The sea coast echo. [volume] (Bay Saint Louis, Miss.) 1892-current, 1916-03-25
GRAND|cH VS.. CITY
SCHOOL TRUSTEES TO
SUPREME TRIBUNAL
Is Recommendation Of Judge
Neville Who Gives Jury
Peremptory Instructions to
Give Verdict For Plaintiff
and Expresses Doubt AS
to Certain Contentious
Sustained by His Court
History of Case.


/ Sustained by His Court
| History of Case.
At the term of Circuit Court for Han
cock county which adjourned Wednes-
day evening of this week, the Grandich
case commonly known as the case filed
by the Grandiches against the Board of
City School Trustees to get their chill
dren in the school was disposed of, i.
e., as far as the lower court was con-
cerned.
BY this time the case should be very
familiar to the public as this was the
second trial of this case celebre. At
former trial the Board of Trustees won
the case. At this trial the court grant,
ed peremptory instruction for the
plaintiffs.
This matter has been hanging for
several years. The trustees several
years back refused admission to these
children who sought to be admitted to
the public schools of Bay ST. Louis.
The trustees passed an order on their
minutes refusing to permit the children
attend school. A suit was subsequently
filed to put them into school, and in this
the trustees won. A new trial was grant
ed to the defendants. The costs were
paid and the case dismissed, however,
another suit was fled by the same par
ties against the same board of trustees,
seeking admission to the school.
| At a former term of this court a de-
murrer was interposed to the petition
| fled on the plea that the child had to
Iseek another remedy than mandamus, it
Ibeing contended by the trustees that the
proper remedy was by appealing from
the action of the trustees to the county
3Superintendent of Education and from
him to the SLa.e Superintendent OF i5s :
iaeation, and the demurrer raised the
question that this had not been done by
the plaintiffs. The court oYerruled the
demurrer.
The next move of the plaintiff was to
seek a change of venue on the ground
that they could not secure fair and
impartial trial in Hancock county.
This motion was. withdrawn by the
plaintiff after two or three witnesses
had been placed on the stand and these
witnesses swore that in their opinion
they belieyed that the plaintiffs could
get fair and impartial trial in Han
cock county.
The next step in this case celebre,
and which in course of time will be-
come as noted as the case made fam ons
by the immortal pen of Dickens-Jaun-
dice VS.. Jaundice, was the fling of sey-
eral pleas by the defendant, among
which pleas was raised the same ques-
tion as was raised on the demurrer, to-
wit: That an appeal should have been
taken from said order, and TO this plea
the plaintiff in turn demurred. The
court oyerruled this demurrer, but stat
at the time that there were serious
doubts in it's mind as to whether or not
it had made an error in overruling the
former demurrer. AS the court doubted
very seriously but what the plaintiffs in
this case should have taken the appeal
rather than by writ of mandamus, how
ever, the court held that if it had made
mistake in its first ruling it would re-
main wrong on that point! This settled
the pleading on the merits of the case.
An elaborate amount of proof was
heard, written and orally. The attor-
neys for Grandich made plea for per-
emptory instruction for the jury to find
/ for them. Argument was heard on both
sides and at the close the court found
for the plaintiff. The finding of the
court being that for the sake of the mo-
ton before the court that the court
would assume while the point was in
dispute but for the sake of argum ent
that the contention of the defend ant
was correct, to-wit: That the first an
cestor, Mrs Jourdan, was full colored
person. Then assuming that this par-
i ty had married a full white person then
1 the offspring would be one-half white
and one-half colored.
/ This point was agreed upon by both
4 sides, However, it seems that the de-
i PENDANTS and the court differed on the
rule of descent as to the amount of col
! ored blood that one would have after
the one half was left. The court hold
ing that when half married a full
white person that the result of this
/ marriage would make an eighth. The
i defendant contends that it would make
one fourth. The court further holding
/ that ii an eighth married full white
person it would make 1-32 white; the
defendant contends that it would make
lf-i6. This point being the question
that decided the case.
lcHILDREN NOT ALLOWED TO GO
TO SCHOOL
4 No sooner had the court granted the
i;netr,1okians than the defendantu asaxA