Civil Rights in Iowa: The Statute and Its Enforcement

Citation preview

C IJflL RIGHTS IH IOWA5 THE STATUTE A m

IT S E&FORCEUEUT

fey R o b e r t Mw&rd G o o s t r e e

A d i s s e r t a t i o n s u b m itte d in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f th e r e q u ir e m e n ts f o r th e d e g re e o f D o c to r o f P h ilo s o p h y i n th e D ep artm en t o f P o l i t i c a l S c ie n ce in th e G ra d u a te C o lle g e o f th e S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y o f Iowa A u g u s t 1950 S tate University of l0W9( u b r a RY

ProQuest Number: 10902167

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is d e p e n d e n t upon the quality of the copy subm itted. In the unlikely e v e n t that the a u thor did not send a c o m p le te m anuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if m aterial had to be rem oved, a n o te will ind ica te the deletion.

uest ProQuest 10902167 Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). C opyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C o d e M icroform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346

T Q rC o ^ )^ cl o^> \ , •

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS T h e a u t h o r w is h © a t o e x p r e s s M s d e e p i n d e b t e d n e s s a n d g r o a t th a n k ® t o P r o f e s s o r B u s s e l l &• W h it© s o l o f t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f P o l i t i c a l S e le n e © o f t h e S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y o f I o w a , u n d e r w hose d i r e c t i o n t h i s Thanks a r e a l s o d u e t o th e

s t u d y w as p r e p a r e d *

s t a f f o f th e D ep artm en t o f

P o l i t i c a l S c i e n c e f o r a d v i c e and s u g g e s t i o n s .

The a u t h o r

I s g r e a t l y o b l i g e d t o Mr. J . B . M o r r i s f o r p e r m i s s i o n t o us© f i l e s

o f The lo w a B y s t a n d e r ! t o Mr. P r a n k E y e r l y ,

m a n a g i n g e d i t o r o f The P e a - M o in e s R e g i s t e r , f o r h i s p e r m i s s i o n t o make u s e o f t h e e d i t o r i a l l i b r a r y o f t h a t p u b lic a tio n !

t o Mr* S. J o e B row n, f o r m uch I n f o r m a t i o n o f

v a l u e w h i c h was u n a v a i l a b l e f r o m o t h e r s o u r c e s , an d t o M r s . Jan© S t e w a r t f o r t y p i n g #

r a>

19 ii

PREFACE

*©ie approach o f the p o l i t i c a l s c i e n t i s t to p u b lic law sh o u ld be th a t o f one I n t e r e s t e d in a l l th e phenomena* w h atever t h e i r kind* w hich a id In m olding p u b lic law and a re i n turn governed by i t #*

So w r ite s C arl A* Sw isher in

r e p o r tin g the work o f th e P an el on P u b lic Law o f the R esearch Committee s e t up by th e American P o l i t i c a l S c ie n c e A s so c ia tio n *

Among su ch phenomena may c e r t a i n l y be in c lu d e d

the p r a c tic e o f r a c i a l and r e l i g i o u s d is c r im in a t io n and se g r e g a tio n *

The in f lu e n c e o f p a tte r n s o f d is c r im in a t io n

i n m olding p u b lic law h as been f r e q u e n t ly and amply demon­ s tr a te d *

The a tte m p ts o f the F ed er a l Government and o f

c e r t a in s t a t e governm ents to r e g u la t e d is c r im in a t io n and o f c e r t a in o th e r s to e n fo r c e i t have been s u b je c te d to g e n e r a l sc r u tin y *

The a t t e n t io n o f s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s in

r e c e n t y e a rs has in I n c r e a s in g measure come to fo c u s on th e many problem s in v o lv e d in d is c r im in a to r y p r a c tic e s * These problem s have been g iv e n im m ediacy by the secon d World War and I t s afterm ath* However* p o l i t i c a l s c i e n t i s t s and law yers have tended to c o n c e n tr a te on q u e s tio n s i n th e a r e a o f c i v i l l i b e r t i e s r a th e r than i n th e a rea o f c i v i l r ig h ts * i f su ch d i s t i n c t i o n i s p e r m is s ib le . ill

The form er are th o se

l i b e r t i e s g u aran teed In th e B i l l o f R ig h ts , su ch a s freedom o f s p e e c h , o f th e p r e s s , o f a sse m b ly , and o f r e l ig i o n *

C i v i l r i g h t s , on th e o th e r hand, r e f e r s t o

t h e s e r i g h t s attem p ted t o be gu aran teed a g a in s t i n f r in g e ­ ment by p e r so n s a c t in g In a p r iv a te c a p a c it y , r a th e r than a s govern m en tal o f f i c i a l s , and in c lu d e s sueh r ig h t s a s th e r ig h t t o employment and t o accommodation in p la c e s o f p u b llo r e s o r t*

Anglo*American la v shows a c o n tin u in g

concern w ith th e p r o t e c t io n o f r ig h t s a s a g a in s t govern­ ment*

Only c o m p a r a tiv e ly r e c e n t l y h as th e r e been comparable

con cern w ith r ig h t s o f in d iv id u a ls a s a g a in s t o th e r in d ­ i v i d u a l s , a p a r t from th o se e s t a b lis h e d by c o n tr a c ts# 3he monographs on c i v i l r ig h t s th a t have been w r itt e n a re o f g r e a t value#

But th e y have m a in ly d e a lt w ith the

a ttem p ts o f th e i^ d e r a l Government to gu aran tee c i v i l r ig h ts #

In c a s e s i n w hich s t a t e law s have been exam ined,

the a n a ly s is has commonly stopped sh o r t a t th e l e v e l o f i n t e r p r e t a t io n by th e s t a t e supreme c o u r ts o f th e s t a t u t e s in v o lv e d , i f more than a sim p le com parison o f s t a t u t o r y language was attem pted#

Too fr e q u e n tly th e assum ption

seems t o have been th a t th e e x is t e n c e o f s t a t e s t a t u t e s on th e s u b je c t f i l l e d

the gap c r e a te d by th e seem ing im potence

o f the F e d e r a l Government to a c t i n such m a tters# iv

y e r i o d i e e l l y a v i o l a t i o n o f c i v i l r ig h t s i s r e p o r te d i n o u r d a i l y p r e ss*

Many more u n d ou b ted ly go u n r e p o r te d .

In s t a t e s i n w hich s t a t u t e s attem p t t o g u a ra n tee c i v i l r i g h t s , t h e s e v i o l a t i o n s may or may n o t he punished*

Cer­

t a i n l y th e mere e x is t e n c e o f su ch a law d o e s n o t gu aran tee th e r i g h t , n or d o e s I t gu aran tee I t s own enforcem ent*

An

extrem e exam ple o f a c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e th a t h as f a l l e n in t o com p lete d is u s e i s t h a t o f L o u is ia n a , s t i l l r e ta in e d a s s e c t i o n 1 0 7 0 , T i t l e 1 3 , G eneral S ta t u t e s o f L ou isian a* The a ttem p t o f t h i s stu d y i s to d eterm in e to what e x te n t th e Iowa c i v i l r i g h t s s t a t u t e h as measured up to I t s purpose*

To t h i s end i t i s proposed to d e lv e beyond th e

l e v e l o f s t a t u t o r y in t e r p r e t a t io n by th e Iowa Supreme Court and to a r r iv e a t a t e n t a t iv e e s tim a te o f th e d eg ree to w hich the Iowa c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e has been e n fo rc ed on th e t r i a l c o u r t le v e l* The d e g r ee o f th rou gh n ess o r adequacy o f enforcem en t I s e v id e n t ly n o t an a b so lu te concep t*

Adequacy and thorough­

n e s s o f en forcem en t are r e l a t i v e f i r s t t o th e fre q u en cy o f th e v i o l a t i o n o f th e s t a t u t e .

In fr e q u e n t en forcem ent

i s n o t Inadequate i f v i o l a t i o n s are p r o p o r t io n a lly In freq u en t* I f , on th e o th e r hand, th e p r o sc r ib e d a c t o ccu rs f r e q u e n t ly , f a i l u r e to p r o se c u te o ffe n d e r s must he a s c r ib e d to o th e r c a u se s than th e ab sen ce o f c r im in a l acta* v

A wide range o f

p u r e l y l e g a l a n d b r o a d l y s o c i a l p h e n o m e n a may b e a t t h e b a s i s o f such in a d e q u a te e n fo rc e m e n t. in te rp re ta tio n in trin sic

o f th e s t a t u t e

by a p p e l l a t e

f l a w s o f th© s t a t u t e

On t h e l e v e l o f t h e t r i a l m u ltip ly *

A v e ry n arro w c o u rts,

or

i t s e l f may h a v e t h i s r e s u l t #

c o u r t th e p o t e n t i a l c a u s e s

T h is le v e l in v o lv e s n o t o n ly s t a t u t o r y i n t e r ­

p r e t a t i o n and t h e s e c o n d a ry a p p l i c a t i o n o f a p p e l l a t e in te rp re ta tio n s,

but a lso a l l

th e f r a i l t i e s

co u rt

o f c rim in a l

t r i a l i n a n y s o r t of c a s e s u n w i l l i n g n e s s o f th e p r o s e c u t o r to p u sh th e c a s e s o r to ta k e a p p e a ls ,

l a c k o f tim e o n t h e

p a r t o f th e p r o s e c u to r , b i a s o f j u r i e s

th a t is ex p ressed

in v e rd ic ts ,

o f th e peace in

cases trie d

th e p re ju d ic e of j u s t i c e s in th o s e c o u rts*

I t i s p ro b a b le t h a t th e d e g re e o f en fo rcem en t v a r ie s a s w e ll w ith th e n a tu r e

o f th e p r o s c r i b e d a c t and i t s

t o t h e a p p r o v e d t e n t s o f tl-ie s o c i e t y * m o re l i k e l y

to

repugnance

More s e r i o u s c r i m e s a r e

se e n f o r c e d t h a n l e s s s e r i o u s c r i m e s

and th e

s e r i o u s n e s s I s d e f i n e d b y t h e comrmm" t y a t l a r g e e v e n b e f o r e th e p o lic e ,

th e p u b lic p r o s e c u t o r ,

ju d g e s and j u r i e s

b rin g

i n t o p l a y t h e i r ju d g m e n ts o f th e im p o r ta n c e o f th e s t a t u t e and i t s p ra c tic e

e n f o r c e m e n t t o th e g r o u p a s a w h o le * o f t h e c o m m u n ity I n v o l v e s

la w w i l l d i e ,

If

t h e common

th e v i o l a t i o n o f a l a w , t h e t

e i t h e r o f f i c i a l l y th ro u g h r e p e a l o r u n o f f i c i a l l y

th ro u g h la c k o f e n fo rc e m e n t;

e i t h e r q u i c k l y o r s lo w ly #

vi

Th©

life

o f th e law I t I s a t r u i s m t o s a y ,

on a p p ro v a l o f I t The f a c t o r s v io la tio n

by th e s o c ie ty * t h a t m ay c a u s e f a i l u r e

to p ro se c u te

o f c rim in a l s t a t u t e s have p a r t i c u l a r r e l a t i o n

to c i v i l r i g h t s l e g i s l a t i o n .

I f a c i v i l s u it or c rim in a l

t r i a l may c o n c e i v a b l y be i n f l u e n c e d a s th e a t t i t u d e s

t o I t s o u tc o m e b y

o f a s i n g l e i n d i v i d u a l to w ard s k i n c o l o r ,

h a ir te x tu re , re lig io u s b e lie f, o rig in s

re s ts u ltim a te ly

ap p earan ce o r n a t i o n a l

o f th e p l a i n t i f f o r d e fe n d a n t, t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y

I s m a g n ifie d In c i v i l r i g h t s cases* v io la tio n of c iv il rig h ts

In such e a s e s ,

th e

Is lik e ly to occur p re c is e ly

because th e v i o l a t o r h im s e lf h o ld s s i m i l a r a t t i t u d e s . The j u d g e , t h e p r o s e c u t o r ,

th e j u s t i c e

o f th e p e a c e , th e

m em bers o f th e j u r y may c o n s c i o u s l y o r u n c o n s c i o u s l y c o n d o n e t h e v i o l a t i o n o f th e p re ju d ic e *

Or a l t e r n a t i v e l y ,

s ta tu te because o f t h e i r because o f c o n sc io u s o r

r a t i o n a l i z e d ag reem en t w ith th e p r e j u d i c e o f th e d e f e n d a n t, t h e y may m i n i m i z e t h e s e r i o u s n e s s o f th e o f f e n s e .

J u stic e

H olm es * " i n a r t i c u l a t e m a j o r p r e m i s e " may on o c c a s i o n be s e e n c l e a r l y I n c i v i l r i g h t s c a s e s t h r o u g h some s u c h r e a s o n ­ in g a s t h i s

on t h e p a r t o f j u d g e , p r o s e c u t o r , o r ju r y m a n s

" T h e r e h a s n ’ t b e e n a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e la w i n t h i s c a s e b e ­ cau se th e rig h ts

la w i s n o good*

S uch p e o p l e s h o u l d n ’ t h a v e t h e

t h a t t h e la w a t t e m p t s t o g i v e * ”

v ll

To summarize* th e r a c i a l o r r e l i g i o u s p r e ju d ic e o f a s i n g l e I n d iv id u a l may o p e r a te as a cau se o f a c o u r t ’ s f a i l u r e t o m a in ta in the r ig h t s o f an I n d iv id u a l a s C on ferred by la w , and la more l i k e l y to do ao i n c a s e s in v o lv in g c i v i l r ig h t s than in o th e r ty p e s o f case* With s p e c i f i c r e fe r e n c e to th e purpose o f t h i s stu d y th e above d i s c u s s i o n r e q u ir e s some refo rm u la tio n *

At the

o u t s e t i t i s n e c e s s a r y to examine the Iowa c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e I t s e l f , a s I t s l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y and a c tu a l c o n te n t may prove r e v e a lin g #

S e c o n d ly , I n t e r p r e t a t io n s

p la c e d on th e s t a t u t e by th e Iowa Supreme Court must be a n a ly z e d , s in c e th e se d e c is io n s become t o a l l I n t e n t s a p a r t o f th e law th a t i s en fo rced by the I n f e r io r co u rts* Only then can th e a c tu a l enforcem ent o f th e s t a t u t e be surveyed*

Such a su r v e y , to d eterm in e th e adequacy o f

e n fo rcem en t, must I n i t i a l l y a r r iv e a t c o n c lu s io n s w ith regard to th e In c id e n c e o f a c t s in v i o l a t i o n o f the s ta tu t e * C ases brought under th e s t a t u t e must be b alan ced a g a in s t th e fre q u en cy o f v i o l a t i o n , and f i n a l l y the number o f eon** v i c t i o n a must be b a la n ced a g a in s t the number o f c a s e s tr ie d *

A ls o , in the c a se o f a c r im in a l s t a t u t e , th e u se

o f su eh a l t e r n a t i v e c i v i l rem ed ies a s may e x i s t w i l l g iv e an I n d ic a tio n o f the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f c r im in a l law en ­ fo rc em e n t.

I f the enforcem ent o f the s t a t u t e i s found to v lll

toe in a d e q u a te , the f o llo w in g l e g a l o r J u d ic ia l f a c t o r s may s i n g l y or in com b in ation b ear a c a u s a l r e l a t io n s 1 . I n t e r n a l in a d e q u a c ie s o f th e s t a t u t e * 2* Narrowness o f in t e r p r e t a t io n by th e Iowa Supreme c o u r t , o r by t r i a l c o u r ts* 5* U n w illin g n e s s o f Iowa cou n ty a tto r n e y s t o p r o se c u te e n e r g e t i c a l l y In the o r ig i n a l t r i a l * 4* U n w illin g n e s s o f Jury t o r e tu r n v e r d ic t a g a in s t v i o l a t o r s o f the s t a t u t e * 8* U n w illin g n e s s o f J u s t ic e s o f th e peace t o e n fo r c e the s t a t u t e In c a s e s in which t h i s method o f t r i a l I s used* However, I t I s p o s s ib le th a t the o th e r v a r ia b le s may e n t e r o th e r than th e many which are found in th e form al p r o c e s s e s o f law enforcem ent*

I t i s p o s s ib le th a t an

Inadequacy o f enforcem en t o f any s t a t u t e may be found to r e s t on a la c k o f knowledge o f th e r ig h t s c o n fe r r e d by law by th o se p er so n s who are p r o te c te d .

In a d d it io n , even

though Iowa N egroes may be found to know t h e i r r ig h t s under th e s t a t u t e , th e y may be u n w illin g in many e a s e s to p r o s e ­ c u te or b r in g s u i t a g a in s t v i o l a t o r s o f the s t a t u t e * Should t h i s u n w illin g n e s s be a dem onstrable f a c t o r , i t may p o s s ­ i b l y r e s u l t from d e s ir e n o t to " a g it a t e B the q u e s tio n o f ra ce r e l a t i o n s , p r e fe r r in g to f i g h t d is c r im in a t io n w ith lac

weans o th e r than l i t i g a t i o n * o r from r e s ig n a t io n to the b e l i e f th a t a ttem p ts to m a in ta in c i v i l r ig h t s through l e g a l a c t i o n i s u s e le s s * fh e problem In i t s e sse n c e i s t h is *

la the Iowa

C i v i l H ighta S ta tu te adequate in c o n ten t* In in t e r p r e ­ ta tio n * and en forcem en t to a cco m p lish i t s in t e n t ? the en forcem en t o f th e s t a t u t e i s inad eq uate* what r e a so n s oan be found?

x

If

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter I*'

Pai

Th© L e g a l S t a t u s o f t h e N e g ro I n Iowa B efore 1004 *■ *■ * # a #■ • « • « » '

II** The L e g i s l a t i v e H i s t o r y o f the Iowa S ta tu te # •’ V #■ •' *' t a « a «' « « •' X II.'S u p r e m e C o u r t I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Iow a A c t •' *' # # * * * # • * * * * IV*

E nforcem en t o f th e

low® S t a t u t e *

* * • *

V.1

The C o u n ty A t t o r n e y a n d t h e S t a t u t e *

VI*>

B re a k in g th e V ic io u s C irc le *

* • •

* « * *

X IS 30 52 71 109

A p p e n d ice s A.4

The H n i t e d S t a t e s C i v i l

E ig h ts A ct * * *

3*

Io w a C i v i l R i g h t s S t a t u t e

Ci

M odel C i v i l R i g h t s B i l l *

* * * *

.

* *

124 12 6

* * * * * * * *

127

* » « « • • * » «

131

ir

ZU S p e c im e n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e

TADLE OF FA OLE3

T able Nvmbor

Page

NO *

X

Wo*

II*

Ho*

1X1 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Ho*

I V* * « • » «

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

9

9

9

9

*

$

•

9

*

9

9

9

« * * * * * * * » • * « » * * « * » *

’* * 0

3 4

7*9

81

• * • * « # * * » # * * * «

03

NO* V * * * # * » * * * » * » « * * * « * < » «

89

No*

VI* * * « « • * * « • • « # « < » * * # # «

93

NO*

VI I « * # • * « * < ) * * * • * * » • • * *

93

No*

VIIX*

* * * * * *

94

No*

XX* # * » * # * » » » ■ * • * * * ♦ * * * *

96

No* X * « 9 * * * * * « * » o » * « i » * 9 « 0

9V

No * X I *

97

• » * «

* * * * * * * *

* * * * * * * » * ■ < »

• * « # * * * « *

NO* XIX t » * « a * * « * 4 * * * » No*

X III*

No * XV* * *

* * * * * *

* * » » » » * * * * * * # » * « * * » * < > • * ' * « »

xl i

*»

97 99 191

1 Chapter I THE Z&&&L STATUS OF THE NEG-BB IN IOWA BEFORE 1884 S la v e r y was n e v e r the l o t o f N egroes In Iowa, e i t h e r b e fo r e or a f t e r th e a d m issio n o f the atat© to th© Union# The f i r s t T e r r i t o r i a l C o n s t it u t io n made s h o r t work o f s la v e r y In th e Iowa T e r r ito r y by sim p ly g u a r a n te e in g in h a b it a n t s o f Iowa th o se r ig h t s gu aran teed by th e T e r r i­ t o r i a l C o n s t itu t io n o f W iscon sin T err ito r y #

T his document

r e f e r r e d to the N orthw est Ordinance o f 1787 as the sou rce f o r r ig h t s gu aran teed in W iscon sin T errito r y *

Thus by

I m p lic a tio n th e T e r r i t o r i a l C o n s t itu tio n o f the Iowa T e r r ito r y in c lu d e d th e right® guaranteed by the N orthw est O rdinance, w hich s p e c i f I e a l l y forb ade s la v e r y .^ In 1 8 3 9 , the y e a r a f t e r the o r g a n is a tio n o f the Iowa T e r r it o r y , the T e r r it o r ia l Supreme Court in the famous ca se o f Ralph^ h e ld th a t even a Negro who had been a s l a v e , but who had been a r e s id e n t o f Iowa c o u ld n o t be retu rn ed t o sla v e r y #

T his I s s u e , e s s e n t i a l l y the same a s th a t In

th e Bred S c o tt Case,® was d e c id e d In a d ia m e t r ic a lly o p p o s ite way from th a t In the l a t e r c a s e .

Hie Case o f

Balph was th e f i r s t d e cid ed b y the Supreme Court o f the Iowa T err ito r y #

I t s I n flu e n c e In th© y e a rs le a d in g up

to the a d m issio n o f the s t a t e must have been c o n s id e r a b le , s in c e th© q u e s tio n o f s la v e r y In th e t e r r i t o r y was g e n e r a lly

2 c lo s e d by I t*

F u r th e r e v id e n c e to t h i s e f f e c t i s

th a t

th e f i r s t c o n s t i t u t i o n s u b m itte d f o r th e a p p ro v a l o f C o n g r e s s a f f i r m e d t h e f r e e d o m o f t h e N e g ro i n t h e p r o p o s e d s ta te ,

b y p r o v i d i n g t h a t wn e i t h e r s l a v e r y n o r i n v o l u n t a r y

s e r v i t u d e , u n l e s s f o r p u n i s h m e n t o f c r i m e s , s h a l l e v e r be to le ra te d

in t h i s s t a t e A l t h o u g h

n e v e r w as e f f e c t i v e ,

th is c o n stitu tio n

t h e i d e n t i c a l w o rd s o f t h e p r o h i b i ­

t i o n o f s la v e r y a p p e a re d in th e c o n s t i t u t i o n o f 1846, u n d e r w h i c h t h e s t a t e v;as f i n a l l y H o w e v e r, i f

o rg a n iz ed *

t h e q u e s t i o n o f s l a v e r y was a c l o s e d one

i n th e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l C o n v en tio n o f 18 4 4 , c i t i z e n s h i p f o r t h e N e g ro was n o t * t o a d m it N egroes to e q u a l r i g h t s

th© q u e s t i o n o f

T his q u e s t i o n — w h e th e r

o f c i t i z e n s h i p w ith w h ite s - -

w as c o n s i d e r e d b y a s p e c i a l c o m m i t t e e o f t h e C o n v e n t io n * H ot o n l y w as t h i s

q u e stio n a ssig n e d to

th e c o m m itte e , b u t a l s o a

p r o p o s a l t o p r o h i b i t N egroes fro m s e t t l i n g i n

th e s t a t e .

