THE COLORED TEACHERS.

Are they a failure? Are they unable to improve the children under their care, or why is it that you want white teachers?

I want it understood, that I am one of those who believe in the ability of the negro to teach as well as to learn. He can instruct the children as well as one of the other race. All he wants is a chance. He wants an opportunity to learn in the normal school the latest methods. He wants a building properly arranged and located, accessible, light and fresh air, then he will give us as high a rate of percentage as others. But if he has disadvantage to work under, he will be as other teachers are.

I do not argue that we must have white teachers to learn our children refinement, for I am of the opinion that our lady teachers in this country are as refined and cultured as any similar class in the profession. Therefore I do not want mixed schools because the negro is a failure as a teacher.

WHAT WILL YOU DO WITH THEM?

What are we going to do with our teachers if this bill passes? What will we do with our schools? We will do nothing with them. We propose in this bill to go to every school house in this State, supported by the taxes of the people, whether in city, village, or on the cross-road, and print on it — Oh ye that thirsteth for knowledge come ye to the waters and drink, without regard to race or color.

This bill does not abolish one school; there will be as many schoolhouses to-morrow as there are to-day. There will be as many pupils in the class to-morrow as there are to-day. This bill does not discharge one teacher in the State that is needed to instruct the children.

This bill does not provide that you shall appoint a committee to go to any teacher and inquire if his father was born in Africa, America, Europe or Germany, but it is intended that to-morrow's sun shall for the first time rise on three and a half million of men, women and children, in this great commonwealth, without a law of distinction, with equal rights to all and special privileges to none.

What advantage will this bill be to the people to take it out of politics?

1st. It will take the question of negro education and civil rights out of the whole of party politics, and enable every man to be the custodian of his right and allow him to make choice of principle, government and policies of administration as other men: not as now, all relating to his rights and immunities.

2d. It will relegate the subject of education of the negro where that same subject is lodged for other people, in the hands of those competent to control the whole. And then our people will have the same say so 0016 15as others; and if they do not get justice in one year, the next year, by the aid of the ballot, which every man has under his control and will, he can make the board so that it will carry out his own will, and give him such privileges as he is entitled to under the Constitution.

3d. It will give the people who live in neighborhoods where the prejudice is strong, an opportunity of having the benefit of the schools in spite of the protests of the few. It will be of great benefit in some rural districts, and will give our people the power of the law in their favor.

4th. I am willing to trust the education of the race to the Board of Directors, when it is made non-partisan. It is only where the subject of education of the negro is found with politics that we find trouble. When getting office depends upon the amount of education the negro is to be given, as to how little he is to have and to how poor accommodations he is to receive, then is the time we suffer as much from our friends as from our enemies.

5th. It will give the child a good teacher, and enable it to be properly instructed in all of the branches. We want the law to be on the side of the weak. We want the law to be just to those who are struggling to educate their children to be useful citizens, and I appeal to all fathers here to aid in the much desired object.

6th. The schools ought to be equal, because the boys and girls who are attending them are to be the rulers and governors of the next generation. They are equal in responsibility, they are equal in destiny, and they are to share with each other in the responsibility of the State and national government. Therefore they ought to have the same opportunity of qualifying themselves for these obligations and duties. It is no mean thing to be a citizen, and then we must remember that they are to assist in the government of the greatest nation on the whole continent.

7th and last. An eminent educational authority has enumerated the advantage of graded schools as follows:

1. They economize the labor of instruction.

2. They reduce the cost of instruction, since in a well classified school fewer teachers are needed for thorough work.

3. They make the instruction more effective, inasmuch as the teacher can more readily hear the lesson of an entire class than the pupils separately, and thus there will be better opportunity for the actual teaching explanation and drill.

4. They facilitate good government and discipline, because all of the pupils are kept constantly under the control and instruction of the teacher and besides are constantly busy.

5. They afford a better means of ineiting pupils to industry by promoting their ambition to excel, inasmuch as there is a constant competition among the pupils of the class, which cannot exist when the pupils are instructed separately.

VII. THE DUTY OF THE HOUR.

What is there for the race to do. If we abolish these laws that discriminate against them, what is expected and what must we do to save the oming generation? Must we abandon all organized efforts, or what must we do to be saved, for we must save ourselves or be lost in the great sea of humanity.

The general analysis of the duty of the hour for the individual members of the race, is to

1st. Get an education of the head, hand and heart.

2d. Get the religion that will enable him to love God with all of his heart, mind and soul, and his neighbor as himself.

3rd. Get integrity, which will enable all men to control themselves and to keep themselves in due bounds.

4. Get money, which will give the race a commercial standing, and then they will become a factor in the great work of saving men and influencing them on their way to the better land, hoping all the time to make this world better by reason of the life of each individual and each family, so that the best influences will form an arch of glory for the race that will guard the pathway of the coming generations.

VIII. THE REASONS WHY.

1. I am in favor of the bill because it is in accordance with the genius of our institutions.

2. I am in favor of the bill because it is demanded on the broad principles of common humanity.

3. I am in favor of the bill because it is just to those who are deprived of human rights.

4. I am in favor of the repeal because we have to share in the responsibility of the government.

5. I am in favor of the repeal because we owe it to the men who fought for the Constitution and the Union.

6. We owe it to the children of the men who laid down their lives for the sacred cause of humanity.

7. We ought to pass this bill, that Ohio might keep abreast with the demands of the age, and lead the other States in doing justice to all of her children.

8. I am in favor of the repeal because we promised the men who stand by our standard bearers last fall that we would allow no party to do more for the equal rights of men than this grand old political party of righteousness. 0017 16

9. I am in favor of the repeal because the question of human rights should be taken out of party politics, and be acknowledged by all parties and all men.

10. I am in favor of the repeal because it is right, eternally right! according to the teachings of the Son of Man and God, and the Golden Rule.

11. I am heartily in favor of the repeal because the common instinct of humanity, the deeper claims of patriotism, and the broader demands of Christian philanthropy, call upon all men to make a common cause against these wicked laws, and to join hands hearts and votes to have them, once for all wiped out of existence; that the genius of universal freedom shall reign from lake to river, and the banner of Freedom and Equality shall wave over the homes of the rich and the poor, and the spirit of the fathers shall inspire the coming generations with hope and faith in the fundamental principles of this grand republic which shall do justice to the children of every race and color; and then, for the first time in the history of the State, will we hear arise from the fireside of every family: “Home, sweet home; the dearest spot on earth to me is home, sweet home"— an Ohio home.

12. I am in favor of the repeal because of all of the illustrious dead of the Republican party were in favor of equal laws and exact justice to all men. Among the heroes of the past were W.H. Seward, Henry Wilson. J.R. Giddings, S.P. Chase, Chas. Sumner, and a host of others who died in the faith, with a lively hope of the triumph of Right over Wrong.

13. Mr. Speaker, let us repeal these laws, because the leaders of the forces of Justice of to-day are in favor of wiping out the color line in State and Church; with such men as J.G. Blaine J.A. Logan, John Sherman. John Little, J.R. Lynch. B.K. Bruce, Frederick Douglass, J.B. Foraker George Hoadly, J.P. Campbell, B.T. Turner, H.M. Turner, B.F. Lee, J. M. Townsend, James Moore, N.S. Townsend. J.W. Gazaway, James Buford, Bishop Shorter, C.L. Maxwell, W.S. Scarborough, all of whom believe in the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man.

14. We must repeal these wicked laws, because seventy thousand ministers in this country are proclaiming every Sunday that “God hath mad of one blood all the nations of the earth.” Their united influence is directed toward the elevation of all men.

15. The Christian and secular press have united in favor of the grand principles of the Declaration of Independence, and every day, with ten thousand leaden tongues appeal to the intelligence, virtue and refinement of this commonwealth to do justice to all men.

16. Let us do our duty, because the most refined, intelligent and wealthy citizens of this State are in favor of their repeal. Many of them have told me to “Do your duty and trust in God, and if the present generation does not approve of your actions, posterity will vindicate you and those who may vote with you.

17. Mr. Speaker, we must repeal these laws, because I have received letters from Democrats, Prohibitionists and Republican, urging me to do my duty as a citizen and leader of the people. The people all over this State are praying that this General Assembly may do its duty to all of its citizens.

The eighteenth reason why the “Black Laws” should be repealed is that we are one in origin, equal in responsibility, and one in destiny, and the sooner the people are taught this fundamental truth the better it will be for the State and for the citizens of this commonwealth.

There was a time when there was much talk about us going back to our native land to carry the torch of civilization, to bear the banner of the cross, and say to those of our race to arise and shine, for the light has come, and the glory of the Lord has risen upon thee and thine. But we have become so intimately connected with the Americans by the ties of consanguinity and affinity that it would be almost impossible to separate us, or to tell which branch of the family should go to Africa, and which part should remain in America. Then the thing is impracticable, and we cannot for one moment think of such a thing. Why, if all the steamers and sailing vessels of this country were brought into requisition, they would not be able to carry the daily arrivals in the family of the race. The increase of the race is 1,401,888 in ten years, or we have an annual increase of 140,188. Now, the entire number of emigrants to this country in the year 1884 was 518,592, so you see that when a vessel started there would be more than a load on its return to this country.

