the white race, and LOAh-r ua.s
the court In that case refer To the :
cial relations OF cacn race. The
oGute laws OF this state fore ids t Z
association OF the two races, in such
way 1t excludes the negro from
white society AMI vice versa BY n
misc geuatiOn Statutes, the lnte:
marri ge tf the two races Is fOro dact
and made IA crime Railroads. are re
quired TO furnish separate coach 10,
the two races. White chiidr and
cOlored children are forbid Ell 10 1T.
tend the same hcnuol. VAR us opiu
ions are quoted to sho tuat pubiis. !.
ing a wulte man rs a negro ha.
be n held to be libelous by variou,
courts
The court then quotes the Language
OF tne three amen m.nts to the con
stitutlOn OF the United States reierr
ed to and argues THAT il must be ap
parent from consulting the texts that
there is not the slightest reference t(
the social condioion OF the two races
AN take pleasure. it is stated ir
the opinion, in bowipg to the au
thOrity Of the United States In regarc
to these amendments, but we woulC
be very far from admitting that tn
social distinction subsis;ing between
the two races has been in any wis,
affected" In concluding the cour,
holds:
We, therefore. hold that these
three amend nents to the federal con
stitutlon have not destroyed The Law
I l1A