The

co m m itte e r e p o r t e d t h a t i t d i d n o t f i n d e i t h e r th e g r a n t i n g o f r i g h t s o f c i t i z e n s h i p o r th e e x c l u s i o n o f N eg ro es from th e sta te

t o be rTe x p e d l e n t w«

th e l i g h t o f th e

T h i s a t t i t u d e may be u n d e r s t o o d i n

t i m e , w hen s l a v e r y w as n o t y e t u n d e r h e a v y

a t t a c k , b u t when o p i n i o n i n Iowa w as o p p o s e d t o I t s f u r t h e r e x te n sio n *

N e g r o e s I n Iow a w e re t o w a i t u n t i l a f t e r t h e

C i v i l b a r f o r th e f u l l r i g h t s o f c i t i z e n s h i p *

P

Ho c h a n g e w as made toy t h e f r a m e r s o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n o f 1 8 4 6 I n t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h a t o f 1 844 r e l a t i n g

to th e

5 l e g a l s t a t u s o f th e N egroes o f Iowa*

Th© l a t e r Instrum ent

c o n tin u ed t h e i r r e l e g a t i o n t o a p o s i t i o n in w hich th e y ware n o t s l a v e s , hut n e it h e r were th e y c it i z e n s *

ih e r ig h t to

v o t e and h o ld o f f i c e was s t i l l d e n ie d , as waa th© r ig h t to s e r v e i n th e m ilit ia * * 7 I t i s # how ever, w ith th e p r e s e n t c o n s t i t u t i o n o f Iow a, framed In 1 0 5 7 , w ith w hich any su rv e y o f th© l e g a l p o s i t i o n Of N egroes i n Iowa must he moat g r e a t l y concerned*

T his

waa th e c o n s t i t u t i o n vfoleh moat a c c u r a te ly r e p r e s e n ts the a t t i t u d e s o f w h ite Xowans toward N egroes b e fo r e the C i v i l War, and w hich lik e w is e r e f l e c t s changes in th o se a t t i t u d e s a fte r i t .

As w r itt e n in 1 8 5 7 , t h i s in stru m en t c o n ta in s a l l

the d i s a b i l i t i e s w hich were e v e r imposed upon Negroes by a c o n s t i t u t i o n In t h i s s t a t e .

As th© c o n s t i t u t i o n o f 1857

h as been amended, i t makes no d i s t i n c t i o n among I n d iv id u a ls by r ea so n o f t h e ir r a c e , r e l i g i o n , o r even t h e i r sex* Th© q u e s tio n o f the p r o h ib it io n o f s la v e r y was n o t r a is e d in th© C o n s t it u t io n a l C onvention o f 1857.

The

wording o f the p r o h ib it io n o f s la v e r y was changed to read a s fo llo w s *

"There s h a l l be no s la v e r y in t h i s S t a t e ; nor

s h a l l th e r e be in v o lu n ta r y s e r v it u d e , u n le s s f o r th e p u n ish Q

ment o f c r i m e . T h e

r ea so n f o r t h i s change in p h r a se o lo g y

was p rob ab ly to c l a r i f y th e p e r m i s s i b i l i t y o f p en a l s e r v itu d e , and to make i t e q u a lly c le a r th a t s la v e r y cou ld n o t e x i s t a t a ll*

4 In the y e a r 8 Im m ediately p r e ce d in g th e C i v i l ifcr, h ow ever, i t was u n l ik e l y t h a t even In Iowa o th e r a s p e c ts o f th e p o l i t i c a l and l e g a l s t a t u s o f N egroes would he l e f t w ith o u t d eb ate*

As a m a tter o f f a c t , a p a r t from th e

fundam ental agreem ent to p r o h ib it s la v e r y , th e r e was a d i f f e r e n c e o f o p in io n i n the c o n v e n tio n on a lm o st e v e r y o th e r p o r tio n o f the c o n s t i t u t i o n which touched on Negro r ig h t s *

The f i r s t s e c t i o n o f the B i l l o f R ig h ts p rovid ed

th a t " A ll men#** have c e r t a in in a lie n a b le rlght#**am ong w hich are th o se o f * ♦.a c q u ir in g , p o s s e s s in g and p r o t e c tin g 9 p r o p e r ty # " But the m a jo r ity o f th© d e le g a t e s were n o t i n f a v o r o f In c lu d in g th e words "and o th e r persona*1 a f t e r th e word "foreigner®** i n s e c t i o n tw enty-tw o o f th e B i l l o f Right® p e r m ittin g a l i e n s to h o ld property* would have s p e c i f i c a l l y in c lu d e d N egroes*

10

To do ao

P ro p erty was

c o n sid e r e d a r ig h t o f c it i z e n s h i p and the m a jo r ity was n o t w i l l i n g u n e q u iv o c a lly to adm it N egroes t o p o s s e s s io n o f t h is a ttr ib u te o f c it iz e n s h ip .

T his a t t i t u d e became even

c l e a r e r a s p r o p o s a ls were adopted to l i m i t the fr a n c h is e to "whit© male" c i t i z e n s ,

11

and to make o n ly " f r e e , w h ite male"

c i t i z e n s e l i g i b l e f o r membership in th© Iowa House o f R e p r e s e n ta tiv e s and Senate*

The cen su s upon w hich r e p r e ­

s e n t a t io n s in both House and S enate was to be ap p o rtio n ed was to in c lu d e o n ly "w hite in h a b ita n ts o f the sta te * " ^ s Nor 13 were N egroes p erm itted to serv e in the s t a t e m i l i t i a * A lso

5 i t was a o r lo u t ly da bated w h eth er th e te stim o n y o f N egroes sh o u ld be ad m itted In cou rts*

The v iew th a t su ch te s tim o n y

was a c c e p ta b le was in c lu d e d in the c o n s t i t u t i o n by Im p lica ­ t i o n , a lth o u g h th e d e le g a t e s d e fe a t e d an amendment to make t h i s p o s i t i o n e x p l i c i t . 1* Even th e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v is io n r e l a t in g to e d u c a tio n was th e r e s u l t o f a compromise a f t e r much d e b a te .

The

compromise measure was b e lie v e d a t th e tim e to "make p o a s16 I b i s the s e p a r a tio n o f n e g r o es and w h ites" s in c e no s p e c i f i c ban on e d u c a tio n a l s e g r e g a tio n was in clu d ed *

The

s e c t i o n was d r a fte d so a s sim p ly to p erm it "the e d u c a tio n o f a l l th e youth o f the S ta te through a system o f cotmon 1© s c h o o ls ." Whether or n o t s e g r e g a tio n were to e x i s t d e ­ pended upon the in t e r p r e t a t io n o f the word "common” and i t rem ained f o r l a t e r in t o rpre t a t io n by th e Iowa Supreme Court to e lim in a t e the p o s s i b i l i t y o f s e g r e g a tio n th a t was be­ lie v e d to e x i s t , and which was p r a c tic e d a t tim es* The a t t it u d e o f many o f th© d e le g a t e s to th© C onvention o f 1 867, i f n o t m ost o f them , i s summarised by a stu d e n t o f t h e ir r e p o r te d d e b a te s a s f o l l o w s « About a l l the C onvention would concede was th a t the n egro was a human b ein g s th e y would have him e n jo y non© o f the p r i v i l e g e s o f c l t l a e n s o f the s t a t e , o r members o f the body p o l i t i c * * * .The o n ly th in g guaran­ te e d to him was th a t he should n o t be h e ld a s a s l a v e . I t was c l e a r l y u n d e rsto o d , how ever, th a t h i s p resen ce in th e ^ s ta te was m ost unwelcome and u n d e s ir e d .1" E leven y ea rs a f t e r th© ad op tion o f t h i s c o n s t i t u t i o n , d u rin g w hich tim e the C i v i l War was fo u g h t, a l l b u t on©

0 o f tli# above l e g a l and p o l i t i c a l d i s a b i l i t i e s o f th e Negro had b een removed by amendment.

Th© s i n g l e rem aining

r e s t r i c t i o n a f t e r 1868 was th e req uirem en t f o r e l i g i b i l i t y t o membership In th e House o f R e p r e s e n ta tiv e s and the sen ate*

Hot u n t i l 1680 was t h i s p o r tio n o f the c o n s t i t u ­

t i o n amended, and th e l a s t l e g a l d i s t i n c t i o n w hich had been Imposed upon N egroes In 1887 e lim in a te d * Between 1 8 8 7 , the year o f th e a d o p tio n o f the p r e s e n t c o n s t i t u t i o n , and 1 8 8 4 , the y ea r in w hich th e Iowa c i v i l r i g h t s s t a t u t e Us came la w , the Iowa Supreme Court d e a l t w ith fo u r e a s e s in v o lv in g r ig h t s w hich were v io la t e d b e­ ca u se th e p a r t i e s were N e g r o e s.

In a d d it io n , a n o th er c a se

was d e c id e d a f t e r th e c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e had become e f f e c t i v e , upon f a c t s o ccu rr in g b e fo r e i t had* Of th e s e e a r l y c a s e s , no l e s s than th ree d e a l t w ith a ttem p ts t o s e t up a se g r e g a te d s c h o o l system f o r by in d ep en d en t s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s *

N egroes

The c o n t r o llin g ca se on

th e q u e s tio n o f se g r e g a te d s c h o o ls i s C lark v* Board o f D ir e c to r s o f Independent S ch ool D i s t r i c t o f M u sc a tin e , which 19 was d e c id e d by th e Iowa Supreme Court in 1808* In t h i s e a s e a t w e lv e -y e a r - o ld Negro c h i ld was r e fu s e d a d m issio n to a M uscatine grammar s c h o o l n ear h e r home*

A p e titio n fo r

mandamus t o com pel the s c h o o l board to admit the c h ild was asked o f th e MuscatIn© D i s t r i c t Court.

Th© s c h o o l board

7 a l le g e d i n d e fe n s e t h a t tta se p a r a te s c h o o l f o r c o lo r e d O tilM rdii” was m ain tain ed b y th© s c h o o l board and th a t th e c h ild had a tten d e d th a t s c h o o l u n t i l 1867*

The d e fe n d a n ts

f u r t h e r attem p ted to j u s t i f y the m aintenance o f such a s e p a r a te s c h o o l by a l l e g i n g th a t wp u b lie se n tim en t In s a id in d ep en d en t d i s t r i c t i s opposed to the in te r m in g lin g o f w h ite and c o lo r e d c h ild r e n In the same s c h o o ls

Th®

board claim ed d is c r e t io n a r y power to r eq u ire Kegro c h ild r e n t o a tte n d a se p a r a te sch o o l* In an o p in io n from w hich o n ly one o f th© f i v e j u s t i c e s d i s s e n t e d , th e r i^ b t o f Hegro c h ild r e n t o a tte n d p u b lic s c h o o ls e q u a lly w ith w h ite c h ild r e n was upheld#

The major­

i t y o p in io n was d e liv e r e d by J u s t ic e C o le , who s a id in p a r ts *Xn view o f th® p r in c ip le o f e q u a l r ig h t s f o r a l l * upon w hich our government

i s founded, I t would seem n e c essa ry *

in o rd er to j u s t i f y a d e n ia l o f su ch e q u a l i t y o f r ig h t to an yon e, th a t some e x p r e ss s o v e r e ig n a u th o r ity f o r such d e n ia l 21 Should be shown# w Thus d i s c r e t i o n mast be shown to be e x p l i c i t l y gran ted to the s c h o o l boards such d i s c r e t i o n d oes n o t e x i s t I n h e r e n tly In th e fom aation o f a board to d i r e c t an Independent s c h o o l d i s t r i c t *

J u s t ic e Cole went on to

i n t e r p r e t A r t ic l e IX o f th© C o n s titu tio n o f low© a s f o r ­ b id d in g su ch se g r e g a tio n *

This s e c t io n rea d s as f o l l o w s t

^The board o f e d u c a tio n s h a l l p rovid e f o r th© e d u c a tio n o f

8 a l l th e y o u th s o f th e S t a t e , through a sy stem o f common S c h o o l s * H e p o in t s out th a t an a c t o f th e se v e n th G en eral A ssem bly p u rp o rtin g t o r e q u ir e the e d u c a tio n o f Hegr© c h ild r e n In se p a r a te s c h o o ls , e x c e p t w ith the unanimous c o n se n t o f w h ite p a r e n ts in the d i s t r i c t , had been d e c la r e d u n c o n s t it u t io n a l under t h i s p r o v is io n o f A r t ic l e IX*

Thus " a l l d i s c r e t i o n I s d e n ie d to the board

o f d i r e c t o r s a s t o s h a t you th s s h a l l be a d m itted ."

The

judgem ent o f the d i s t r i c t c o u r t in g r a n tin g th e p e t i t i o n f o r mandamus was a ffir m e d . J u s t ic e Wright was the s o l e d i s s e n t e r In the C lark ea se.

He b u i l t t h i s d i s s e n t on th e ground th a t " a l l have

a r ig h t to a tte n d th e common s c h o o ls ."

And he b e l ie v e s

th a t t h i s i s the o n ly r ig h t the c o n s t i t u t i o n In ten d ed t o secu re.

By t h i s the j u s t i c e means th a t th e gu aran tee

r e f e r s o n ly to e d u c a tio n a t th e p u b lic e x p e n se .

Thus th e

d if f e r e n c e in o p in io n a r i s e s out o f d i f f e r e n t in t e r p r e ­ t a t i o n o f the word "common" in A r t ic le IX o f th e c o n s t it u ­ tio n *

The d i s s e n t e r in te r p r e te d t h i s word to mean "paid

f o r in common", w h ile th e m a jo r ity f e l t th a t i t had the se n se o f "open to common u se " .

J u s t ic e W right*a p o s i t i o n

1« v e r y l i k e th a t adopted by the U n ited S ta te s Supreme 24 Court in th e phrase " sep a ra te but e q u a l." Two o th e r c a s e s d e a lin g w ith s e g r e g a tio n in the p u b lic s c h o o ls i l l u s t r a t e th a t J u s t ic e C ole*s o p in io n In

th e C lark c a se had c lo s e d th© i s s u e l e g a l l y , even though i t had n o t e lim in a te d th© problem#

In 1874 and a g a in In

1878 actio n ® f o r mandamus were brought a g a in s t the board ©f d ir e c to r ® o f th© Keokuk s c h o o l d i s t r i c t , t o compel a d m ittan ce o f Uegro c h ild r e n # 25

In b o th th e s e case® th©

p l a i n t i f f had been d e n ie d adm ittance b ecau se o f race to th e h ig h s c h o o l a f t e r c o m p letio n o f grammar sch ool*

In

b o th o a se s th e d e fe n se was o ffe r e d th a t an adequate sep ­ a r a te s c h o o l had been e s ta b lis h e d *

J u s t ic e Cole in th e

e a r l i e r and C h ie f J u s t ic e M ille r In the l a t e r o f th e se e a s e s h e ld th a t s in c e th© a lle g a tio n ® o f th© p l a i n t i f f had been found a s f a c t In th e lo w er c o u r t , the r u le o f th© C lark c a se would apply* in g mandamus was upheld#

In b oth c a s e s th© judgment g r a n t­ Sin ce 1876 no ca se I n v o lv in g

s e g r e g a tio n o f s tu d e n ts In th© p u b lic s c h o o ls on th© b a s is o f race h as reached th® Iowa Supreme Court#

I h is I s n o t

to s a y th a t some s e g r e g a tio n or d ie c r im in a tio n may n o t e x i s t In p u b lic or p r iv a te e d u c a tio n a l I n s t i t u t i o n s w ith in th e s t a t e today#

I t i s sim p ly to sa y th a t th© Iowa Supreme

Court h a s r e p e a te d ly taken a fir m stan d th a t s e g r e g a tio n o f s tu d e n ts on th© b a s is o f ra ce la n o t p e r m is s ib le w ith in th e p u b lic s c h o o l system #

There i s , how ever, no rea so n to

b e lie v e th a t t h i s r u le i s e q u a lly a p p lic a dLe to p r iv a te s c h o o ls in Iowa#

10 The o n ly c a se heard by th© Iowa Supreme Court b e fo r e 1884 th a t d e a lt w ith c i v i l r ig h t e in the se n se o f i n t e r in d iv id u a l d is c r im in a t io n was th a t o f Coger v* Horth West 20 TJnion J a c k e t Company# The p l a i n t i f f brought s u i t in the l e e D i s t r i c t Court f o r damages s u s ta in e d when o f f i c e r s o f a r i v e r p a ck et owned by the d efen d a n t company had removed h er from th e d in n e r ta b le on th e boat#

The answer p lea d ed th a t

"custom o r r e g u la tio n on d e fe n d a n t’s b o a ts req u ire d H egroes t o take t h e i r m eals on th© guards or in the pantry#**®7

A fte r

h a v in g been s o inform ed th e p l a i n t i f f had s e a te d h e r s e l f a t ta b le w ith w h ite p a ssen g ers# The Iowa Supreme Court found th a t th e o n ly q u e s tio n b e fo r e i t was w hether the d e fe n d a n t, a s a common c a r r i e r , had "the a u th o r ity to e s t a b l i s h and e n fo r c e r e g u la t io n s d e p r iv in g an I n d iv id u a l o f c o lo r o f the p r i v i l e g e s and r ig h t s accorded to w h ite p a sse n g e rs t r a v e lin g upon i t s steam ers and to e n fo r c e r u le s whereby the form er were r e ­ q u ired to subm it t o treatm en t and a c c e p t accommodations d i f f e r e n t from th e l a t t e r # 1*®8

Th© is s u e o f d is c r im in a tio n

on th© b a s is o f race was thu s sh a rp ly drawn, w ith the c o u r t bru sh in g a s id e c o n te n tio n s o f th e d efen d a n t th a t frau d had been u sed in o b ta in in g a t i c k e t f o r d in n e r and th a t th© d efen d a n t had been removed from th e ta b le because o f o b je c ­ tio n a b le conduct#

Th© c o u rt lik e w is e Ign ored the p l a i n t i f f ’s

c o n te n tio n th a t ©he was n o t a Hegro a s n o t r e le v a n t "anywhere

XX w it h in th® j u r i s d i c t i o n o f th® f e d e r a l c o n s t i t u t i o n , and m ost c e r t a i n l y n o t In I o w a , T h e

imp11cation® o f th®

p l a i n t i f f * a b r i e f on t h i s sc o r e r e c o g n ize d th® v a l i d i t y o f th® company*« r u le s a s a p p lie d to n e g r o e s and r e s te d h er s u i t upon th e c o n te n tio n th a t sh e was n o t a Negro* C h ief J u s t ic e Beck d e liv e r e d th® unanimous o p in io n o f th e c o u r t In fa v o r o f th e p l a i n t i f f and u p h old in g th e Judg­ ment o f th e low er cou rt*

The j u s t i c e r e fe r r e d w ith ap p ro v a l

to th e C lark c a s e , sa y in g th a t i t **1® p la n te d on the broad and j u s t ground o f the e q u a l i t y o f a l l men b e fo r e th e la w , w hich i s n o t lim it e d by c o lo r , n a t i o n a l i t y , r e l i g i o n or C o n d itio n In l i f e * 1* F u rth er, the d e c is io n in th e Coger ea se was p la n te d sq u a r e ly on th e s e c t i o n o f th e B i l l o f R ig h ts o f th e Iowa C o n s t itu t io n ^ i l c h s t a t e s **ia langiiag© m ost compre­ h e n s iv e and In ca p a b le o f m is c o n s tr u c tio n * * • *A11 men a r e , by SO n a tu r e , f r e e and e q u a l* tn The c o u r t fu r th e r found th a t r ig h t s a c q u ir e d by the c o n tr a c t o f tr a n s p o r ta tio n were e q u a l fo r a ll*

f h ia g u aran tee o f © q u a lity o f the r ig h t o f c o n tr a c t

was made s p e c i f i c by th e F ed era l C i v i l R igh ts Act o f 1866, Which p r o v id e s t h a t ”c i t i z e n s o f every race and c o lo r ,w ith o u t regard to any p r e v io u s c o n d itio n o f s la v e r y or in v o lu n ta r y s e r v it u d e * •• s h a l l have the same r ig h t* * * to mak© and e n fo r c e 31 c o n t r a c t s * •« as i s en joyed by whit© c i t i z e n s * ”

12 m i l t i t deems d u b iou s in r e t r o s p e c t th a t th e c o u r t was on fir m ground in i t s in t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e f e d e r a l s t a t u t e g u a r a n te e in g e q u a l r ig h t s to make c o n t r a c ts as c o n fe r r in g eq u a l r ig h t s in c o n t r a c t s , many p r e c e d e n ts e x is te d , in th© common law f o r such r ig h t s a g a in s t common c a r r ie r s #

C a r r ie r s are l e f t to adopt r e a so n a b le r e g u la ­

t i o n s f o r t h e i r p a s s e n g e r s , b u t su ch r e g u la t io n s by th e common law "must be r e a s o n a b le , and must tend to th e com fort and s a f e t y o f the p a sse n g e r s g e n e r a lly , and##» accom m odations e q u a l in com fort and s a f e t y must be a ffo r d e d SB to a l l a l ik e who pay the same p r i c e . w A c tin g upon t h i s p r i n c i p l e , J u s t ic e Beck found th a t th e r e g u la t io n s o f th e p a ck et company r e q u ir in g th a t N egroes e a t a p a rt from w h ite s were n o t r ea so n a b le s in c e "the ad van tages o f th e c o n tr a c t made w ith o th e r p a sse n g e r s was d en ied her#

Her money

would n o t purchase f o r h er th a t which the same sum would e n t i t l e a w h ite p a sse n g e r to r e c e i v e .

In th e se m a tte r s # •#

h e r r ig h t to demand s e r v ic e s to Which she was la w f u lly e n t i t l e d was d e n ie d . *fh© Iowa Supreme Court had by the tim e o f the Coger c a se exten d ed p r o t e c t io n to r ig h t s o f N egroes a g a in s t d is c r im in a t io n in the p u b lic s c h o o ls and by common c a r r ie r s . In the form er s i t u a t i o n th© c o u rt had r e l i e d upon c o n s t i ­ t u t i o n a l a u th o r it y and in the l a t t e r s i t u a t i o n upon

15 e s t a b l i s h e d p r i n c ip l e s o f the common law . In Bowlin 54 v . Lyon* h ow ever, th e c o u r t se r v e d n o t ic e o f i t s u n w illin g n e s s to expand th e common low d o c tr in e upon w hich i t had r e l i e d in the Coger ea se*

The c a se o f

Bowlin v# Lyon p r e s e n ts an anomalous f a c t s i t u a t i o n in th a t th e a c t s w hich gave r i s e to i t occu rred b e fo r e the e f f e c t i v e d a te o f the c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e i n 1 8 8 4 ,a lth o u g h th e e a se I t s e l f was n ot d e c id e d u n t i l 18 8 5 , when the a e t was enforced *

The c o u r t was thus com pelled to Ign ore th e

pending l e g i s l a t i o n which in a l l l ik e lih o o d would have changed th e outcome o f the l i t i g a t i o n #

The c o u r t c o u ld

f in d no r e a so n f o r e x te n d in g th e common law p r in c ip le r e g a r d in g d is c r im in a t io n by c a r r ie r s and in n k eep ers to p la c e s o f amusement, even though th e l e g i s l a t u r e had a lr e a d y exten d ed t h i s p r in c ip le by s ta t u te # Bowlin v* Lyon came to th e Iowa Supreme Court on a p p ea l from the Linn C ir c u it Court*

Oh© p l a i n t i f f had on

two o c c a s io n s been r e fu s e d a d m issio n to a s k a tin g r in k o p era ted by the d e fen d a n ts in Cedar R ap id s, Iowa#

Bow lin

a lle g e d th a t the o n ly r ea so n f o r t h i s e x c lu s io n was th a t he was a Utegro*

The d e fe n d a n ts demurred to th e p e t i t i o n

on the ground th a t Bowlin had n o t averred any l e g a l r ig h t to e n te r t h e i r s k a tin g r in k on e i t h e r o c c a s io n , and th a t no such l e g a l r ig h t e x is te d #

The demurrer was s u s ta in e d

14 by th e Idnn c o u r t cad t h is r u lin g was a p p e a le d ,

The

d e fen d a n t a a d m itted In the dem urrer th a t " p l a i n t i f f was e x clu d ed from th e p la c e In q u e s tio n on th e s o l e ground th a t he I s a c o lo r e d man*11®® The q u e s tio n a t I s s u e b e fo r e th e Supreme Court was w h eth er th e r e e x i s t e d any r ig h t a t common law t o bo a d m itted t o a p la c e o f amusement,

J u s t ic e Reed, d e liv e r in g

the o p in io n o f th e c o u r t, took o c c a s io n a t th e b eg in n in g Of h i s o p in io n to s t a t e th a t t h i s q u e s tio n " i s in no manner a f f e c t e d by th e f a c t th a t he i s a c o lo r e d man,"

H is

r ig h t s In th e m a tter were th o se o f a w h ite man b eh avin g in a s im ila r manner.

