Jackson advocate. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1939-current, 1947-06-07
u.s.. Appeals Court In Fl Decision
Declare Washington Covenants Valid
Case Headed For Supreme Court
By Louis LAutier

States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia last Monday
held that perpetual restrictive co
venants are valid and enforceable
by injunctions, cancelling sales, e
victing colored families from the
homes, they have bought and pre-
venting sales to other persons.
Justice Henry w. Edgerton, in
a sharp dissenting opinion, said
restrictive covenant suits "and
the Ghetto system they enforce
are among our conspicuous fail
ures to live together in peace
The majority opinion was based
on the courts decisions in similar
cases over a period of 25 years.
Property on which the covenant
was upheld is the first 20 houses
known as ia TO 152 Bryant Street
Northwest. All of the lots and
houses were sold subject to the
covenant that they shall never
be rented, leased, sold, transfer
red or conveyed unto any Negro
or colored person." under a penal
ty of $4,000.
The adjoining eleven lots and
dwellings from 154 to liza Bryant
Street are not subject to any such
restrictions and have been contin-
uously occupied by eolored people
for twenty years.
"The fact that snce the case
was originally heard below, a sim
liar covenant. covering property
in adjoining block has expired by
time Limitation and four purchases
by colored people have been made,
would not, even if it had occurred
before decision, have changed the
result" said Justice Bennett
Champ Clark, who wrote the ma
jority opinion.
Pointing out that the neighbor'
hood, consisting of about thous
and homes. churches and business
properties, was exclusively occu
pied by white persons, Justice
Clark sad the infiltration Of four
colored families would not have
REQUIRED the court to hold that
"the restrictive condition had
failed by reason of the change in
the neighborhood, so that it's en-
forcement would impose hard
ship rather than an advantage.
Justice Clark said the court con-
sidered the contention that re-
strictive covenants constitute an
illegal restraint on alienation but
adhered to its previous ruling.
Differing with Justice Clark and
Justice Wilbur X. Miller, who
joined in the majority opinion,
justice Edgerton said he believed
restrictive covenants were invalid
for five reasons:
1. They are void as unreason-
able restraints on alienation.
2. They are void because con.
trary to public policy.
8. Their enforcement by In
junction is inequitable.
4. Their enforcement by in
junction violates the due process
clause of the Fifth Amendment.
5. Their enforcement by in
junction violates the Civil Rights
Act which provides that Call citi-
zens of the United States shall
have the same right, in every
State and Territory, as is enjoyed
by white citizens thereof to in
herit. purchase, lease, sell, hold,
and convey real and personal
rOp0ILy.
Justice Edgerton pointed out
that the United States Supreme
Court has never passed on the
questions of whether racial re-
strictive covenants are valid and
whether they are enforceable by
Injunction.
Referring to the United Nations
Charter, Justice Edgerton said:
Americas adherence to this
Charter, the adherence of other
countries to it, and our American
desire for International goodwill
and cooperation canot be neglect
ed in any consideration of the
public policy of preventing men
Continued on Page 81