Professor Gilliam says that we must go; that we cannot live in this country, but must return, and leave this country for the Anglo-Saxons to inhabit.

Now, in the name of the intelligence of the race, I give notice to all concerned that we do not intend to go unless it is of our own free will and accord. We cannot go without taking some of the glory of this country with us. We cannot go unless we have a settlement with this nation. We cannot go unless we receive indemnity at the hands of the government. We would desire to take everything that belongs to us with us, and therefore we must have the bones of our fathers, the tears of our mothers, the sighs of our sisters, the groan of our brothers, and the blood of the wounded and 0018 17the life of the dead, in order that we may be able to carry our memories with us, and forget the wrongs of the years and the sufferings of the centuries. We must have a settlement for the years of unpaid labor in the South. We want to collect in some huge cask the tears wrung from the hearts of the bondsmen by the lash. We will not leave this country as long as there remains a bone of the soldiers of the Revolution in the soil. No, sir; we will stay here until every bone of the fugitives of other years is returned, with its flesh, to its family and friends, and the reunited families shall be honored with the blessings of the new day of freedom.

Ask us to go from this land with the record of the soldiers of the three great wars shining with glory to our race! No, sir; you might as well understand it first as last, we are NOT going.

While the memory of the heroes of Port Hudson and “Milliken's Bend” is being sung by our children, and while the soldiers of the war assemble around the camp fire and relate how We led the Union soldier, When fleeing from his foe; We brought him through the mountains, Where white men dare not go. Our hoe cake and our cabbage And pork we freely gave, That this old flag might be sustained; Now let it brightly wave. Let us remember the deeds of valor of the heroes of the war, and preserve the jewel of liberty in the family of freedom.

We say unto you, that as God reigns in the world we will not leave nor forsake you, for your country shall be our country; we will feel the same pride in its mountains of iron, silver and gold as you do. We will feel as much pride in its valleys, plains, lakes, rivers, trade, commerce, institutions of learning, manufacturing interests, and in its unparalleled advantages to the husbandman, and in all of these we glory with you.

We shall say of our country, our fathers' country. Where thou dwellest, I will dwell; where thou goest to school, I will go, whether in the log school-house at the cross-roads, or the high school on the avenue; thy preacher shall be my preacher, and I will be buried in the same graveyard with you—so help me God.

We are willing to bear our equal burden, and assist in developing the resources of the country. We are willing to go to the corn-field or to the cotton-field, and there do our duty as men. We have toiled in the canebrakes of Alabama, and waded in the rice swamps of the Carolinas; we have dug in the lead mines of Missouri without pay or hope of reward. But now we have the same aspirations that other men have. If they live in the city, so can we. If they prosper on the farm so can we. If they hold office, so can we, if we get roles enough. If they go to church, so will we. If they are on the grand or petit jury, one of us will be there to find a true bill or to bring in a verdict. If they go to the workhouse, they will have company in breaking stone. Whether in good or bad society, in doing right or wrong, we are bound together as one. We are united in life, and shall not be separated in death.

Seeing, then, that we are so intimately connected with each other as men and citizens, what wicked prejudice it is to have laws separating our children while learning their duty to themselves, their neighbor, to society, to country and their God; let us do our duty, and in doing this the walls of separation will crumble and fall.

HON. JERE A. BROWN.

0020

THE BLACK LAWS! SPEECH OF HON. J. A. BROWN, OF CUYAHOGA COUNTY, IN FAVOR OF THEIR REPEAL.

Delivered in the Ohio House of Representative, March 10, 1886.

Mr. Speaker: My duty to race, my duty to the State, and my duty to all humanity demands that I should offer some reasons why these statutes should be repealed. Pindar says, “Friends have all things in common,” and upon this plane I stand, and on this ancient truth I shall base my argument. You are asked to repeal Sections 4008, 6987 and 3988 of the Revised Statutes of the State of Ohio. That these statutes are there, no one will deny. Whatever may have been the cause for the entactment of these statutes in the past, if causes ever existed, surely the most prejudiced mind will admit that to-day, in the light of all subsequent legislation conferring full and unqualified rights upon colored men, not only in Ohio, but in the United States as well, no reasonable grounds exist for their retention upon our statute books. While it is not our purpose to enter into a discussion of the motives that called into existence these discriminating laws, we shall in brief endeavor to show their utter uselessness, and why they should be repealed in the interest of justice, equity, the rights of all citizens as guaranteed by the constitution, the injury they cause by a division of our universal brotherhood, the creation and fostering of race prejudice, the unnecessary expense, already grown to an enormous amount, and the many disadvantages we are compelled to undergo; and, lastly, the complete subordination of our citizenship. As a component part of the citizenship of this State, amenable to all of its laws, owning and controlling in our own right a large amount of taxable property, sincerely having the welfare of the State at heart in all of its many and varied interests, and contributing largely to its growth and advancement, we deem it unfair, unjust and impolitic that we should be made and continued the victims of class legislation to the extent that the same becomes a stultification of those liberties which every citizen is guaranteed—nay, more, expects and should demand, as the interpretation of the fundamental principles of a free government. Now, gentlemen, I ask you in all seriousness why it is that schools must be separate because, forsooth, there is or may exist a difference in the color of the skin, or that some may be of different. races? Let us take the Church for example. Here no difference is shown, and this is true of all denominations, for all who can subscribe to their particular creed are admitted to membership.

In the United States we find men of my race filling positions of honor and trust from judges down through every political gift at the hands of their fellow-citizens. We have honored the general government by our presence in every department; have had representation in both branches of Congress; have had one of our despised race place his name upon legal-tender notes of our country, and have seen our greatest orator, who ranks as such with any person in our land, occupy the proud distinction of being the right-hand man of a Chief Executive of this great Nation. In Ohio we have filled, and are to-day filling, responsible positions in different branches of the State government. It is with pride we point to those of our race who have occupied these positions. No word has ever been uttered against any black man who has ever been called to a position of honor and 0021 20trust, but all have filled them with honor to themselves, their race and the country of which they are proud to be classed as citizens. I challenge any race to produce the equals of our prominent men, both in Church and State, taking into consideration the fact that our race has been the victim of such circumstances as are created by that hydra-headed monster, human slavery.

What shall we say of Payne, Wayman, Tanner, Lee, Turner, Mitchell, Mortimor, De Baptist, Arnett and a host of others who daily immortalize themselves in the field of theology; of Revels, Bruce, Smalls, o'Hara, Rainey, Lynch and others who have distinguished themselves at the National Capital. In the profession of law we point to Ruffin, Gibbs, Chester, Straker, Green and many others. Last, but not least, we present the “old man eloquent,” Frederick Douglas, whom no words we utter can add to his hitherto untarnished fame and reputation. This list could be enlarged until it would include men in all professions and trades and in all the paths of industry who have cast a glorious halo upon our race.

If we can fill with credit such positions as we have and are now doing, whereby we are placed in close proximity with all citizens, in church as well as in state, after we have reached manhood, why is it that we cannot, as children, do likewise, especially when such close associations have a tendency to better adapt us toward each other in alter life? Gentleman, I challenge on this floor the production of any proof whereby a stain can be cast upon the honor, integrity and character of any colored man who has ever occupied a position under the government of this State. And this has been largely due to the education we have received, inferior in many instances though it be. We are not speaking of education in its narrow sense, but of that education from youth upwards which makes a man eagerly pursue the ideal perfection of citizenship and teaches him how rightly to rule and obey. That training which is given by suitable habits to the first instincts of virtue in children; when pleasure and friendship and pain and hatred are rightly implanted in souls not yet capable for understanding the nature of them, after they have attained reason, to be in harmony with her. This harmony of the soul, when perfected, is virtue; but the particular training in respect of pleasure and pain, which leads you always to hate what you ought to hate, and love what you ought to love, from the beginning to the end, should be called education. Let me endeavor to impress the application here: Separate schools engender a spirit of inferiority in the mind of the colored race, while it cultivates and fosters a spirit of superiority in the bosom of the more favored one. Take a school boy, a colored lad, if you please, who is compelled daily to pass a school building set apart for all other nationalities except his own. If he is a lad of spirit, if he have that characteristic of true born Americans, at once a feeling of his race's inferiority looms up in his mind, and, like “Banquo's ghost,” will not down. On he must go to a school building set apart for his own race, compelled, for the sake of obtaining an inferior education, to submit, by the sanction of law, to these humiliations. Before and after school hours he plays on the common with his more favored neighbor, but when that bell rings these two boys must divide their pathway. Look at the outcome of this pernicious system. The colored boy leaves school, where he has been hampered and ostracised, when he arrives at an age to fully understand that indignities have been heaped upon him; his soul is small and unrighteous. “His slavish condition has deprived him of growth, uprightness and independence; dangers and fears which were too much for his truth and honesty, came upon him in early years, when the tenderness of youth was unequal to them, and he has been driven into crooked ways; has become stunted and warped.” And so he has passed out of youth into manhood, having no soundness in him, wanders off into the world, and generally becomes of no practical use to State, church or society, but “The blood of Deity yet flowing in his veins.” Now, when we declare by statutory legislation that one class of the body politic can be legislated for to the exclusion of all others, we at once declare ourselves in favor of class legislation. This might do in a country other than a republic, but in a country or a State that welcomes all classes to her shores, that stands with open arms and invites, “Oh, everyone that pants for the living water of freedom and equality, that thirsts for justice, come to our fair shores, where all men are born free and have an equal chance in the race of life,” that declaration is a lie on its face when we set off a part of our community, and by that very act declare we are not in favor of giving that particular class an equal opportunity in the broad race of American citizenship. I declare that this body has just as much right to set apart a portion of our cities, towns, county and State for the habitation of colored citizens as it has to set apart a separate and distinct school for the education of colored children. I go further, and affirm that this body has the same right to set apart a portion of this chamber for colored representatives as it has to put our children in a separate school. The existence and perpetuity of 0022 21Section 4,008 gives, by remaining upon the Statute books, to other persons, of whatever race or color, the same privilege for the establishment and maintenance of schools for their separate education. Could they not truthfully and logically argue that there is a law giving colored persons separate schools, and why may not we have a like privilege if we so desire? Such a construction can easily be placed upon this statute, which, if done and carried into effect, would destroy the usefulness of our public school system, besides promoting and encouraging class legislation.