The c o u r t i n a c t u a l i t y i s fram ing th e

q u e s tio n from th e p o in t o f view o f th e d e fe n d a n t, somewhat as fo llo w s i

I s th e r e a r ig h t f o r o p e r a to r s o f a p la c e o f

amusement to e x clu d e anyone f o r any r ea so n from th a t p la c e ? I f s o , as th e co u r t saw I t , th e r ig h t to e x c lu d e N egroes by r ea so n o f t h e i r race was subsumed under th e more g e n e r a l r ig h t o f e x e lu s io n . The d e fe n d a n ts were n ot o p e r a tin g under a s t a t e or m u n icip a l l i c e n s e , and th e sk a tin g r in k was n o t r e g u la te d under th e p o lic e power o f th e c ity #

The c o u r t f e l t th a t th e

b u s in e s s was a p r iv a te b u s in e s s , r a th e r than b e lo n g in g to a c l a s s In w hich "the g e n e r a l p u b lic has su ch an i n t e r e s t th a t th e y a re p r o p e r ly th e s u b je c t o f r e g u la t io n by la w ," which c l a s s in c lu d e d in n k eep ers and c a r r ie r s .

A s k a tin g r in k .

15 an d , toy I n f e r e n c e , o th e r such p la c e s o f amusement and r e c r e a t io n , was th u s d e f i n i t e l y d is t in g u is h e d from th o se b u s in e s s e s In w hich common law r ig h t s o f accommodation e x is t e d *

The f a c t th a t th e s k a tin g r in k was n o t lic e n s e d

nor s u b je c t t o l i c e n s e was p rob ab ly d e c i s i v e In e s t a b lis h * in g the c o u rt* # a t t i t u d e a s t o th e r ig h t s o f i t s o p e r a to r s , s in c e J u s t ic e Heed s a y s i " I t may be th a t the managers o f a p la c e o f p u b lic amusement, Who c a r r ie s on h i s b u s in e s s under a l i c e n s e gra n ted him by the s t a t e ,* th e same r e s t r i c t i o n s *

# * would be s u b j e c t to

We i n c l i n e t o th in k th a t he w ould. n

Nor would such an e n t e r p r is e as th e s k a tin g r in k in q u e s tio n be o th e r than a p r iv a t e b u s in e s s , " u n t il th e putolle assum es 39 some c o n t r o l o f i t *n S in ce th e b u s in e s s was u n re g u la te d by th e p u b lic and s in c e I t was a p r iv a te b u s in e s s , th e c o u r t f e l t th a t each in d iv id u a l c o n tr a c te d s e p a r a t e ly w ith the owners f o r ad­ m is s io n .

R e fe r r in g to the d ef© n d a a ts, th e c o u r t s a i d 5 "As

th e p la c e b elo n g ed to them, and was under t h e i r e x c lu s iv e c o n t r o l , • . * i t cannot be s a id • • . th a t any person had 40 th e r ig h t to demand a d m is s io n .” The p r o p r ie to r s were c o n sid e r e d to have com plete d i s c r e t i o n a s to who sh ou ld or sh ou ld n o t be a d m itte d .

The c o u r t con clu d ed th a t t h i s

r ig h t ren dered the race o f the p l a i n t i f f I r r e l e v a n t , be cause no one had any l e g a l r ig h t to be ad m itted to th e sk a tin g

10 Wink* B ow lin v* Xyon la o f p a r t ic u la r I n t e r o a t In th e l in o o f c a s e s d e a lin g w ith th e l e g a l s t a t u s o f the Negro in Iowa*

T his a r i s e s out o f the p e c u lia r s i t u a t i o n w hich

e x is t e d when i t was heard and d ecid ed *

The Iowa C i v i l

l i g h t s s t a t u t e had a lr e a d y been p a ssed by th e l e g i s l a t u r e when th e c a se was begun, and had been i n e f f e c t f o r a lm o st a y e a r when I t was d ecid ed *

In I t s d e c is io n the c o u r t

r e fu s e d to a p p ly th e common law d o c t r in e o f r i g h t s to accommodation by In n k eep ers and c a r r ie r s to such e n te r * p r i s e s a s th e s t a t e had n o t undertaken to r e g u la te *

However,

th e c o u r t d id s t a t e i t s o p in io n th a t the common law d o c tr in e would be p ro b a b ly a p p lic a b le sh ou ld th e s t a t e undertake t o r e g u la t e h e r e t o f o r e wp r lv a t e tt b u sin e ss*

The c o u r t co u ld n o t

have f a i l e d to be c o g n is a n t o f th e n atu re o f pend ing l e g i s ­ l a t i o n on the s u b j e c t , and seems to have gone out o f i t s way in the B ow lin o p in io n t e n t a t i v e l y to approve su ch l e g i s ­ la t io n *

I t seem s a l s o th a t the c o u rt may have been sp ea k in g

t o the l e g i s l a t u r e in p a r t and sa y in g t h a t i t would t r e a t the c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e a s e x te n d in g t o o th e r e n t e r p r is e s the common law d o c t r in e a lr e a d y a p p lic a b le to in n k eep ers and c a r r ie r s *

The r e f u s a l o f the c o u rt to expand the common

law d o c tr in e In I t s s u b s ta n tiv e a s p e c ts w ith regard t o new c l a s s e s o f e n t e r p r is e s Im p lied th a t s t a t u t o r y coverage o f t h e s e ty p e s would be in te r p r e te d a s an e x te n s io n o f th e

17 common law* D esalt© th e fact? th a t the Iowa c o u r t draw back from th e e x te n s io n o f common law r ig h t s o f the Hegro In th a t s t a t e , t h e i r l e g a l p o s i t i o n a f t e r th e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l amend** m ents o f 1868 were p a ssed and b e fo r e the enactm ent o f th e c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e seem s to have been a s fa v o r a b le i n Iowa a s e lse w h e r e In th e U nited S t a t e s , and c e r t a i n l y was b e t t e r than In many so u th ern s t a t e s .

I t must be remembered

th a t su ch r ig h t s a s were extend ed by the s t a t e In 1884 were 41 gu a ran teed t o Hegroea by the A ct o f C ongress o f 1875 u n til 42 t h i s a c t was d e c la r e d u n c o n s t it u t io n a l in 1885* The v o id in g o f th e F ed er a l law l e f t a h ia t u s In the s t a t u t o r y p r o t e c t io n o f th e se r ig h t s u n t i l th e e f f e c t i v e d a te o f the s t a t e s t a t u t e s w hich p u rp orted to c o v e r much th© same a r e a . I t i s ir o n ic th a t the Bowlin ca se a ro se d u rin g t h i s period* the a c t s o f w hich h© eom plalned would p rob ab ly have been c o v ered by f e d e r a l s t a t u t e a year b efo re or by s t a t e s t a t u t e a y e a r la t e r *

18 Chapter IX THE IJSGISIATIVE HISTORY OF THE IOWA STATUTE A ft e r th e Act o f C ongress o f 187©, th e F e d e r a l C i v i l E ig h ts S t a t u t e , had been h e ld I n v a lid in 188©, the l e g i s l a t u r e s o f s e v e r a l n o rth ern s t a t e s moved to f i l l the l e g a l gap l e f t by the v o id in g o f th e law*

Iowa was among

the f i r s t o f th e se s t a t e s w hich assumed th e p r o t e c t io n o f c i v i l r i g h t s , w hich J u s t ic e B ra d ley had d e c la r e d t o be a s t a t e power s in c e i t in v o lv e d th e r e g u la t io n o f in d iv id ­ u a l s n o t p ro v id ed f o r by th e F o u rteen th Amendment#43 Such l e g i s l a t i o n went in t o e f f e c t In Iowa in 1884, as d id s im ila r law s i n C o n n e c tic u t, O hio, and New Jersey#

Seven

o th e r s t a t e s fo llo w e d s u i t the n e x t y e a r , and f i v e o th e r s w ith in th e n e x t decade#^4 Most o f th e se s t a t e c i v i l r ig h t s a c t s fo llo w e d the g e n e r a l form o f the d e fu n c t F ed era l s t a t u t e , a lth o u g h l a t e r a d d it io n s have c o n s id e r a b ly changed some in scope# In t h i s r e g a r d , the Iowa a c t i s l i k e the r e s t and seems t o have been a lm ost e x a c t l y c o p ie d from the F ed era l law# Two b i l l s were in tr o d u ce d In the House o f R e p r e s e n ta tiv e s 45 and one in th e Senate o f the T w en tieth G eneral Assembly# These th r e e b i l l s were p rob ab ly about th e same in c o n te n t and c o v e r a g e , f o r no attem p t was made in the House to amend th e S enate b i l l #

T h is l a t t e r was In trod u ced by

S en ator M ile s , r e p r e s e n tin g th e Fourth S e n a to r ia l D i s t r i c t ,

19 co m p risin g Wayne and Lucas c o u n tie s *

The S en ate b i l l , the

f i r s t o f th e th r e e to be r ep o rted from th e com m ittee to w hich i t had b een a s s ig n e d , was approved by th e Senate Committee on th e J u d ic ia r y on January 2 9 ,1 8 8 4 , w ith o n ly AM m inor a lt e r a t io n s * Lack o f r e c o r d s p r e v e n ts com parison o f the b i l l a s r e p o r te d w ith th e o r i g i n a l form as proposed by S e n a to r M ile s , b u t as th e changes th a t were made o c c a sio n e d no p r o t e s t from th e S e n a to r , i t seems th a t th e y c o u ld have been o f l i t t l e

im portance*

The b i l l was p assed unanim ously by the Senate on March 2 2 ,1 8 8 4 , w ith no change e x c e p t th e I n s e r t io n o f the words "barber shops* on the m otion o f Sen ator M iles* t h ir t y - t w o y e a s were rec o rd ed , w ith e ig h te e n S en a to rs 47 a b se n t o r n o t v o tin g * The b i l l p a ssed th e Mouse o f R e p r e s e n ta tiv e s on March 2 5 ,1 8 8 4 , by a unanimous vo te* B ig h ty-on e v o t e s were o a s t f o r the m easure, w ith n in e te e n 48 a b sen t or n ot v o tin g * The f i n a l form in which the law took e f f e c t on J u ly 4 ,1 8 8 4 , was as f o llo w s ; Sec* 1 A l l p er so n s w ith in t h i s s t a t e s h a l l be e n t i t l e d to th e f u l l and equal enjoym ent o f any o f the accom m odations, a d v a n t a g e s , f a c i l i t i e s , and p r i v i l e g e s o f in n s , p u b lic co n v ey a n ces, b arber shop®, th e a te r s and o th e r p la c e s o f amuse­ ment} s u b je c t o n ly to th e c o n d itio n s or l i m i t a ­ t io n s e s t a b lis h e d by law , and a p p lic a b le a lik e to e v e r y person* S ec. 2 Any p erson who s h a l l v i o l a t e th e fo r e g o in g S e c tio n by den yin g to any p e r so n , e x c e p t f o r r e a so n s by law a p p lic a b le to a l l p e r so n s , th e

20 f u l l enjoym ent o f any o f th e accom m odations, a d v a n ta g e s, f a c i l i t i e s , or p r i v i l e g e s enumerated i n s a id s e c t i o n or by a id in g o r i n c i t i n g su ch d e n ia l s h a l l f o r each o f f e n s e be g u i l t y o f a m isdem eanor.49 Only S en ator M ile s 1 l a s t m inute a d d it io n o f barber shops to th e r o l l o f e s ta b lis h m e n ts covered in th© a c t i s an a d d it io n t o the F ed er a l la w .

The i d e n t i c a l words o f th a t

law appear i n c e r t a in p o r tio n s o f the Iowa a c t , and the changes In p lir a se o lo g y are so m inor as to p r e se r v e f u l l y 50 th© se n s e o f the A et o f 1875. I t w i l l be n o ted th a t th e Iowa a c t , a s p a s s e d , d id n o t p r o v id e a s p e c i f i c p e n a lty f o r v i o l a t i o n .

Far from

le a v in g v i o l a t i o n w ith o u t s a n c t io n , how ever, the o m issio n o f a s p e c i f i c p e n a lty worked to make p o s s ib le a r a th e r heavy p e n a lt y .

A b la n k e t punishm ent p r o v is io n had e a r l i e r

been s e t up f o r misdemeanors f o r which no s a n c tio n had been im posed, a s f o llo w s : Bvery p erson who i s c o n v ic te d o f a misdemeanor the punishm ent o f which i s n o t p r e sc r ib e d by any s t a t u t e o f t h i s s t a t e , s h a l l be punished by Im prisonm ent In the cou n ty j a i l n o t more than one y e a r , or by f i n e not e x c e e d in g f i v e hundred d o l l a r s , or by b o th su ch f i n e and im prisonm ent. T h is p o s s ib le f i n e and Im prisonm ent was the same as th a t p r e sc r ib e d by the F e d e r a l law .

However, the Iowa s t a t u t e

d id not in c lu d e one s i g n i f i c a n t remedy f o r d e n ia l o f r ig h t s th a t the F ed er a l a c t had p erm itted * The l a t t e r had a llo w ed r e c o v e r y o f damages t o a maximum o f $500 by the a g g r ie v e d p a r ty In an a c tio n o f d e b t.

I t a ls o a llo w ed p r o c ee d in g s by

21 a g g r ie v e d parole® "under t h e i r r ig h t s a t common law and by S t a t e s t a t u t e # ” f o r dam ages, a s an a l t e r n a t i v e to th e s t a t u t o r y damages a llo w a b le in th® U n ited S t a t e s c o u r t s .

go

The Iowa law d id n o t in c lu d e such a p r o v is io n because i t i s l i k e l y th a t l e g i s l a t o r s f e l t th a t I f any c i v i l damages were d e s i r a b l e | th e y co u ld be secu red under th e common la w , w ith ­ o u t s p e c i f i c s t a t u t o r y a u th o r is a tio n *

In th© l i g h t o f th e

o p in io n o f th e Iowa Supreme Court In Coger v* Horth West S3 Union P acket Company I t seems th a t t h i s assum p tion on t h e i r p a r t was w a rra n ted , i f su ch were th e reason f o r the f a i l u r e t o p ro v id e f o r damages in th® a ct* The T w en ty-fou rth G eneral A ssem bly, m eetin g in 1 8 9 2 , added c o n s id e r a b ly to th e c o n te n t o f th e s t a t u t e by ex te n d ­ in g i t

t© co v er a number o f ty p e s o f e sta b lis h m e n ts n o t

In clu d ed by th® o r ig i n a l term s o f the a c t ,

T h is b i l l was

In trod u ced In the House o f R e p r e s e n ta tiv e s by R sp r e se n ta tiv e A*L* Brooks o f Audubon County*

I t p rovid ed f o r th© amendment

o f th© o r i g i n a l s t a t u t e by th© I n s e r t io n a f t e r the word ”in n ” o f the words *r e s t a u r a n t s , chop h o u s e s , e a tin g h o u se s, lu n ch c o u n te r s and a l l o th e r p la c e s whore r efresh m en ts are se r v e d ” and a f t e r the words "barber sh o p s11 the words "bath 54 hou 0 e s ,,* T h is b i l l p a ssed th© Hous® o f R e p r e s e n ta tiv e s by a v o te o f s ix t y - o n e to s e v e n , w ith t h ir t y -tw o a b sen t or 55 n ot v o tin g * A n a ly s is of th e l i s t o f th o se v o tin g a g a in s t

22 th© h i l l shows th a t ©lac were Dem ocrats— th© r e p r e s e n t a t iv e s o f L inn, C lin to n * Jack son , Iowa* Be® Moines* and S iou x ©©unties*

The p a r ty a f f i l i a t i o n o f th® se v e n th was n ot

a s c e r t a i n a b le .

T his v o te r e p r e se n te d th© h ig h p o in t o f

o p p o s it io n a g a in s t any o f th© en actm en ts d e a lin g w ith c i v i l r ig h ts *

I t w i l l he n oted th a t o n ly on© o f th©

above c o u n t ie s I s n ot lo c a te d in th© e a s te r n p a r t o f the s t a t e * where th® s t a t e * s p o p u la tio n was c o n c e n tr a te d a t th a t tim e*

S in ce i t I s n o t l i k e l y th a t any r e l a t i v e l y

h ig h p e r ce n ta g e o f Wegroes to w h ite s e x is t e d In th o se c o u n tie s * I t d o es n o t seem th a t the o p p o s it io n o f th e se f i v e r e p r e s e n t a t iv e s can be e x p la in e d on th a t b a s i s , The Brooks b i l l p assed th e Senate w ith f o r t y - f i v e in fa v o r* two a g a in s t* and o n ly th r e e a b sen t o r n ot v o t in g . Both the S e n a to r s who v o te d a g a in s t th© b i l l * S h ie ld s o f Dubuque County and Teomans o f Woodbury County, were Demo­ c r a ts*

However, much s i g n if i c a n c e cannot be a tta c h e d to

t h i s f a c t , s in c e In both House and Sonata a number o f Demo­ c r a t s v o ted In fa v o r o f tha b i l l *

The v o te o f Democrats

a s th© main o p p o s itio n to the b i l l could have r e s u lt e d from a lm o st any c a u s e , from lin g e r in g C iv il War f e e l i n g to p u r e ly p a r t is a n o p p o sitio n *

The form er seems most p o s s i b l e , but

cannot b© a s s ig n e d a s the cause w ith any g r e a t d egree o f c e r ta in ty *

25 Hi© s e v e r e s t p o s s i b l e c r i t i c i s m can b© l e v e l l e d a g a in s t th© Iowa C i v i l B ig h ts s t a t u t e as I t was o r i g i n a l l y p a s se d , even w ith i t s e x te n s io n to a d d it io n a l c l a s s e s o f e n t e r p r is e s In 1898#

I t was v i r t u a l l y Im p o ssib le o f enforcem ent#

T h is

r e s u lt e d from th e d e lib e r a t e f a i l u r e to In clu d e a s p e c i f i c p e n a lty In th e o r i g i n a l a c t , and the f a i l u r e to remedy the la c k o f f o r e s i g h t o f th a t l e g i s l a t u r e #

Th© f a i l u r e to

p r o v id e a p e n a lty * to g e th e r w ith th e p e a a lty a s s e s s e d by the b la n k e t p e n a lty s e c t i o n o f th e code by rea so n o f th© la c k o f s p e c i f i c a t i o n In th e c i v i l r ig h t s a c t , c la s s e d th© v i o l a t i o n o f c i v i l r ig h t s a s an I n d ic ta b le misdemeanor#

The r e q u ir e ­

ment o f p r o s e c u tio n on in d ic tm en t r e s u lt e d from the f i x i n g o f th e s a n c tio n a t above one hundred d o lla r s #

The j u r i a d i c -

t lo n o f j u s t i c e s o f the peace in Iowa i s lim it e d by the C o n s t itu tio n to c a s e s ”th e punishm ent f o r which i s l e s s than 57 one hundred d o l l a r s fin© or t h i r t y days im prisonm ent#* Thus the procedure f o r a v i o l a t o r o f th® s t a t u t e was o r d in a r ily t o w aive p r e lim in a r y h e a r in g , t o r e q u e st o r ig i n a l h ea r in g by the grand ju r y , and to esca p e p r o se c u tio n when the grand ju r y f a i l e d to r etu r n an Indictm ent#

This was

commonly th© ca se befor© 1925, a cco rd in g to S* ^oe Brown, Des Moines a tto rn ey * T his te s tim o n y o f an a tto r n e y who was engaged In prac­ t i c e d u rin g t h i s p er io d and who was e s p e c i a l l y i n t e r e s t e d

24 i n th e c i v i l r i g h t s s t a t u t e i s c o n c lu s iv e ly su p p orted by th e l i s t o f c o n v ic t io n s o b ta in e d f o r v i o l a t i o n o f th e a c t from 1884 to 1 9 2 3 , when th e p e n a lty s e c t i o n was amended# In t h i s f o r t y - y e a r p e r io d o n ly th r ee c o n v ic t io n s o f c i v i l r i g h t s v i o l a t i o n s by d i s t r i c t c o u r ts are recorded*

The

e a r l i e s t o f th e s e occu rred in 1887 in Mahaska County, when a barber was c o n v ic te d and f in e d f o r r e f u s in g t o s h a v e a p r o s p e c t iv e custom er# 89 Iowa Supreme Court#

This c a se was l a t e r r e v e r se d by the The o th e r two are r ep o rted o n ly as

v i o l a t i o n o f c i v i l r i g h t s , w ith no s p e c i f i c a t i o n o f th e n a tu re o f th e v io la t io n *

A te n d o l l a r f i n e was a s s e s s e d

In 1908 in th e C la y to n County s e s s io n o f th© d i s t r i c t c o u r t. 61 A f i v e d o l l a r f i n e was g iv e n in 1917 in Monroe County.

