The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1914-08-02
RACE SEGREGATION LAW
BEFORE SUPREME COURT
Right or Cities To Assign Sections to
White and Colored Population
Is Questioned.
CASE COMES UP FROM ASHLAND
Claimed That Ordinance Is Confs-
cat0ry, and Thus Unconstitutional
and Invalid-Test Case Will BE
Watched With Interest.

The race segregation ordinances. en-
forced rigldly for some years in many
| OF the cities and towns Of Virginia.
are challenged as unconstitutional.
Municipal laws prohibiting negroes
| from living In the same residence
| blocks, streets or neighborhoods with
| white citizens are for :he first time
under fire I'm the Supreme Court of
Appeals OF Virginia
The fight to have the aggregation or
dinances annulled az contrary TO the
] Constitution of the State OF Virginia
and the Constitution Of the United
states has been inaugurated in Ash
land. where negroes have been ex-
Guided from residence blocks where
| white people are in the majority since
| 1911.
! The preliminary move in the light
to eliminate race segregation resulted
yesterday In first victory FOR the OPP
| poncnts Of the segregation law. when
| the Supreme Court granted "A writ Of
error and aupersedcas In the Ashland
case.
| TEST CASE COMES
FROM Town % ASHLAND
| The title OF the suit is The Town
Of Ashland vs. John Coleman"
| John Coleman was fined $40 in the
Mayors Court OF that town OH convic-
| ton 81 the charge made In IA criminal
warrant issued by Mayor Henry q
| Ellis, which charge was based upon the
race segregation ordinance passed By
the Town Council in September. 1911.
| lie was specifically charged with oc-
cupying as a residence house upon 4
street between two adjacent streets
on which greater number Of houses
are occupied as residences by white
| people than arr occupied as residences
| by colorcd people
He appealed from the decision Of
the Mayors Court TO the Circuit Court
! o. Hanover County. which sustained
| the decision. Relying upon the plea
that the ordinance was invalid. Cole
| mans attorney agreed 10 submit; the
| appeal 10 the Circuit Court without the
| Intervention OF a jury. The defense
contended that the ordinance is un-
| constitutional and invalid in that IL
| wholly ignores vested rights By maxi
| ing il unlawful for one owning prof.
| crty. which II was properly lawful for
him 20 own and use. 10 move into such
! property or rent II except to members
OF a particular race, thus practically
| connscating ii by compelling hin TO
allow il 10 remain idle or TO sell X
! at possible sacrifice"
CLAIMS THAT WHOLE
ORDINANCE Is VOID
The appellant further argues in his
petition 10 the Supreme Court that
the valid portion OF the ordinance. II
any. is 30 connected with and depend
cnt on that which is void that neither
can stand alone as tho will OF tho Leg
| islaturc, and. therefore, the whole is
void"
Also that these segregation laws
are laws which impair the obligation
Of contracts" and. further. such -
! law as the ordinance here involved
/ violates both the Constitution OF Nir
; ginia and the Constitution of the
I United States"
II is contcndcd that the segregation
/ ordinance violates section IS OF the
| Constitution of Virginia. in that il pro-
! vidcs for the taking OF private prop
! crty without just compensation"
! The ordinance is denounced as "un-
equal. unreasonable oppressive. par
tial aud discriminating in its char
actcr."
case will bc watched with eager in
tercst by thousands OF people In AL
parts OF Virginia. II is n well-known
fact that many property owners and
real estate agents in different Scities
and towns have from time 10 time
demonstrated their hostility 10 the
existing ordinances y going to court
in disputes over the right OF negroes
to move into white nclghborhoods. and
vice versa. None of these suits. how
ever. ever progressed farther than a
Corporation or Circuit Court The
Ashland case IL tho first to come before
tho State Supreme Court.