Children enter the common schools, English, German, Irish, Scotch, and of all nationalities, and come out of them thorough Americans. Hence, as an assimilating organ, they are far beyond any factor in the body politic. It is here that memories are formed, binding each to the other in citizenship, as well as to the country forever. How necessary, then, is it for unity, kindred nature and the cause of humanity, that our public school system be extended and maintained that it may embrace all children, without regard to race, they thereby receiving the same benefits and teachings.

In the rural districts it is a notorious fact that several school districts are combined for the purpose of forming one separate district for colored children. These children's parents are taxed for the maintenance of the schools in their respective localities, while their children must travel in some cases two or three miles in order to reach the school set apart for them.

Mr. Speaker My learned and eloquent friend, the member from Greene, has, in his argument, presented to you the unconstitutionality of these statutes, and for me to undertake to add anything to his able efforts in that direction would be futile. We have had in the court of final resort of this State some cases touching the rights of colored men as to sending their children to the schools in common with all other citizens. No case, perhaps, in the books has had the prominence of that as Van Camp vs. Board of Education of Logan. This was a case, and I read from 9 O.S. 406, that was brought by the head of a family in the incorporated village of Logan, who had as members of that family two white children over five and under twenty-one years of age—one, his son, the other his indentured apprentice. Having applied to the Board for admission of these children to those schools, the Board refused, hence the action, basing and claiming damages of five hundred dollars. Upon the hearing of the case, the defendants, in their answer as submitted, denied that the children were white; that the plaintiff was a colored man, being nearly one-half African blood, and was so treated and regarded in the community; that plaintiff's wife was a colored woman, and his son, having considerable African blood, was a colored child, and so treated; that said indentured apprentice is also distinctly colored, having nearly one-half African blood, and is so regarded and treated by the community. They, the defendants, therefore denied that these children were white, but admitted that they had a small portion more of white than black or African blood; that the schools established by the Board were for white children alone; that there were not enough colored children in the district, including these children, to establish a separate school, and that the money raised by taxation for school purposes from the colored persons had been reserved to be appropriated for the education of said colored children, and at that time no separate school for this class of citizens had been established. The learned Judges, Peck, Scott and Gholson, J. J., concurring, decided in substance as follows: That the law establishing and maintaining these separate schools was constitutional, quoting Chief Justice Hitchcock's decision as the true policy as follows: “That the white and colored youth should be placed in separate schools, and the school fund should be divided between them in proportion to their numbers.” That there were only two classes of children which the law makes provision as to their education all within the State. The law, then, became not one of exclusion but of classification. That where the number of colored youth was too small to justify organizing separate schools, they would have to be temporarily delayed or suspended. Here follows a long argument, produced by the learned Judge to prove that the Board was justifiable in this matter in with-holding the funds until enough persons of color became citizens to warrant them in doing so. That every person not black was white, and vice versa, until he proved himself to be quite a philologist. While he admitted that these statutes had had their day, he did not rise in his judicial dignity above his prejudice. Here was a nice state of affairs I must admit. We paid our taxes as levied for school purposes, the Board carefully placed it in the bank, I suppose, where they had the privilege of drawing the interest and dividing it among themselves, until such times as enough colored children were in the district to form a school for them especially. Suppose it was twenty years before enough colored children were born in that village or removed there, would these children be denied for that length of time the privilege of attending the public schools, although paying for the same? Mr. Speaker, I ask in all seriousness can any man tell how many similar cases exist to-day in this State? No doubt enters my mind but what there are 0023 22cases, for in quite a number of countries we have a small population but no schools, although paying taxes for this purpose. Then where is this money and who gets the benefit of holding it? Does the Board individually? The school fund is said to be ours, then who does get it?

Much more could I read and comment upon, but I forbear at this time. Suffice it to say that the decision of the majority of the court was against the plaintiff. But composing that court were two judges, Brinkerhoff, C. J., and Sutliff, J.; who were far above prejudice, and rose above all feeling, rendering a dissenting opinion, as follows: Sutliff, J; says, “I am unable to concur in the judicial construction given in this case by my brethren, to the words 'colored children,” as used in the statute under consideration. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

In the first place, I remark, that caste legislation, the inveterate vice of absolute governments, is inconsistent with the theory and spirit of a free and popular government like ours, asserting in its bill of rights the equality of all men. A free government like ours must be preserved, so far as practicable, to avoid class legislation; and rather to trust and favor the natural liberty and right of individuals to form and regulate their own social circles and classification according to their respective predilections or prejudices. In the second place, it is quite obvious, if it should be deemed proper and consistent legislation for a free State to organize the people into classes, that it is impracticable to any considerable extent, without encountering inextricable difficulties. This difficulty will be encountered whether the basis of classification be a difference in races, religion, language, color, or any physiological peculiarities. A strict construction against all unnecessary extent of such legislation should, therefore, be preserved. The wisdom and beneficence of the law under consideration is not in this case called in question; the line of demarcation between the two classes is. Nor is the popular or philological meaning of the world' colored' now under consideration; but the legal construction of the words 'colored' and 'white' is necessarily involved in the case, and submitted for our adjudication.”

Here follows a presentation of the laws existing for a period of fifteen years, quoting largely from former decisions, establishing what was understood by the word “colored.” That it was not a question of color when the word “white” was used in the law, but describes blood and not complexion.

“Statutes which are in restrain of natural liberty, or which derogate in any other manner from the general law, and laws which have an apparent hardship in them, are to be interpreted in such a manner as not to extend beyond what is clearly expressed in the law to any consequences to which the law does not necessarily extend. It may also, in this connection, be remarked that the Constitutional Convention, well knowing the construction so given the the word “white” in the old constitution, and the legislation under it, accepted and approved that construction by inserting the same word 'white' citizen in the new constitution. “An amendment of the school law by a provision allowing any of either class, upon permission first obtained and due notice given, to be taxed with and attend the schools of the other class, would obviate such objection. The line of caste would thus become, to some extent, self-adjusting to meet the actual social classification of the youth, as existing in fact in every district. But it seems to me alike unwise and wholly out of character with the progress, the general intelligence and liberality of the age, at this time—more than ten years after the repeal of the 'Black'Laws,' so called, and more than half a century after a liberal and humane interpretation of those disabling statues has been inaugurated, and constantly,ever since then, maintained—to overrule all the decisions of the many able and wise judges who have preceded us, and give an extent and effect to those disabling statutes, which this Court has always heretofore, time and again, refused to do. For these reasons, I utterly dissent from the opinion expressed by my brethren in this case.”

I commend the words of this just and humane Judge, gentlemen, to your careful consideration. Here we find a man who had the manhood to assert his convictions of right and wrong as he found and understood it. Compare the decisions, gentle-man; analyze the construction of their arguments, and I submit to you if Judge Sutliffe, in his argument, does not prove conclusively that these statutes should be abolished. In the U. S. Circuit Court, District of Ohio, Judge Baxter presiding, in delivering the charge to the jury in a case relating to separate schools, and the exclusion of colored children from the schools, which occurred in Washington township, Clermont county, says: “The mere fact that this defendant excluded this colored boy from the privileges of his school would not constitute an offense. * * * * He must have excluded him from his school, and he must have done that under some color of law, or statute, or ordinance, or regulation, or custom of the State. * * * * I have stated to you, gentlemen of the jury, that under our Constitution and laws the negro has the same rights as the white man; precisely the same rights in all respects. He is subject to the same obligations, duties and liabilities, 0024 23and that right has been secured by the amendments to the Constitution.”

Right here let me add what the learned Judge could not say at the time: That, while the negro is under the same obligations, duties and liabilities as other citizens, he does not receive the rights which he should receive by being amenable to all those duties. But let us read further from the same case: “The Legislature of Ohio has authorized the establishment of public schools; that is to say, they have authorized the classification of these school children, and have authorized the negroes to be educated separately, in one school, separately from the white children, and the white children separately from the negro. Now, that is no wrong to the negro. The Legislature has a right to do that.” Well, gentlemen, here is a very broad and comprehensive statement by our learned Dogberry.

First—The negro has the same rights.

Second—The Legislature has ordered, by statute, that the negro be separated—classified he calls it but if he had said casteified that would have been better and more applicable.

Third—That the Legislature has a right to do this, after admitting in his first proposition that we are citizens, and have the same and all rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.

