CHAPTER XII
RACE DISTINCTIONS VERSUS RACE DISCRIMINATIONS
Heretofore, the writer has let the legislatures and
courts speak for themselves, withholding personal opinions
and refraining from making deductions from the
facts revealed. Now, however, that the various race distinctions
have been reviewed at some length, it may be
worth while to consider what conclusions the facts warrant
and what practical lessons they suggest.
RACE DISTINCTIONS NOT CONFINED TO ONE SECTION
Race distinctions are not confined to any one section of the country. This conclusion is the most patent of all. There is scarcely a State or Territory in the Union where legislative or judicial records do not reveal the actual existence of at least some race distinctions. Of the twenty-six States and Territories that prohibit intermarriage, more than half, extending from Delaware to Oregon, are outside the South. Negroes have, on account of their race, been excluded, usually contrary to the local laws, from hotels in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Indiana, New York, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Iowa; from barber-*shops, in Nebraska and Connecticut; from boot-black stands, in New York; from billiard-rooms, in Massachu-
