Valley Spirit: 11 20, 1867Go To Page : 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Negroes In The Cars
(Column 1)Summary: The article reports on a case in which a black woman was ejected from a railroad car carrying white people and was forced to sit in another section of the train. The women sued the company and won. On appeal, however, Pennsylvania's Supreme Court ruled in the Railroad's favor, asserting that, since there "is an aversion between individuals of the different races," it had the right "to make reasonable regulations to preserve order in their cars."
Full Text of Article:Loyalty And Disloyalty Change Places
The Radicals seem to be exceedingly unfortunate in their selection of men for official positions. Andrew Johnson is not the only man who has turned his back upon the party which elevated him to power. When Judge Agnew was elected to the Supreme Court, he was regarded as the strongest type of Radical. Whilst his ability and integrity were conceded by all parties, there was a general impression prevailing that, upon questions involving the tenets of his party creed, he would be extremely ultra. No suspicion was entertained by anybody that he would fail to take his position along with the advance guard of "the party of great moral ideas." Everybody was therefore astonished to learn that he has chimed in with the overwhelming popular sentiment, and uttered his condemnation of the odious doctrine of the social equality of the races.
In a case which came up to the Supreme court recently, from the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia county, Judge Agnew delivered an opinion which is a model for conscience and perspicuity, to say nothing of its sound doctrine. The plaintiff was a colored woman, named Mary E. Miles, who brought a suit against the Philadelphia and West Chester Railroad Company, to recover damages for being ejected from a car in which white persons were seated, and forced to take a seat in another car, to which she was directed by the conductor of the train. Judgment was rendered in her favor in the court below, whereupon a writ of error was sued out to the Supreme Court. The question involved was, as stated by Judge Agnew, "whether a public carrier may, in the exercise of his private right of property, and in the due performances of his public duty, separate passengers by any other well-defined characteristic than that of sex."--The court take the affirmative side of the question, and base their opinion upon two grounds, namely, the right of private property which the carrier has in the means of conveyance, and the public interest. We quote from the opinion of Judge Agnew on the second ground.
The public has an interest in the proper regulation of public conveyances for the preservation of the public peace. A railroad company has the right and is bound to make reasonable regulations to preserve order in their cars. It is the duty of the conductor to repress tumults as far as he reasonably can, and he may on extraordinary occasions stop his train and eject the unruly and tumultuous. But he has not the authority of a peace officer to arrest and detain offenders. He cannot interfere in the quarrels of others at will merely. In order to preserve and enforce his authority as the servant of the company it must have a power to establish proper regulations for the carriage of passengers. It is much easier to prevent difficulties among passengers by regulations for their proper separation than it is to quell them. The danger to the peace engendered by this feeling of aversion between individuals of the different races cannot be denied. It is the fact with which the company must deal. If a negro takes his seat beside a white man, or his wife, or daughter, the law cannot repress the anger or conquer the aversion which some will feel. However unwise it may be to indulge the feeling, human infirmity is not always proof against it. It is much wiser to avert the consequences of this repulsion races by separation, than to punish afterwards the breach of the peace it may have caused.
The Supreme Court thus recognize the fact of an unconquerable aversion, on the part of the whites, to the idea and practice of being placed in social contact with the negro. They doubtless speak from experience as well as observation. And if they had needed any additional evidence to convince them the result of the late elections would furnish them with the judgement of the white masses upon this question. But the opinion goes further. It announces the fact, that a Higher Power than any human agency has fixed a great gulf between the two races, across which it was never intended that either should pass. It says:
Why the Creator made on black and the other white we know not; but the fact is apparent, and the races distinct, each producing its own kind, and following the peculiar law of its constitution. Conceding equality, with nature as perfect and rights as [UNCLEAR] , yet God has made them dissimilar, with those natural instincts and feelings which He always imparts to His creatures when He intends that they shall not overstep the natural boundaries He has assigned to them. The natural law which forbids their intermarriage and that social amalgamation, which leads to corruption of race, is as clearly divine as that which imparted to them different natures. The tendency of intimate social intermixture is to amalgamation, contrary to the law of races. The separation of the white and black races upon the surface of the globe is a fact equally apparent. Why this is so, it is not necessary to speculate, but the fact of a distribution of men by race and color, is as visible in the providential arrangement of the earth as that of heat and cold. The natural separation of the races is therefore an undeniable fact, and social organizations which lead to their amalgamation are repugnant to the law of nature. From social amalgamation, it is but a step to illicit intercourse, and but another to intermarriage.