60

I f a l l v i o l a t i o n s o f the c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e are l i s t e d In r e p o r tin g c r im in a l c o n v ic tio n s by th e s p e c i f i c n atu re o f th e c h a r g e, and th e r e I s no reason to b e lie v e o th e r w is e , th e above th r e e c a s e s a re th© o n ly v i o l a t i o n s o f th© c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e S u c c e s s f u ll y p r o se c u te d b e fo re 1984#

T his t o t a l , o f

c o u r s e , d o es n ot in c lu d e c i v i l a c tio n s w hich were brought 62 w ith v a ry in g d e g r ee o f s u c c e s s In th© same p e r io d . R e a lis in g th a t th© la e k o f a s p e c i f ie d p e n a lty f o r v i o l a t i o n s o f c i v i l r ig h t s was robbing th e s t a t u t e o f much o f I t s p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t , the Dee Moines c h a p te r o f th e N a tio n a l A s s o c ia t io n f o r th e Advancement o f C olored P eop le engaged in a compalgn f o r a secon d amendment o f th© s t a t u t e

to Include a f ix e d p e n a lty low enough to b ring c i v i l r ig h t s c a se s w ith in the J u r is d ic tio n o f the j u s t ic e courts#

This

campaign bore f r u i t In th© F o r tie th General Assembly, when R ep resen ta tiv e D lltss o f Polk County Introduced such an amend­ ment to the s ta tu te #

The form o f t h is amendment c o n s is te d in

adding the word® "and s h a ll be punished by a fin© not to exceed one hundred d o lla r s or Imprisonment in the county J a il 63 not to exceed t h ir t y days*" The B l i t z amendment passed the House o f R e p r esen ta tiv e s by a v o te o f se v en ty -n in e to one, 64 w ith tw e n ty -e ig h t absen t or not voting* The Senate was unanimous In i t s app roval, w ith t h ir t y - f o u r v o te s f o r the b i l l , and f i f t e e n ab sen t or n ot v o tin g # 65 approved and took e f f e c t March 28, 1928*

The b i l l was The form o f the

s t a t u t e a f t e r th® a d d itio n o f t h i s amendment la the f o m In which i t appears to d a y , as f o llo w s : C iv il R ights d efined* A ll persons w ith in t h is s t a t e s h a l l be e n t i t le d to th© f u l l and equal enjoyment o f the accommodations, advan tages, f a c i l i t i e s , and p r iv ile g e s o f In n s, r e s ta u r a n ts , ©hop h o u se s, e a tin g h ou ses, lunch c o u n te r s, and a l l o th er p la c e s where refreshm ents are serv ed , p u b lic conveyances, barber shops, bath hou ses, th e a te r s and a l l o th er p la c e s o f amusement* Punishment# Any person who s h a ll v io la t e the p r o v isio n s o f the above s e c tio n by denying to any p erson , except fo r reasons by law, a p p lic a b le to a l l p erso n s, the f u l l enjoyment o f any o f th© accommodations, advantages, f a c i l i t i e s , or p r iv ile g e s enumerated th e r e in , or by a id in g or I n c it in g such d e n ia l, s h a ll be g u i l t y o f a misdemeanor and s h a ll be punished by a f in e

26 n o t to exceed on© hundred d o l l a r s or Im p rison­ ment In th e c o u n t y j a i l n o t t o ex ceed t h i r t y

days*66

th e s t a t u t e , a s i t has e x is t e d s in c e 1925, in e ss e n c e c o v e r s fo u r g e n e r a l c l a s s e s o f e n t e r p r i s e s t p la c e s where r efre sh m en ts are s e r v e d , p u b lic c o n v e y a n c es, barber sh o p s, and p la c e s o f amusement.

Many o f the o th e r s t a t e s have

c i v i l r ig h t s a c t s which are more b ro a d ly worded, and which co v er a g r e a t e r number o f c l a s s e s o f e n t e r p r is e .

Rhode

I s la n d , f o r exam p le, p r o h ib it s d is c r im in a t io n by "any l ic e n s e d p la c e s o f p u b lic accommodation or amusement"

(3*7

w h ile W ashington e x te n d s th© g e n e r a l it y o f i t s c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e t o the extrem e o f c o v e r in g

p la c e o f p u b lic

r e s o r t , accom m odation, assem blage or am usem ent."6^

However,

th e Iowa s t a t u t e i s broader in I t s a p p l i c a b i l i t y th a n , f o r exam p le, th a t o f N ebraska, w hich i s phrased a s was the e a r l 69 l e s t form o f the Iowa law . Hi© in c lu s io n o f p r o h ib itio n o f I n c i t i n g o r a id in g an a c t o f d is c r im in a tio n I s common to t h ir t e e n o f the e ig h t e e n s t a t e s which have c i v i l r ig h t s * 70 la w s. F ive o f th e s t a t e s which have c i v i l r ig h t s law s do not Impose any s p e c l f i o c r im in a l p a n a lty fo r I t s v i o l a t i o n . Of t h e s e , C a lifo r n ia s p e c i f i c a l l y p erm its r e c o v e r y o f damages In a c i v i l a c t i o n , w h ile M in n esota, N ebraska, Rhode I s la n d , and W ashington n e it h e r s p e c i f y a c r im in a l p e n a lty nor perm it

e l v l l damage a lay t h e i r a c t a * I n

a d d itio n to th e se s t a t e s ,

th e I l l i n o i s a c t p r o v id e s th a t a v i o l a t o r may he e n jo in e d from fu tu r e v i o la t i o n * making p o s s ib le a fin© f o r contem pt sh o u ld the I n ju n c tio n be d e f i e d , but Im posing no o th e r 7© p en a lty * Th© rem ain in g s t a t e s a l l perm it f i n e s In v a r y in g am ounts.

Of th e s e s t a t e s , Hew York, C olorad o, C o n n e c tic u t,

K ansas, M ich igan , and Ohio have s t a t u t e s w hich f i x a minimum 78 fin e * These minimum f i n e s v a ry from te n d o l l a r s in the c a se o f C olorado to f i f t y d o l l a r s In Hew York and Ohio*

The

f o llo w in g s t a t e s do n o t s e t a minimum f i n e s Hew J e r s e y , In d ia n a , Iowa, M a ssa c h u se tts, P e n n sy lv a n ia , and W isconsin*

74

The maximum f i n e s In th o se s t a t e s which p erm it th e le v y in g o f f i n e s v a r ie s from on© hundred d o l l a r s in C o n n e c tic u t, In d ia n a , Iow a, M a ssa c h u se tts, M ichigan, P e n n sy lv a n ia , and W iscon sin to one thousand d o l l a r s In Kansas*

In r e s p e c t to

th e p e r m is s ib le fin© f o r c i v i l r ig h t s v i o l a t i o n s , the pro­ v i s i o n o f th© Iowa a c t i s com parable to th a t o f m ost o th e r s t a t e s which perm it f i n e s as punishm ent f o r t h i s o ffe n s e * I t i s n e c e s s a r y to e m p h a sise, how ever, th a t Iowa cornea In th© group o f s t a t e s w ith th e lo w e s t maximum fin e * The s i t u a t i o n w ith regard to im prisonm ent a s a p e n a lty f o r c i v i l r i g h t s v i o l a t i o n s shows about th e same v a r i a b i l i t y among th e s t a t e s as in f in e s *

Only th ree s t a t e s —Hew York,

M ichigan and Ohio— f i x a minimum j a i l se n te n c e f o r v i o l a t i o n

28 o f c i v i l r ig h t s #

75

Maximum s e n te n c e s p o s s i b l e In th e s t a t e s

f o r v i o l a t i o n o f c i v i l r ig h t s range from t h i r t y days In C o n n ecticu t* Indiana* Iowa and M a ssa ch u setts to one year In 76 Colorado* in the l a s t s t a t e * no o p tio n o f p r is o n se n te n c e i s a llo w ed s I f any i s imposed* i t I s a mandatory one yea r term*

However* th e C olorado s t a t u t e d oes n o t perm it the

Im p o sitio n o f b oth fin® and Imprisonment*

In t h i s r e s p e c t

I t i s th e o n ly s t a t e o th e r than Iowa which d oes n ot perm it both ty p e s o f p en a lty # Mina s t a t e s s p e c i f i c a l l y p rovid e f o r c i v i l l i a b i l i t y f o r In frin g em en t o f c i v i l r ig h ts *

Only one o f th ese*W iscon sin *

p r o v id e s fo r c o l l a t e r a l e s t o p p e l o f c i v i l a c tio n by c r im in a l 77 * p ro se cu tio n * Mew York* Hew J ersey * C a lifo r n ia * Colorado* Indiana* Kansas* M assach u setts* and M innesota perm it damages* but in no c a se more than #500* w ith th© e x c e p tio n o f K ansas, whose sta t& te p r o v id e s no lim it*

The Iowa a c t makes no pro-**

v i s i o n f o r the award o f damages to th© a g g r ie v e d party* but damages have been awarded* and t o r t l i a b i l i t y has been upheld 78 i n th© Iowa Supreme Court# The term s o f th e Iowa s t a t u t e seem p la in and s u s c e p t ib le o f a p p lic a t io n w ith o u t need o f c o n sid e r a b le in te r p r e ta tio n # In d eed , th e s t a t u t e i t s e l f h as n o t been a f e r t i l e sou rce o f l i t i g a t i o n b e f o r e the Supreme Court o f th e s ta te *

However*

th a t body has been c a lle d upon to I n te r p r e t th e s t a t u t e in

29 a l l I t s th r e e form®, and th e s e In te r p r e ta tio n ® u n d o u b ted ly w i l l h e lp t o e x p la in the s t a t u s o f enforcem en t o f th e la w , b o th p a s t and p r e sen t*

30 Chapter I I I SUPREME COURT INTERPRETATION OP THE IOWA ACT S in c e 1 8 3 4 , when th e o r ig i n a l c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e was p a ssed by the Iowa l e g i s l a t u r e , o n ly fo u r c a s e s have been d e c id e d by the Supreme Court o f th a t s t a t e which I n t e r p r e t th a t s t a t u t e d i r e c t l y In I t s c o n te x t o f a ttem p t­ in g to r e g u la te in d iv id u a l act® toward o th e r I n d iv id u a ls * The f i r s t o f t h e s e was d e c id e d in 1887, and d e a ls w ith th e o r i g i n a l form o f th e s t a tu te *

The second and th ir d were

d e c id e d in 1305 and 1910 r e s p e c t i v e l y , and hence d e a l w ith th e s t a t u t e as amended by the Twenty-tfourth G eneral Assembly* The m ost r e c e n t e a se was d e c id e d in 1949, and i s thus the 79 o n ly one w hich d e a ls w ith th e p r e s e n t s ta t u te * Of th e se fo u r e a s e s , th e f i r s t and th e l a s t were c r im in a l a p p e a ls , the secon d and th ir d were a p p e a ls from judgm ents in c i v i l a c tio n s * The f i r s t ea se to appear b efo re the Iowa Supreme Court f o r I n t e r p r e t a t io n o f the c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e was S ta te v* 80 B a l l , brought on a p p e a l from th© Mahaska D i s t r i c t Court* The d e fe n d a n t, Sen H a ll, a barber in the c i t y o f O sk aloosa, Iowa, was charged w ith v i o l a t i o n o f th e c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e In th a t he "know ingly, w i l f u l l y , and u n la w fu lly r e fu s e d to 81 sh a v e* * * a s n n e t t , and would g iv e no reason th erefo r" * He was i n d ic t e d , t r i e d , and c o n v ic te d in the d i s t r i c t c o u r t.

SI where a f i n e o f f i v e d o l l a r s wee Im posed.

Proa t h i s d e t e r ­

m in a tio n , H e ll appealed* The b r i e f s su b m itted to th e s t a t e supreme c o u r t in d ic a t e th a t H a ll was a N egro, and, i n t e r e s t i n g l y , th a t th e com p lain­ in g w i t n e s s , C«R* B e n n ett, was l ik e w is e a Negro.

There was

e s s e n t i a l agreem ent upon the f a c t s as s e t f o r t h in th® in d ic tm e n ts th a t B en n ett r eq u ested to be shaved by H a ll, and 82 t h a t H a ll, w ith o u t g iv in g any r e a so n , r e f u s e d . The S ta te argued b e fo r e th® c o u r t th a t the in t e n t io n o f th e l e g i s l a t u r e was t h a t nwhat a fo r e tim e a s a p p lie d to In n -k eep ers and common c a r r ie r s was sim p ly a c tio n a b le sh ou ld be c r im in a l as w e l l 9 and th a t th e se c r im in a l p e n a l t i e s were in ten d ed to a p p ly in 8$ a d d it io n t o b arb er shops and p la c e s o f amusement* That i s to s a y , th e S ta te contended th a t th e s t a t u t e f i r s t added a c r im in a l p e n a lty f o r a c t s o f d is c r im in a t io n by in n -k e e p e r s and common c a r r ie r s to th® c i v i l l i a b i l i t y a lr e a d y rec o g n ize d by th® common law*

A ls o , a c co rd in g to the S t a t e ’s argum ent,

th e s e c r im in a l p e n a l t i e s c r e a te d by l e g i s l a t i v e a c tio n were lik e w is e exten d ed to s im ila r a c ts o f d is c r im in a t io n by barber shops and p la c e s o f amusement*

Thus the s t a t u t e by th e

I n t e r p r e t a t io n o f the p r o s e c u tio n had a tw o -fo ld nature* the e sta b lish m e n t o f new p e n a l t i e s f o r c e r ta in r ig h t s r e c o g n ize d a t common law and the c r e a tio n o f new r ig h t s o f the same kind a s a g a in s t barbershops and p la c e s o f amusement.

As a c o r o lla r y

m t o th© c r e a t io n o f new r ig h t s by the s t a t u t e , the same p e n a l t i e s a p p lie d to th© e o n o n law r ig h t s by the s t a t u t e would be a p p lie d to th® new ly c r e a te d r ig h ts *

The S ta te

I n te r p r e te d th e p o r tio n o f the s t a t u t e a p p lic a b le to barber s h o p s, th e n , a s c r e a tin g new r ig h t s *

S in c e t h i s g e n e r ic

r ig h t had been r e c o g n iz e d by th e co m o n law a s a g a in s t in n ­ k e e p e rs and oosaaon c a r r i e r s , t h i s c r e a tio n o f new r ig h t s was In i t s easonc® th e e x te n s io n o f an e x ta n t r ig h t to new s u b je c ts *

This was to sa y th a t the r ig h t had in e f f e c t

e x is t e d by the r e c o g n it io n o f the common law , but n o t as a g a in s t b a r b e r sh o p s, and th a t the Iowa l e g i s l a t i v e enactm ent was an enlargem en t o f the scope o f t h i s common law r ig h t* T h is l i n e o f r e a so n in g on th e p art o f the S ta te im p lie s a l i b e r a l c o n s tr u c tio n o f the s t a t u t e , i f n o t th a t r e f u s a l o f s e r v ic e was nrlma f a c i e d is c r im in a t io n by barber shops as in th e c a se o f innkeepers* H a ll *s a tto r n e y s argued in o p p o s itio n to t h i s view o f th e natu re o f th© s t a t u t e th a t no r ig h t s were co n fer re d by th e s t a t u t e , b u t th a t i t sim p ly gave na cu m u lative remedy fo r common-law r i g h t s , so th a t the o ffe n d e r l a now l i a b l e 84 both c i v i l l y and c r i m i n a l l y .w Thus th© appellant agreed w ith th e S ta te th a t c r im in a l l i a b i l i t y had been added to c i v i l l i a b i l i t y a s regard s in n -k e e p e r s and common c a r r ie r s # However, th© c o n te n tio n th a t new r ig h t s had been c o n fer re d

33 ©r t h a t common law r ig h t s had bean e x ten d ed to in c lu d e barber sh op s and p la c e s o f amusement was denied*

I f th® S t a t e ' s

argument were h e ld to be in c o r r e c t In r e l a t i o n to b arb er Shops and p la c e s o f amusement, no o f f e n s e had been com m itted! s in c e i f no r ig h t s had been c o n fe r r e d by the s t a t u t e , none such e x i s t e d as to barber sh o p s, because th e r ig h t t o accommo­ d a tio n by a barber shop was unknown to th e common law#

The

a p p e l l a n t ' s a t to r n e y s fu r t h e r argued th a t i f th® d efen d an t were l i a b l e under the s t a t u t e , th en th a t I t s e l f was u n c o n s ti­ tu t io n a l#

The d e fe n s e was th u s r e s te d p r im a r ily upon th e

th e o r y th a t no r ig h t s as a g a in s t barber shops were c o n ferred by th e s t a t u t e , s e c o n d a r ily upon th© argument th a t had th e l e g i s l a t i o n a ttem p ted to c o n fe r r ig h t s t o accommodation in a b arb er sh op, such an attem p t must f a l l a s u n c o n s tit u tio n a l# T his d ou b le d e fe n s e was tantam ount to p r e s e n tin g the c o u r t w ith the l e g a l I s s u e o f u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y in two forms * one open and one v e ile d *

The p l a i n l y s t a t e d a s s e r io n o f th e

u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f any attem p t to c o n fe r r ig h t s a s a g a in s t barber sh op s o n ly a secon d ary r e s o r t .

The major form o f the

is s u e o f u n e o n a t it u t t o n a lit y i s to be found in th e I n i t i a l c o n te n tio n th a t no r ig h t s were c o n fe r r e d , s in c e I f t h i s con ­ t e n t io n were a c ce p ted by the co u rt th o se p o r tio n s o f th® s t a t u t e p u rp o rtin g to c o n fe r r ig h t s as a g a in s t barber shops would have been in o p e r a tiv e #

A r u lin g by the co u rt f o r e i t h e r

a a n te n tlo n o f th® a p p e lla n t would have th® a f f e c t o f n u l l i f y i n g th e s t a t u t e ' s Im pact on H all* Th® i s s u e o f u n e o n s t l t u t l o n a l l t y was th u s c l e a r l y p r e se n te d to the court*

I t w as, how ever, a b le to a v o id

th e l e g a l dilemma th u s posed by d e c id in g th e ea se on a p u r e ly t e c h n ic a l ground*

D e c is io n on t h i s b a s is rendered

u n n e c e ssa r y any c o n s id e r a tio n o f th® n atu re o f th© s t a t u t e or I t s c o n s titu tio n a lity #

&I4 1

The c o u r t , sp eak in g through

J u s t ic e R othrock, r e v e r se d the c o n v ic t io n on the ground th a t th e in d ic tm e n t under w hich H a ll had been c o n v ic te d was Im p rop erly drawn*

“There was a dem urrer to the i n d i c t ­

m ent! one ground o f w hich was th a t th© charge and f a c t s s e t f o r t h In th e In d ictm en t do n o t c o n s t it u t e an o f f e n s e p u n ish ­ a b le by law*

The dem urrer was o v e r r u le d .

We th in k i t

sh ould have been s u s ta in e d upon the ground s e t o u t."

86

The

c o n s id e r a tio n upon w hich the co u rt b a ses t h i s c o n c lu s io n i s th a t the d efen d a n t H a ll gave no reason f o r h la r e f u s a l to shave 3en n e t t .

C o n seq u en tly , th ere la no e v id en ce in the

reco rd to show th a t the r e f u s a l was d is c r im in a to r y in nature* F u r th e r, “th e r e sh ould have been an averment th a t th ere was no good r e a so n , and i t should have been averred th a t a t th a t tim e and im m ed ia tely a f t e r th e a lle g e d r e f u s a l he proceeded 87 to shave o th e r ® .w I t seems th a t the co u rt Is sa y in g th a t u n le s s a rea so n i s g iv e n by th e person r e fu s in g th e " f u l l

35 enjoym ent'1 r eq u ire d by th® s t a t u t e , th e r e can be no p r o o f t h a t th e r e f u s a l la d is c r im in a to r y *

U n le ss a reason l a

g iv e n when th e r e f u s a l o f accommodation o c c u r s , the burden o f p r o o f upon th e com p lain ant to show th a t th e r e f u s a l was n o t " fo r r e a so n s by law a p p lic a b le to a l l p erson s" becomes a lm o st In su p era b le*

Ih© co u r t h as to a l l i n t e n t s in th©

H a ll ca se s u p p lie d a g r a tu it o u s lo o p h o le through w hich o ffe n d e r s may ©scape*

S in ce the f in d in g in the c a se was

b ased upon th e in ad eq u acy o f the in d ic tm e n t, the c o u r t fs remarks about H a l l ' s f a i l u r e to g iv e a reason f o r h i s r e ­ f u s a l to sh aveB en n ett ar© o f cou rse pure d ic ta *

But the

p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t o f such d i c t a in fu tu r e c a s e s cannot be ignored* In th© p r o c e s s o f showing th a t the f a i l u r e o f the in d ic tm e n t to n e g a tiv e th© e x c e p tio n to th© g e n e r a l a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f the s t a t u t e , J u s t ic Rothrock seems o v e r ly to s t r e s s the r ea so n s why th e r e f u s a l to shave B ennett m ight have occurred*

P o in tin g out th a t the in d ic tm en t

f a i l e d to a v e r th a t th e r e was no good reason f o r th e r e f u s a l , th© j u s t i c c o n tin u e s , "For aught th a t appears in th e i n d i c t 88 ment th e r e may have been good reason f o r the r e f u s a l ." It seems l i k e l y th a t H a ll would have advanced © reason f o r h i s r e f u s a l t o shave Sen n ott had th ere

been any good r e a so n ,

© s p e c ia lly had th e r e been a reason s u f f i c i e n t to meet th©

requirem ent® o f the s t a t u t e *

I f B ennett had been M runk,

d i s o r d e r ly , p r o fa n e , o r f i l t h y 11 or had had ^som© c o n ta g io u s d i s e a s e , such a s b arb er* s i t c h 1* a s J u s t ic e Rothrock sug @9 je ste d , i t i s l i k e l y th a t t h i s c o n d itio n would have been advanced by H a ll upon t r i a l *

A d m itte d ly , th e burden o f

p r o o f th a t the a c t com plained o f under th e s t a t u t e i s d i s ­ c r im in a to r y r e s t s on the S ta te *

The r e a l o b j e c tio n to the

d e c is io n o f S ta te v* H a ll I s th a t i t s apparent a p p roval o f H a ll *s f a i l u r e to g iv e a rea so n f o r h i s r e f u s a l to shave B en n ett may make im p o s s ib le the p r o o f o f d is c r im in a t io n by p r o s e c u to r s i f a d efen d a n t sim p ly r e f u s e s t o jiv© a reason f o r an a c t th a t may b© d isc r im in a to r y *

Th© co u rt may have

been w ise to r e f r a in from an u n n e ce ssa ry d e c is io n a s to the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f th© s t a t u t e , and c e r t a i n ly th© t e c h n ic a l p o in t upon w hich th e c a se was d e c id ed was w e ll taken*

But

i t aeems a s though th© c o u r t, w h ile c a r e f u l l y r e fr a in in g from d e c id in g on© i s s u e , may have r a is e d an e q u a lly k n o tty one* E ig h teen y e a r s l a t e r , in the c a se o f Humburd v* Crawford, th e Iowa Supreme Court was a g a in c a ll e d upon to p a ss upon the v a l i d i t y o f the c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e .

In t h i s c a se th©

a c t* e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y was up held by I m p lic a tio n , through th© f a i l u r e o f th e ap p ellan t* to s e r i o u s l y c h a lle n g e it * W*H# Humburd, a Negro who was s e r v in g on a P olk D i s t r i c t Court ju r y , was taken by th© b a i l i f f , t o g e th e r w ith the o th e r

90

37 member® o f the ju r y , to a b oard in g house o p era ted by Mrs* M Crawford in Das M oines,

Mrs# Crawford r e fu se d to se rv e 01 him , and he was com p elled to e a t elsew h ere* A s u it fo r damages was b rough t a g a in s t Mrs* Crawford.

Humburd a lle g e d

In th e p e t i t i o n " th a t as a n a tu r a l and proxim ate r e s u l t o f s a id u n la w fu l a c t s o f th e d e fe n d a n ts , th e p l a i n t i f f was g r e a t l y h u m ilia te d , su b je c te d to p u b lic h a tr e d , contem pt and r i d i c u l e , stiffe n e d g r e a t p a in and m en tal a n g u ish and damaged in th e sum o f * * « F if t e e n Hundred D o lla r s ,"

92

The t © s t i -

many o f th e b a i l i f f and o f o th e r s o f th e ju r y e s t a b lis h e d th a t the a c t com plained o f had o c cu rred , and Ifumburd was awarded f i f t y d o l l a r s damages in P olk D i s t r i c t C o u r t # T h © d e fe n d ­ a n ts ap p ea led on th© ground® th at the type o f e s ta b lish m e n t which th e y were o p e r a tin g was not covered by th e c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e , bu t was a p r iv a te b u s in e s s .

