The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation Part 214

[1133] New York C.R. Co. _v._ White, 243 U.S. 188 (1917); Middleton _v._ Texas Power & Light Co., 249 U.S. 152 (1919); Ward & Gow _v._ Krinsky, 259 U.S. 503 (1922).

[1134] Lincoln Federal Labor Union _v._ Northwestern Co., 335 U.S. 525 (1949).

[1135] Miller _v._ Wilson, 236 U.S. 373 (1915); Bosley _v._ McLaughlin, 236 U.S. 385 (1915).

[1136] Muller _v._ Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908).

[1137] Dominion Hotel _v._ Arizona, 249 U.S. 265 (1919).

[1138] Radice _v._ New York, 264 U.S. 292 (1924).

[1139] West Coast Hotel Co. _v._ Parrish, 300 U.S. 379 (1937); overruling Adkins _v._ Children's Hospital, 261 U.S. 525 (1923); and Morehead _v._ Tipaldo, 298 U.S. 587 (1936).

[1140] Goesaert _v._ Cleary, 335 U.S. 464 (1948).

[1141] Ibid. 466.

[1142] Mallinckrodt Chemical Works _v._ Missouri ex rel. Jones, 238 U.S.

41 (1915).

[1143] International Harvester Co. _v._ Missouri ex rel. Atty. Gen., 234 U.S. 199 (1914).

[1144] Tigner _v._ Texas, 310 U.S. 141 (1940), overruling Connolly _v._ Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 U.S. 540 (1902).

[1145] Standard Oil Co. _v._ Tennessee ex rel. Cates, 217 U.S. 413 (1910).

[1146] Carroll _v._ Greenwich Ins. Co., 199 U.S. 401 (1905).

[1147] Pacific States Box & Basket Co. _v._ White, 296 U.S. 176 (1935).

_See also_ Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36 (1873); Nebbia _v._ New York, 291 U.S. 502, 529 (1934).

[1148] Pace _v._ Alabama, 106 U.S. 583 (1883).

[1149] Collins _v._ Johnston, 237 U.S. 502, 510 (1915); Pennsylvania ex rel. Sullivan _v._ Ashe, 302 U.S. 51 (1937).

[1150] McDonald _v._ Ma.s.sachusetts, 180 U.S. 311 (1901). _See also_ Moore _v._ Missouri, 159 U.S. 673 (1895); Graham _v._ West Virginia, 224 U.S. 616 (1912).

[1151] Carlesi _v._ New York, 233 U.S. 51 (1914).

[1152] Ughbanks _v._ Armstrong, 208 U.S. 481 (1908).

[1153] Pennsylvania ex rel. Sullivan _v._ Ashe, 302 U.S. 51 (1937).

[1154] Finley _v._ California, 222 U.S. 28 (1911).

[1155] Minnesota _v._ Probate Court, 309 U.S. 270 (1940).

[1156] Pace _v._ Alabama, 106 U.S. 583 (1883).

[1157] Francis _v._ Resweber, 329 U.S. 459 (1947).

[1158] Skinner _v._ Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942). _Cf._ Buck _v._ Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927). (Sterilization of defectives.)

[1159] Buchanan _v._ Warley, 245 U.S. 60 (1917).

[1160] Corrigan _v._ Buckley, 271 U.S. 323 (1926).

[1161] Sh.e.l.ley _v._ Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948). _Cf._ Hurd _v._ Hodge, 334 U.S. 24 (1948), where the Court held that a restrictive covenant was unenforceable in the Federal Court of the District of Columbia for reasons of public policy.

[1162] Plessy _v._ Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896). _Cf._ Morgan _v._ Virginia, 328 U.S. 373 (1946), where a State statute requiring segregation of pa.s.sengers on interstate journeys was held to be an unlawful restriction on interstate commerce. _See also_ Hall _v._ De Cuir, 95 U.S. 485 (1878), where a State law forbidding steamboats on the Mississippi to segregate pa.s.sengers according to race was held unconst.i.tutional under the commerce clause, and Bob-Lo Excursion Co.

_v._ Michigan, 333 U.S. 28 (1948), where a Michigan statute forbidding discrimination was held valid as applied to an excursion boat operating on the Detroit River; and Henderson _v._ United States, 339 U.S. 816 (1950), where segregation in a dining car operated by an interstate railroad was held to violate a federal statute.

[1163] McCabe _v._ Atchison, T. & S.F.R. Co., 235 U.S. 151 (1914).

[1164] c.u.mming _v._ County Board of Education, 175 U.S. 528 (1899).

[1165] Gong Lum _v._ Rice, 275 U.S. 78 (1927).

[1166] 305 U.S. 337 (1938).

[1167] Sipuel _v._ Oklahoma, 332 U.S. 631 (1948).

[1168] Fisher _v._ Hurst, 333 U.S. 147 (1948).

[1169] 339 U.S. 629 (1950).

[1170] 339 U.S. 637 (1950).

The "Separate but Equal" Doctrine took its rise in Chief Justice Shaw's opinion in Roberts _v._ City of Boston, 59 Ma.s.s. 198, 200 (1849), for an excellent account of which _see_ the article by Leonard W. Levy and Harlan B. Phillips in 56 American Historical Review, 510-518 (April, 1951). _See also_ Judge Danforth's opinion in Gallagher _v._ King, 93 N.Y. 438 (1883).

In a case in which Negro children brought a suit in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of South Carolina, to enjoin certain school officials from making any distinctions based upon race or color in providing educational facilities, the court found that statutes of South Carolina which required separate schools for the two races did not of themselves violate the Fourteenth Amendment, but ordered the school officials to proceed at once to furnish equal educational facilities and to report to the court within six months as to the action taken. On appeal to the Supreme Court the case was remanded for further proceedings in order that the Supreme Court may "have the benefit of the views of the District Court upon the additional facts brought to the attention of that court in the report which it ordered." Briggs _v._ Elliott, 342 U.S. 350, 351 (1952).

Recently, the Fourth United States Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting at Richmond, ruled that Negroes must be admitted to the white University of North Carolina Law School in terms which flatly rejected the thesis of separate but equal facilities. "It is a definite handicap to the colored student to confine his a.s.sociation in the Law School with people of his own cla.s.s," said the opinion of Judge Morris A. Soper.--McKissick _v._ Carmichael, 187 F. 2d 949, 952 (1951).

[1171] Guinn _v._ United States, 238 U.S. 347 (1915).

[1172] Williams _v._ Mississippi, 170 U.S. 213 (1898).

[1173] Giles _v._ Harris, 189 U.S. 475, 486 (1903).

[1174] Lane _v._ Wilson, 307 U.S. 268, 275 (1939).

[1175] _See_ p. 1141, _ante_.

[1176] Nixon _v._ Herndon, 273 U.S. 536 (1927).

[1177] Nixon _v._ Condon, 286 U.S. 73, 89 (1932).

[1178] Grovey _v._ Townsend, 295 U.S. 45 (1935).