美国经典判例Plessy v Ferguson.docx

美国经典判例Plessy v Ferguson.docx

《美国经典判例Plessy v Ferguson.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《美国经典判例Plessy v Ferguson.docx（15页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

美国经典判例PlessyvFerguson

U.S.SupremeCourt

PLESSYv.FERGUSON,163U.S.537（1896）

163U.S.537

PLESSY

v.

FERGUSON.

No.210.

May18,1896.[163U.S.537,538] ThiswasapetitionforwritsofprohibitionandcertiorarioriginallyfiledinthesupremecourtofthestatebyPlessy,theplaintiffinerror,againsttheHon.JohnH.Ferguson,judgeofthecriminaldistrictcourtfortheparishofOrleans,andsettingforth,insubstance,thefollowingfacts:

ThatpetitionerwasacitizenoftheUnitedStatesandaresidentofthestateofLouisiana,ofmixeddescent,intheproportionofseven-eghthsCaucasianandone-eighthAfricanblood;thatthemixtureofcoloredbloodwasnotdiscernibleinhim,andthathewasentitledtoeveryrecognition,right,privilege,andimmunitysecuredtothecitizensoftheUnitedStatesofthewhiteracebyitsconstitutionandlaws;thatonJune7,1892,heengagedandpaidforafirst-classpassageontheEastLouisianaRailway,fromNewOrleanstoCovington,inthesamestate,andthereuponenteredapassengertrain,andtookpossessionofavacantseatinacoachwherepassengersofthewhiteracewereaccommodated;thatsuchrailroadcompanywasincorporatedbythelawsofLouisianaasacommoncarrier,andwasnotauthorizedtodistinguishbetweencitizensaccordingtotheirrace,but,notwithstandingthis,petitionerwasrequiredbytheconductor,underpenaltyofejectionfromsaidtrainandimprisonment,tovacatesaidcoach,andoccupyanotherseat,inacoachassignedbysaidcompanyforpersonsnotofthewhiterace,andfornootherreasonthanthatpetitionerwasofthecoloredrace;that,uponpetitioner'srefusaltocomplywithsuchorder,hewas,withtheaidofapoliceofficer,forciblyejectedfromsaidcoach,andhurriedoffto,andimprisonedin,theparishjailof[163U.S.537,539] NewOrleans,andthereheldtoanswerachargemadebysuchofficertotheeffectthathewasguiltyofhavingcriminallyviolatedanactofthegeneralassemblyofthestate,approvedJuly10,1890,insuchcasemadeandprovided.

Thepetitionerwassubsequentlybroughtbeforetherecorderofthecityforpreliminaryexamination,andcommittedfortrialtothecriminaldistrictcourtfortheparishofOrleans,whereaninformationwasfiledagainsthiminthematterabovesetforth,foraviolationoftheaboveact,whichactthepetitioneraffirmedtobenullandvoid,becauseinconflictwiththeconstitutionoftheUnitedStates;thatpetitionerinterposedapleatosuchinformation,basedupontheunconstitutionalityoftheactofthegeneralassembly,towhichthedistrictattorney,onbehalfofthestate,filedademurrer;that,uponissuebeingjoineduponsuchdemurrerandplea,thecourtsustainedthedemurrer,overruledtheplea,andorderedpetitionertopleadovertothefactssetforthintheinformation,andthat,unlessthejudgeofthesaidcourtbeenjoinedbyawritofprohibitionfromfurtherproceedinginsuchcase,thecourtwillproceedtofineandsentencepetitionertoimprisonment,andthusdeprivehimofhisconstitutionalrightssetforthinhissaidplea,notwithstandingtheunconstitutionalityoftheactunderwhichhewasbeingprosecuted;thatnoappeallayfromsuchsentence,andpetitionerwaswithoutrelieforremedyexceptbywritsofprohibitionandcertiorari.Copiesoftheinformationandotherproceedingsinthecriminaldistrictcourtwereannexedtothepetitionasanexhibit.

Uponthefilingofthispetition,anorderwasissuedupontherespondenttoshowcausewhyawritofprohibitionshouldnotissue,andbemadeperpetual,andafurtherorderthattherecordoftheproceedingshadinthecriminalcausebecertifiedandtransmittedtothesupremecourt.

Tothisordertherespondentmadeanswer,transmittingacertifiedcopyoftheproceedings,assertingtheconstitutionalityofthelaw,andaverringthat,insteadofpleadingoradmittingthathebelongedtothecoloredrace,thesaidPlessydeclinedandrefused,eitherbypleadingorotherwise,toad-[163U.S.537,540] mitthathewasinanysenseorinanyproportionacoloredman.

Thecasecomingonforhearingbeforethesupremecourt,thatcourtwasofopinionthatthelawunderwhichtheprosecutionwashadwasconstitutionalanddeniedthereliefprayedforbythepetitioner（ExpartePlessy,45La.Ann.80,11South.948）;whereuponpetitionerprayedforawritoferrorfromthiscourt,whichwasallowedbythechiefjusticeofthesupremecourtofLouisiana.

Mr.JusticeHarlandissenting.

A.W.TourgeeandS.F.Phillips,forplaintiffinerror.

Alex.PorterMorse,fordefendantinerror.