The argument o f th e

a p p e lla n t s framed th e is s u e upon "the s t a t u s o f the e s t a b l i s h ­ ment k ep t

by th e d e fen d a n ts and a p p e lla n ts " and t h e ir c o n ten ­

t io n th a t

" th ey d id n ot keep a p u b lic house o f any s o r t , but

th a t t h e i r e sta b lis h m e n t was s t r i c t l y a p r iv a te house which 94 had n ev er been h e ld out to the p u b lic a s an in n ." The d e c is io n o f an unanimous cou rt was d e liv e r e d by Rustic© Ladd,

A presum ption o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y i s allo w ed

f o r th© a c t i t s e l f , sine© a f t e r r e c i t i n g the f a c t s , the J u stic © remark® th a t " i t i s n ot q u estio n ed but th a t t h i s was

38

a v i o l a t i o n o f th e c i v i l r i g h t s s t a t u t e , i f d e fe n d a n ts were m a in ta in in g an e a t in g house su ch a a t h e r e in content** 95 p la t e d * " Hie whole c a se h in ged upon the n a tu re o f th e e s t a b lis h m e n t , a s the f a c t o f damage was r e s te d e q u e r e ly upon th e v i o l a t i o n o f the s t a t u t e *

The c o u r t c i t e s au th or­

i t i e s d i s t i n g u i s h in g an in n from a boardin g h o u se , o b ser v in g th a t the c r u c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n i s th a t an inn keep er h o ld s him­ s e l f o u t to the p u b lic w ‘w h ile th© k eep er o f a boarding house r e s e r v e s th e c h o ic e o f comers and the term s o f aecommo96

d a t io n , c o n tr a c tin g s p e c i a l l y w ith each cu stom er. * 11

T his

was found t o be th© t e s t adopted by th e t r i a l co u rt in t h i s c a s e , and i n s t r u c t i o n s to t h i s e f f e c t w e p r o p e r l y g iv e n the jury* a c c o r d in g to J u s t ic e la d d .

**Hot from a d v e r tise m e n ts

or s ig n s a lo n e was th© tru e c h a r a c te r o f th© e sta b lish m e n t to be a s c e r t a in e d , b u t from th© manner o f co n d u ctin g th© b u s in e s s a s w e l l , and, i f m eals were served by d e fe n d a n ts to whomsoever cam®, a t a uniform p r i c e , a s the ev id en ce tended to show, t h is was s u f f i c i e n t h o ld in g ou t to th e w orld to 9*7

c o n s t i t u t e i t a p u b lic e a t in g bouse**1

Th© m a tter o f f a c t

was o f cou rse d eterm in ed by th e ju r y in the case*

C onsequent­

l y the award o f damges was affirm ed * Two a s p e c ts o f th© Eumburd c a se are h e l p f u l in se e k in g a p a tte r n o f in t e r p r e t a t io n o f the c i v i l r i g h t s a c t in the Iowa Supreme C ourt.

3 o th support th e view th a t th e s t a t u t e

m i s t o be regard ed a s an e x te n s io n o f the common law and as ad d in g an a d d it io n a l c r im in a l p e n a lty #

T h is v iew was argued

in S t a t e v# B a l l , but th e n a tu re o f the d e c i s i o n in th a t e a se l e f t th e q u e s tio n u n s e ttle d *

Nor d o es th e Bumburd ca se

a f f o r d more th an c lu e s a s to th e way In w hich th e s t a t u t e la to

be In te r p r e te d *

However, the a c ce p ta n c e by the c o u r t

o f th e common law d i s t i n c t i o n between in n s and boarding h o u ses le a d s to the b e l i e f th a t the common law con cep t o f r ig h t s to accommodation was fo rem o st in th e mind o f the court* In a d d it io n , the f a c t th a t the c a se was brought a s a c i v i l a c t i o n , r a th e r than by c r im in a l in d ic tm e n t, seems t o show th a t th e common law c o n cep t had engaged the a t t e n t io n o f th© 98 a tto r n e y s f o r the p l a i n t i f f # Future l i b e r a l in t e r p r e t a ­ t io n o f the s t a t u t e m ight more l o g i c a l l y d e r iv e from a c c e p t­ ance o f t h i s view than from adherence to the view th a t th© s t a t u t e i s p u r e ly p en a l and c r e a te s an o f f e n s e c o m p le te ly unknown to th e common law . That the s t a t u t e c r e a te s a new o f f e n s e and c o n fe r s new r i g h t s , unknown In the common law , was the a t t it u d e tak en by the Iowa c o u r t in the n oxt c a se in v o lv in g th© a c t 99 to com© b e fo r e it * Thus in 1910 the d i r e c t io n g iv e n to th© in t e r p r e t a t io n o f the s t a t u t e by Humburd v# Crawford w ss s i g n i f i c a n t l y a lte r e d #

The J.H . S e l l Company, a firm o f

c o f f e e m erch an ts, had taken a booth in a "pur© f o o d show11

o p era ted toy th e De® Moines R e t a il Grocer® A s so c ia tio n # A d m ission was charged by the G rocers A s s o c ia t io n to th e p rem ises upon w hich the show was held#

Ihe B e ll Company

was engaged in the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f sam ples o f t h e i r c o f f e e from th e booth*

The p erson in charge o f th a t b ooth refu g ed

t o se r v e Mr* and Mrs# S* Joe Brown w ith c o ffe e *

Mrs- Brown

brought s u i t f o r one thousand d o l l a r s dam ages, a l l e g i n g th a t a l l w h ite persona a p p ly in g were serv ed and th a t the p erso n in charge o f th e booth r e fu se d to se r v e h e r , s t a t i n g a s a rea so n w *we are n o t se r v in g c o lo r e d p eo p le here* or words to th a t e f f e c t *

A dem urrer o f the p l a i n t i f f to

d e fe n d a n t's answer was o v erru led by the P olk D i s t r i c t Court* Prom t h i s d e te r m in a tio n , the p l a i n t i f f appealed* J u s t ic e Deemer d e liv e r e d th e o p in io n o f the m a jo r ity o f a d iv id e d co u rt*

A fte r r e c i t i n g th© f a c t s o f the c a s e ,

tbs j u s t i c e began h is o p in io n b

s t a t i n g th a t th e r e was no

o f f e n s e su ch as th a t con tem p lated by the s t a t u t e known to th© common law and h o ld in g th a t "the l i a b i l i t y and th© remedy are b oth c r e a tu r e s o f the s t a t e * w

Thus the c o u r t f e e l s con­

s t r a in e d to in t e r p r e t the s t a t u t e s t r i c t l y ,

The m a jo r ity

seems e i t h e r to be in ig n oran ce o f or to ign ore the a t l e a s t aw slogou s c i v i l l i a b i l i t y th a t e x is t e d in the common law f o r both c a r r ie r s and in n k eep ers*

on the on© hand,approach­

in g c o n s tr u c tio n o f th e s t a t u t e from the view o f th© c r im in a l

41 a s p e c t s a lo n e , the co u rt I s u n d ou b ted ly j u s t i f i e d in In vokin g th e r u le o f the s t r i c t c o n s tr u c t io n o f p e n a l s t a t u t e s .

But

on the o th e r hand, th e I n s t a n t e a se i s n o t a c r im in a l p r o s­ e c u t io n a t a l l , and a d is c r im in a to r y a c t on the p a rt o f the k e ep er o f a p la c e o f amusement would seem under the r u le o f eluadem a e n e r ls to be e q u a lly a s a c tio n a b le a s a s im ila r a c t IDS o f d is c r im in a t io n on th e p a r t o f an In n k eep er. A l l in a l l , th e c o u r t seem s to be con fu sed as to what p r in c ip le sh o u ld gu id e c o n s t r u c tio n o f th e s t a t u t e in th e in s t a n t c a s e . The a c t i t s e l f I s h e ld c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a s an e x e r c is e o f th e p o l i c e pow er, bu t t h i s I s c a r e f u l ly q u a l if i e d was 105 a p p lie d t o a b u s in e s s o f a p u b lic or q u a si p u b lic c h a r a c t e r .w F u r th e r, # th e r e i s no doubt o f th e v a l i d i t y o f the s t a t u t e as a p p lie d to a n y th in g in the n a tu re o f an in n , p u b lic convey­ a n c e , p u b lic b ath h ou se, t h e a t e r , or o th e r p la c e o f amusement** But th e c o u r t e x p r e s s e s doubt a s t o th© s t a t u t e ’s a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o barber sh o p s, based on what seems th e in v id io u s d i a t i n e 104 t lo n betw een p u b lic and p r iv a te b u s in e s s . I f the dictum o f the c o u r t in Bowlin v . Lyon which makes th© assum p tion o f some measure o f c o n t r o l by th© s t a t e th© c r i t e r i o n o f d e d ic a tio n t o the p u b lic be a d op ted , then barber shops and o th e r lic e n s e d b u s in e s s e s and o c cu p a tio n s must be c o n sid er ed to a c q u ir e a p u b lic c h a r a c te r .

I t m ight even b© argued th a t

th e p a s s in g o f the c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e c o n s t it u t e d p er s© a

m s u f f i c i e n t assu m p tion o f c o n t r o l by th© s t a t e *

th©

d i s t i n c t i o n betw een p u b lic and p r iv a t e mad© b y th© c o u r t l a th© Brown c a se r e s t s upon what th e n a tu re o f th© bus­ i n e s s In q u e s tio n h a s been in th e p a s ts w hether or n o t a b u s in e s s "has alw ays been regarded a s semi o r q u asi p u b lic * " 3^

T h is d i s t i n c t i o n i s s t u l t i f y i n g to any l e g i s ­

l a t i v e attem p t to embrace o th e r b u s in e s s in th e category* I f any su ch c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f b u s in e s s i s j u s t i f i a b l e , th© stan d ard s e t up In the Bowlin c a se i s much c le a r e r *

In the

l i g h t o f th e extrem e In terd ep en d en ce o f a l l th© a s p e c ts o f an econom y. I t seems h ig h ly d o u b tfu l th a t th© apparent d i f f e r e n c e in kind I s more than a d if f e r e n c e in d eg ree o f d e d ic a t io n to th© p u b lic *

In a d d it io n , t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n

a s made by th e Brown c a s e , a s i n f l u e n t i a l as I t may have become In low er c o u r ts d e a lin g w ith th© problem , i s pure d ictu m and has no c l e a r b ea rin g on the a c tu a l p o in t upon w hich the c a se was d ecid ed * The f i n a l b a s is upon which th e Brown case was d ecid ed was th© f a c t o f th e r e n ta l o f th© booth by th e B e ll Company from th e R e ta il G rocers A s s o c ia tio n and the a c t i v i t y c a r r ie d on b? th e d efen d a n t in th e ren ted booth*

Th© company

was found n e it h e r to have been co n d u ctin g a p la c e o f amuse­ ment nor to be a p la c e where refresh m en ts were served w ith in th e meaning o f th© s ta tu t e *

Th® booth was n o t a p la c e o f

43 am usement, " fo r In to f a r a s th© p la c e was l i k e a t h e a t e r or o th e r p la c e o f p u b lic amusement, i t waa n o t b ein g con­ d u cted by th e B e ll Company, and in r e f u s in g to se rv e the c o f f e e i t d id n o t in any way d e p r iv e th e p l a i n t i f f o f any ^106 amusement*” On th e c o n tr a r y , the amusement a s p e c t s o f th e pure fo o d show were conducted by the He t a l l G rocers A s s o c ia t io n , and th e p l a i n t i f f was ad m itted to the show* " P l a i n t i f f was p erm itted a l l the e n te r ta in m e n t, amusement and in s t r u c t i o n to which sh e wag e n t i t l e d by rea so n o f 107 p ayin g h e r a d m issio n fe e * * ' Sin ce no prom ise o f c o f f e e was g iv e n by th© G rocers A s s o c ia t io n , th© p l a i n t i f f was n o t C on sidered a s e n t i t l e d to be serv ed th e c o f f e e by th© pay­ ment o f the a d m issio n p r ic e #

H e ith c r cou ld the booth as

o p era ted by th© 3 e l l Company be c o n sid er ed a s f a l l i n g w ith ­ in th e s t a t u t o r y c l a s s o f p la c e s where refresh m en ts are served*

In c o n str u in g t h i s p h r a se o lo g y the c o u r t remarked?

" It s u r e ly d o e s n o t a p p ly to a p r iv a te soda fo u n ta in , a p la c e where s o f t d r in k s are s o l d , or to a saloon*"^08

The co u rt

o f f e r e d in fu r t h e r su p p o rt o f I t s e x c lu s io n o f th© d efen d ­ a n t 1s a c t i v i t y from the c a te g o r y con tem p lated by the s t a t u t e th a t "the c o f f e e was a d o n a tio n f o r a d v e r tis in g p u rp oses and 109 t o en a b le I t t o se c u r e futur© tr a d e * ” Such d o n a tio n s are s p e c i f i c a l l y h e ld n o t to f a l l w ith in th© purview o f the sta tu te*

"The donor had th© undoubted r ig h t to s e l e c t th e

44 O b je c ts o f h i s b o u n ty , and m ight e x c lu d e a l l working men, a l l c o lo r e d p e o p le , a l l Irish m en , a l l Jew s, or a l l A d v e n tis ts f o r r e a so n s w hich to him m ight seem s u f f i c i e n t *

Ih ese

r e a so n s may be based upon race o r r e l i g i o u s p r e ju d ic e , and y e t th© c o u r t would n ot be

J u s t i f i e d In sa y in g th a t any r ig h t

had bean i n v a d e d * i h e

c r u c ia l p o in t I s n o t th® p r iv a te

n a tu re claim ed e lse w h e r e In th© o p in io n f o r the b u s in e s s , and th® m en tion o f soda fo u n ta in s was p u r e ly g r a tu ito u s to th© d e c i s i o n , a s the c o u r t l a t e r adm itted*

The e s s e n t i a l f a c t

in e x c lu d in g th© d e f e n d a n t s a c t i v i t y from the coverage o f the s t a t u t e was th a t the refresh m en t was g iv e n away and n ot so ld * 33a© term " serv ed ” l a

co n stru ed to mean "sold" and

upon t h i s p o in t the c o u r t r e s t s I t s d e c is io n th a t th© B e ll Company’s b ooth was n o t an e n te r p r is e s e r v in g refresh m en ts# Upon the e x c lu s io n o f the company’s a c t i v i t y from the c a t e g o r ie s o f p la c e s o f amusement and p la c e s where r e f r e s h ­ m ents are s e r v e d , the co u rt a ffirm ed th© o rd er o f the t r i a l 111 c o u r t o v e r r u lin g the p l a i n t i f f ’ s demurrer* J u s t ic e Evans wrote a d is s e n t in g o p in io n ,c o n c u r r e d In by J u s t ic e Weaver, in w hich the m a jo r ity was sh a rp ly c r i t i c i z e d f o r t h e i r a ccep ta n ce o f the d e fe n d a n t’s a l l e g a ­ t io n th a t th© b ooth could be sep a ra ted from the rem ainder o f the food show f o r the purpose o f d e c id in g th© case*

The

d i s s e n t i n g J u s t ic e s m ain tain ed th a t th© show was a u n ita r y

45 e n t e r p r is e *

“W ithout the b ooth s th e r e could have been no

showj and w ith o u t the show, th e r e co u ld have been no b o o t h s .”

112

The u n it a r y and p u b lic n a tu re o f th e food show, taken w ith the a d m issio n th a t the p l a i n t i f f was n o t serv ed a t the booth b ecau se ah© was c o lo r e d , b r in g s the ca se “f a i r l y w ith in th© 11 s l e t t e r o f th e s t a t u t e and c l e a r l y w ith in i t s s p i r i t * ” The j u s t i c e d id n o t b e l ie v e th a t th© s t a t u t e req u ired any in t e r p ­ r e t a t i o n , b ecau se o f i t s sim p le and com prehensive language* The p l a i n t i f f p e t it io n e d fo r a r e h e a r in g , which was d en ied *

However th e c la im in the p e t i t i o n th a t the sta te m en t

r e g a r d in g th© a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f the s t a t u t e t o soda fo u n ta in s was u n n e c e ssa r y to d e c id e th© c a se r e s u lt e d In a r e t r a c t io n o f th a t p o r tio n o f th© o p in io n p er curiam*

Th© co u rt s t a t e d

th a t i t s c i t a t i o n o f c a s e s d e a lin g w ith soda fo u n ta in s was f o r th e r e a so n in g in th o se c a ses*

I t d is c la im e d any in t e n ­

t io n o f ap p rovin g them or o f w ish in g to a d ju d ic a te th e 114 a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f the Iowa s t a t u t e t o such b u sin e sse s*

T his

d is c la im e r a s regard s soda fo u n ta in s fu r th e r saps th e s tr e n g th o f tbs c o u r t *s r e a so n in g a s to the a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f th© s t a t u t e to barber sh o p s. I t Is i r o n i c a l th a t the n e x t ca se in v o lv in g th© c i v i l r i g h t s s t a t u t e th a t cam© b e fo r e the c o u rt d e a lt w ith an 115 a lle g e d v i o l a t i o n by a drug sto r e * The com p lain in g w itn e s s e s were John B ib b s, Leona & Hudson, and Mrs* Edna G r iffin *

46 Th®y t e s t i f i e d th a t a w a it r e s s a t th e soda fo u n ta in had 116 inform ed them th a t w *We d o n ’ t se rv e c o lo r e d * ** The g e n e r a l manager o f th© s t o r e , Maurice K atz, t o ld th e co m p lain an ts t h a t B ’ I c a t e r to a la r g e body o f whit© trad e and d o n ’ t have th e proper equipment to serv e y o u * 1 S a te was f in e d f i f t y d o l l a r s and c o s t s In the Des Moines 118 M unicip al Court* Prom t h i s judgment he appealed* The unanimous o p in io n o f the Supreme C ourt, d e liv e r e d by C h ie f J h stle © H ays, made s h o r t s h r i f t o f the t e c h n ic a l a ssig n m en ts o f e r r o r made by th e a p p e lla n t*

Th© ap p eal

was based upon c o n te n tio n s th a t th® In fo rm a tio n f i l e 1 a g a in s t Kiats d id n o t charge a crim e, th a t c e r ta in ev id en ce had been w rongly a d m itted , th a t c e r t a in remarks o f th© s t a t e *o a tt o r n e y were improper and p r e j u d i c i a l , and th a t the p r e s id in g judge w r o n g fu lly in s tr u c te d th e jury# The f i r s t assign m en t o f e r r o r was th© same as th at upon which th e a p p e lla n t r e l ie d in th e case o f S ta te v . H all*

Th®

c o u r t d is p o se d o f t h i s assign m en t by c i t i n g a s e c t io n o f th e Iowa God©, p assed some tim e a f t e r the H a ll c a s e , p rovid e in g th a t “No In d ictm en t f o r an o ffe n s e c r e a te d or d e fin e d by s t a t u t e s h a l l b© in v a lid or i n s u f f i c i e n t m erely f o r th© rea so n th a t I t f a l l s to n e g a tiv e any ex ce p tio n * • .c o n ta in e d in th© sta tu t© c r e a tin g or d e f in in g the o ffe n s e .* '^ ®

Thus

th© p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t o f th© h o ld in g In S ta te v . H a ll has

47 bft®!» p a r t l y e lim in a te d by th e s t a t u t o r y en a ctm en t, w ith i t # s p e c i f i c a p p lic a t io n to the c i v i l r ig h t# s t a t u t e in th i# c a se #

The p o r t io n o f th e e a r l i e r caee w hich m ight

have had e f f e c t a# p r e c e d e n t la e lim in a t e d , b u t th e d i c t a o f th e c a se may y e t p la g u e some fu tu r e c o u r t. The a p p e lla n t# a l s o conten ded th a t q u e stio n # asked by th e s t a t e #s a t t o r n e y w ith r e fe r e n c e to th e s e r v in g o f N egroes a t th® drug s to r e in th e p a s t were improper#

The

c o u r t d is p o s e d o f t h is c o n t e n tio n on th e ground th a t d e m o n stra tio n o f th e g e n e r a l p o l i c y o f th e s t o r e was p e r t in e n t t o th e q u e s tio n as to w hether th© r e f u s a l o f s e r v ic e was d is c r im in a to r y #

Such e v id e n c e , a lth o u g h I t

m ight he I n a d m iss ib le i f I t s on ly purpose was t o show th e com m ission o f crim es in th e p e s t , i s h ere a d m iss ib le be* cau se i t a l s o shows "a planned p o lic y o r in t e n t to v i o l a t e th e s p e c i f i c s t a t u t e , a v i o l a t i o n o f w hich i s h e r e charged•*

120

The fu r th e r a ssig n m en ts in e r r o r were brushed a s id e by the c o u r t , w hich remarked th a t a lth o u g h c e r t a i n words used by th e s t a t e * # a tt o r n e y in argument and b y th® c o u r t in in s t r u c ­ t i n g th® Jury war® u n fo r tu n a te ly c h o se n , th e y were n o t p r e ju ­ d i c i a l and hence were n o t grounds f o r r e v e r s a l#

The c o u r t

found th e s e word# n o n -p r © J u d icia l in th e c o n te x t o f the t r i a l b ecau se "nowhere in the record i s th e r e any d e n ia l o f the sta te m e n t mad® by th® s t a t e 1# w itn e s s e s t h a t th e y were r e fu s e d s e r v ic e by an employs® o f a p p e lla n t , and f o r th e

f u r t h e r r e a s o n , th a t a p p e lla n t submi tt e d M s c a se upon th® s o l e th e o r y th a t r e f u s a l was due to d is tu r b a n c e s c r e a te d 121 by the th r e e N eg ro es* w S in ce th ere was no d e n ia l o f th e a l l e g a t i o n s o f th® N eg ro es, a sta te m en t to th a t e f f e c t was n o t p r e j u d ic ia l*

In a d d it io n , the th e o r y upon which

Katz r e s t e d h i s c a se had been su b m itted to th e ju r y , which found a g a in s t him on it * 122 c o u rt was u p h e ld .

The f i n e le v ie d by the t r i a l

These fo u r c a s e s do

o t f u r n is h a v e r y firm b a s is

f o r fu r th e r e lu c id a t io n o f the c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e *

In

o n ly o n e. S ta te v* K atz, d id th© co u rt expand th© meaning o f th e s t a t u t e t o co v er under th© r u le o f eluadem g e n e r is an e n t e r p r is e n o t s p e c i f i c a l l y l i s t e d in th e a ct*

In t h i s

c a se a drug s t o r e was h e ld to come w ith in the purview o f the s t a t u t e as a p la c e s e r v in g refresh m en ts*

In one o th e r

c a s e , Humburd v* Crawford, the c i v i l r ig h t s a c t was a p p lie d to a boardin g house as in clu d ed in th e c a te g o r y o f In n . In a t h i r d , Brown v* B e ll Company, the c o u rt refu sed to ap p ly th© a c t in a s e t o f r e s t r i c t e d c ircu m sta n ces which are n o t l i k e l y to fu r n is h a c lo s e a n alogy f o r su c c e e d in g c a ses*

In

t h i s c a se and in the fo u r th , S ta te v . H a ll, c e r t a in d ic t a o f the c o u r t have been th e sou rce o f c o n fu sio n and may g iv e r i s e to a d d it io n a l c o n fu sio n and I n j u s t ic e in the fu tu re* The c l o s e s t approach to a standard by which the a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f th© s t a t u t e m ight be measured was probab ly

49 t h a t su g g e s te d by th e c o u rt in Bowlin v . Lyons th a t l ic e n s e d e n t e r p r is e s would be s u f f i c i e n t l y under th© c o n t r o l o f th e p u b lic th a t th e common law r ig h t s a s a g a in s t In n k eep ers m ight be exten d ed to them by a n a lo g y . Som ething o f t h i s c o n cep t i s to be found in Humburd v . Crawford, in th e id e a th a t a b oard in g h o u se , a lth o u g h un­ l i c e n s e d , was s u f f i c i e n t l y d e d ic a te d to the p u b lic to come w ith in the scop© o f th© term ,!ln n n in the s t a t u t e . In the f i n a l a n a l y s i s , how ever, th e r e has been no ca se In w hich th© c o u r t has c l e a r l y in d ic a te d the n atu re o f c i v i l r ig h t s *

In Bowlin v . Lyon, Humburd v* Crawford, and, In

a lim it e d s e n s e , In S ta te v* K atz, the c o u rt has seem in g ly view ed th e s t a u t e as In i t s e sse n c e e x te n d in g common law r i g h t s , r a th e r than as c r e a tin g and c o n fe r r in g new r i g h t s . T his I n t e r p r e t a t io n i s opposed by th e d o c tr in e i m p l i c i t In the d i c t a o f Brown v* 3©11 Company t h a t th© s t a t u t e was one c o n fe r r in g r i g h t s , n o t m erely con firm in g and e x te n d in g them*

With th e e x c e p tio n o f the Brown c a s e , the I n te r p r e ­

t a t io n o f th© n a tu re o f th e s t a t u t e le a d in g to a broad in t e r p r e t a t io n aeema to have been a d o p ted .

