New Britain herald., 1917-11-06
SUPREME COURT
 KNOCKS OUT LAW
Negro Segregation, Found 0. K.
 by State Courts, 0Yerruled

negro segregation ordinance was yes- terday declared unconstitutional by the supreme court. The decision af- fecte similar ordinances in Balti- more Richmond. St. Louis and any southern cities.
 The Louisville negro segregation or dinance was appealed to the Supreme court from the Court of Appeals of Kentucky after all the courts in that state had declared is constitutional The ordinance became effective on May II, 1914, and it's purpose was to "prevent conflict and i'll feeling be- tween the white and colored races in the city of Louisville and to preserve the public peace and promote the general welfare by making reasonable provisions requiring as far practic- able the use of separate blocks for residence. places of abode and places of assembly by white and colored respectively"
 The ordinance does not attempt to confine members of either race to cer- tain sections of the city, fut fur nishes a mans whereby in the future separation of the two races into white and negro sections will be gradually accomplished. The city block is made the unit and members
 
 moving into a block where the major ity of residences are occupied by those of the opposite color. The ordinance in no way affects the right of occup- ancy of houses acquired prior to its passage.
 Persons desiring to erect new build- ings must obtain from the building de- partment of the city information az to whether the block upon which the building is to be erected Is either white or colored and tho application for the building permit must state for what purpose the building is to be used and by what race. The owner- ship and devolution of property are in no way affected, merely the occu- pancy in certain cases is restricted as stated.
 The law only affects property within the limits of the city of Louisville. Suburban subdivisions are not af- fected thereby, it being the contention of the farmers that the, crowded con- ditions and close association of negro and white families in the city tends to cause conflict and disorder. as well as to lead to the danger of amalgama- tion of the two rces. It was also shown that where negroes move into q white block the value of property therein is immediately and greatly depreciated.
 Opponents of tho ordinance claim that as a result of the measure the negro inhabitants. of Louisville would be com pelled to live in. quarters where they will be thrown into close touch with and subject to contamination by disagreeable and worthless neighbors and that 1t prevents them from mov- into 6eSirah hla hoa1fhv noi0h- borhoods and confines them to un- healthy and crowded localities This contention was expressly denied by the advocates for the ordinance. They assert that the ordinance is framed so that what is prohibited to the negro is prohibited to the white and that the ordinance will be the means of rid ding the negro sections of that un- desirable class of white people which is frequently found in such localities. It is further claimed that the question of desirability Is economic and that experience has shown that the negro sections when relieved of the burden of undesirable residents will be made desirable.
 Opponents also contend that the property rights of the negroes in tho city of Louisville arc greatly affected thereby This is met by the con- tention of the advocates for the or dinance that the same rule applies to the white as we'll as to the negro residents. What is granted one is granted the other What is denied the one is denied the other. And further. as the white people own the bulk of property in the city of Louis- vile, that any restrictions upon pro- perty would fall heavier upon the x1yh}< than the owner.
 The case was the outgrowth of a suit instituted by Charles H. Buch- Anan, white property owner. to com- pei William Marley. a negro. to full i'll 8 contract to purchase his gro perty. The ideal was conditional upon warley's being able to reside there under tho terms of the segregation or dinance. It was alleged in the peti- ton that the lot in question, being next to 8 negro residence. was not saleable to a white person for resi- dence and. therefore the owner was unconstitutional and asking that purpose. As the majority of persons living on the block. where the pro- perty was located. were white. Marley was not permitted to occupy the pro- perty for a residence and refused to complete the deal on this ground.
 Buchanan instituted a suit against Marley alleging that the ordinance was unconstttutionl and skiing that the defendant be compelled to fulful the alleged contract. The circuit court of Jefferson county upheld the validity of the segregation ordinance. A sim liar decision was handed down in the Kentucky court of Appeals
 THEY LOVE JAM.
 London, Oct 17.-The British army In Fr4ncA gets nearly 100000