The Rise of Jim Crow: school segregation Dawson v. Lee – Kentucky, 1884 (83 Ky. 49); Lehew v. Brummell – Missouri, 1891 (15 S.W. 765); Berea College v. Commonwealth – Kentucky, 1906 (94 S.W. 623), affirmed, 211 U.S. 45 (1908)
“State taxation for purposes of education should be provided for by general laws applicable to all classes and races alike … It was obviously the purpose of the Legislature … to exclude the negro children of the State from any share of the proceeds of the common school fund set apart by the Constitution … In this respect, as well as regards the partial and discriminating taxation provided for, the act is … in violation of the fourteenth amendment.” - Justice ___ Lewis, in Dawson “There are differences in races, and between individuals
of the same race, not created by human laws, some of which can never be
eradicated. These differences create
different social relations, recognized by all well-organized governments. If we cast aside chimerical theories and look
to practical results, it seems to us it must be conceded that separate schools
for colored children is a regulation to their great advantage.” - Justice Francis
Black, in Lehew “The separation of the human family into races, distinguished no less by color than by temperament and other qualities, is as certain as anything in nature. Those of us who believe that all of this was divinely ordered have no doubt that there was wisdom in the provision; albeit we are unable to say with assurance why it is so … [A]t the very bottom of all the trouble is the racial antipathy to the destruction of its own identity; and that, if that danger is removed, the friction practically disappears.” - Justice Ed O’Rear, in Berea College The Rise of Jim Crow: Railroads Chesapeake, Ohio & S__ R. Co. v. Wells – Tennessee, 1887 (4 S.W. 5); Smith v. State – Tennessee, 1898 (46 S.W. 566), writ of error dismissed, 21 S.Ct. 917 (1900); Ohio Valley Railway’s Receiver v. Lander – Kentucky, 1898 (47 S.W. 344); Chiles v. Chesapeake & Ohio R. Co. – Kentucky, 1907 (101 S.W. 386), affirmed, 218 U.S. 71 (1910)
“If it be true, as is sometimes, said, that race prejudices exist here that make it uncomfortable or unsafe, or promotive of disorder, to mix the races in public conveyances, then both safety and good order are promoted, as well as comfort in their separation. The state is to judge of the necessity for such a regulation.” – Justice David Snodgrass, in Smith The Rise of Jim Crow: Residential Restrictions Harris v. City of Louisville – Kentucky, 1915 (177 S.W. 472)
“[T]hose who have studied the future of the [black] race … declare that they must ultimately rise largely through the co-operation, the earnest efforts, and the loyal service of their own more fortunate and more enlightened brothers. For those of the race who are doing their full duty in this respect, municipal segregation will simplify the problem; and if there be those more fortunate members of the race who in the day of their good fortune would abandon their less fortunate fellows and be false to the duties and responsibilities laid upon them by virtue of their own success, municipal segregation will indirectly enforce their acceptance of those responsibilities and coerce their performance of the duties thereby imposed, and thus, in the end, it will justify that enlightened civic spirit by which it is demanded.” – Justice J.B. Hannah, in Harris | ![]() ![]()
Ad for Berea College, Kentucky, 1900 (inviting black students to apply) - courtesy Wikimedia Commons “The assumption by
some colored persons, and by some of the white race … that the [segregation]
statute implies or assumes that the colored race is an inferior race, is not
well founded. … [I]t is manifestly
better for the colored race to be separated from the white race than to be
placed in the same coach with white persons, with the result that the same
would be offensive to the white race; for, if this be true, it would reasonably
cause disturbances, which would be alike disagreeable and injurious to both
races. … [I]t is to be regretted that the law has not been accepted by both
races as designed and intended for the mutual benefit, convenience, and
protection of both races.” – Justice B.L.D.
Guffy, in Lander |
EMPIRE OF LAWS - The Legal History of the 50 American States > 4. MOUNTAIN SOUTH LEGAL HISTORY > 4.4 Mountain South (1877-1920): The "New South" Era >