Ihe view o f

th© s t a t u t e e x p r e sse d by th e a p p e lla n t In S ta te v . H a ll has been d isca r d e d e n t i r e l y , and the c r u c ia l q u e stio n now l i e s in c h o o sin g between the I n t e r p r e t a t io n o f the s t a t u t e as c o n firm in g e x i s t i n g common law r ig h t s or as c o n fe r r in g new r ig h ts *

Iheae view s are n ot sep a ra ted f o r the s c r u t in y o f

50 th® c o u r t In S ta te v* H a ll, but have corn® to r e p r e se n t th e o p p o sin g concep tion ® o f the n atu re o f the s t a t u t e *

On the

form er can be based a l i b e r a l in t e r p r e t a t io n o f the s t a t u t e , w h ile th© l a t t e r i s l i k e l y to prove more r e s t r i c t i v e $ sine® an e x te n s io n o f r ig h t s a lr e a d y e x i s t i n g in the common law a llo w s more leew a y f o r J u d ic ia l in t e r p r e t a t io n than i s p erm itted by the g e n e r a l/\th a t s t a t u t e s c o n fe r r in g new r ig h t s are to be in te r p r e te d s t r i c t l y * In sum m arizing th® p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t s o f the d e c is io n s o f the Iowa Supreme C ourt, i t seems a f a i r e stim a te th a t th ey are more l i k e l y to prove d e tr im e n ta l to w idespread enforcem ent than o th e r w is e , w ith the p o s s ib le e x c e p tio n o f S ta te v* Katz*

I t may w e ll be th a t the d e c is io n In

th a t ca se marks th e b eg in n in g o f a new and more l i b e r a l phase o f I n t e r p r e t a t io n o f the s ta tu te *

b u t, In p a r t ic u la r ,

the d i s t i n c t i o n mad© in brown v . B e ll Company between p u b lic and p r iv a te b u s in e s s may be shown to have had a d e le t e r io u s e f f e c t on en fo rcem en t, and may co n tin u e to do so*

I t seems

p r o b a b le, how ever, th a t th® c a u se s o f su ch In ad eq u acies o f enforcem ent a s may be found t o e x i s t can n o t bo l a id e x ­ c l u s i v e l y a t the door o f the Iowa Supreme C ourt, sine© th a t body has had romarkably l i t t l e

to do w ith the sh ap in g o f

the s t a t u t e , due to th e p a u c ity o f l i t i g a t i o n to come b efo re It*

Ihus th e s in s o f the co u rt are l a r g e ly s in s o f o m issio n ,

51 r a th e r than aln a o f coiam isslon* o p p o r tu n ity f o r e i t h e r .

And th e re h as boon l i t t l e

Chapter IV ENFORCEMENT OF THE IOWA STATUTE I d e a lly * th e d eg ree to w hich any c r im in a l s t a t u t e I s e n fo r c e d co u ld foe p o rtra y ed by an en forcem ent q u o tien t* O ils r a tin g would foe th e r e s u l t o f th e t r i p l e r a t i o o f v i o l a t i o n s o c c u r r in g to the number o f v i o l a t i o n s brought to t r i a l t o the number o f c o n v ic tio n s *

The assum ption

i m p l i c i t In such a fo r m u la tio n I s th a t f u l l d a ta on a l l th r e e f a c t o r s o f th e e q u a tio n would be a v a ila b le * Where th e se d a ta are n ot a v a i l a b l e , how ever, th e problem o f d e ter m in in g th e n a tu re o f enforcem ent becomes one which must b© e x p r e sse d in much more g e n e r a l term s.

Almost

n ever can thenumber o f v i o l a t i o n s o f a cr5.mlnal s t a t u t e be d eterm in ed .

More fr e q u e n tly d a ta reg a rd in g the number

o f t r i a l s and o f c o n v ic t io n s I s a v a i la b l e .

However, th©

Iowa c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e makes the in frin g em en t o f c i v i l r ig h t s a sim p le m isdem eanor.

The i n i t i a l t r i a l o f such

c a s e s ta k e s p la c e in the j u s t i c e o f th© peace c o u r ts o f th© s t a t e or In th® m u n icip a l cou rts*

Sine© th e s e ar©

n o t c o u r ts o f r e c o r d , the problem o f a r r iv in g a t some e s tim a te o f the adequacy o f enforcem ent o f th a t a c t la a d d i t io n a ll y c o m p lica ted by th e n o n - a v a i l a b i l i t y o f com plete and a c cu ra te d a ta r eg a rd in g the number o f c i v i l r ig h t s v i o l a t o r s brought to t r i a l or even o f the c o n v ic tio n s

m O btained*

The a sse ssm e n t o f adequacy o f en forcem en t o f th©

© l v l l r ig h t s law th u s becomes a problem o f a v e r y g e n e r a l and n e c e s s a r i l y t e n t a t iv e nature#

An e s tim a te o f the d eg ree

o f d is c r im in a t io n must se r v e a s an in d ic a t io n o f the v i o l a ­ t io n o f th a t s t a t u t e * upon th e r e a so n in g th a t v i o l a t i o n s o f a c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e are more l i k e l y to tak e p la c e where a p a tte r n o f d is c r im in a t io n h as been e s t a b lis h e d than where such a p a tte r n h as n o t been accep ted #

C o n clu sio n s r e l a t i n g

t o th e adequacy o f a c tu a l en forcem ent w i l l be reached on th e b a s i s o f the r e l a t i o n o f r e c e n t ly rep o rted v i o l a t i o n s o f th e s t a t u t e s and c o n v ic tio n s o b ta in ed to th e g e n e r a l l e v e l Of d is c r im in a tio n #

Such c o n c lu s io n s can o n ly be t e n t a t iv e in

nature# E a r ly in 1950* a p e t i t i o n was p r e se n te d to th e A ttorn ey G eneral o f Iow a, R obert L arson, by th© Iowa Emergency C iv il R ig h ts C om m ittee, an o r g a n is a tio n con n ected w ith th e R a tio n a l A s s o c ia t io n f o r th e Advancement o f C olored People*

The

p e t i t i o n s t a t e d t h a t the com m ittee was "charged w ith the S p e c ia l d u ty to J o in w ith you in your p r e se n t campaign f o r th e enforcem ent o f some o f th e seldom e n fo rced c r im in a l s t a t u t e s * and to c a l l your e s p e c i a l a t t e n t io n to the Iowa C i v i l R ig h ts S ta tu te # *

X23

Th© com m ittee was c l e a r l y con vin ced

th a t enforcem ent o f the c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e was inadequate* The p e t i t i o n s t a t e d quit© d e f i n i t e l y th a ts "The v i o l a t i o n o f

54 t h i s C rim in al s t a t u t e h as been p r a c tic e d w ith Im punity f o r m lo n g a tim e th a t th e r e are e a tin g h o u s e s , r e s t a u r a n t s , and •v e n b ear ta v e r n s 1m v a r io u s c i t i e s o f Iowa th a t have d i s ­ p la y e d i n them g la r in g p o s t e r s s t a t i n g th a t th e y w i l l n o t se r v e N egroes o r C olored P e r so n s, and many o th e r s who do n ot So a d v e r t is e o p e n ly s t a t e t o any Negro who a p p lie s th a t th ey 104

w i l l n o t s e r v e him*tt

'Ihe com m ittee th en p o in te d o u t

s e v e r a l I n s ta n c e s o f d is c r im in a to r y p r a c t ic e s In Des M oines, lb s te stim o n y o f the d e fen d a n t In S ta te v* Katz was c i t e d 120 in a d d it io n a l su p p ort o f t h i s p o in t# The A tto r n e y G eneral Was commended upon h i s campaign f o r the enforcem ent o f gam bling la w s , and I s urged t o add "to th e o b j e c t iv e s o f your campaign th e enforcem en t o f th e Iowa C i v i l B ig h ts S t a t u t e , w hich I s * • • e q u a lly as f la g r a n t ly and c e r t a i n l y more openl y v i o l a t e d ." 1B6 I h ia p e t i t i o n was o n ly a phase o f a c o n tin u in g cam­ p a ig n f o r c i v i l r ig h t s b

the N a tio n a l A s s o c ia tio n fo r th©

Advancement o f C olored P e o p le , which r e c e iv e d added im petus d u rin g the war y e a r s and from th e p r o p o sa ls o f P r e sid e n t Truman f o r f e d e r a l c i v i l r ig h t s l e g i s l a t i o n #

However, c o n s id ­

e r a b le s i g n if i c a n c e can b© a tta c h e d to the p e t i t i o n as e v i ­ dence o f non-enforceraent o f th e s t a t u t e and o f th e e x is t e n c e o f a d ev elo p ed p a tte r n o f d is c r im in a tio n In Iowa.

Such a

p e t i t i o n i s prim s f a c i e ev id en ce o f the e x is t e n c e o f the e v i l

m w hich i s com plained of#

I t must be n o te d th a t th e r e i s no

ad vocacy o f ex p a n sio n o f th e e x i s t i n g s t a t u t e by I n te r p ­ r e t a t i o n o f th e A tto r n e y G en eral, bu t m erely a r e q u e st f o r en forcem en t o f th e e x ta n t law*

The I n t e r n a l e v id e n c e o f

th e p e t i t i o n te n d s to support th e p o s i t i o n th a t d is c r im ­ in a t o r y p r a c t i c e s ar© f a i r l y w idespread in Iowa*

The f a c t

th a t s ig n s o f a d is c r im in a to r y n atu re are in w idespread u se i s s u s c e p t ib le o f read y dem onstration#

Bach s ig n s u s u a lly

take th© form o f ,#W© r e s e r v e the r ig h t to s e a t our cu sto m ers11 127 o r "Door r ig h t s r e se r v e d # ” Th® p o s tin g o f su ch s ig n s s u g g e s ts t h a t a p a tte r n o f d is c r im in a t io n h a s been d evelop ed th a t m eets w ith f a i r l y g e n e r a l p u b lic ap p roval In the s t a t e , sine© p r o t e s t s . I f an y, have been i n s u f f i c i e n t to induce th e rem oval o f su ch sig n s*

The d is c r im in a to r y fo r c e o f such

s i g n s , a s w e ll a s m erely v e r b a l r e f u s a l o f s e r v i c e , i s fu r t h e r i l l u s t r a t e d by a c tu a l c a s e s brought t o t r i a l * C o n sid era b le a d d it io n a l e v id en ce o f p r e v a le n t p r e ju d ic e and d is c r im in a t io n can b® adduced*

A su rv ey made o f d is c r im ­

in a t io n in v a r io u s a s p e c ts o f l i f e In Des Moines by th© C ouncil o f Church Women o f th a t c i t y showed the f o llo w in g s In th e f i e l d o f e d u c a tio n th e re was found to be no d is c r im in a t io n in the p u b lic s c h o o ls or In Drake U n iv e r s ity * * * * Most b u s in e s s and com m ercial s c h o o ls ar® c lo s e d to Negroes* * « « Two o f the h o sp ita l® are open to Negroes f o r m ed ica l or n u rses tr a in in g # • « • L i t t l e or no d is c r im in a t io n was found in s t a t e w e lfa r e and s e c r e t a r i a l work, the p o s t o f f i c e , c i t y

68 lib r a r y # w a ter works and p o l i c e departm ent# • « #Tfeer© are no c le r k in g p o s i t i o n s open In c i t y s t o r e s bu t • • • N egroes o f t e n are employed a s n u r se s a id s In h o s p it a ls # as maids# © le v a to r op erator® , stockroom h e lp . Janitor® # c o o k s, w a ite r s and w a it r e s s e s * 1®8 D is c r im in a tio n In employment i s n o t an u n s u b s ta n tia l in d ic a t io n t h a t i t i s l ik e w is e to be found in o th e r a c tiv ity #

A nother example o f d is c r im in a t io n I s t o be

found In th® f a c t th a t u n t i l mandamus p r o c ee d in g s were f i l e d a g a in s t th e C ity R e c r e a tio n Committee o f Cedar Rapids# Iowa, In 1948# N egroes were barred from th e m u n icip a l swim129 ming p o o l o f th a t c it y * I t i s common knowledge in Iowa C ity# Iowa# th a t th e o n ly barber shop which w i l l se r v e N egroes I s a c o n c e s s io n a ir e o f th e S ta te U n iv e r sity *

An

in c id e n t in w hich two men and th ree boys fo r c e d a Negro to le a v e Lenox#Iowa, i l l u s t r a t e s th a t the p a tte r n o f p r e ju d ic e 130 i s n o t c o n fin e d t o urban areas* A f i n a l b i t o f e v id en ce In p o in t i s th e f a c t th a t, in 192©, the House o f R epresen ta­ t i v e s o f th e F o r t y - f i r s t G eneral Assem bly p a ssed a b i l l to p r o h ib it m arriage "where on© p a r ty has o n e -fo u r th p art 131 or more o f negro b lo o d , and th® o th e r p a r ty i s w h ite # w The b i l l d ie d In th© Senate s i f t i n g com m ittee. Such exam ples o f r a c i a l p r e ju d ic e and d is c r im in a tio n could be m u lt ip lie d , but th e se seem s u f f i c i e n t to in d ic a te th a t r a c i a l p r e ju ­ d ic e and th e d is c r im in a t io n a tte n d a n t on I t are n ot un­ common in Iowa#

I f f u r t h e r ev id en ce on t h i s sc o r e I s deemed

m d e s i r a b l e , th© p r o s e c u tio n o f v i o l a t o r s o f th© c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e and c i v i l a c t io n s based on in fr in g e m e n ts o f c i v i l r ig h t s a r e in th e m se lv e s su ch e v id e n c e . The en forcem en t o f th© p r e s e n t Iowa c i v i l r ig h t s a c t was su rveyed f o r th© te n y e a r s 1 9 3 9 -1 9 4 9 .

T h is p e r io d was

ch o sen b e c a u se i t was f e l t th a t c a s e s brought e a r l i e r than 1939 would p rob ab ly be v a l u e le s s as e v id en ce o f th© p r e se n t enforcem en t o f the s t a t u t e .

C o n sid era b le r e se a r c h in

v a r io u s p e r io d ic a l s r e v e a le d no r e p o r ts o f c i v i l r ig h t s e a s e s e a r l i e r than th a t tim e , and the memories o f in d iv id u a l in fo rm an ts fu r n ish e d no c lu e s o f any a id .

To the ton year

p e r io d su r v e y was added th e one ca se th a t was r ep o rted in the f i r s t h a l f o f 1 9 3 0 , c h i e f l y because t h i s c a s e r ep re sen ted the o n ly c i v i l r ig h t s p r o se c u tio n in th e l o c a l i t y In w hich i t occurred.

The su rvey o f th e ten yea r p er io d was conducted

In v a r io u s Iowa p e r io d ic a l s , s in c e c i v i l r ig h t s c a s e s are 139 n o t t r ie d o r i g i n a l l y in c o u r ts o f record* During th© decad© from 1939 to June 1 9 3 0 , tw enty-tw o c r im in a l p rosecu tion ® were brought under the Iowa c i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e a g a in s t e le v e n d e fe n d a n ts .

Th© e a r l i e s t o f

th e se was S ta te v# C h a ffe e , brought In 1941 on th© com plaint o f Mr®. Josep h in e Jones a g a in s t Dempster D. C h a ffee, manager o f the F.&W. Grand Store In Des M oines, Iow a.

Th© c r im in a l

ch a rg es a r o se ou t o f an a l le g e d r e f u s a l o f s e r v ic e o f lu n ch

53 a t a t a b le in th e lu n c h e o n e tte op erated by the sto r e *

These

c h a r g es were dropped a f t e r th e management o f the s to r e agreed t o c e a se d is c r im in a tio n *

Two y e a r s l a t e r , ch arges on the

b a s i s o f a s im ila r a l l e g a t i o n , f a i l u r e t o g iv e booth s e r v i c e , were brought In S ta te v« B e s s ie .

J.W* B e s s ie was th® manager

o f th e same F* & W# Grand S to re th a t was in v o lv e d in S ta te v . C h affee *

The com p lain in g w itn e s s in th® B e s s ie c a se was

Mrs* C.P# Howard*

This c a s e , l i k e th e e a r l i e r on e, was d i s ­

m issed from the Des Moines M unicip al Court a f t e r an a g r e e ­ ment had been reached th a t th e s t o r e would n ot in fu tu r e r e fu s e to se r v e H egroes in b o o t h s * I n

J u l y ,1 9 4 3 , the same

month th a t S ta te v . B e ssie a r o s e , th e f i r s t o f ten e a s e s ch a r g in g v i o l a t i o n o f the c i v i l r ig h t s a c t was brought a g a in s t th e Kats Drug S t o r e , Bee Moines*

Mrs* Marie Johnson charged

th a t the d r u g sto r e r e fu se d to se r v e a t th e soda fou n tain * The ca se was d is m is s e d from th® h as Moines M unicipal C ourt, a l ­ though w ith o u t any c o n c e s s io n s on the p a r t o f th© d efen d an t 135 in t h i s in sta n c e * Ih ree c i v i l r ig h t s c a s e s were brought in 1944*

In the

f i r s t o f t h e s e , S ta te v* Johnson, Mrs* Beulah Henry com­ p la in e d th a t she was r e fu se d s e r v ic e o f i c e cream cones by Richard Johnson, th© o p e r a to r o f H iggin s Fairground Pharmacy, Dea Moines#

Mrs# Henry and e ig h t c h ild r e n were t o ld by

Johnson th a t I t was to o l a t e to be s e r v e d , th© com plainant a lle g e d #

L a te r , Sh® t e s t i f i e d , one o f th® c h ild r e n who d id

59 n o t 41lo o k l i k e o c o lo r e d g i r l ” was s o ld a candy bar toy Johnson*

Johnson t e s t i f i e d th a t ha alw ays c lo s e d the

fo u n ta in c a sh r e g i s t e r e a r l y , and th a t t h i s was th© reason th© com p lain an t was r e fu s e d s e r v ic e *

The ca se was d l s -

m issed by th© Baa Moines M u n icip al Judge Don .Allen**®® The second o f th e 1944 c a s e s was S ta te v* Y arn ell#

In t h i s e a e e ,

th e Rev* W*F* O gleton com plained th a t Elmer Y a r n e ll, oper­ a t o r o f th e Y a r n e ll Drug S to r e , Des M oines, r e fu se d to se r v e him a sandwich#

He was so ld a m alted m ilk , but was

t o ld th a t he would have to take h i s sandw ich o u ts id e I f he wanted i t , a s wwhlt© p eop le from the s t a t e house would to© coming In to e a t #n

The S ta te * s a t to r n e y asked f o r a

Jury t r i a l in Des Moines M u nicip al C ourt, Judge H* a# Grund p r e sid in g *

The ju r y , composed o f fo u r women and two men,

a c q u itte d Y arn ell#*® 7

fh e th ir d o f the 1944 c i v i l r ig h t s

o a se s was a l s o © g a in st the Kats Drug Store*

In t h i s

i n s t a n c e , Dr* v?.H# P rin ce H aggerty f i l e d a com p lain t to th© e f f e c t th a t he was r e fu se d lun ch in a booth In the drug­ s to r e #

H© t e s t i f i e d

th a t the manager o f the s to r e s t a t e d

th a t i t was n ot th© store*® p o l i c y to se r v e Negroes* 'Hie manager, Maurice K ata, was foxmd n ot g u i l t y by a M unicip al 158 Court Jury o f s i x women on December 4,1944* Only one c a se was p r o se c u te d In 1945*

T h is i s both

th e f i r s t c i v i l r ig h t s ca se t r ie d In a c i t y o th e r than

60 Dea Moin s a and th e f i r s t c o n v ic t io n o f th© t@n-y©ar su rv e y p erio d *

I t i s a l s o b e lie v e d to be the f i r s t c a se o f th e

s o r t e v e r t r ie d in D avenp ort, Iowa*

In S ta te v* B axter,

Mrs* D orothy B a x ter, p r o p r ie to r o f th e C o lo n ia l F oun tain and G r i l l in th a t c i t y , was found g u i l t y by a Jury in the Davenport M u n icip al Court o f v i o l a t i o n o f th© c i v i l r ig h t s a ct#

Mrs# B axter had r e fu se d to se rv e Mr* and Mrs* C h arles

Toney, who f i l e d the com plaint*

She was f in e d ten d o l l a r s

and costs#^® ^

V. Four c i v i l r ig h t s c a s e s were t r i e d In 1946* 'The f i r s t

o f t h e s e , S ta te v* S t e g g a l l , was brought on th© com p lain t o f Mr* and Mrs* Josep h Johnson a g a in s t C e c il S t e g g a ll, Manager o f C u rle y 1® C afe, Des Moines*

The Johnsons t e s t i f i e d

th a t when th e y e n te r e d th© c a f e , th e y were r e fe r r e d to the sig n in th e window, which reads "We r e se r v e the r ig h t to s e a t our cu sto m ers* 11

They were then to ld th a t th e y cou ld

e a t in the k it c h e n , a t th e c o u n te r , or take food o u t, but cou ld n o t be se r v e d a t a ta b le *

.S te g g a ll was a lle g e d to

have g iv e n a s a reason fo r t h i s treatm en t th a t to se r v e the co m p lain an ts a t a ta b le "would h u rt h i s b u sin ess* "

Th©

M u n icip al Court Jury returned a se a le d v e r d ic t o f a c q u it t a l 140 a f t e r fo u r hours d e lib e r a t io n * The second cas© in 1946 was S ta te v* Sp iros*

Harry S p ir o a , o p era to r o f th© V ic to r y

Cafe In D avenp ort, was found g u i l t y o f c i v i l r ig h t s v i o l a ­ t i o n in r e fu s in g to se rv e food to Robert Jones*

He was

61 f in e d te n d o l l a r s and c o a t s in D avenport P o lic e Court*^* The th ir d o f th e se e a s e s , S t a t e v# Brown, was d is m is se d b ecause o f the f a i l u r e o f the com p lain in g w itn e s s to make appearance when th© c a se was c a l l e d f o r t r i a l .

T his s i t u a ­

t i o n a r o se when th e d efen d a n t was g ran ted a ju r y t r i a l , and th e c a se was postponed#

Th© com p lain in g w it n e s s , a d e le g a te

t o th e n a t io n a l c o n v e n tio n o f th e American Veteran® Comm­ i t t e e , had l e f t town b e fo re th© c a se came to t r i a l #

the

d efen d a n t Brown was th e o p e r a to r o f th e Rose Bowl, a Des 142 M oines tavern# The f i n a l ca se o f 1946 was tr ia d in ^ C e n t e r v i l le , a town in s o u t h - o e n t r a l Iowa#

This c a s e .

