Railroad and streetcar segregation: the origins of “separate but equal” Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Railroad Co. v. State – Mississippi, 1889 (6 So. 203), affirmed, 133 U.S. 587 (1890); Ex parte Plessy – Louisiana, 1893 (11 So. 948), affirmed, 163 U.S. 537 (1896); Patterson v. Taylor – Florida, 1906 (40 So. 493); Alabama & Vicksburg Railroad Co. v. Morris – Mississippi, 1912 (60 So. 11)
| “The addition of a [segregated] car, at the state line, to each of its trains may impose additional expense on the company, but how it is a burden or obstruction to commerce it is difficult to conceive.” – Justice __ Cooper, in Louisville “The dissatisfaction felt with it [streetcar segregation] by a portion of the people seems to us so unreasonable that we can account for it only on the ground of some misconception. Even were it true that the statute is prompted by a prejudice on the part of one race to be thrown in such contact with the other, one would suppose that to be a sufficient reason why the pride and self-respect of the other race should equally prompt it to avoid such contact, if it could be done without the sacrifice of equal accommodations.” – Justice Charles Fenner, in Plessy “If the peculiar conditions existing here demanded this legislation to conserve the peace of the state, and our lawmakers have so decided, the mere fact that the passenger is going out of the state, coming into the state from without, or traveling across the state, does not alter the complexion of affairs, nor render the danger less should a negro or white man be required, against his will, to occupy a car with passengers of another race.” – Justice __ Cook, in Morris |
EMPIRE OF LAWS - The Legal History of the 50 American States > 6. DEEP SOUTH LEGAL HISTORY > 6.5 Deep South (1877-1920): Bourbons, Straight-Outs, Jim Crow and Southern Progressivism > 6.5.1 Deep South (1877-1920): The Rise of the "Straight-Outs" and Jim Crow >