SEPARATE COLORED COMMON SCHONLS.
On motion of Mr. RATLIFF, the House proceeded to the consideration of the special order, viz: The Education Committee's colored school bill [H. R. 113] which was read.
Mr. RATLIFF proposed to amend by striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting new matter. It provides for equality of taxation; colored children to be enumerated separately, and established in common schools by districts or consolidation of districts. He said the difference between his bill and the original was; leaving out the provision for an election of the district for one third to exclude the colored children, etc., and establishing colored schools directly.
Mr. COFFROTH suggested that it was special legislation in regard to colored children. Would it be competent for the General Assembly to organize separate schools for Catholics or Presbyterian children, and provide that said schools shall not be taught the same number of days with others? In reply to Mr. Ratliff, he alleged that negro children were not contemplated in the State constitutional provisional for the education of all the children of the State. Gentlemen could not say that negro children were contemplated in the provision for common school education.
Mr. RATLIFF read from that provisions of the constitution, and alleged that it made no discrimination against the negro race, for the provisions for the spread of knowledge shall be general.
Mr. WELBORN. If the provision includes negroes, where the necessity of providing for them by special act, as proposed in this bill?
Mr. RATLIFF answered: Because the school law excludes them, which law, in this respect, he regarded as unconstitutional. He referred, particularly, to the exemption of the property of negroes and mulattoes for school purposes. It was a violation of first section of the tenth article of the Constitution. He pointed out the objection to the law, by which the property of negroes and mulattoes were taxed for school houses. He referred to the= perpetual school fund of eight millions, and its sources--one from taxation, which Mr. Coffroth combated, showing that no part of the permanent fund was derived from taxation of negro property. He showed that they were taxed for municipal school houses. He showed that negro children were equally entitled to the schools in Ohio, New York and other page: 341[View Page 341] States. The school law for the last fifteen years taxed all property, without any regard to the color of the owner, for the purpose of building and furnishing school houses, to the amount of over six millions of dollars which was in accordance with the Constitution, but the school law excludes the colored portion of these tax-payers from any of the benefits of this tax which they have helped to pay. And section one of article ten of our State Constitution, requires the General Assembly to provide for an equal rate of assessment of all property, both personal and real, for taxation, and section one of the school law, exempts the property of negroes and mulattoes from taxation for school or tuition purposes, and the General Assembly had the same right under this provision of the Constitution, to exempt the property of colored persons from taxation for county and State purposes, as for school purposes, and this we hold to be class legislation, and contrary to the genius of our institution, and an unconstitutional exemption.
He quoted from the Constitution authorizing a general system of education, and setting forth that a republican government finds its greatest security in the general diffusion of knowledge. He pronounced the present school law, which taxes a portion of the people of the State--the colored--for the support of the schools, and refuses to them the benefits of the same, as unconstitutional and oppressive, and opposed to the genius of free institutions, which depend for their perpetuity upon the education of the whole people without regard to color or caste. He then pursued the general principles of the equality of rights under the Constitution, and the general constitutional amendments, which have uniformly been met with opposition, by the party which here arrays itself against this bill.
Mr. VATER demanded the previous question.
Mr. COFFROTH and Mr. McFADIN preferred the test on a motion to postpone indefinitely.
Mr. VATER adhered to the demand, which was seconded and under its pressure--the first question, on the adoption of Mr. Ratliffs substitute was decided in the affirmative; yeas 52, nays 34; as follows:
Yeas--Messrs. Baker, Barnett, Beatty, Beeler, Bowen, Britton, Breckinridge, Buskirk, Chapman, Davidson, Davis, Dunn, Fairchild, Field of Lake, Field of Lagrange, Furnas, Gilham, Gordon, Green, Hall, Higbee, Higgins, Hutson, Johnson of Parke, Johnson of St. Joseph, Jump, Lamborn, Mason, Milliken, Miller, Mitchell, Monroe, Osborn, Overmyer, Pierce of Porter, Pierce of Vigo, Ratliff, Ruddell, Sabin, Shoaff, Skidmore, Smith, Stephenson, Stewart of Rush, Tabor, Underwood, Vardeman, Vater, Williams of Hamilton, Williams of St. Joseph, Wilson and Mr. Speaker,--52.
Nays--Messrs. Addison, Admire, Bobo, Calvert, Carnahan, Cave, Coffroth, Cory, Cotton, Cox, Cunningham, Dittemore, Hutchings, Hyatt, Johnston of Montgomery, Lawler, Logan, McBride, McDonald, McFadin, McGregor, Miles, Mock, Montgomery, Neff, Odell, Palmer, Shoemaker, Sleeth, Sunman, Tebbs, Wile, Williams of Knox and Zenor--34.
Mr. Fuller and Mr. Williams of Hamilton, were paired, so the substitute amendment was adopted.
Mr. VATER moved that the bill, as amended, be now ordered to the engrossment, and thereon he demanded the previous question, and adhered to it against the remonstrance of Mr. McFadin and others.
The demand was not seconded.
Mr. McFADIN then expressed his views on the question of educating the negro, and of the relative position of the black and white races. He began with the creation of the world and unfolded gradually the beauty of God's laws in the creation of men and animals. As to the latter, giving to one advantages not possessed by the other, for instance, to one means of defense while others were helpless, to others strength and courage to overcome, and others beauty and symmetry of form with weakness. And so with man, giving to the white man powers of intellect that were refused to the negro, and whatever we might do with the view of elevating the negro to an equality with the white, God's law is unchangeable, and our efforts in that direction will be abortive. He took ground that the negro was not of the same race with the white man. This was in harmony with the varying instincts of animals, with the history of the Jews and the American Indian.
In reply to Mr. Pierce of Porter--though he was always for the weaker party--the under dog in the fight--he found no warrant for legislation to make equality of races against the ordinances of the Creator. He contemplated the inferiority of the negro in history it had been perpetual and would remain insurmountable. The negroes never built school houses. They were helpless--impotent for self-government and political power. And he said this, not that he would tread them down with oppression, but he would rather ameliorate their condition as far as possible. They could not blend with the white man without debasing the latter. He took a wide range of argument and denunciation of the quasi philanthropy and benevolence of the men of some of the Eastern States, which would seem to be totally forgotten in their negligence of the welfare of the factory children. God made the races as they are, and legislation can not make them any better.
Mr. PIERCE of Porter, said it was not proposed by this bill to make the negro equal to the white man, but it was proposed to elevate the negro. He scouted the benevolence that would refuse to do this measure of justice, which was a proposition to try to educate the children of the colored race, out of the money that is wrung from them for school purposes. page: 342[View Page 342] He also took a wide range of remark. He alluded to the fact that a gentleman in the city was now engaged in getting out a work on the Bible, and advised Mr. McFadin, in order that it may conform, at least in one instance, to his particular views, to induce the author to make such change at a certain point as to make the reading as follows: "Suffer little while children to come unto me, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven."
Mr. JOHNSON of Parke, confessing his natural prejudice against the African, yet seeing nothing objectionable in the bill, he defended it on its merits, incidentally replying to Mr. McFadin. To elevate the negro by separate common schools; was not a proposition to degrade the white man. If the bill took money from the schools devoted to the education of white children, it was but paying back to the negro what has been unjustly withheld from him ever since we have had a common school law.
Mr. VATER demanded the previous question, and nuder its pressure, the bill was ordered to be engrossed.