Mr.JusticeBROWN,afterstatingthefactsintheforegoinglanguage,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt.

ThiscaseturnsupontheconstitutionalityofanactofthegeneralassemblyofthestateofLouisiana,passedin1890,providingforseparaterailwaycarriagesforthewhiteandcoloredraces.Acts1890,No.111,p.152.

Thefirstsectionofthestatuteenacts'thatallrailwaycompaniescarryingpassengersintheircoachesinthisstate,shallprovideequalbutseparateaccommodationsforthewhite,andcoloredraces,byprovidingtwoormorepassengercoachesforeachpassengertrain,orbydividingthepassengercoachesbyapartitionsoastosecureseparateaccommodations:

provided,thatthissectionshallnotbeconstruedtoapplytostreetrailroads.Nopersonorpersonsshallbepermittedtooccupyseatsincoaches,otherthantheonesassignedtothem,onaccountoftheracetheybelongto.'

Bythesecondsectionitwasenacted'thattheofficersofsuchpassengertrainsshallhavepowerandareherebyrequired[163U.S.537,541] toassigneachpassengertothecoachorcompartmentusedfortheracetowhichsuchpassengerbelongs;anypassengerinsistingongoingintoacoachorcompartmenttowhichbyracehedoesnotbelong,shallbeliabletoafineoftwenty-fivedollars,orinlieuthereoftoimprisonmentforaperiodofnotmorethantwentydaysintheparishprison,andanyofficerofanyrailroadinsistingonassigningapassengertoacoachorcompartmentotherthantheonesetasidefortheracetowhichsaidpassengerbelongs,shallbeliabletoafineoftwenty-fivedollars,orinlieuthereoftoimprisonmentforaperiodofnotmorethantwentydaysintheparishprison;andshouldanypassengerrefusetooccupythecoachorcompartmenttowhichheorsheisassignedbytheofficerofsuchrailway,saidofficershallhavepowertorefusetocarrysuchpassengeronhistrain,andforsuchrefusalneitherhenortherailwaycompanywhichherepresentsshallbeliablefordamagesinanyofthecourtsofthisstate.'

Thethirdsectionprovidespenaltiesfortherefusalorneglectoftheofficers,directors,conductors,andemployeesofrailwaycompaniestocomplywiththeact,withaprovisothat'nothinginthisactshallbeconstruedasapplyingtonursesattendingchildrenoftheotherrace.'Thefourthsectionisimmaterial.

Theinformationfiledinthecriminaldistrictcourtcharged,insubstance,thatPlessy,beingapassengerbetweentwostationswithinthestateofLouisiana,wasassignedbyofficersofthecompanytothecoachusedfortheracetowhichhebelonged,butheinsistedupongoingintoacoachusedbytheracetowhichhedidnotbelong.Neitherintheinformationnorpleawashisparticularraceorcoloraverred.

Thepetitionforthewritofprohibitionaverredthatpetitionerwasseven-eightsCaucasianandone-eighthAfricanblood;thatthemixtureofcoloredbloodwasnotdiscernibleinhim;andthathewasentitledtoeveryright,privilege,andimmunitysecuredtocitizensoftheUnitedStatesofthewhiterace;andthat,uponsuchtheory,hetookpossessionofavacantseatinacoachwherepassengersofthewhiteracewereaccommodated,andwasorderedbytheconductortovacate[163U.S.537,542] saidcoach,andtakeaseatinanother,assignedtopersonsofthecoloredrace,and,havingrefusedtocomplywithsuchdemand,hewasforciblyejected,withtheaidofapoliceofficer,andimprisonedintheparishjailtoanswerachargeofhavingviolatedtheaboveact.

Theconstitutionalityofthisactisattackeduponthegroundthatitconflictsbothwiththethirteenthamendmentoftheconstitution,abolishingslavery,andthefourteenthamendment,whichprohibitscertainrestrictivelegislationonthepartofthestates.

1.Thatitdoesnotconflictwiththethirteenthamendment,whichabolishedslaveryandinvoluntaryservitude,exceptapunishmentforcrime,istooclearforargument.Slaveryimpliesinvoluntaryservitude,-astateofbondage;theownershipofmankindasachattel,or,atleast,thecontrolofthelaborandservicesofonemanforthebenefitofanother,andtheabsenceofalegalrighttothedisposalofhisownperson,property,andservices.ThisamendmentwassaidintheSlaughter-HouseCases,16Wall.36,tohavebeenintendedprimarilytoabolishslavery,asithadbeenpreviouslyknowninthiscountry,andthatitequallyforbadeMexicanpeonageortheChinesecoolietrade,whentheyamountedtoslaveryorinvoluntaryservitude,andthattheuseoftheword'servitude'wasintendedtoprohibittheuseofallformsofinvoluntaryslavery,ofwhateverclassorname.Itwasintimated,however,inthatcase,thatthisamendmentwasregardedbythestatesmenofthatdayasinsufficienttoprotectthecoloredracefromcertainlawswhichhadbeenenactedintheSouthernstates,imposinguponthecoloredraceonerousdisabilitiesandburdens,andcurtailingtheirrightsinthepursuitoflife,liberty,andpropertytosuchanextentthattheirfreedomwasoflittlevalue;andthatthefourteenthamendmentwasdevisedtomeetthisexigency.

So,too,int