Fourth—That it does no harm to the negro.

Weigh these statements, I ask you, gentlemen. Place them side by side, and understand them thoroughly. How does any man know how these separate matters harm the negro, especially when that man has never had them applied to him. With a great regard for the learned Judge, I must differ with him, and place my experience against this theory the better evidence, as well as others of my race who have felt the sting.

He says, further: “If you find upon the facts of this case that such a school had been provided, which afforded like facilities as to the one to which he went and claimed admission, reasonably accessible to him—not exactly—I don't put it upon the ground of exactly as accessible, but if the colored school was established in good faith, supplied with a competent teacher, corresponding in a reasonable degree with the qualifications of the white teachers of the country, and reasonably accessible to this negro, it was his duty to go to the colored school; and if he refused to go there and claimed admission into the white school, and was excluded, he has nothing in law to complain of.” “Reasonably accessible to this negro” seems to be the burthen of the learned gentleman's song at this stage of his charge. Why dwell so much on the accessibility to the school. To me this is wonderfully apparent, for if the school was situated so far away that it would smack of oppression to make our poor little ones tramp miles, then some excuse would become plain for this action. Oh, gentlemen, I tell you there are hundreds of cases where our boys and girls tramp, TRAMP, TRAMP many weary miles through the elements to procure a dwarfed and stunted education. How is the parent to determine the qualifications of the teacher of the child, I ask? He can only arrive at a conclusion, after the child has spent years of trudging to and from school, finally awakening to the fact that his child is making no progress, but is remaining at a standstill. Continuing, he says: “But if you find, as a matter of fact, that this colored school was so remote—too remote for child of this black man to attend without oppression, or without going over unreasonable and unusual distances; that the school board or trustees of the district—trustees, whoever they may be, whose duty it was to provide these schools—had placed this negro at a disadvantage with his white neighbor, material disadvantage; had required of him, in order to get his education, more than they required of others—to travel over the greater distance, which was unusual, they had not provided for him the same accommodation, the same facilities, the same conveniences, or something approximating them, that he could obtain in his home school, if I may so term it—the school nearer to them; then, and in that event, he had a right to go to this white school.”

Here you have it in the words “or something approximating thereto.” Not to be the same, but something near; not as good, but nearly so. I say here, that three-fifths of our children labor under every one of the disadvantages this judge has characterized as being unlawful. We are too poor, generally, to enter upon a lawsuit to establish our rights, hence they never come to the knowledge of the people. Why, Mr. Speaker, within the last two months a case was tried in the courts at Yellow Springs, this State, where a citizen's children were refused admission on the ground that that they were negroes. Strange to relate, the witnesses were unable to satisfy the court that they were negroes, and for the enlightenment of the court the children were produced, when the court decided they were white children, and entitled to go to the schools the same as other children. This case cost the board about five hundred dollars, and if we would bring each individual case into the courts, it would cost the State a half million of dollars.

Nothing, gentlemen, is more insulting to an American citizen than. taxation without representation. That fact clings to the 0025 24lovers of freedom, justice and equity with more force, and is more humiliating than all the obnoxious legislation you can heap upon them. Do we get a par return for the amount of taxes we pay for the maintenance of the schools, being the same quota as all other citizens pay? I answer No! and I shall endeavor to verify this statement. First, the buildings set apart for these separate schools, as a rule, are in every respect inferior to the same buildings in that community for other children. I have conversed with teachers of colored schools, and I learn that it is the rule to supply these schools with the old and worn-out furniture and apparatus that were replaced in the other schools by new and improved furniture and apparatus This is not giving us equal school facilities as we should have.

Second, the teachers, as a rule, are inferior, from the fact that the schools being inferior, the salaries of these teachers are correspondingly small, which, in consequence, does not and cannot demand the highest grades of talent so requisite in an instructor. This reason will commend itself to your judgment, and I hope, will convince you of the great disadvantages that children attending these separate schools have to undergo in this one particular.

In mixed schools this is not the case, for the best and highest grades of scholars are employed, the salaries paid being sufficient to demand this desirable quality. And right here I am compelled to state a fact, loth as I am to say anything disparaging of any man or men, but truth compels me to say what my eyes have beheld. I have seen some teachers of colored schools commit acts that totally unfit them holding for one hour the certificates entitling them to such positions; which demonstrated their utter incompetency by such associations and the frequency of such places, as not only lowered them in the estimation of all good citizens, but debased their station in life, dwarfed and impaired their usefulness and clouded their intellect. Happy am I to state that these were isolated cases, for I firmly believe that the majority of these teachers are honest and sincere in their calling. What I consider of equal importance to a child is the moral and more refining influences which are taught by those who have had the benefit, not only by association, but by reason of a thorough training as acquired in a normal school.

My race has, to a large extent, been deprived of refining influences at their fire-sides and in their home circles. These influences are not found in separate schools, and this I say without disparagement to those teachers who are employed therein. In the city of Cleveland we are blessed —yes, I reiterate it, blessed with mixed schools. Those noble-hearted philanthropists who early settled on the Reserve brought with them a spirit of freedom which they bequeathed to their children that has never left them.

They have given all men the same chance of life; have given us mixed teachers whom I am proud to say are second to none in the State, and to-day the public schools of Cleveland, Ohio, are acknowledged to be the schools of Ohio, taking rank with any in the world. Certainly, if there was a necessity for separate schools, it would appear in a city possessing the population of Cleveland, especially when her citizens embrace in that population every race and all classes. But no; after a continued residence in that city, and enjoying an intimate acquaintance with teachers, scholars and members of the Board of Education, I have yet to hear one word utter against the many colored children who daily attend. I have yet to learn of any act that has been committed by these children which has brought mixed schools under the ban of the popular will. Well, then, if no disturbance has ever arisen after these many years of trial, I ask, in the name of common humanity, what necessity exists for this damaging separation. Now, I affirm, and I do it with all the vehemence I possess, that colored children who graduate from separate schools possess neither the education nor the refinement that those do who successfully pass through our mixed schools. In speaking of this fact, the the separate schools established and maintained in the city of Cincinnati, Ohio, come directly to my mind, as possessing a corps of responsible teachers, and in being as successful as any separate schools in the United States. On this floor I challenge a comparison of the colored youth who graduate from those separate schools with those who graduate from the mixed schools of Cleveland, O., in substantiation of my assertion. The training of the mind during inception stamps and moulds the man, and largely enters into the calculation whether he shall become a quiet, orderly, law-abiding citizen, or otherwise. How requisite, then, is it for the welfare of the State that its youth receive the best training and education to be had. “It is the duty of the State to protect every one of its subjects in all his proper rights. Whatever is necessary to secure the great ends for which it exists, whatever is necessary for the highest good of all—this it has the right to do and ought to do. This is a duty which it owes to the whole and to each individual. It has to do with its subjects, not as men, but as citizens. As a State, its end and aim are single, thereby securing the liberty and the rights of all its members. What, then, 0026 25is the duty of the State as regards the education of its subjects? I affirm here that it is directly concerned with the civil rights and privileges of the subject; that, while not so closely exercising care of his intellectual, moral or religious character, it has to do with these only so far as they may bear upon the former, by making the man a better citizen and a better subject. It is impossible that the State should reach its highest point of prosperity, should realize the true idea of a free and noble State, without intelligence and virtue in the community. In proportion to the education and general intelligence of the people, in connection with their moral and religious culture, will be the amount of liberty enjoyed, because in this proportion will be their ability to understand and their rights. Neither an ignorant people, nor yet an irreligious people, are competent for self-government.” Surely the State is or should be deeply interested in the future welfare, worth and character of those who are destined to be her citizens, and this surely cannot be better promoted than by opening every avenue whereby knowledge is to be obtained, without any impediment being interposed, even if it is done under sanction of the law.

“Can the State, safely of honorably to herself, send any class of her youth to separate schools, to have the grand ideas of nationality, citizenship and loyalty stamped and crushed out of them?” Our children should be under the immediate eye of the State, not tucked away in a remote corner; not receiving the attention from school authorities that other children do; not receiving an instruction far below the average; receiving an education by ostracism, which totally unfit them to receive those moral and political ideas that will fit them for their place as citizens in the State, and fellow citizens to each other.

Now, I affirm, and that boldly, that the State, in its organic and moral unity, is a power; but when it comes to the enactment of race or special class legislation, that power is weakened and in time will be destroyed. What has been the fact in correspondence to this? The nation or State which has sanctioned such laws have been rent and broken in strength, and swept from the foundation on which it should have existed. When it has assumed to identify itself exclusively with a race, or to build upon the distinction of races, their names have perished in the cycle of time, and their record is deciphered from the fading lines upon the broken and shattered stones of their buildings.

Why, Mr. Speaker, a State which so treats any class of her citizens has no longer a moral foundation, nor a universal end when it asserts, by such laws, the rights of a race and not the rights of a man; but a government that no longer recognizes Justice as necessary, nor subsists in the sovereignty and freedom of all of her citizens in all of her organisms, and is identity with a race,gives a sure sign of an expiring civilization. The thought—that everyone, even the least, his welfare, his rights, his dignity, is the concern of the State—that every one in his own personality is to be regarded and protected, and honored, and esteemed, without respect to ancestry, or rank, or race, or gifts, if only he bear the human face and form, is the characteristic principle of the age and its true distinction. This principle is alien to the earlier ages, and even to the age of the Reformation. It is first in the modern age that humanity, in its full conception, has become an encouraging principle of right and duty. I remember reading from De Lamartine the following:

“The Nation—The second form of society, not natural, but artificial, since it is man's own creation—is civil society. The object of government is, not to suppress or create individual or family rights, but to regulate the manner of exercising all rights.”

