The Twin City star. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1910-19??, 1914-12-15

VI tlC SdilC idSC VI oSSupdtioh. IL ID
the fact, clearly established, of injury
to the complainant-not to others
which justifies judicial Intervention.
***It is not alleged that any one
of the complainants has ever travelled
on any one of the five railroads, or
has ever requested transportation on
any of them; or that any one of the
complainants has ever requested that
accommodation be furnished to him
in any sleeping cars, dining cars or
chair cars; or that any of these five
companies has ever notified any one
of these compliments that such &C
commodations would not be fur
nished to him, when furnished to
others, upon reasonable request and
payment of the customary charge.
Nor is there anything to show that
in case any of these compliments Of
fers himself as a passenger on any
of these roads and is refused accom-
modations equal to those afforded to
others on like journey, he will not
have an adequate remedy at law. The
desire to obtain a sweeping injunc-
ton cannot be accepted as a substi-
tute for compliance with the general
rule that the complainant must pre-
sent facts sufficient to show that his
individual need requires the remedy
for which he asks"
The compliments and their attor-
neys have every reason to rejoice
over this decision for, paradoxical as
it may appear, although they lose,
they win. The injunction is denied,
but the Court decides that the law is
unconstitutional in that it is in viola
ton of the Fourteenth Amendment,
and that the railway companies can
not furnish sleeping, dining and par
Tor car service to the whites and not
to the Negroes, and that was the de-
sire of all parties in the effort to Sc
cure an injunction. Some of the Of
ficials and the attorneys for the rail-
way companies and for the State have
indicated that the matter is finally
settled, and that there will be no fur
Their trouble or difficulty so far as
they are concerned. Whether or not
new legislation upon the subject will
be attempted time only will tell.
Attorney William Harrison, Of
Oklahoma City, who argued this case
in the U. S. Supreme Court, and the
attorneys who assisted him in its
preparation and arguments in the
Courts below, deserve great credit for
the result obtained. The case was
handled with skill and ability and
brought about the result desired.
An interesting reminder in this mat
ter is that it was Judge Hooks at
titute in this case that prompted the
Negroes of the Country to protest his
appointment to the Supreme Bench
by President Taft.
This decision will be of importance
and foreshadows the result in another
case argued in the u. S. District
Court at St. Paul, year ago and now
in the U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals
on it's way to the u. S. Supreme
Court, entitled DR.. Thompkins VS.. A.
T. & S. F. Ry. Co., ct al, involving
the validity of the same Oklahoma
Jim Crow law. In that case DR..
Thompkins was an interstate passen-
ger going from Kansas City, Mis-
souri, into the State of Oklahoma, and
after paying for sleeping car accom-
modations was forcibly elected from
the car and placed under arrest at a
small town in Oklahoma, brought be-
fore a Justice of the Peace, tried and
fined for violating the law in riding
in sleeping car. The Doctor brought
suit against the railway companies
and they set up the Jim Crow Law as
their defense. From the decision in
the McCabe case it looks much like
the defense of the railway companies
in the Thompkins case has been swept
away. Houston & Galloway, two
Colored attorneys at Kansas City,
represent DR.. Thompkins.