and the Making of AmericaPhoto of
Time and
Place Slave
Memories Resources The Slave Experience

Slave Experience: Education, Arts, & Culture
Intro Historical Overview Character
Spotlight Music in Slave Life Personal Narratives Original
Original Documents Education, Arts, & Culture

Courtesy of Library of Congress, Rare Book and Special Collections Division,
African American Pamphlet Collection
return to main documents page
Photo of the text of EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW
view full-sized image
Document Description
This pamphlet focuses on the debate about whether school discrimination is founded on race or color. The document indicates that even before the civil rights amendments enacted under Reconstruction, African Americans in the North were demanding equal educational opportunities in "common schools" -- schools with both white and black students

This argument, though addressed to the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, is mainly national and universal in topics, so that it is applicable wherever, especially in our country, any discrimination in educational opportunities is founded on race or color. It is a vindication of Equal Rights in Common Schools. The term "Equality before the Law" was here for the first time introduced into our discussions. It is not found in the common law, nor until recently in the English language. It is a translation from the French, whence Mr. Sumner took it.

The Supreme Court heard the argument and, in their opinion, complimented the advocate; but they did not take the responsibility of annulling the unjust discrimination. After stating the claim of Equality before the Law, Chief Justice Shaw reduced it to very small proportions when he said that it meant 'only that the rights of all as they are settled and regulated by law are equally entitled to the paternal consideration and protection of the law for their maintenance and security,'(a1) This made it mean nothing; but such was the decision. The victrix causa was not less odious to Mr. Sumner, who never ceased to regret the opportunity lost by the court of contributing an immortal precedent to the recognition and safeguard of human rights.

The error of the court was repaired by the Legislature of Massachusetts, which, in 1855.(a2) enacted as follows:

"In determining the qualifications of scholars to be admitted into any Public School or any District School in this Commonwealth. no person shall be excluded from a Public School on account of race, color, or religious opinions of the applicant or scholar."

By other sections the child thus excluded was entitled to "damages therefor in an action of tort," and by a bill of discovery to obtain evidence. Then came this supplementary protection:

"Every person belonging to the School Committee under whose rules or directions any child shall be excluded from such school, and every teacher of any such school, shall, on application by the parent or guardian of any such child, state in writing the grounds and reasons of such exclusion."

Since this legislation Equal Rights have prevailed in the Common Schools of Massachusetts, and nobody would go back to the earlier system.

Associated with Mr. Sumner in this case was Robert Morris, esq., a colored lawyer.

May it please your Honors:

Can any discrimination on account of race or color be made among children entitled to the benefit of our Common Schools under the Constitution and Laws of Massachusetts? This is the question which the Court is now to hear, to consider, and to decide.

Or, stating the question with more detail and with more particular application to the facts of the present case, are the Committee having superintendence of the Common Schools of Boston intrusted with power,, under the Constitution and Laws of Massachusetts, to exclude colored children from the schools and compel them to find education at separate schools set apart for colored children only, at distances from their homes less convenient than schools open to white children?

This important question arises in an action by a colored child only five years old who, by her next friend, sues the city of Boston for damages on account of a refusal to receive her into one of the Common Schools.

It would be difficult to imagine any case appealing more strongly to your best judgment, whether you regard the parties or the subject. On the one side is the city of Boston, strong in wealth, influence, character; on the other side is a little child, of degraded color, of humble parents, and still within the period of natural infancy, but strong from her very weakness and from the irrepressible sympathies of good men, which, by a divine compensation, come to succor the weak. This little child asks at your hands her personal rights. So doing, she calls upon you to decide a question which concerns the personal rights of other colored children; which concerns the Constitution and Laws of the Commonwealth; which concerns that peculiar institution of New England, the Common Schools; which concerns the fundamental principles of human rights; which concerns the Christian character of this community. Such parties and such interests justly challenge your earnest attention.

Though this discussion is now brought for the first time before a judicial tribunal it is no stranger to the public. In the School Committee of Boston for five years it has been the occasion of discord. No less than four different reports, two majority and two minority, forming pamphlets of solid dimensions devoted to this question, have been made to this Committee and afterwards published. The opinions of learned counsel have been enlisted. The controversy, leaving these regular channels, ...

(a1) Roberts vs. City of Boston,, 5 Cushing. 206.
(a2) Statutes of Massachusetts, 1855. cap. 256; General Statutes of Massachusetts, cap. 41. sec. 9

this page to a friend
About the Series K-12 Learning Feedback [an error occurred while processing this directive]Support