passed the act prohibiting discriminations against persons of color in public conveyances, to which reference has been made, the Supreme Court of the State ruled[14] that it was not an unreasonable regulation of the railroad company to separate the passengers so as to promote personal comfort and convenience. This is interesting because it is the earliest case found supporting the legality of the separation of races in public conveyances. Since the case arose before the Civil Rights Bill of the Commonwealth was adopted, it does not purport to rule upon the constitutionality of that act.
In San Francisco,[15] in 1868, a street car conductor refused to stop for a colored woman, saying, "We don't take colored people in the cars," whereupon she brought an action against the company and was awarded damages by the lower court. Here there is an implication that the railroad company had a regulation excluding persons of color from street cars.
In 1870, the Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company[16] refused to admit a colored woman to the car set apart for ladies and gentlemen accompanying them. Whereupon she brought an action and recovered two hundred dollars damages. It does not appear from the case that the railroad had set apart any car or part of a car for the exclusive accommodation of colored persons.
A steamboat company in Iowa, in 1873, had a regulation that colored passengers should not eat at the regular tables, but at a table on the "guards" of the boat. The Supreme Court of that State held[17] that this rule was unreasonable and, therefore, illegal.
The first case to reach the Supreme Court of the
