The broad ax. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1895-19??, 1914-04-25
new ORDINANCE
BREEDS STRIFE
MsasUTD Passed h MOTiuk
VI, Called Unjust
DENIES MANHOOD RIGHTS

What an Influential Weekly PapsP
says 81 Renewed AttsmPt 10 otaltlty
Anbitioa aPd Check the ProsrssS q
- colerOd Citizens Race NUS
coatsad For Justice.
he recent adoption Of Q new gogrO-
cation ordinance In Norfolk, Va, y
canEing no little unrest among tie
colored citizens against whose interest
the MEASURE II aimed The frSt Segrs-
cation law adopted by the city was de-
clared invalid. unreasonable and un-
Just By Police Justice James s. Bar
ron and ruled out by Judge McLemore
Of the city circuit court
The Journal and Guide, an tnnuen-
dial weekly edited by P. B. Young In
Norfolk, va, commenting at length on
the new ordinance In an able editorial.
in part says:
'The new ordinance AZ adopted by
both bodies Of the city council with
only one dissenting vote differs from
the old ordinance in one or two essen
tfal parts. II establishes the right OF
the city to appeal by eliminating the
iail sentence from the penalty for its
violation and under its provisions
whether intended 50 to be or motifs
operative In only such city blocks AZ
are already white or black as de-
fined by the ordinance
'sThe old ordinance defined a block
a. white or black In proportion to
the number Of white or colored resi-
dents In the block. Strange TO say,
the new law takes no cogntZance OF
blocks occupied by both races From
a layman's point Of view the ordinance
merely anticipates q condition that
may never exist Still in its hnal
analysis It Is as objectionable as the
old ordinance inasmuch as In its legal
aspects II abrogates the right OF one
citizen TO contract with another and Is
a serious menace to the economic ad-
vaneement and even existence Of me
Nero.
ain order to conform to q legislative
statute It Il framed to prevent con-
nict and III feeling between the white
and coIored races in the city Of Nor
foIk ana to preserve the pubic peace
and promote the general welfare By
making reasonable provision requiring
The use OF separate blocks for residents
for white and colored people respee-
lively
sTn this particular it Is q misnomer.
No arbitrary law, no manner Of class
LEGISLATION can prevent III feeling be
tween the races. On the other hand,
Il can only serve TO aceentuGte race
prejudice and is Of itself a practical
demonstration Of III feeling between
the races. As DR.. James B. Dudley
has wisely said, That government Il
best that governs least-that places no
unnecessary restrictions and handicaps
upon the activities Of the people
'.The vote In the common council was
almost unanimous, only one member,
John ]. Pitt Of Washington ward vot-
ing against # Mr.. Pitt made a state
ment before casting bis vote to the ef-
feet that he did not think the meas
ure was Just to the colored residents
Of the city. I cannot get the consent
OF my conscience 70 vote for II, and
for that reason make this statement
before voting. Mr.. Pitt also said that
be did not subscribe to the doctrine
that might makes right and that he
regarded human rights above property
rights.'
sThose were lofty sentiments. II
requires great courage for q young
southern white man TO take that stand
He stood alone, which was not q rare
thing. But II gives him more honor.
able distinction because Of having
stood alone. The colored citizens Of
Norfolk. who have long suffered a
the result Of unjust restrictions, have
written the name Of John ]. PIT upou
a ron Of honor, which b headed b.
the names Of those princely Virginia
gentlemen. TazewelI Taylor and James
S. Barron
we tan 10 recognise the necessity Of
a Segregation ordinance IN Norfolk
me Negro does not want to encroaeh
upon the precincts which the Whits
man has set aside for himself he
does not want to Invade the Whibe
mans exclusive resefvationA me Ne
gro does want room for expansion.
however. He eann0t be restricted to
IN area inadequate to meet the d.
mands Of natural growth and survive
tie pressure Of economic competition.
The Eegro's fight against segregation
ls not a fight 70 I've with the white
nan. bnt fight to i've b. himself
~We have been asked why the Negro
objects to segregation. We DO not OBJ
ject 70 segre9ati0h Is voluntarily pfae-
iced b. both races because Of the nat
ural Law Of selection which leads mem.
beFs Of separate races to group t0eefh.
e. which 8 good and desirable thing
b or situation. bat We % object q
segregation bE legislation. because 4
stignatizes Is IS legal undesirablss:
conzEns ~ 20 undeirable localIlIes.
ae~sI.- - - ..frrr-.oafr.., 4. ....f.1l- a.