These are the fundamental principles of all true governments. Gentlemen, in this State, and I quote from the last report of the Commissioner of Public Schools, there are 25,347 colored children. Of this number only 8,490 are enrolled as attendants at the schools of the State. Why is it that only one-third of the number only are enrolled? Why is it that there is a steady decrease in the attendance at separate schools? There is only one answer I can give: It is, that the colored people are awakening to the fact that their children are receiving an inferior education; are having inculcated in their minds, by reason of this statue, that they are different from other citizens; are not worthy to receive the same treatment as other children receive from the State. These are the paramount reasons, but when you come to add the lack of refinement which we have in large numbers been deprived of by the inhuman and barbarous condition in which an enforced slavery placed us, it is meet that we should withdraw our children and place them in such countries and institutions where these prejudices do not exist. What we have received has been acquired through and by associations with our more favored fellow-citizens, and by attendance at mixed schools. There are in this State 225 colored teachers, scattered through 35 counties of the 88. Hamilton county possesses the luxury of employing 34, Greene 23, Ross 19, Gallia 15, Brown 17, and the remaining number scattered through counties, ranging in number from 9 down to 1. 0027 26This shows just where the trouble lies, and where the opposition to the repeal of this statute will come from. Let us see what cities have abolished separate schools, and what the outcome has been so far: The cities of Cleveland, Toledo, Dayton, Columbus and Delaware are the principal ones. No trouble has arisen at any point by reason of this action by the Boards of Education, and, knowing the advantages we have gained by these actions, we say with these beautiful lines: “It grew, it crept, it pushed, it clomb; Long had the darkness been its home. But well it knew, though veiled in night, The goodness and the joy of light.” Mr. Speaker, I placed Cleveland in the van as the poineer in this good work. I thank God that so many of my race have cast their lot upon the Western Reserve. It is here that we receive the treatment that all men should receive according to their worth and merit. I thank God, from the deepest recesses of my heart, that the good people of those countries never have, as yet, by deed, word or action, been guilty of casting or placing any obstruction in the path of the youth to accomplish a thorough and systematic education, be he rich or poor, native or foreign born, white or black. Standing as they do, upon the broad plane of human rights to all men alike, believing in the letter and spirit of the Constitution, they have never violated one of its provisions. I had thought to have been able to gather definite statistics as to the cost of separate schools from the reports of the proper officer of this State. Unfortunately, this item does not appear but every other matter relating thereto does. But I make the statement that in several countries where these separate schools do exist, that upon comparison with those counties where they do not flourish the cost is considerably greater, especially in the erection and maintenance of separate school buildings.

I have heard many gentlemen upon this floor extol our great State; how far she was in advance of her sister States; that she occupied the proud position of being third in the galaxy comprising this great Union. Let us see how she compares with her Northern sisters in this matter of separate schools, and what I state for your information is gained from the report of the U.S. Commissioner of Education. Of these States the following have by statute decided that no separate schools on account of color shall be placed in operation: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, and the Territories of Arizona, Dakota, Idaho, and Washington. Can it be said that Ohio is still behind all of these States and Territories in the advancement of the rights guaranteed to all citizens? God forbid that it should longer stand to her disgrace as a monument in the path of human freedom and rights. It may be argued by gentlemen that the colored people of Ohio have not asked for the abolition of separate schools For six years there have been cases before the courts, in different parts of this State, where colored men appealed for the protection of the strong arm of the law; and whenever and wherever these cases have been brought the substantial colored citizens of those communities, and the universal voice of the colored press have given material aid in helping those who had the courage to contend for their rights. I opine that much, if not all the opposition to the repeal of this statute will come from those who are now engaged as teachers in separate schools. With them it is not a question of equitable rights before the law, or beneficial results to the scholar, but is wholly one of livelihood. But to them and such arguments, I ask this pertinent question: Shall the pecuniary benefits of the few be allowed to counteract and check the good that the repeal of this section would bring to an overwhelming majority? It is sincerely hoped not.

It is hardly necessary for me to call your attention to the recommendations of ex Gov. Hoadly and our present Chief Executive, Governor Foraker, on the absolute necessity to the repeal of all statures that discriminate against the black man. I know, gentlemen, you have read the opinions of these able gentlemen as expressed in their respective messages. By their utterances, being similar in their convictions the repeal of these statutes become non-partisan, and devoid of any political bias, but simply become a question of the removal of all impediments placed in the pathway of the American citizen of African descent. I have too much faith in the honor, integrity and love of justice that premeates the breast of you, my more favored countrymen to believe that you will by your votes defeat the passage of this bill, thereby turning a deaf ear to the advice given you by the recent standard-bearers of our two great political parties.

The repeal of Sections 6987 and 6988 are asked for, and in great measure the arguments on class legislation will also apply to these. While all men believe, and firmly, that there is an unseen force that propels each toward an affinity in the opposite sex, all must also admit that no special or specific law that can be enacted will counteract or destroy this adaptation. If the enactment of this law was called for, or if the existence and perpetuity of it was occasioned by the commission of any crime 0028 27against the law of nature, my race would be the last to ask for its repeal. The subject has to a great, a very great extent, regulated itself, until now we find these marriages of rare occurrence. Such laws are barbaric in their tendencies and inhuman in their enforcement. Who shall dictate to the man or woman whom he or she shall marry? Who shall say, Take this one or that one; do not let your affections centre there? What country enacts and enforces such laws? History and the laws of nations show but one, and truth compels us to admit that free(?) America is the exception.

The great “Giver of Light and Knowledge” has said in his eternal Book, “Whom God has joined together, let no man put asunder.” This is applicable from the inception of matrimony, not after its consummation alone, for the ceremony is not the act of God, but the drawing together of affinities. This law of the Ruler of the destinies of men and nations should be given more than a passing thought. There being many persons dark-hued and applying for licenses to marry, it makes the asking of, “Are you a negro, or have you any African blood in your veins?” a delicate question to propound. One example will show my meaning, and make it more apparent to you. During my connection with the Probate Court of Cuyahoga county a dark-colored person made application for a license to marry. The usual questions as to age, etc., having been propounded and answered satisfactorily, the gentlemanly clerk, in the best language he could command, asked him the question in accordance with the provisions of this statute. The gentleman was for the moment dumbfounded. Quickly recovering, however, he asked if public officials were chosen to insult reputable citizens. The matter was explained, when he remarked that he “would remove from Ohio as soon as possible to some State where the law did not give officials the right to insult citizens.” It is too fine a discrimination in this day of mixing and commingling to ask any judge or issuer of licenses to determine these particular cases, and case he fails to do so he is liable to fine and imprisonment. We utterly fail to understand wherein such laws are beneficial to the vast body that compose the citizenship of the State. Surely all law is sought to be of some practical utility, but these sections are looked upon as being obsolete and antiquated, and are regarded as a standing monument to the discredit of this great and progressive State.

All the colored man desires, Mr. Speaker, is that he be given the same legislation that is accorded to other men. No man can deny that we have proven ourselves other than true, patriotic and honorable citizens. Going back to the early days of the history of our country, where the picture is presented of a black man in the person of Crispus Attucks, shedding his blood, the first spilled in the great struggle for American freedom, we are forced to stand appalled at that country's ingratitude. When, again, I bring in this galaxy of bright lights Benjamin Banneker, the great mathematician, and those brave men of my race who fought, bled and died for our country in the war of 1812, I ask you, gentlemen, is such ostracisms the reward for that heroism and devotion. But when I contemplate the actions of the American negro on the battle-fields of the South—at the many scenes of carnage in which he was engaged during the late war of the rebellion—with what heroism he performed deeds of valor, showing and demonstrating his ability even at the cannon's mouth, my very heart bleeds for the foul blot heaped upon the countless thousands of black men, who laid their lives upon their country's altar for the establishment and perpetuity of this government. In that South-land my race put on the blue, shouldered their muskets, and to-day their bones lie bleaching on dozens of battle fields, where they were massacred by those who sought to destroy this fair land. What, gentlemen, I ask you, is the reward Ohio gives those of her black sons whose bones are scattered there? How is she rewarding them to-day for their valor, patriotism and devotion to the interests of our great country? To her shame, be it said, by allowing laws to remain on on her statue books born of that inhuman and enforced slavery for the destruction of which they gave their lives, that their children might reap the benefits and enjoyments of a free republic. History nowhere records that where any portion of a country's prople, slaves though they may have been, went forth and honored their country as the black man has done, but what the nation removed all obstacles from their path, and not only clothed them with full citizenship, but protected them in the full enjoyment of that citizenship. Our fathers spurned and chose death rather than to submit to galling and ignominious subjugation, and I tell you, gentlemen, that the twenty-five thousand colored voters in Ohio will awake to refight the battles of their fathers. Today they are watching what action this House shall take in wiping out those repugnant laws that disgrace the name of Ohio. Repeal them, and to your ensign will cluster the friendship of my race—redress our grievances with that power delegated to every American citizen. Defeat this bill, and the wrath of the colored voters will bury you beneath their ballots cast by as loyal citizens as the sun of Heaven looks down upon. Repeal them, and in after 0029 28years, when we show our children these obnoxious and pernicious laws, explaining to them the disadvantages we were subjected to by and under them, we can teach them, to love and venerate the memories of those who were instrument in giving us equal facilities with our more favored brethren.

