Judges: Avery
Filed Date: 9/5/1890
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
Plaintiff offered in evidence the following paper, which was excepted to by defendants, but allowed by the court:
It is ordered by the board of education that Nathan McMillan be assigned to Croatan District No. 4, and the committee of said district are hereby directed to receive his children into the public schools of said district. By order of the board of education.
This 3 September, 1888. J. A. McALLISTER, Clerk.
The following issues were submitted to the jury:
1. Are plaintiff's children Croatan Indians? Answer: "No."
2. Were plaintiff's children included in the census taken under (611) the act of 1885? Answer: "No."
3. Are plaintiff's children of negro blood within the fourth degree? Answer: "Yes."
4. Did the board of education of Robeson County order plaintiff's (612) children to be received in said school? Answer: "Yes."
The plaintiff asked the following instruction:
"That if the jury believe the evidence as to the children of Nathan McMillan being negroes within the fourth generation, their answer should be in the negative as to the third issue."
The court declined to give the instruction, except in so far as it was given in the charge, and charged the jury as follows:
"That it being admitted that plaintiff himself was not a Croatan Indian, but only his wife, they must answer the first issue `No.' They must be guided by the evidence as to the second issue, and that the main issue was the third, and they must determine from the whole testimony as to the third issue. If they believe from the testimony that plaintiff was a slave, the law would raise a presumption that he was a negro, it being a matter of common knowledge that none but negroes were slaves in this county. In order to find that the children of plaintiff are of negro blood within the fourth degree, they should consider that from the children to the father, the plaintiff, is one degree; from plaintiff to parent would be the second degree; from children to grandparent would be the third degree, and from children to great-grandparent would be the fourth degree; and if they believe from the evidence that plaintiff's father was a white man, they must also be satisfied from the evidence that plaintiff's mother was a negro, in order to make plaintiff's children negroes within the fourth degree, and thus within the prohibition of the Croatan act, above mentioned. If, from the whole testimony, they are satisfied that plaintiff's children are negroes within the fourth degree, they will answer the third issue `Yes'; otherwise, `No'; (613) they will answer the fourth issue `Yes.'" *Page 425
Plaintiff moved for a new trial, for refusal to give the instruction asked. Motion denied, and plaintiff excepted. Motion for judgment on fourth issue non obstante veredicto. Motion denied. Plaintiff excepted, and appealed from the judgment rendered. We think the Legislature was not prohibited by the Constitution from providing separate schools, to be governed by committees of their own race and taught by teachers selected by such committees, for those persons now residing in Robeson County who claim to be descendants of the friendly tribe of Indians known as Croatans, and that chapter 51, Laws 1885, as amended by chapter 60, Laws 1889 (which amendatory act excludes all negroes "to the fourth generation" from the privilege of attending said schools), is valid and should be enforced.
If it had not been provided in section 2, Article IX of the Constitution that the children of the white race should be taught in schools separate and distinct from those in which children of the colored race should receive instruction, but that there should be no discrimination in favor of, or to the prejudice of, either race, the same end might have been attained by enacting a statute embodying similar provisions, just as intermarriages between whites and negroes, or Indians, "to the third generation," were prohibited by Laws 1871-72, ch. 193, sec. 2 (Bat. Rev., ch. 69, sec. 2), which was enforced before the Convention of 1875 provided by section 8, Article XIV of the Constitution that "all marriages between a white person and a negro, or between a white person and a person of negro descent to the third generation, inclusive," should be forever prohibited. S. v. Hairston,
In the case of Games v. McCann,
It is clear that if the Legislature could give, by law, the power to an educational board to classify pupils according to race, as well as according to sex, the law itself could be so framed as to indicate in general terms upon what principle a board or committee should proceed in making a classification, and to secure equal advantages for each class. It is evident that there was a just division of the school fund among the three classes, that schoolhouses were built and teachers employed to open schools in them in reach of each class. The law was constitutional, and the board of education, with the cooperation of the school committee, seem to have acted fairly and justly in carrying out its provisions.
But the plaintiff insisted that, in some aspects, if not in any phase of the evidence, his children were shown to be Croatans and entitled to admission into their schools. "Generation," as used in the statute, means "a single succession of living beings in natural descent." If, by tracing *Page 427
back four successive generations, through father or mother, we reach a negro ancestor of the plaintiff's children, then they are excluded, by the terms of the act of 1889, from the schools established for the persons whose claim to descent from the Croatan Indians has been (616) recognized by the Legislature. The contention of counsel that "generation" is used in the sense of degree cannot be sustained. It is true that jurors related within the ninth degree to one of the parties were declared subject to challenge, as at common law, in this State.S. v. Perry,
For the reasons given, we think there was no error in the charge and rulings of his Honor upon which the assignment of error was predicated, and the judgment must be
Affirmed.
Cited: Hare v. Board of Education,