And, after showing conclusively, in addition, that the laws and customs of the State have been uniformly against intermixture of the races, this admirable opinion closes as follows:
Following these guides, we are compelled to declare that at the time of the alleged injury, there was that natural, legal, and customary difference between the black and white races in this State, which made their separation as passengers in a public conveyance the subject of a sound regulation, to secure order, promote comfort, preserve the peace, and maintain the rights of both carriers and passengers.
What a terrible damper upon the progressive notions of the Radical party! How it undermines and explodes the Radical legislation of the last session of our General Assembly, which imposes a heavy penalty upon the conductors or other employees of railroad companies, who refuse the negro the right to sit in whatever car and upon whatever seat he pleases! Judge Agnew deserves the thanks of every white man in the Commonwealth, not so much by entertaining these views as for having the independence to give expression to them. But we submit to our Radical friends that he is sadly in need of "reconstruction," and that it might be well to have the perambulating committee on "a republican form of government," to take him and his opinion into special consideration.
(Column 2)Summary: There has been radical transformation in the country since the end of the war, assert the editors. No longer is the South the bastion of treasonous senitment; rather, the region is home to the country's most patriotic citizens. In contrast, the editors contend, the reverse is true in the North, where "those who trample loyalty beneath their feet" are now honored.
Full Text of Article:Denouncing Their Leaders
Time makes queer changes. It sometimes causes States as well as men to turn complete somersaults. In 1861, eleven Southern States seceded. Treason was rampant within their limits. Patriotism was entirely dead in the hearts of their inhabitants. Armed rebellion planned and labored there to break up the National Government. Loyalty was a stranger to Southern soil. Then, the North was ablaze with the fires of patriotism. "The high-ways and the by-ways" were crowded with armed men rushing forward to save the Republic from destruction. Loyalty, pure, disinterested loyalty was displaced everywhere throughout the Northern States. Loyal men occupied the high places of public trust. Northern Legislatures were composed of men who were anxious to have everybody else fight, bleed and die for their country. Whenever copperheadism dared to raise its head, it was pelted most unmercifully. The wretch who dared to be a Democrat in those days, was hooted at, proscribed and threatened with the direst evils. Loyal men waited upon him with intimations that he must change his evil way, or take the consequences. The South was totally disloyal--the North was pre-eminently loyal.
What a wonderful transformation has taken place! The tables have been turned. Loyalty has taken its flight from Northern soil, and made its home in the South. Disloyalty, driven from the South, has taken possession of the Northern States and threatens to hold permanent sway. Yes! strange to say, the South, lately so terribly rebellious, elects loyal men to its high positions, whilst the North, lately the home of the highest type of loyalty, honors those who trample loyalty beneath their feet. The South has become Union--the North has become rebel. Was ever such a metamorphosis seen before? The superlatively loyal men of the North ought certainly to emigrate. Inasmuch as they have lost their hold on power here, they might go to the South and assist the blacks in administering the State governments in that section. Have our Radical friends never heard of the dog, which, in crossing a stream with a piece of beef in his mouth, saw his shadow and jumping in to catch it, lost the meat?
(Column 3)Summary: According to the editors, white rank-and-file Republicans are, in fact, satisfied with the results from the election because they hope it will send a message to the party's leaders that they should abandon their efforts to enfranchise blacks.The Fort Delaware Fraud
(Column 3)Summary: As mandated by an 1864 legislative act, Gov. Geary apppointed a commission to record the votes of soldiers stationed at Fort Delaware. The editors challenge the commission's results and assert that the soldiers in question were ineligible to vote anyway.