Shall it longer be said that the General Assembly of the State of Ohio allowed a portion of her citizens to be defrauded by obnoxious laws? Repeal these statues, so that it cannot be said: “As with fingers of the blind, We are groping here to find What the hieroglyphics mean Of the Unseen in the seen.” We expect you, Mr. Speaker and gentlemen, to show by your action on this bill to-day, to those who founded and who seek to perpetuate this system, “You ideas are obsolete, and we inaugurate a new system.”

When you do this, you place yourselves upon the broad platform of human rights, and the gentlemen who do so will take rank with the great philanthropists of the world. When all has been passed and forgotten in the rapid flight of time, our prayer shall be, “That our eyes may never be opened to what lies behind.”

Here we close, leaving it with you, gentlemen, whether the black man of Ohio can with you sing and re-echo the magnificent words of Whittier's Centennial hymn: “Our fathers' God! from out whose hand The centuries fall like grains of sand, We meet to-day, united, free, And loyal to our land and Thee, To thank Thee for the era done, And trust Thee for the opening one. Oh, make Thou us, through centuries long, In peace secure, and justice strong; Around our gifts of freedom draw The safeguard of thy righteous law; And, cast in some diviner mould, Let the new cycle shame the old.”

BLACK LAWS OF OHIO SINCE 1802.

What Our Fathers Had to Contend With.

In the Constitutional Convention of 1802, I find that a section to the Constitution was passed as follows:

“No negro or mulatto shall ever be eligible to any office, civil or military, or give their oath in any court of justice against a white person; be subject to do military duty, or pay a poll tax in this state; provided always, and it is fully understood and declared, that all negroes and mulattoes, now in or who may hereafter reside in this state, shall be entitled to all the privileges of citizens of this state, not expected by this constitution.”

House Journal Appendix, 1848-9, page 326.”

BLACK LAWS OF 1804.

Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Ohio, That from and after the first day of June next. no black or mulatto person shall be permitted to settle or reside in this state, unless he or she shall first produce a fair certificate from some court within the United States, of his or her actual freedom, which certificate shall be attested by the clerk of said court, and the seal thereof annexed thereto, by said clerk.

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That every black or mulatto person residing within this state, on or before the fifth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and four, shall enter his or her name, together with the name or names of his or her children, in the clerk's office in the county in which he, she or they reside, which shall be entered on record by said clerk, and thereafter the clerk's certificate of such record shall be sufficient evidence of his, her or their freedom; and for every entry and certificate, the person obtaining the same shall pay to the clerk twelve and an half cents. Provided nevertheless, That nothing in this act contained shall bar the lawful claim to any black or mulatto person.

Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That no person or persons residents of this state, shall be permitted to hire, or in any way employ any black or mulatto person, unless such black or mulatto person shall have one of the certificates as aforesaid, under pain of forfeiting and paying any sum not less than ten nor more than fifty dollars, at the discretion of the court, for every such offense, one-half thereof for 0031 30the use of the informer and the other half for the use of the state;and shall moreover pay to the owner, if any there be, of such black or mulatto person, the sum of fifty cents for every day he, she or they shall in any wise employ, harbour or secret such black or mulatto person, which sum or sums shall be recoverable before any court having cognizance thereof.

Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That if any person or persons shall harbour or secret any black or mulatto person, the property of any person whatever, or shall in any wise hinder or prevent the lawful owner or owners from retaking and possessing his or her black or mulatto servant or servants, shall, upon conviction thereof, by indictment or information, be be fined in any sum not less than ten nor more than fifty dollars, at the discretion of the court, one-half thereof for the use of the informer and the other half for the use of the state.

Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That every black or mulatto person who shall come to reside in this state with such certificate as is required in the first section of this act, shall, within two years, have the same recorded in the clerk's office, in the county in which he or she means to reside, for which he or she shall pay to the clerk twelve and an half cents, and the clerk shall give him or her a certificate of such record.

Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That in case any person or persons, his or their agent or agents, claiming any black or mulatto person that now are or hereafter may be in this state, may apply, upon making satisfactory proof that such black or mulatto person or persons is the property of him or her who applies, to any associate judge or justice of the peace within this state, the associate judge or justice is hereby empowered and required, by his precept, to direct the sheriff or constable to arrest such black or mulatto person or persons and deliver the same in the county or township where such officers shall reside, to the claimant or claimants or his or their agent or agents, for which service the sheriff or constable shall receive such compensation as they are entitled to receive in other cases for similar services.

Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That any person or persons who shall attempt to remove, or shall remove from this state, or who shall aid and assist in removing, contrary to the provisions of this act, any black or mulatto person or persons, without first proving as hereinbefore directed, that he, she or they, is or are legally entitled so to do, shall, on conviction thereof before any court having cognizance of the same, forfeit and pay the sum of one thousand dollars, one-half to the use of the informer and the other half to the use of the state, to be recovered by action of debt, qui tam, or indictment, and shall moreover be liable to the action of the party injured. Elias Langhan, Speaker of the house of representatives. Nath. Massie, Speaker of the Senate. 5 th January, 1804.

BLACK LAWS OF 1807.

Sec. 1. Be it enacted by the general assembly of the state of Ohio, That no negro or mulatto person shall be permitted to emigrate into and settle within this state, unless such negro or mulatto person shall within twenty days thereafter, enter into bond with two or more freehold sureties, in the penal sum of five hundred dollars, before the clerk of the court of common pleas of the county in which such negro or mulatto may wish to reside (to be approved of by the clerk) conditioned for the good behavior of such negro or mulatto, and moreover to pay for the support of such person, in case he, she or they should thereafter be found within any township in this state, unable to support themselves. And if any negro or mulatto person shall migrate into this state, and not comply with the provisions of this act, it shall be the duty of the overseers of the poor of the township where such negro or mulatto person may be found, to remove immediately, such black or mulatto person, in the same manner, as required in the case of paupers.

Sec. 2. Be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the clerk, before whom such bond may be given as aforesaid, to file the same in his office, and give a certificate thereof to such negro or mulatto person; and the said clerk shall be entitled to receive the sum of one dollar for the bond and certificate aforesaid, on the delivery of the certificate.

Sec. 3. Be it further enacted, That if any person being a resident of this state, shall employ, harbor or conceal any such negro or mulatto person aforesaid, contrary to the provisions of the first section of this act, any person so offending, shall forfeit and pay, for every such offence, any sum not exceeding one hundred dollars, the one half to the informer, and the other half for the use of the poor of the township in which such person may resid, to be recovered by action of debt, before any court having competent jurisdiction, and moreover be liable for the maintenance and support of such negro or mulatto, provided he, she or they shall become unable to support themselves.

Sec. 4. Be it further enacted, That no black or mulatto person or persons, shall hereafter be permitted to be sworn or give evidence in any court or record, or elewhere in this state, in any cause depending, or matter of controversy, where either party to the same is a white person, or in any prosecution, which shall be instituted in behalf of this state, against any white person.

Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That so much of the act, entitled “An act to regulate black and mulatto persons,” as is contrary to this act, together with the sixth section thereof be, and the same is hereby repealed.

This act shall take effect and be in force, from and after the first day of April next. Abraham Shepherd, Speaker of the house of representatives. Thomas Kirker,

Speaker of the senate. January 25th, 1807.

BLACK LAWS OF 1807.

Letter from one of the Heroes of the Battle for Their Repeal, in 1848. COLUMBUS, APRIL 8, 1886. Hon. B. W. Arnett:

Dear Sir—I received yours of the 7th, expressing a desire to obtain some account of the repeal of the Black Laws of Ohio, in 1848, with the names of the men who were active in securing that result. I should be happy to comply with your request in detail, having still in my possession many of the papers relating to that event, but your wish for an immediate response, together with the fact that now, at the opening of the Spring Term at the University, my time is fully occupied, will compel me to write briefly and from memory.

Before 1848 the colored people of Ohio were subject to very oppressive legislation; some of their grievances were as follows:

1. No black or mulatto person was allowed to testify in any court if a white person was a party to the suit. This injustice subjected colored people to various outrages, and placed them at the mercy of any white scoundrel whose villainies could not be proven by the testimony of some white person.

2. No black or mulatto person could settle with his family in any town in Ohio without first obtaining satisfactory bondsmen who would be responsible for the support of the colored man's family in case they became a public charge.

3. The children of black or mulatto persons were excluded from the public schools; although the property of colored persons was taxed equally with that of their white neighbors.

4. By a constitutional provision black or mulatto persons were denied the right of suffrage.

In the legislative session of 1848-9 several seats in the House were in controversy, and at the same time the Governor's election was also contested. The Democrats, including the Democratic claimants of contested seats, and two Free Soil men, Hugh Smart and W. VanDoren, who were elected by Democratic votes, had more than half the House. The Whigs, including Whigs claimants of contested seats, and several Free Soil men, Messrs. Riddle, Chaffee, McClure, Lee, and Johnson, who had been elected by Whig and Free Soil votes, had an equal number. Two independent Free Soil men—that is, elected in opposition to the candidates of both Whig and Democratic parties, John F. Morse, of Lake county, and N. S. Townshend, of Lorraine, held what was called the “balance of power.”

