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

would be sustained.
Thirdly its enactment the stat
of Kentucky would seek to deny per
sons within its Jurisdiction Of thu
equal protection of the laws.
The court is of the opinion that tn
validity of the act of the Legislature
which is being considered and tn,
consequent determination of the ques
tions raised by the defendants demur
rer depended wholly upon the ques
ton as to whether the action of the
General Assembly in passing the &C
in question was legitimate and prop
er exercise Of the internal police pow
er, which is the inherent right of al
states.
The idea which influenced the Leg
islature to pass the act must have
been that the association, whether
voluntary or involuntary of persons o.
negro and white races in the intimate
relation which could reasonably be
expected to follow, from their being
received together as pupils to be edu
Gated in the same institution, at the
same place, and at the same time
was inimical and detrimental to the
public peace and morals, and hurtful
to society. II such a view on the part
Of the Legislature was a reasonable
one. the legislation in question can
not be held to be an unvarranted ex-
ercise Of the police power. The real
question is was the possible danger
to the public peace, morals, and to
the welfare of society from such an
association so obvious that the Leg
islature could reasonably anticipate
such 6ansger, and therefore be war
ranted in taking this step to avoid it.
This act does not prevent the
teachers in Berea College from exer-
cising their calling even in that instr
tuition. Their calling is teaching. Not
withstanding this act they can teach
at all times and at all places. except
only that they are prohibited from
teaching in sny educational institu-
ton where members of both races are
received together as pupils.
No boy or girl is denied the right
to go to school. The two races are
simply prohibited from going to
school together.
The Trustees are not prohibited
from establis hing and maintaining
schools. If they want to establish
and maintain a school for tie colored
youth they can do it; and if they at
the same time want to establish and
maintain a school for the white youth
they can do il, but if one school is to
be branch of or connected with the
other they must be twenty-five miles
apart. The Trustees are prohibited
simply from establishing and main
tanning a mixed school for the educa-
ton of the two races.
The exercise of the calling of those
who teach, the right of the students,
and the right of the college to acquire
and protect its property must all sub
NIT TO such reasonable regulations as
are deemed proper by the legislature
in the exercise of the police power of
the state.
Due process of the law and the law
of the land are synonymous, and the
police power is a part of the law of
the land. 1t cannot be said therefore
that the exercise of the police power
is a taking of property without due
process of law. Justice Bradley in
III U. s., TAG. said:
"The right TO follow any of the com
mon occupations Of life is an inalien-
able RIGHT. 1t was formulated as such
under the phrase pursuit of happi-
ness in the Declaration of Independ-
ence, which commenced with the fun
damental proposition that all men
are created equal, that they are en-
dowed by their creator with certain
inalienable rights; and among these
are life, liberty and pursuit of hap
piness.' This right is a large ingre
dent in the civil liberty of the citi
zen" Further, he said:
81 hold that the liberty of pursuit
the right to follow any of the ordin
airy callings of life-is one of the
privileges of a citizen of the United
States" Justice Peckham in les U
5, $50, after referring TO these state
nents of Justice Bradley said:
1.-THE foregoing extracts have been
made for the purpose of showing
what general definitions have beer
given in regard to the meaning of the
word liberty as used in the amend
nent, but We do not intend to hoid
hat in no such case can the state ex
! ercise its police power. When and
how far such power may be legiti
mately exercised with regard to these
subjects may be left for determine
ton to each case as it arises"
'The constitutional guaranty is
that no person shall be deprived OF
life, liberty, Or property without a
due process of law; but a valid exer
else of the police power does not de
prive any person of life, libertyoI
property without due process of law
State VS. Holden, IA Utah, us.
Chief Justice Shaw of Massachu
sets in the case of Commonwealth
VS.. Alger, Cush. So, said:
rights of property, like all other
social and conventional rights, are
subject to such reasonable limitations
in their enjoyment as shall prevent
them from being injurious, and tc
such reasonable restraints, and regu
lations establishcl by law as the leg
Islatures, under the governing and
controlling power vested in them by
the constitution, lay think necessary
ard expe dent This is very different
from the right of eminent domain
the right of a government to take
and appropriate private property tc
public use whenever the public ext
gency requires (which can be done
only on condition of providing a reas
enable compensation therefor. The
power we allude to is rather the pub
lie power-the power vested in the
Legislature by the constitution &c
make. ordain and establish all man
ner of whole some and reasonable
laws, statutes and ordinances, eithel
with penalties or without, not repug
nant to the constitution, as they shall
Judge to be for the good and welfare
of the Common wealth, and of the sub
iects of the same. 1t is much easier
to perceive AMI realize the source o
this power than to mark its bounda
ries, or to prescribe limits to its ex
ercise."
1.-THE constitutional guarantees tina
no person shall be deprived OF life
liberty, or property, without due pre-
cess of law, Go not limit ard wer'
not intended to limit the subjects
unon which the police power of ;
state NAV be lawfully exerted, 10
these guarantees have never beeI