S ta te v« Thompson, a r o se o u t o f an a lle g e d r e f u s a l o f s e r v ic e by a r e sta u r a n t to two d e le g a t e s to th e s t a t e con fe r e n e e o f th e N a tio n a l A s s o c ia t io n f o r th© Advancement o f Colored P eople#

AJury In th e co u rt o f J u s t ic e o f the

Peace H#H# Henderson found the d e fen d a n t n ot g u i l t y o f v i o l a t i o n o f th e s t a t u t e . The year 1947 saw o n ly two p r o s e c u tio n s f o r c i v i l r ig h t s v io la t io n #

The f i r s t o f th e se was th® th ir d S ta te

v# Katz Drug Store#

The com p lain in g w itn e s s In t h i s

in s ta n c e was D#H, Harper#

I t was d ism isse d in Des Moines 145 M unicipal Court f o r la c k o f w itn e ss e s # The o th e r , S ta te v# Jam es, was th e f i r s t c i v i l r ig h t s case to b e t r ie d In Iowa C ity ,Io w a #

Two Negro s tu d e n ts a t th e S ta te U n iv e r s it y ,

02 B iehard T* C u lb ertaon and W illiam Knox, a lle g e d th a t th e y w m

r e fu s e d ad m ittan ce t o th e M ayflow er, an Iowa C ity

n ig h tc lu b *

f h l s e s ta b lis h m e n t waa o p era ted by C h arles

James a s a c lu b , t o w hich membership was purchased in the form o f a membership c a r d , w hich p erm itted e n tra n ce to th© clu b*

A fte r th e co m p lain an ts had purchased membership

c a r d s , th e y were asked to le a v e and t o ld th a t s a le o f ca rd s t o them was an erro r*

A fte r fo u r p ostp on em en ts, a

m otion t o d i s m i s s , and h e a r in g on th e m otion , th e ca se was f i n a l l y d e c id e d by J u s t ic e o f the Peace John Kadlec o v er two months a f t e r th e o r ig i n a l ch a rg es wore f i l e d .

James

was found n o t g u i l t y by Kadlec on th e b a s is o f the d e c is io n 144 Of the Iowa Supreme Court In Brown v* B ell* Here I s an In sta n c e In w hich the d i s t i n c t i o n made o b it e r between p r iv a te b u s in e s s and p u b lic b u s in e s s c l e a r l y in flu e n c e d s t a t u t o r y en fo rcem en t. In th e f i r s t ca se i n 1 9 4 8 , S ta te v . N ixon, a n o th er Jury brought in an o th er a c q u itt a l*

J*H. B urtt o f Ottumwa

f i l e d Charges o f v i o l a t i o n o f th e e l v l l r ig h t s s t a t u t e a g a in s t C lif f o r d Macon, o p e r a to r o f N ixon 1s L uncheonette in Lea M oines, a l l e g i n g th a t he was r e fu s e d s e r v i c e . The ju r y th a t a c q u itte d Nixon In the JDes M oines M unicipal Court was composed o f e le v e n women and o n ly one man*^4^

The

fo u r th p r o s e c u tio n o f the Kate Drug S tore wsr- a ls o begun in

65 1948.

In S ta te v . Katz XV, Mrs# Edna G r i f f i n , John B ibb s,

and Leonard Hudson were th e com p lain in g w it n e s s e s .

They

a lle g e d v i o l a t i o n o f the c i v i l r i g h t s s t a t u t e c o n s i s t i n g i n r e f u s a l o f s e r v ic e a t th e d r u g sto r e fo u n ta in *

The manager

o f the s t o r e , M aurice K atz, was found g u i l t y by a Des Moines M u n icip al Court Jury and f in e d f i f t y d o l l a r s and c o s t a by 146 M unicip al Judge H*B* Grand* Katz ap p ealed to the J0wa 147 Supreme C ou rt, w hich up held h ie c o n v ic tio n l a t e in 1949* W hile th e a p p ea l was s t i l l p en d in g , s i x a d d it io n a l ch arges were f i l e d on the same d ay, November SO, 1 9 4 9 , a g a in s t Katz and the Katz Drug S tore*

These in c lu d e one com p lain t by

^anneth W alker, a whit© who s a id th a t he was r e fu sed s e r v ic e b ecau se he s a t a t the co u n te r between two N egroes.

These

s u i t s were dropped when K atz, a f t e r l o s i n g h i s appea" on 148 S ta te v* Katz IV, a g reed to se rv e Negroes* The s in g le c a se to come to t r i a l In th e f i r s t s i x months o f 1950 was S ta te v* I v e r s o n , t r ie d In the Sioux C ity M unici­ p a l C ou rt.

Boy I v e r s o n , p r o p r ie to r o f the C offee Cup C afe,

Sioux C ity , was charged w ith v i o l a t i o n o f the sta t\it© by r e f u s in g to se r v e c o f f e e to two Negroes#

Iv e rso n pleaded

g u i l t y to the charge and was g iv e n a ehoie© betw een a t h i r t y f i v e d o l l a r f i n e and a te n -d a y J a i l s e n te n c e .

The se n te n c e

was suspended on payment o f c o s t s d u rin g good b eh avior by 149 M unicipal Judge George M. P aradise* Table I , f o llo w in g , Shows th e s e c a s e s In a summary form#

64 «**•% ,* ft

£

fl

o

*d

2 to

o

0» «r»

• 0

0 tH 0

S

s

d A H «£J TO •H •TO ,o TO 43 s

43

r*t 43

4

9

TO © d *4 o PI TO © ft 1 H TO* 09 rt

© 4® 4» TO @ 0 € a

TO © p •ti & $§j TO i JL *0 TO* o> rt

•H *M

TO *H

TO TO © 2 PI •H wP o 0 iff m TO TO A 1 I IQ TO* >0 $ ft ♦TO r t

TO

TO

M M 43

5

9

* >

H 43

P 43 TO 60

43 To/ 4® 60

©

43

e

U 0

4® TO

d 0 TO

d

TO 2 P %4 &| pB $d* < TO« 09 ♦TO

TO © P 0 si TO TO* ft •TO

0

& 0 Q 43 43 TO TO feO W

H H TO

i"0

h*

•

• TO

©, 43 43 TO 43 TO 43 co 00

M M M j|,*H

#

©

43 TO

43 CO

4*»

43 0 P» P © h S 1 10 TO* O) •TO

TO © 49 d 'd «H 0 o ft ss P 0 TO § 1

©

a

'W H 0 43

• i> o 43 TO 43 60

i p

TP O w TO TO 03

rH TO fcD fc€

43

03 # h

TO 43 TO

4® 00

43 d Q} w 0 O |T TO TO TO

m

TO 0 H ft CO

• h

*s 0 0 «H fij (S IE? ft

« TOJ

TO © q *H *«£b*B w ft TO S «

03

i OtP* T

*0 0 0 0 £j TO ■H ft

TO © p H .S TO & Jt> TO* ft H

TO

04 i 0 fcn l

« >

43 TO

43 60

H 0 43 43 «rj 0 0* 0
QSiis second method assum es th a t the A ttorn ey G eneral lias a g e n e r a l su p e r v iso r y c o n t r o l ov er th e a c t i v i t i e s o f county a tto r n e y s

121 In Iowa, a lth o u g h th a t v e r y assum ption I s d e b a ta b le , or th a t su ch c o n t r o l could c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y be co n fer re d by sta tu te i

A

com plainant would th u s have a d d it io n a l reco u rse

to the A tto r n e y g e n e r a l should a co u n ty a tto r n e y show re* lu c ta n c e to p r o se c u te under the s t a t u t e #

A p r o v is io n

m ight even be made th a t a s p e c i a l p r o se c u to r could take o v er the p r o s e c u tio n o f th e c i v i l r i g h t s ca se In su ch an ev en t*

Hew York, Hew j e r s e y , and I l l i n o i s r eq u ire the

en forcem en t o f c i v i l r ig h t s l e g i s l a t i o n by the s t a t e At ~ id o fovn&y G eneral** A lthough su ch a p r o v is io n I s n o t In-* elu d ed in the Model d i l l , i t 1® recommended by M ilton R* 101 K onvitz a s **a s t e p In th e r ig h t d ir e c t io n * w There seems to be no bar to su ch procedure in th e C o n s titu tio n o f Iowa* An

a l t e r n a t i v e f o m o f t h is p r o p o sa l i s , o f c o u r s e , the

p r o v is io n o f a s p e c i a l s e c t io n o f the s t a f f o f th e A ttorn ey G eneral to e n fo r c e th© c i v i l r ig h t act#

The o v e r a ll s it* '-

.a t io n in Iowa seems h a rd ly to warrant su ch a d r a s t ic m easure, however* The problem o f th e p o t e n t i a l u n w illin g n e s s o f a d i s t r i c t c o u r t ju ry to c o n v ic t f o r v i o la t i o n o f a r e v is e d C i v i l r ig h t s s t a t u t e i s seem in g ly one w hich must be met on a n o th er l e v e l than tH p u rely l e g a l or o r g a n iz a tio n a l* This i s the l e v e l o f p u b lic support a t w hich the p h ilo so p h y o f c i v i l r ig h t s l e g i s l a t i o n must stand or f a l l *

To examine

122 th e r o o t s o f p r e ju d ic e In Iowa la f a r from the purpose o f t h i s study*

I t must s u f f i c e t o sa y th a t th e e f f e c t s o f

p r e ju d ic e are p rob ab ly o b ser v a b le in ju r y b e h a v io r , a t l e a s t r e c e n tly #

To examine any o r g a n is a t io n a l p r o p o sa ls

f o r th e e lim in a t io n o f p r e ju d ic e from the e f f e c t s o f v e r d ic t s in c i v i l r i g h t s c a s e s would n e c e s s i t a t e a thorough a n a l y s i s o f the ju ry sy s te m . I t s s tr e n g th and i t s weak­ n esses*

Other than on an o r g a n iz a tio n a l l e v e l , an a ttem p t

to remedy a t t i t u d e s o f ju r o r s toward c i v i l r ig h t s c a s e s must take r e fu g e In the p r o p o s itio n th a t h ere I s the job o f e d u c a t io n , home, and church*

E f f o r t s to d e a l w ith

p r e ju d ic e on t h i s l e v e l can be a id e d by l e g i s l a t i o n , but to r e c e iv e a id -fr o m I t th e re must be law enforcem ent in c o n ju n c tio n w ith e d u c a tio n , p a r e n ta l p r e c e p t, and r e l i g i o u s d e d ic a tio n *

As Arthur &■* S c h ie s in g e r , J r * , w r ite s :

While

we may not be a b le t o r e p e a l p r e ju d ic e by law y e t law i s an e s s e n t i a l p a r t o f th e e n te r p r is e o f e d u c a tio n which a lo n e can end p r e ju d ic e *

I t may

© f o o l i s h t o th in k th a t we can

tran sform fo lk w a y s and e r a d ic a te b ig o tr y overn igh t*

iiut

I t i s f a t a l not to m a in ta in an u n r e le n tin g a tta c k on a l l 190 form s o f r a c i a l d is c r im in a tio n * w These words m ight w e ll se r v e a s a b a s is upon w hich Negroes I n t e r e s te d in the m aintenance o f c i v i l r i g h t s should apx^roach the problem o f en fo rcem en t, s in c e d is c r im in a tio n in Iowa seems t o be

xg s d i r e c t e d p r im a r ily a g a in s t them*

U n rem ittin g a t ta c k through

th e means fu r n is h e d by law can be a v a lu a b le d e v ic e f o r ©hanging p op u lar a t t i t u d e s and g e t t i n g a t the problem o f d is c r im in a t io n a t it® source*

P a r t ic u la r ly may t h i s a t t r i t i o n

o f p r e ju d ic e be o f e ld i f i t i s accompanied by f u l l p u b l i c i t y , w hich i® n e it h e r o v e r ly sym p ath etic nor unsym pathetic* Such a c o n tin u o u s a t t a c k upon th e v i o la t o r s of c i v i l r ig h t s w i l l u n d o u b ted ly be time consum ing, and w i l l r e s u l t In c o n s id e r ­ a b le p e r so n a l d is c o m fo r t on th e p a r t o f th o se who are con­ d u c tin g a campaign f o r c i v i l r ig h ts *

the r ig h t s are worth

h a v in g , how ever, th e y a re worth a g g r e s s iv e a c tio n to obtain * A lthough i t seems t o be the b e l i e f o f many low? N egroes th a t i l l - f e e l i n g would be aroused by more em phasis on c i v i l r ig h t s l e g i s l a t i o n , i t seems l i k e l y th a t lowans would In ­ c r e a s in g ly su p p ort such l e g i s l a t i o n In resp on se t o a g g r e s­ s i v e a c tio n fo r the p assage o f a new c i v i l r ig h t s law , or a t l e a s t f o r more a f f e c t i v e enforcessent o f the p r e se n t sta tu te*

124 Appendix A THE UNITED STATES CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OP MARCH 1 , 1875 W hereas, I t I s e s s e n t i a l t o j u s t government we r e c o g n iz e the © q u a lity o f a l l men b e fo r e the la w , and h old th a t i t I s the d u ty o f government In I t s d ea lin g © w ith th e p e o p le to mete o u t e q u a l and e x a o t ju a tic © to a l l , o f w h atever n a t i v i t y ,r a c e , c o l o r , or p e r s u a s io n , r e l i g i o u s o r p o l i t i c a l } and i t b e in g th e a p p r o p r ia te o b je c t o f l e g i s l a t i o n to e n a c t g r e a t fundam ental p r i n c ip l e s in t o law : T h er efo r e, 3® i t en a c te d by the Senate and House o f R e p r e s e n ta tiv e s o f the U n ited S t a t e s o f America In Congress assem b led , That a l l p e r so n s w it h in th e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the U n ited S ta te s s h a l l be e n t i t l e d to the f u l l and e q u a l enjoym ent o f th e accom m odations, a d v a n ta g e s, f a c i l i t i e s , and p r i v i l e g e s o f In n s, p u b lic convey­ a n c e s on lan d o r w a te r , t h e a t e r s , and o th e r p la c e s o f p u b lic amusement; s u b je c t o n ly to th e c o n d itio n s and l im i t a t io n s e s t a b lis h e d by la w , and a p p lic a b le a lik e to c i t i z e n s o f e v e r y ra ce and c o l o r , r e g a r d le s s o f any p r e v io u s c o n d itio n o f s e r v i ­ tude, SBC* 2* That any p erson who s h a l l v i o l a t e the fo r e g o in g s e c t i o n by d en y in g to any c i t i z e n , e x c e p t fo r rea so n s by law e x p lic a b le to c i t i z e n s o f ev ery race and c o lo r , and r e g a r d le s s o f any p r e v io u s c o n d itio n o f s e r v it u d e , th e f u l l enjoym ent o f any o f the accom m odations, a d v a n ta g e s, f a c i l i t i e s , or p r i v i ­ l e g e s in sa id s e c t io n enum erated, or by a id in g or i n c i t i n g such d e n i a l , s h a l l , f o r every suqh o f f e n s e , f o r f e i t and pay the sum o f f i v e hundred d o l l a r s to th e person a g g r ie v e d th e r e b y ,to be rec o v er ed In an a c tio n o f d©bt, w ith f u l l c o s t s ; and s h a l l a l s o , f o r e v e r y such o f f e n s e , be deemed g u i l t y o f a misdemeanor, and, upon c o n v ic t io n t h e r e o f , s h a l l be f in e d n ot l e s s than f i v e hundred nor more th an one thousand d o l l a r s , or s h a l l be im­ p r iso n e d n o t l e s s than t h i r t y days nor more than one year: P ro v id e d , That a l l p erso n s may e l e c t to sue f o r the p e n a lty a f o r e s a id or to proceed under t h e i r r ig h t s a t common law and b S ta te s t a t u t e s ; and h avin g so e le c t e d to proceed In the one mode or the o th e r , t h e ir r ig h t to proceed In the o th e r j u r i s d i c t i o n s h a l l be barred* But t i i s p r o v iso s h a l l n ot apply to c r im in a l p r o c e e d in g s , e i t h e r under t h i s a c t or the c r im in a l law o f any S ta te s And p rovid ed f u r t h e r , That a judgment f o r the p e n a lty In fa v o r o f th e p a r ty a g g r ie v e d , or a judgment upon an In d ic tm e n t, s h a l l be a bar to e i t h e r p r o se c u tio n r e s p e c t iv e ly * SBC* 5* That the d i s t r i c t and c i r c u i t co u r ts o f th e U nited S t a t e s s h a l l h a v e , e x c l u s i v e l y o f the c o u r ts o f the s e v e r a l S t a t e s , cog n iza n ce o f a l l crim es and o f f e n s e s a g a in s t, and v i o l a t i o n s o f , th e p r o v is io n s o f t h is a c t; and a c tio n s f o r the p e n a lty g iv e n by th e p reced in g s e c t io n may be p r o se ­ cu ted in the t e r r i t o r i a l , d i s t r i c t , or c i r c u i t c o u r ts o f the

125 U n ited S t a t e s w herever th e d e fe d a n t may be fo u n d , w ith o u t regard t o th e o th e r p a rty ; and the d i s t r i c t a t t o r n e y s , m a r s h a ls, and d ep u ty m a rsh a ls o f the U nited S t a t e s , and com m issioner® a p p o in ted by the c i r c u i t and t e r r i t o r i a l c o u r ts o f the U nited S t a t e s , w ith powers o f a r r e s t in g and im p r iso n in g or b a l l i n g o ffe n d e r s a g a in s t th e law s o f the U I t e d S t a t e s , are hereb y s p e c i a l l y a u th o r iz e d and req u ired tB I n s t i t u t e p r o c e e d in g s a g a in s t every p erson who s h a l l v i o l a t e the p r o v is io n s o f t h i s a c t , and ca u se him to be a r r e s te d and im prisoned or b a l l e d , a© the case may b e , f o r t r i a l b e fo r e such c o u r t o f the u n ite d S t a t e s , or t e r r i t o r i a l v c o u r t, as by law h a s c o g n iza n ce o f the o f f e n s e , e x c e p t in , r e a p e c t o f th e r ig h t o f a c t io n a c cr u in g to the person a g g r ie v e d ; and such d i s t r i c t a tto r n e y s s h a l l cause su ch p r o c e e d in g s to be p ro se cu ted t t h e ir term in a tio n as in o th e r c a s e s : P ro v id e d , That n o th in g co n ta in ed In t h i s s e c t i o n s h a l l be c o n str u e d to deny or d e f e a t any r ig h t o f c i v i l a c t io n a c c r u in g to any p e r so n , w hether b reason o f t h i s a c t or o th e r w is e ; and any d i s t r i c t a tto r n e y who © h all w i l l f u l l y f a l l t o I n s t i t u t e and p r o se c u te the p ro cee d in g s h e r e in r e q u ir e d , s h a l l , f o r e v e r y such o f f e n s e , f o r f e i t and pay the sums o f f i v e hundred d o l l a r s to the p erson a g g r ie v ed th e r e b y , to be rec o v er ed by an a c tio n o f d e b t, w ith f u l l c o s t s , and s h a l l , on c o n v ic t io n t h e r e o f , he deemed g u i l t y o f a m isdem eanor, and be f in e d not l e s s than on© thousand nor more than f i v e thousand d o l l a r s : And p rovid ed fu r t h e r , H3aat a judgment fo r the p e n a lty in fa v o r of the p a r ty a g g r ie v e d a g a in s t any such d i s t r i c t a tt o r n e y , s h a l l -e a bar to e it h e r p r o se c u tio n r e s p e c t iv e ly * SEC. 4 . That po c i t i z e n p o s s e s s in g a l l o th e r q u a l i f i c a ­ t io n s w hich are sir may b© p r e sc r ib e d by law s h a l l be d i s q u a l i f i e d f o r s e r v ic e as grand or p e t i t ju r o r in any co u r t o f th e U n ited S t a t e s ,o r o f any S t a t e , on account o f r a c e , c o lo r , or p r e v lo iis c o n d itio n o f s e r v it u d e ; and any o f f i c e r or o th e r person charged w ith any d u ty i n the s e l e c t i o n or summoning o f ju r o r s who s h a l l exctlude or f a i l to summon any c i t i z e n fo r th e cau se a f o r e s a id s h a l l , on c o n v ic tio n t h e r e o f , be deemed g u i l t y o f a m isdem eanor, and be fin e d n ot more than f i v e thousand d o lla r s * SEC* 5* That a l l c a s e s a r i s i n g under the p r o v is io n s o f t h i s a c t in the c o u r ts o f the U nited S t a t e s , w ith o u t regard to the sum in c n tr o v e r s y , under th e same p r o v is io n s and r e g u la t io n s a s are now p ro /Id ed by law f o r the review o f o th er cause© in s a id court* Approved, March 1, 1875*

126 A ppendix B IOWA C IV IL RIGHTS STATUTE

S e c tio n 755*1 C i v i l r ig h t s d e fin e d * A l l p erso n s w ith in £ftis "stoTSe 'e h a l l he e n t i t l e d to the f u l l end e q u a l enjoy-* mant o f th e accom m odations, a d v a n ta g e s, f a c i l i t i e s , and p r i v i l e g e s o f in n s , r e s t a u r a n t s , choph ouaes, e a t in g b o u se s, lu n ch c o u n t e r s , and a l l o th e r p la c e s where refresh m en ts a r e served * p u b lic conveyance® , barber shop®, bath h o u s e s , t h e a t e r s , and a l l o th e r p la c e s o f amusement* S e c tio n 755*2 Punishment* Any person who s h a l l v i o la t e ffi'e p r o v is io n s o f s e c t i o n 755*1 by d en yin g to any p erso n , e x c e p t f o r rea so n s by law a p p lic a b le t o a l l p e r so n s , the f u l l enjoym ent o f any o f the accom m odations, a d v a n ta g e s, f a c i l i t i e s , or p r i v i l e g e s ©numerated t h e r e in , or by a id ­ in g or i n c i t i n g su ch d e n i a l , s h a l l be g u i l t y o f a misdemeanor and s h a l l be punished by a fin© not to exceed one hundred d o l l a r s or im prisonm ent In th e cou n ty j a i l n o t t o ex ceed t h i r t y days*