On the first Monday of December, 1848, the Democrats went to the House at an unusually early hour, swore in their members, and claimants of disputed seats, and effected an organization. At the 0034 33usual hour the Whigs went to the House, and finding there an organization they would not recognize, swore in their members, and claimants of disputed seats, and elected speakers, clerk and sergeant-at-arms, and occupied another part of the legislative chamber.

After three weeks of disorder, the Free Soil members, some of whom had been enrolled with both factions, succeeded in persuading both to have those claimants whose seats were contested stand aside until the House could be properly organized, after which contested seats were to be settled in the usual manner.

In the permanent organization Morse and Townshend voted for the Democratic candidate for speaker, after obtaining from him a written pledge that the standing committee on Privileges and Elections should be fairly constituted. A Free Soil man, now the Hon. Stanley Matthews, of the Supreme Court of the United States, was then elected clerk. The Committee on Privileges and elections included two able Whigs, two Democrats, and N.S. Townshend, chairman. A majority of this committee soon reported in favor of the Whig candidate, Seabury Ford, for Governor. The contested seated in the House were decided after much controversy.

Soon after the House was ready for business, Mr. Morse introduced a bill to provide separate schools for colored children, and for other purposes. This bill gave to all colored children rights in the common schools, but where there was not room for them, or where popular prejudice would not permit their attendance, separate schools were to be provided. The other purposes referred to in the title of the bill were expressed in a clause to the effect, that all previous acts, or parts of acts, making distinctions on account of color, should be repealed. On the 30th of January, 1849, this bill passed the House, and subsequently the Senate, in which body General Randell, Mr. Swift, and Mr. Beaver were known as Free Soil men. Thus the infamous Black Laws, dictated by a committee of slaveholders from Kentucky, with the evident design of making freedom in Ohio worse if possible than slavery on the other side of the river, were swept away.

The next important step secured by the anti-slavery men of the Legislature of 1848-9 was the election of S.P. Chase to the United States Senate. The Democrats had nominated Mr. Allen; the Whigs, Mr. Ewing. Mr. Morse, with the concurrence of several Free Soil men, nominated Mr. Giddings, and Mr. Townshend nominated Mr. Chase. A few of the Whigs absolutely refused to vote for Mr. Giddings, and the remainder, with all the Free Soilers, were not sufficient to elect. The Democrats, seeing that they could not elect Mr. Allen, decided to vote for Mr. Chase. Several Free Soil members, finding their election of Mr. Giddings impossible, also voted for Mr. Chase, and helped to secure his election.

Other anti-slavery measures were proposed and carried at this session. Mr. Pennington, a Whig, from Belmont county, introduced a joint resolution denouncing slavery in the District of Columbia, and requesting our representative in Congress to use every constitutional means to secure its speedy abolition. This resolution passed both branches of the General Assembly. 0035 34A further progressive step was taken at the session of '48-9. The people of Ohio were given an opportunity to vote for a convention to revise the State Constitution. When the Constitutional Convention was held in 1850, so unprogressive was that body that only twelve members voted for striking out the word white.

A further result of the struggle of 1849-9 was the awakening of public attention to the evil of slavery, and a great advance in liberal and anti-slavery sentiment throughout the State. Yours truly, N. S. Townshend.

Governor William Bebb, in his message December 6, 1847, took strong grounds on the subject of Human Rights, and used the following language:

“Whilst upon this kindred subject I cannot forget that the Black Laws still disgrace our statue books. All I can do is earnestly to reiterate the recommendation for their unqualified repeal.”

Mr. Russell, of Harrison country, moved that the recommendation of the Governor, on the subject of Black Laws, be referred to a special committee of five. The following persons constituted said committee: Samuel Russell, Harrison county; William Coolman, Portage, Lucas county, and Theodore, Breck, Cuyahoga county. Jan 11, 1848.

Mr. Blake offered H. B. 177, to repeal four sections of laws of 1807. It was lost by a vote of 25 yeas to 41 nays. Feb. 1, 1848.

House Bill 25, to prevent kidnapping, was offered by Mr. Blake.

Mr. Russell reported, from a select committee, House Bill 25 to prevent kidnapping, and the jails from being used in confining persons claimed as fugitive slaves, without amendment.

It was lost on its passage, years, 24, nays 36 February 1, 1848.

BLACK LAWS OF 1848

SEC. 1 Be it enacted by the general assembly of the state of Ohio, That all such property belonging to black or colored persons, as is liable to taxation when owned by white persons, be taxed for school purposes, and the taxes thereon assessed be collected in the same manner as similar taxes are by the acts to which this is an amendment, a separate account of which shall be kept by the several county auditors, and shall be paid our for the support of schools for black or colored persons in any such district in which the children of black or colored persons are permitted to attend the common schools with the children of white persons, then such fund shall be added to 0036 35the common school fund of the district from which it was collected, and paid over to the treasurer of said district on the order of the directors of said district.

Sec. 2. That every city, incorporated town or village, seat of justice or organized township in this state, containing twenty or more black or colored children, of any age, and desirous of attending school, shall constitute a school district for such children; and it shall be lawful for colored persons residing in such school district as aforesaid, to assemble and organize said district, appoint school directors of their own number, to erect and repair a suitable school house of their own, to procure suitable teachers, and in all respects, for such purpose only, to possess the same powers, and enjoy the same benefits that are possessed and enjoyed by white persons, by virtue of the acts to which this is an amendment.

Sec. 3. That if any of the said school districts, as herein provided, contain more than fifty black or colored scholars, the same may be divided by the school directors of said districts, into two or more districts, and each of such new districts shall have all the powers and privileges possessed by those from which said districts were taken: Provided, no school district shall contain a less number of black or colored scholars than twenty.

Sec. 4. That when any three or more of the black or colored taxpayers in a school district shall be desirous of dividing said district, as hereinbefore provided, they shall first cause ten days' notice to be given, by posting up written or printed notices, in at least three public places within said district, of the time and place that the directors will meet for that purpose, which notice shall, also, contain a description of the boundaries of the proposed new division; and it shall be the duty of said directors to meet at the time and place named in said notice, and if a majority of the black or colored taxpayers in said district are in favor of dividing said district, as described in said notice, it shall be the duty of said directors to make said division.

Sec. 5. That in every city, incorporated town or village, seat of justice, or organized township in this state, containing a less number than twenty black or colored children, desirous of attending school, it shall be the duty of the school directors of any school district organized for the education of white children, to admit said black or colored children upon the same terms, and they shall be entitled to the same benefits as they would be if they were white, under the acts to which this is an amendment: Provided, no written objection be filed with the directors, signed by any person having a child in such school, or by any legal voter of such district.

Sec. 6. That in any city, incorporated town or village, seat of justice, or organized township in this State, where they are less than twenty black or colored children desirous of attending the common schools, and the white inhabitants will not permit them to attend said schools, and in all other respects be entitled to the same privileges, and governed in the same manner as they would be if they were white, under the acts to which this is an amendment, in all 0037 36such districts, no black or colored person's property shall be taxed for school purposes.

Sec. 7. That when any black or colored person or person's residing in any school district within this state, where they are less than twenty black or colored children of any age, desirous of attending the common schools in said district or districts, shall have paid a tax for school purposes, it shall be the duty of the county auditor in the county in which such district or districts are located, on application of such black or colored person or person's and satisfactory proof thereof, to draw an order in favor of such black or colored person or person's, on the county treasurer, for the amount of said tax: Provided, in all cases, that the white inhabitants will not permit such black or colored children to have the benefit of the common schools in said districts, upon the same terms, and enjoy the same privileges, and possess the same powers, in all respects, that they would if they were white, under the acts to which this is an amendment.

Sec. 8. That when he said schools are organized, as herein before provided, they shall, in all respects, be governed except as herein provided, and, also, in their organization, according to the provisions of the act to which this is an amendment; the children of such schools shall be enumerated, and have the exclusive benefit of any donation or grant of land which shall be made by any person or person's, or by congress for the support of such schools, which shall be vested in the legislature of this State and appropriated to such schools only; and all the taxes levied and collected from the property of colored or black persons in the same manner that they would be entitled to were they white, and in all other respects have the same powers under the acts to which this is an amendment.

Sec. 9. That nothing in this act shall be construed as to tax the property of white persons for the purpose of building school houses for black or colored children, or purchasing sites for such houses, or for tuition purposes, contrary to the wishes of such taxpayers.

Sec. 10. That all acts or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this act are hereby repealed; and, in no case, shall the property of black or colored persons be taxed for the support of schools organized to educate white youth, except as herein provided. Joseph S. Hawkins. Speaker of the house of representatives. Charles B. Goddard. February 24, 1848. Speaker of the Senate. [Vol. 46, pp. 81,82,83. Repealed February 10, 1949.]

