Arizona republican., 1912-07-16
Opinion Yesterday Revers- ing the Decision By Judge Kent of the Terri torial District Court in the Bayless Case.
COLOR LINE DRAWN
 BY SCHOOL TRUSTEES
The Constitutionality of the Territorial Law Hitherto Held Invalid Is Support ed by Long Opinion by the Supreme Court.

| VAN SN NHA S4A4S SSAA Vs The Bayless case, involving the right 1 of the board of education of the Phoa-
 nix school district to segregate color l ed from white children under the au- l thority of the territorial statute, which l has been in the courts for more than l two years, was decided by the supreme ! court yesterday. By order of this tribu- nal the case is reversed and remanjed to the superior court of this county with direction that the injunction he vacated and the case be dismissed. It will be recalled that the proceed. ing grew out of an injunction obtained by Samuel F. Bayless, negro resident of this city, restraining the board of education from requiring his two chil-
 dren to attend the Madison street school. which had been set apart for the use of colored children
 In his decision Judge Kent held that
 the Bayless children were not given school advantages equal to those grant ed children of the white race and that
 they should be permitted to attend an- other school. It is this decision that is reversed.
 The Bayless case came in for a great deal of comment while it was in the superior court. About that time the constitutional convention was in ses- sion and there was a proposition to provide for segregation by constitution al enactment. The proposition was abandoned, however. for the reason it was feared it might defeat or delay 1 statehood
 The substance of the supreme courts decision which deals with all the feat. ures of the case, is as follows: This is an action brought by appel | lee. Samuel F. Bayless, the father of | two children of school age, residing in School District No. 1 of Maricopa county, against the school board to re-
 strain them from enforcing the com- pulsory attendance school law as against appellees children.
 The question raised involve the con- stitutionality of chapter 67 of the Ses- sion Laws of the 18th Legislative As- sembly of the Territory of Arizona, as contained in subdivision II of section | l thereof. This section provides that | the school board may segregate pupils
 of the African from pupils of the white race and to that end are empowered to provide all accommodations made nec- l essary by such segregation" when the
 number of African pupils shall exceed eight in number in any school district. In pursuance of the provisions of the
 law, the African pupils exceeding eight
 in number in the school district, the | school board passed a resolution of
 segregation and to prevent the enforce
 ment of the order of the board, as to
 the children of appellee, this action
 was brought
 | The case was tried before the court and after hearing the evidence the l court made the following finding of fact, among others, to-wit:
 1 That said school situated on Madi-
 son street between Fifth and Sixth
 sreets in said City of Phoenix, at which | school all the colored children attend l ing public schools are now attending. is the newest. best constructed and most sanitary of any of the school
 buildings in said district; that it's lequipment is equal. if not superior, to any of the other school buildings; that the number of children attending said | school being relatively small, under the present plan each child receives more
 individual attention from the teachers
 than in the larger classes in the white
 schools. The course of study. manual
 training and curriculum generally is
 the same for the colored children of
 said schoo? as it is for the white chii- dren in the other schools; that at Sai Madison street school the colored chit dren are as well off as the white chil- 7 dren attending the other schools. That , therefore under the order of segrega- l the Board of Trustees Of said school , district prior to the commencement oi t this suit. the colored children were 7 able to receive and did receive, so fal . as their instruction was concerned ? eaual educational facilities with the l white children of said district; that il 9 is dangerous for any child of the Afri- . can race or of any race to be compellec to cross dangerous railroad tracks tt l reach the school which they attend
 but that the children of this petitioner
 crossed the railroad tracks at the enc
 of the last school year." being te same
 railroad tracks tat they were obliged
 to cross in attending the Madison stree r school.
 He. also, found that, by reason O the railroad crossings, the lives ant
 limbs Of the children were exposed t l danger F ' AS conclusions of law, the cour