The advocate. [volume] (Charleston, W. Va.) 1901-1913, 1907-07-18

IL ID one OIL Tie lFOulBS OIL IdCo
that the opinion handed down by
the Interstate Commerce Commits
sion Is along precisely the same lines
as the provisions Of the much-mooted
I'opaker-Warner amendment to the
rate bill, concerning which there was
such wide diversity of sentiment
among the colored people of the
North and South at the time it was
up in Congress for action. Senator
Foraker tried his level best to Sc
cure the Incorporation Of an amend
ment that would prevent separation
based upon anything save differences
in amount Of fare paid, but he was
out-vQted and as compromise, he
agreed to allow an amendment to be
reported permitting the roads to
separate the races, on the condition
| that the accommodations . for each
race should be identical. He yielded
to this compromise at the urgent
solicitation of humber of promi-
nent colored men who thought that
in this way the down-trodden and
helpless Negroes in the southern
state could be granted comforts that
lthey could secure by no other me-
thod, and that the interference Of
the federal authorities having once
been successfully exercised, further
concessions could the more easily be
obtained. They supported the So
called equal accommodations
measure as the very best result that
could be gotten out Of q bad sttua-
ton. The North made howl about
the NATURALIZATION Of the j1m-crow
car" and claimed that such an act
would give the separationists full
leeway to foist the ",jim-crow' sys-
tenn upon the colored people in every
state in the Union, etc. So acute
was the division Of e., feeling that the
Foraker-Warner amendment - pro-
viding equal, though separate-ac-
commodations for the races, was de-
feated. Yet less than year had
elapsed when a delegation Of Ken
lucky ministers and business men of
color called on the Railroad Com
missioners of that state and asked
for the enforcement Of the self-same
equal odations-though sep
arate---embodied in the despised
Forak er-Warner amendment, on the
theory that half loaf was better
than no bread" The crux Of the sit
uation is that the purposes aimed at
by Senator Foraker have been ac-
complished by construction Of the
existing law and the equal accommo-
dations plan has been placed in
working order without compelling
Congress to go on record on the sub
ject. No law has been changed In
the slightest, bearing out the con-
IGNITION Of the friends Of the Foraker
proposition that the legislation orig
inally outlined gave the railroads mo-
right they did not then possess, but
1t did give the problem a federal as
pect in indicating the right Of the
national government to prescribe
conditions Of travel, to the end that
the distressing determinations prac-
.ticed against colored passengers In
the South might be removed by the
mandate Of Congress-. 1t was held
by this element that the Jim crow"
laws were purely a matter Of local
sentiment, and the North would not
in any way be affected by the Foraker
provision, for there was no particu-
lar outcry against the mixing Of the
races above the Mason's and Dixon's
line. They contended, as has been
demonstrated, as far as the Inter
state Commission controls the mat
ter, that whenever the railroads
reach the conclusion that there
should be separate cars in New York,
Ohio or Nebraska,
they can set the races apart with i'm
.punity, and be upheld by the ma
tional authority, provided, Of course,
that the accommodations for each
race be equal 1t has been demon
strated by the trend Of events that
the railroads do not want the lin
crow" car law, If they can get out
of it, for it means additional expense,
litigation and trouble, without ade-
,quate recompense in the way Of pas
Sengers. There isn't the slightest
danger Of tn separate car law, except
in communities where the sentiment
Of the people overwhelmingly de-