Fort Mill times. [volume] (Fort Mill, S.C.) 1892-current, 1905-03-22

Court involving libel suits of $l0,-
each against The Charleston News
Courier and The Charleston Post
Augustus NJ. Flood. who was re-
ed to in both publications as
lored man." in their mention of his
against the Charleston Street
i>uilway. The decision is against the
newspapers and the cases go back 10
charleston for the assessment of such
damages as jury may see fit Tho
reference to Flood as colored man
was an error which the one paper fell
into by reason of the others lack OF
diligence. and both papers promptly
apologlZed when the mistake was
called to their attention. In the COM
plalnt Mr.. Flood alleges that the refer
ence 10 him as Il colored man DAMAGED
ms social and business position to the
extent OF $4,000 in each case. The
defendants demurred on the ground
that under the fourteenth and fifteenth
amendments to the Federal constitution
10 refer to man as a negro is nor
: hbeiouS per Sc and that to refer 10 Il
white man as a negro when he is nCl
Il negro is an apparent mistake which
can do him no harm. The Supreme
court reserves this position and holds
that in spite of the Federal conslitu-
tion II is libelous per Sc to refer to
white man as negro. inasmuch as tho
laws of this State forbid social equality
by its jim crow car laws, it's laws
against miscegenation and otherwise
The decision in the newspaper case
is written by Chief Justice Pope and
1t is very exhaustive. Among the par
allel cases referred to is one in which
reporter referred to a white man as
cultured gentleman" the 'intelligept
compoSitor set il up" "colored gentle
man." and the proofreader changed it
to negro" The Supreme Court says:
The only question presented by this
appeal is. is ii libelous per Sc to pub
lisa white man rs negro? To
call white man a negro affects the
social status of any white man 50 re-
ferred to-" Authorities are quoted on
this point and the court continues:
When we stop to think oe the racial
distinction subssting between the
white man and the black man. it must
| be apparent that 10 impute the con-
| dltion of a negro to white man
would affect his, the white mans. so
| cial status. and in case any one pub
! lished a white man to be a negro II
would not only be galliI to his pride,
! but would tend to interfere serousl, \,
with the social relation of the white
! man with his fellow white men: and
! publication il is necessary to bring
such charge to an issue quickly"
In Strauder VS.. West Virginia tho
| court held that these amendments.
| twelfth, fourteenth and fifteenth. were
! designed to accord members of the ne
! gro race the same projection in life.
liberty and property which was already
enjoyed by the white race and no.
| where does the court in that state re-
! fer to the social relations of each race
The statute law of this State forbids
! the association OF the TWO races. in
such way it excludes the negro from
white society and vice versa. BY the
! miSCeEcnatiOn statutes the inter
! marriage Of the two races is forbidden
| and made crime. Railroads are re-
! quired to furnish separate coaches for
! the two races. White children and
colored children are FORBIDDEN to at
tend the same school. Various opir-
| ions are quoted to show that publish
! ing a white man as negro has been
! held to bc libclous by various court".
Tho court then quotes the language
! OF the three amendments TO the con-
stitution of the United states referred
! to and argues that IL must he appGr-
ent from consulting the texts that
! there is not the slightest reference to
| the social condition of the two races
! "All take pleasure" il is stated in tin"
! opinion. lin bowing to the authority
of the United States N regard to
! these amendments. but we would be
| very far from admitting that the So
| cial distinction subSisting between ;hc
! two races has been in any wise afte u
etd." In concluding the court holds
We therefore. hold that these
| three amendments to the Federal con-
| stituton have not destroyed the laN
of this State. which makes the cub
! lication of white man as negro
! anything but libel. The judgment of
| this court is that hte judgment OF the
! Circuit Court be reversed when ii Sus-
tanned the demurrer in this case ana
the action is remanded to the Circuit
= Court for such other proceedings aS
! NAV be in accordance with law"