BLACK LAWS OF 1849

Sec. 1. Be it enacted by the general assembly of the state of Ohio, That the trustees of each incorporated township in this state, and the trustees, visitors, and directors of schools, or other officers having authority in the premises, of each city and incorporated town 0038 37or village, shall be and they are hereby authorized and required respectively, in case they shall not deem it expedient to admit the colored children resident in any such township, city, town or village, into the regular common schools therein established, to create one or more school districts for colored persons, in every such township, city, town or village, which district or districts, shall include all the territories thereof; and in laying off said districts, and in altering the same, they governed in all respects by the provisions of the act for the support and better regulation of common schools, etc., passed March 7, 1838.

Sec. 2. Whenever any district shall be established as afore-said, the trustees or other authorities establishing the same, shall give notice, by public advertisement, to the adult male colored taxpayers residing in such district, to meet at a time and place specified in the notice, and choose the school directors, and such meeting, and all subsequent meetings, for the election of directors, and for other purposes, shall be held and conducted as is directed in respect to meetings for like objects by the said act of March 7, 1838, and the acts amending the same: and the powers, rights, and duties of the directors so chosen, and of their successors, shall be the same in respect to the school officer of their several districts, as are conferreed upon, or required of school districts by said acts.

Sec. 3. The trustees or other authorities establishing separate districts, as aforesaid, shall cause an accurate list to be made as speedily as possible, of all colored taxpayers, and of all colored youth over four and under twenty-one years of age, resident therein, and shall certify it to the county auditor, who shall preserve the same in his office; and no property of any colored taxpayer within said districts shall be charged with any special tax for district purposes, for the benefit of the schools in any regular district composed wholly or in part of the same territory: and no property of any white person in any regular district, shall be charged with any such tax for the benefit of the schools in any separate district composed wholly, or in part, of the same territory.

Sec. 4. Every separate district, established as aforesaid, shall be held to include for school purposes, only the colored persons resident within its territorial limits, and from and after the establishment of the same, the colored youth resident therein, shall attend the schools organized under the directors of such district; and the powers and duties of county auditors, county treasurers, township trustees, township treasurers, township clerks, district treasurers, and district clerks and other officers in regard to such separate district and the schools established therein, shall be the same as now are or may be exercised or performed by said officers respectively, in relation to the regular districts, and the schools established therein, and said districts and schools shall in all respects except so far as this act provides to the contrary, be governed by and have the benefit of all the provisions of said act of March 7, 1838, and the amendatory acts, and all acts relating to schools in cities, towns, or villages, modifying the same.

Sec. 5. The term colored as used in this act, shall be construed 0039 38as being of the same signification as the term “black or mulatto,” as used in former acts.

Sec. 6. The act entitled an act to provide for the establishment of common schools for the education of black and mulatto persons, etc., passed February 24th, 1848, and the act regulate black and mulatto persons, passed January 5th, 1804, and the several acts to amend the same, passed January 5th, 1807, and February 27th, 1834, and all parts of the other acts, so far as they enforce any special disabilities or confer any special privileges on account of color, are hereby repealed, except the act of the 9th February, 1831, relating to juries, and the act of the 14th March, 1831, for the relief of the poor; Provided, however, that if any person shall bring or cause to be brought, or shall aid in bringing or causing to be brought, or shall persuade or induce to come into this state, any person or persons who is or are likely to become chargeable as paupers in any township of this state, or to become vagrants, every such person so offending shall forfeit and pay a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars, to be recovered, with costs of suit, in any court having jurisdiction by action of debt, in behalf of the state of Ohio, or by indictment, and, shall also be imprisoned until such fine be paid, unless the court shall otherwise direct.

John G. Breslin, Speaker of the house of representatives. Brewster Randall, February 10, 1849. Speaker of the senate. [Vol. 47, pp. 17, 18. Repealed March 14, 1853.]

BLACK LAWS OF 1853.

Sec. 31. The township boards of education in this State, in their respective townships, and the several other boards of education, and the trustees, visitors, and directors of schools, or other officers having authority in the premises, of each city or incorporated village, shall be, and they are hereby authorized and required to establish within their respective jurisdictions, one or more separate schools for colored children, when the whole number by enumeration exceeds thirty, so as to afford them, as far as practicable under all the circumstances, the advantage and privileges of a common school education; and all such schools so established for colored children shall be under the control and management of the board of education, or other school officers, who have in charge the educational interests of the other schools; but in case the average number of colored children in attendance shall be less than fifteen for any one month, it shall be the duty of said board of education, or other school officers, to discontinue said school or schools for any period not exceeding six months at any one time; and if the number of colored children shall be less than fifteen, the directors shall reserve the money raised on the number of said colored children, and the money so reserved shall be appropriated for the education of such colored children under the direction of the township board. March 14th, 1853.

BLACK LAWS OF 1861.

Sec. 6987. A person of pure white blood, who intermarries, or has illicit carnal intercourse, with any negro, or person having a distinct and visible admixture of African blood, and any negro, or person having a distinct and visible admixture of African blood, who intermarries, or has illicit carnal intercourse, with any person of pure white blood, shall be fined not more than one hundred dollars, or imprisoned not more than three months, or both.

SEC. 6988. A probate judge who knowingly issues a license for the solemnization of any marriage made penal by the last section, and every person who knowingly solemnizes any such marriage, shall be fined not more than one hundred dollars, or imprisoned not more than three months, or both. January 31, 1861.

BLACK LAWS OF 1864.

Sec. 4. That section thirty-one of said act be so amended as to read as follows:

Sec. 31. The township boards of education in this state, in their respective townships, and the several other boards of education, and the trustees, visitors and directors of schools, or other officers having authority in the premises, of each city or incorporated village, shall be and they are hereby authorized and required to establish, within their respective jurisdictions, one or more separate schools for colored children, when the whole number, by enumeration, exceeds twenty, and when such schools will afford them, as far as practicable, the advantages and privileges of a common school education; and all such schools so established for colored children, shall be under the control and management of the board of education, or other school officers who have in charge the educational interests of the other schools; and such schools for colored children shall be continued in operation each year until the full share of all the school funds of the township or district belonging to said colored children, on the basis of enumeration, shall have been expended: provided, that when the number of colored children residing in adjoining townships or districts, whether in the same or in different counties, shall exceed twenty, the boards of education of said townships or districts so situated, may form a joint district for the education of colored children, and said school shall be under the control and direction of the board of education of the township or district in which the school-house is situated. When the whole number of colored children enumerated is less than twenty, or when owing to the great distance they reside from each other a separate school for colored children is impracticable, the board of education shall set apart the full share of school funds raised on the number of said colored children, and the money so set apart shall be appropriated each year for the education of such colored children, under the direction of the board. March 18, 1864.

BLACK LAWS OF 1878.

SEC. 4008. When, in the judgment of the board, it will be for the advantage of the district to do so, it may organize separate schools for colored children, and boards of two or more adjoining districts may unite in a separate school for colored children, each board to bear its proportionate share of the expense of such school, according to the number of colored children from each district in the school, which shall be under the control of the board of education of the district in which the school house is situate. May 11, 1878. 67 th General Assembly, Regular Session. H. B. NO. 71. Mr. Arnett. A BILL To repeal Secs. 4008, 6987 and 6988 of the Revised Statutes of Ohio.

Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the 2 State of Ohio, That sections 4008, 6987 and 6988 of the Revised 3 Statutes of Ohio be and the same are hereby repealed.

Section 2. That this act shall take effect and be in force 2 from and after its passage.

VOTE OF THE HOUSE ON THE REPEAL

Yeas —Albaugh, Ames, Arnett, Bader, Bailey, Beatty, Boehmer, Boyd, Brown, of Cuyahoga; Brown, of Warren; Brumback, Cameron, Clement, Coates, Cope, Cowgill, Deyo, Dickson, Eggers, Emerson, Fimple, Geyer, Graydon, Green, Haley, Harris, Hartpence, Hilles, Holcomb, Johnson, of Van Vert; Johnson, of Williams; Kennedy, Kitchen, Lampson, Linduff, Little, Matthews, McBride, McClure, Merrick, Nieman, Outcalt, Palmer, Poorman, Rawlins, Ryan, Shepard, Smalley, Stewart, of Muskingum; Stewart, of Trumbull; Stranahan, Strecker, Taylor, Terrell, Tomlinson, Tomkins, Washburn, Whittlesey, Williams, of Columbiana; Williams, of Noble; Worthington and Entrekin—62.

Nays —Armor, Austill, Baker, Braddock, Butterfield, Chaney, Cuff, Eidemiller, Francisco, Habbeler, Higgins, Howard, Hubbard, Huffman, Hull, Johnson, of Huron; Kreis, Le Blond, Lisle, Loyns, McCray, McKeever, Puck, Vinnedge, Williams, of Coshocton; Work, Young and Ziegler—28.

Absentees —Ankeny, Barrett, Buerhaus, Ryal, Cole, Hunt, Ignman, Ohlemacher, Sackett, Shultz, Shaw, Wydman—12.

Not Voting —Turner. Attest: David Lanning, March 10, 1886, 67th General Assembly. Clerk, H. R.

NOTE FROM N. S. TOWNSHEND, CONCERNING REPEAL OF BLACK LAWS IN 1848.

The committee on Privileges and Elections was subsequently elected by the House. The contest for Governor did not come before the committee referred to, except in their individual capacity, but was determined in joint convention of the Senate and House. N. S. T.