Local and Personal--Religion
(Column 1)Summary: Rev. J. H. Menges, of York, Pa., will preach in the Lutheran Church next Sunday.Local and Personal--Newspapers Change
(Names in announcement: Rev. J. H. Menges)
(Column 1)Summary: J. R. Gaff sold the Valley Echo, published in Greencastle, to Col. B. F. Winger. Editorial control of the newspaper will be under M. D. Reymer.Local and Personal--Burglarious
(Names in announcement: J. R. Gaff, Col. B. F. Winger, M. D. Reymer)
(Column 1)Summary: Last Wednesday, a burglar broke into Peter Brough's mansion on West Market St. and stole a wardrobe, which contained two suits, from the room occupied by John Brough.Local and Personal--Branch Railroad
(Names in announcement: Peter Brough, John Brough)
(Column 1)Summary: It is reported that the Cumberland Valley Railroad Co. is considering constructing a branch from Hagerstown to Williamsport. The proposed line would put the residents of Franklin county "in communication with Cumberland" and would give them greater access to the "famous 'Cumberland coal.'"Local and Personal--Teachers' Institute
(Column 1)Summary: Relates that the meeting of the Teachers' Institute was a success.Local and Personal--Properties Purchased
(Column 2)Summary: John Orr purchased the Smith Farm owned by John Karper. Orr paid $100 per acre for the 106 plot. Jacob Mohler, Sr., purchased Col. Jason B. Orr's farm for $125 an acres.Local and Personal--Look Out
(Names in announcement: Jacob MohlerSr., John Karper, Col. Jason B. Orr, John Orr)
(Column 2)Summary: The article cautions readers to be on the lookout for a "thieving set of stragglers" who have preyed upon unsuspecting local residents, going door-to-door asking for charity. Reportedly, these "scoundrels" have committted several robberies.Married
(Column 4)Summary: On Nov. 14th, Dr. J. P. Bixler and Emma Brackenridge were married by Rev. Moore.Married
(Names in announcement: Rev. J. P. Bixler, Emma Brackenridge, Rev. Moore)
(Column 4)Summary: On Nov. 18th, Henry Cretin and Mary Harbaugh were married by Rev. John A. Mullin.Married
(Names in announcement: Henry Cretin, Mary Harbaugh, Rev. John A. Mullin)
(Column 4)Summary: On Oct. 21st, Jacob Eyter and Mary S. Hudley were married by Rev. G. H. Beckley.Married
(Names in announcement: Jacob Eyter, Mary S. Hudley, Rev. G. H. Beckley)
(Column 4)Summary: On Oct. 31st, Charles Shaffer, of Adams Co., and Sarah A. Stokes were married at the residence of P. Hammon by Rev. H. Y. Hummelbaugh.Married
(Names in announcement: Charles Shaffer, Sarah A. Stokes, Rev. H. Y. Hummelbaugh, P. Hammon)
(Column 4)Summary: On Oct. 31st, James H. Conner and Fannie Rots were married at the residence of J. Sutter by Rev. H. Y. Hummelbaugh.Married
(Names in announcement: James H. Conner, Fannie Rots, Rev. H. Y. Hummelbaugh, J. Sutter)
(Column 4)Summary: On Nov. 12th, Jacob Keller and Sophia Spielman were married by Rev. Charles G. Fisher.Married
(Names in announcement: Jacob Keller, Sophia Spielman, Rev. Charles G. Fisher)
(Column 4)Summary: On Nov. 7th, George F. Summers and Mary A. Deardorff were married by Rev. Eyster.Married
(Names in announcement: George F. Summers, Mary A. Deardorff, Rev. Eyster)
(Column 4)Summary: On Nov. 13th, Adam C. Hammaker and Alice M. Stanley, of Maryland, were married by Rev. S. H. C. Smith.
(Names in announcement: Adam C. Hammaker, Alice M. Stanley, Rev. S. H. C. Smith)
Description of Page: This page contains advertisements.