127 A ppendix 0 MODEL STATE CIVIL RIGHTS BILL PROPOSED W THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION A b i l l t o a ssu r e t o a l l p erso n s w ith in th e s t a t e o f f u l l and e q u a l p r i v i l e g e s In p la c e s o f p u b lic sceom m od stion , r e s o r t , en ter ta in m en t and amusement, and e q u a l r ig h t s In employment and la b o r u n io n s , and f o r o th e r purposes* SEC. 1 . That w ith in th e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h i s S ta te any p e r so n , n a tu r a l o r c o r p o r a te , who s h a l l make any d i s t i n c t i o n , d is c r im in a t io n , or r e s t r i c t i o n on accou n t o f r a c e , c o l o r , c r e e d , a c e s t r y or n a t io n a l o r i g i n , or f o r any reason n o t sa n c tio n e d by law and n ot a p p lic a b le a lik e t o p erso n s g e n e r a lly , In the a d m issio n o f any p erso n t o , or the accommodation or s e r v ic e of any p erson in any p la c e o f p u b lic accom m odation, r e s o r t , e n te r ta in m e n t, o r amusement, w hether lic e n s e d or n o t, or any p u b lic co n v ey a n ce, or any p u b lic m eetin g or a ssem b la g e, or who s h a l l d i r e c t l y a id or cause thew aking o f any such d i s t i n c t i o n , d is c r im in a t io n , or r e s t r i c t i o n , s h a l l fo r each such a c t or d e n ia l be l i a b l e as h e r ln a f t e r p rovided f o r in S e c tio n s 8 and 9* SEC* 8 ( a ) P la c e s o f p u b lic accomm odation, r e s o r t , e n te r ta in m e n t, or amusement s h a l l be deemed to In clu d e h o t e l s , r e s t a u r a n t s , s t o r e s , or sh ops where f o o d s t u f f s , d r in k s , g o o d s, o r w ares are s o ld o r o f f e r e d , a d v e r tis e d , or d is p la y e d f o r s a le to the p u b lic ; h o s p i t a l s , c l i n i c s , t h e a t e r s , m o tio n p ic tu r e h o u s e s , c o n c e r t h a l l s , amusement p a rk s, p u b lic parks and p u b lic b u ild in g s under th e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the n a tio n a l or m u n icip a l governm ents; b u ild in g s r e s i d e n t i a l or o th e rw ise e n jo y in g em in en t domain, or r e c e iv in g any t a x exem ption from any s o u r c e , or the c o n s tr u c tio n o f which was d i r e c t l y fin a n c e d In w hole o r In pa t by any p u b lic funds or g r a n ts; p u b lic l i b r a r i e s , k in d e r g a r te n s , prim ary and seco n d a ry s c h o o ls , h ig h s c h o o ls , a ca d em ies, c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s , e x te n s io n c o u r s e s , and a l l e d u c a tio n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s under th e p r o v is io n o f the s t a t e a u t h o r i t i e s ; and any such p u b lic l ib r a r y , k in ­ d e r g a r te n , prim ary and secon d ary s c h o o l, academy, c o l l e g e , u n i v e r s i t y , p r o f e s s io n a l s c h o o l, e x te n s io n cou rse or o th e r e d u c a tio n a l f a c i l i t y , supported in whole or in p a r t by p u b lic fu n d s or by c o n tr ib u tio n s s o l i c i t e d from the g e n e r a l p u b lic or o b ta in in g any ta x e ixemptlon from any s o u r c e , e x c e p t th ose I n s t i t u t i o n s , a d m issio n to which i s based on r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f or a f f i l i a t i o n s p r o v id e d , th a t th e fo r e g o in g enum eration s h a l l n o t be con stru ed a s lim it in g in any way the meaning o f

128 th e g e n e r a l p h r a s e , wplao©® o f p u b lic accom m odation, r e s o r t , anfcertaln m en t, o r amusement*w (b ) The p u b lic a t io n o f any o r d e r , n o t i c e , or a d v e r tisem en t r e a so n a b ly c a lc u la t e d t o p rev en t or d isc o u r a g e the patronage o r custom o f p erson a o f any r a c e , c o lo r , c r e e d , a n c e s tr y or n a t io n a l o r i g i n , as w e l l as th e a c t u a l e x c lu s io n or se g r e g a ­ t i o n o f o r d is c r im in a t io n a g a in s t any p erson on a c co u n t o f r a c e , c o lo r , c r e e d , a n c e s tr y or n a t io n a l o r g in s h a l l be deemed an u n la w fu l d i s t i n c t i o n , d is c r im in a t io n , and r e s t r i c t i o n w ith in th e m eaning o f t h i s Act* The p ro d u ctio n of any such o r d e r, n o t i c e , o r a d v e r tisem en t p u rp o rtin g to be made by any p erson b e in g the ow ner, l e s s e e , o p e r a to r , p r o p r ie t o r , manager, a g e n t , o r em ployee engaged in or e x e r c is in g c o n tr o l o v er th e opera­ t i o n of any p u b lic conveyance or any p la c e o f p u b lic accommo­ d a t i o n , r e s o r t , e n te r ta in m e n t, or amusement, s h a l l be prima f a c i e e v id e n c e in any c i v i l or c r im in a l a c t io n th a t th e same was a u th o r iz e d and p u b lish e d by such person* ( c ) The p r o v is io n s and req u irem en ts o f t h i s Act s h a l l bind and o b lig a t e ©very owner, l e s s e e , o p e r a to r , p r o p r ie to r , manager, a g e n t , and employe©, whether n a tu r a l p e r so n , corp­ o r a t io n , or u n in co rp o ra ted a s s o c i a t i o n , engaged in or e x e r c is in g c o n t r o l ov er th e o p e r a tio n o f any p u b lic conveyance or any p la c e o f p u b lic accom m odation, r e s o r t , e n te r ta in m e n t, or amusements p r o v id e d , th a t whenever any a g e n t or employee s h a ll so e x e r c is e any fu n c tio n o r employ any power w ith w hich he i s charged or e n tr u ste d a s to v i o l a t e any p r o v is io n o f t h i s A ct, both he and h i s p r in c ip a l or em ployer s h a l l be h e ld e q u a lly r e s p o n s ib le and l ia b l e * (d ) N othing in t h i s Act s h a l l be deemed to p r o h ib it the p r o v id in g o f se p a r a te accommodations or f a c i l i t i e s f o r p erso n s o f d i f f e r e n t sex* SEC* 3* Ho p e r so n , a g en cy , bureau, c o r p o r a tio n or a s s o c i a t i o n , b ein g th e owner, l e a s e e , p r o p e r it o r , manager, s u p e r in te n d e n t, a g e n t or employe© o f any p la c e o f p u b lic e n ter ta in m en t and amusement as h e r e in a f t e r d e fin e d s h a l l r e f u s e to adm it to any p u b lic petformanc© h eld a t such p la c e any p erso n over th e age o f tw en ty-on e yea rs who p r e s e n ts a t i c k e t o f a d m issio n to the perform ance a reason ab le time be­ f o r e th e commencement t h e r e o f , or s h a l l e^ e ct or demand the d ep a rtu re o f any such p erson from such p la c e during the c o u rse o f th e perforxnance, w hether or n o t accom panied by an o f f e r to refu n d th e purchase p r ic e or v a lu e o f the t i c k e t o f a d m issio n p r e se n te d by su ch person; but n o th in g in t h i s s e c t i o n c o n ta in e d s h a l l be co n stru ed to p reven t the r e f u s a l

129

o f a d m issio n to or the e j e c t i o n o f any p erson whoso conduct o r sp e e c h th e r e a t o r t h e r e in i s a b u siv e or o f f e n s iv e or o f any p erso n engaged in any a c t i v i t y w hich may ten d to a breach o f th© peace* ■£tae p la c e s o f p u b lic e n ter ta in m en t and amusement w ith in th e m eaning o f t h i s s e c t i o n s h a l l in c lu d e but not be lim it e d t o l e g i t im a t e t h e a t r e s , bu rlesq u e t h e a t r e s , m usic h a l l s , m otion p ic tu r e h o u s e s , opera h o u s e s , c o n c e r t h a l l s end c ir c u s e s # SEC* 4* No p e r so n , a g e n c y , bureau, C orp oration or a s s o c i a t i o n employed or m ain tain ed to o b ta in or aid in o b ta in in g p o s i t i o n s f o r tea ch er® , p r i n c i p a l s , s u p e r in te n d e n ts , c le r k s or o th e r employee® in the p u b lic s c h o o ls o f the S t a t e , and no in d iv id u a l o r in d iv id u a ls co n d u ctin g o r employed by or i n t e r e s t e d d i r e c t l y or I n d i r e c t ly in such an a g e n c y , bureau, c o r p o r a tio n or a s s o c i a t i o n , and no board o f e d u c a tio n , t r u s t e e o f a s c h o o l d i s t r i c t , s u p e r in te n d e n t, p r in c ip a l or te a c h e r o f a p u b lic s c h o o l o r o th e r o f f i c i a l or employee o f a board o f ‘ e d u c a tio n , s h a l l r e fu s e t o employ or promote any person on a cco u n t o f r a c e , c o lo r , c r e e d , a n c e s tr y o r n a t io n a l o r i g i n , or d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y a s , in d ic a t e or tra n sm it o r a ll y or In w r itin g th e r a c e , c o lo r , c r e e d , a n c e s tr y or n a tio n a l o r ig in o f any p erson seek in g employment or o f f i c i a l p o s it io n in the p u b lic s c h o o ls the S ta te* SEC# 5 . I t s t a l l ue u n la w fu l f o r any p u b lic u t i l i t y company, or a common c a r r ie r a s d e fin e d by S e c tio n s o f th e S t a t u t e s o f to r e fu s e to employ or promote any p erso n in any c a p a c ity in the o p e r a tio n or m aintenance o f a p u b lic s e r v ic e on a cco u n t o f the r a c e , c o lo r , c r e e d , a n c e s tr y o r n a t io n a l o r ig in o f su ch p e rso n . SEC# 6 . I t s h a l l be u n la w fu l f o r any p e r so n , fir m or c o r p o r a tio n engaged t o any e x te n t w h atsoever In th e p r o d u c tio n , m anufacture o r d i s t r i b u t i o n o f equipm ent or s u p p lie s f o r any p u b lic agency w hether f e d e r a l , s t a t e , or l o c a l to r e fu s e to em ploy or promote any p erso n In any c a p a c ity on a cco u n t o f the r a c e , c o lo r , c r e e d , a n c e s tr y or n a t io n a l o r ig in o f such p erson . SEC • 7# As u sed In t h i s s e c t i o n , the t o m " lab or o r g a n i­ z a t io n ” means any o r g a n iz a tio n w hich e x i s t s and i s c o n s t it u t e d f o r the p u rp o se , in whole or in p a r t , o f c o l l e c t i v e b a rg a in ­ in g , or o f d e a lin g w ith em ployers co n cern in g g r ie v a n c e s , term s or c o n d itio n s o f em ployem ent, or o f o th e r mutual a id or' p ro­ t e c t io n # No la b o r o r g a n iz a tio n s h a l l h e r e a f t e r , d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y , by r i t u a l i s t i c p r a c t i c e , c o n s t i t u t i o n a l or by­ law p r e s c r i p t i o n , by t a c i t agreem ent among I t s members, or o t h e r w is e , deny a p erson or p erson s membership in i t s

iso o r g a n is a t io n by rea so n o f h is r a c e , c o lo r , c r e e d , a n c e s tr y o r n a t io n a l o r i g i n , or by r e g u la t io n s , p r a c tic e or o th e r w is e , s e g r e g a te or d e n y t o any o f i t s members, by reason o f r a c e , c o l o r , c r e e d , a n c e s tr y or n a t io n a l o r i g i n , e q u a l treatm en t w ith a l l o th e r members w ith in such la b o r o r g a n iz a tio n or in any d e s ig n a t io n o f memoers t o any em ployer f o r employm ent, prom otion or d i s m i s s a l by su ch em p loyer. SEC* 8# Any p erson who or any agen cy, bureau, corp ora­ t i o n or a s s o c i a t i o n w hich s h a l l v i o l a t e any o f the p r o v is ­ io n s o f s e c t i o n s 1 , 5 , 4 , 6 , o r 6 or who or w hich s h a l l a id or ca u se the v i o l a t i o n o f any o f sa id p r o v is io n s , and any o f f ! e a r or member o f a la b o r o r g a n iz a tio n , a s d e fin e d by S e c tio n 7 , or any p erson r e p r e s e n tin g any o r g a n iz a tio n or a c t in g in i t s b e h a lf who s h a l l v i o l a t e any o f the p r o v is io n s o f s e c t i o n 7 or who s h a l l a id or cause the v i o l a t i o n o f any o f th e p r o v is io n s o f such s e c t i o n s h a l l f o r each and e v e r y v i o l a t i o n t h e r e o f be l i a b l e to a p e n a lty o f n o t l e s s than one hundred d o l l a r s nor more than f i v e hundred, d o l l a r s , to be rec o v er ed by th e p erson a g g r ie v e d th ereb y or by any r e s ­ id e n t o f fc i s s t a t e , to whom su ch person s h a l l a s s ig n h is bau se o f a c t i o n , in any c o u r t o f com petent j u r i s d i c t i o n in th e co u n ty In w hich th e p l a i n t i f f o r the d efen d an t s h a l l rea id e# SBC, 9 , Any person who o r any a g en cy , bureau, c o r p o r a tio n or a s s o c i a t i o n w hich s h a l l v i o la t e any o f th e p r o v is io n s o f s e c t io n s 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , or6 or who or which s h a l l aid or cause the v i o l a t i o n o f any o f sa id p r o v is io n s , and any o f f i c e r o r member o f a la b o r o r g a n iz a tio n , a s d e fin e d by s e c t io n 7 , or any p erson r e p r e s e n tin g any o r g a n iz a tio n or a c t in g in i t s b e h a lf who s h a l l v i o l a t e any o f the p r o v is io n s o f s e c t io n 7 or who s h a l l aid or cause th e v i o l a t i o n o f any o f the pro­ v i s i o n s o f su ch s e c t io n s h a l l be deemed g u i l t y o f a m is­ dem eanor, and upon c o n v ic t io n th e r e o f s h a l l be fin e d not l e s s than one hundred d o l l a r s nor more than f i v e hundred d o l l a r s , or s h a l l be iiapriaoned not l e s s than t h i r t y days nor more than n in e t y d a y s , or both such f i n e and im p rison ­ ment* SEO. 10* The S e c r e ta r y o f S ta te s h a l l revoke any l ic e n s e is s u e d pursuant to the p r o v is io n s and req uirem en ts o f S e c tio n o f the S ta tu te s o f the S ta te o f whenever 1 t s h a l 1 have been j u d i c i a l l y determ lned tKat" the l i c e n s e e or person op erat ng o r doing b u s in e s s under sa id l i c e n s e .ha3 v i o la t e d t h i s A ct In the cou rse o f such opera­ tio n or b u s in e s s two tim es or more w ith in any tw elve-m onth

131

p erio d # No s im ila r l i c e n s e s h a l l b© Issu e d t o the o ffen d * Ing p e r so n o r f o r th e u se o f the p la c e where s a id v i o l a t i o n s s h a l l havo occu rred f o r a p e r io d o f s i x t y days f o llo w in g such r e v o c a tio n * The p r o v is io n s o f t h i s s e c t io n may be e n fo r c e d b y an a c t io n o f mandamus f i l e d a g a in s t th e S e c r e ta r y o f S t a t e by any o i t l a e n o f th e S ta te o f * SEC# 11* A l l p erso n s w ith in the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h i s s t a t e s h a l l be e n t i t l e d to the e q u a l p r o t e c tio n o f the law s o f t h i s s t a t e o r any s u b d iv is io n th e re o f# No person s h a l l , b ecau se o f lii s r a c e , c o l o r , c r e e d , a n c e s tr y or n a t io n a l o r i g i n , be su b je c te d to any d is c r im in a tio n in h is c i v i l righ t® by any o th e r p erson o r by any f ir m , c o r p o r a tio n or i n s t i t u t i o n , or by th e s t a t e , o r any agency or s u b d iv is io n o f the s t a t e # A person who s h a l l v i o l a t e t h i s s e c t io n i s g u i l t y o f a misdemeanor p u n ish a b le by a f i n e o f n ot l e s s than one hundred d o l l a r s or more than f i v e hundred d o lla r s # SEC* 12* The p r o v is io n s o f t h i s A ct are h ereb y d e c la r e d to be sep arab le* I f any p r o v is io n o f t h i s A c t, or the a p p lic a t io n t h e r e o f to any person or c ir c u m sta n c e s, i s h e ld I n v a lid , th e rem ainder o f the A c t, and the a p p lic a t io n o f such p r o v is io n t o o th e r p erso n s or c ir c u m sta n c e s, s h a l l n o t be a f f e c t e d thereby#

131 Appendix 1) SPECIMEN QUESTIONNAIRE {Not©: An e x tr a ah a et i s a tta c h e d a t th e hack o f th e p r in te d q u e s tio n n a ir e f o r a d d it io n a l comments, e tc # Pleas© I n d ic a te number o f q u e s tio n to w hich comment r e f e r s * )

I f you a r e a ©ounty a t t o r n e y , p le a s e check* I*

G eneral q u estIo n a 1# Pleas® ch eck one o f the fo llo w in g to In d ic a te your a c t io n : Qu est> o n s answered Qu e s tio n n a ir e retu rn ed f o r la c k o f tim® to answer Wou ld p r e fe r to e x p r e ss no o p in io n s 2* Are d is c r im in a to r y p r a c t ic e s w ith in th e m eaning o f the s t a t u t e fr e q u e n t, to your knowledge? o Ye s No No o p in io n 3# Are o th e r p r a c t ic e s w hich m ight be co n sid er ed d is c r im ­ in a to r y (s u c h as l i s t e d In No* 7) fr e q u e n t, to your knowledge? Yea No Mo o p in io n 4* Do you th in k th a t th e s t a t u t e i s a d e q u a te ly en fo rced ? Ye s No No o p in io n 5# I f q u e s tio n 4 answered ttMow, p le a s e g iv e your reason s on e x tr a sh eet* 6# Have you p a r t ic ip a t e d In c a s e s brought under the sta tu te ? _______ Yes No ( I f Y es, p le a s e g iv e p a r t ic u la r s on e x tr a she®t as to p erso n s in v o lv e d , p la c e , approx­ im ate d a t e , d i s p o s i t i o n o f e a s e , and c a p a c ity in which you p a r t ic ip a t e d * )

II

Q u estio n s r e l a t in g to c o n te n t o f s ta tu te * 7* P le a se ch eck a p p ro p ria te column to I n d ic a te your o p in io n a s t o w hether the s t a t u t e should be amended to In clu d e

152 th e fo llo w in g * a* Amusement Parks h* P u b lic Bathe e» Beauty P a r lo r s d* P o o l P a r lo r s e . Bowling A lle y s f* C em eteries g» D r u g sto re s h* E le v a to r s I* F a ir s j* Garages k« G olf c o u r se s 1* Gymnasia m* L ice n sed p la c e s o f e n te r ta in m e n t n* P u b lic l i b r a r i e s o* Restroom s p* S k a tin g r in k s

Ye® Yea Yes Yea Yes Yeo Yes Y es Yes Yes Yes Yes

No ‘No No No No No No 'No No No No No

Yes \e s Yes Yes Yea r . Swimming p o o ls *" Yea s* Other ( p le a s e s p e c i f y )

NO No No So No No

*"

No No No Ho No Ho No Ho Ho Ho No No

o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n

No No No No No No

o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n o p in io n

8*

In your o p in io n are any o f the above l i s t e d e n t e r p r is e s co v ered by im p lic a tio n In th e p r e se n t s t a t u t e ? Yes No

9*

I f answer to q u e s tio n 8 was f,Y es,f, p le a s e s p e c i f y by le t t e r *

10* Should p r ic e d is c r im in a tio n on th e b a s is of r a c e , c r e e d , or c o lo r be s p e c i f i c a l l y fo rb id d en by law? Ye s No No o p in io n 11* Should th e s t a t u t e be amended to fo r b id a d v e r tis in g o f d is c r im in a to r y p o l i c i e s by th o se e n t e r p r is e s , e t c * , covered ? a* P u b lic a d v e r t is in g (N ew spapers, m agazin es, s ig n ­ b oard s, e t c * ) Ye s No No o p in io n b« P r i v a t e a d v e r t i s i n g (H andfeTlis, p la c a r d s in e s t a b lis h m e n t s ) Ye s No No o p in io n 12* I f answer to e it h e r p a rt of q u e stio n 12 was ttY esw,w hat p e n a l t i e s do you su g g e st? ft

133 13* In your o p in ion * d o e s the p o s t in g o f sign® " r e s e r v in g d oor r ig h t s " or h earin g o th e r su ch term s in e s t a b l i s h ­ m ents a t p r e se n t covered by th e s t a t u t e l i m i t t h e i r l i a b i l i t y under th e s t a t u t e In any way? Yea . No No o p in io n 14* I f answer to q u e s tio n 13 e i t h e r "Yes" or "No" p le a s e e x p la in b r i e f l y on e x tr a sh eet* 15* Should a d v e r t is in g o f r e a l e s t a t e f o r s a l e or ren t as b ein g r e s t r i c t e d " or in o th e r su ch term s >e fo rb id d en by law? Ye s No No o p in io n 16* Should d is c r im in a t io n a n d /o r s e g r e g a tio n on th e b a s is o f race creed o r c o lo r be fo rb id d en by lew in th e f o llo w in g ty p e s o f e d u c a tio n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s in Iowa? a* S ta te I n s t i t u t i o n s or any s u b d iv is io n th e r e o f Yea No No o p in io n b# Any i n s t i t u t i o n to which s t a t e c o n tr ib u te s fu n d s. Ye s No No o p in io n e . Any n o n -s e c t a r ia n ta x exempt i n s t i t u t i o n Yes No Ho o p in io n d . Any s e c t a r ia n ta x exempt i n s t i t u t i o n s ( s p e c i f i c r e l i g i o u s req u irem en ts e x c e p te d ) ________No No o p in io n Ye s 1 7 . Should d is c r im in a t io n and s e g r e g a tio n by h e a lt h s e r v ic e s and h o s p it a ls on th e b a s is o f r a c e , c r e e d , or c o lo r be fo r b id d e n by law? Ye s No No o p in io n III.

Q u estio n s d e a lin g w ith s a n c tio n s

1 8 . Should S e c tio n 7 3 5 * 2 ,Code o f 1946, be amended to read " f u l l and equal" r a th e r than " fu ll" ? Ye s No No o p in io n 1 9 . Should S e c tio n 735*2 be amended to f i x a minimum f in e ? Ye s No No o p in io n 2 0 . I f answer to q u e s tio n 19 I s "Yes", what would you su g g e s t?

134 21* Should th e maximum fin© to® in c r e a se d ? Yea Wo No o p in io n 22* I f answ er t o q u e s tio n 21 I s wY esn, what would you su g g e s t? 23* Should S e c tio n 735*2 he amended to f i x a minimum j a i l a e n ten ce ? Ye s Wo Ho o p in io n 24* I f answ er to q u e s tio n 23 i s wY esw, what would you s u g g e s t? 25* Should the maximum j a i l se n te n c e be in c r e a se d ? Yea Wo No o p in io n 26* I f answ er to q u e s tio n 25 1® lfYeS*, what would you su g g e st? 27* Should S e c tio n 7 3 5 .2 he amended to a llo w Im p o sitio n o f b o th f i n e and j a i l se n te n c e ? Ye s No No o p in io n 2 8 . Should c r lifi'n a l a c tio n in c i v i l r ig h t s c a s e s h© I n s t i t u t e d on co m p lain t o f a g g r ie v ed p a r ty a lo n e? Yea No No o p in io n 29* In your o p in io n , d oes a c i v i l a c tio n l i e In Iowa in a d d it io n t o o r a l t e r n a t i v e to the c r im in a l p e n a lt ie s im posed by s t a t u t e ? Yea No No o p in io n 5 0 . Should the s t a t u t e be amended s p e c i f i c a l l y to perm it c i v i l damages? _________ Yes No . No o p in io n 31* Should c i v i l damages be a l t e r n a t i v e to or In a d d itio n to c r im in a l p e n a lt ie s ? (Check) a* A lt e r n a t iv e to to* In a d d itio n to c* N e ith e r . 3 2 . Should th e Iowa s t a t u t e be amended to p ro v id e th a t the e n t e r p r is e found g u i l t y o f v i o l a t i o n may be e n jo in e d from fu tu r e v io la t io n ? a . A fte r f i r s t v i o la t i o n Ye s No No o p in io n ty* Only a f t e r rep eated v io la tio n Ye s No No o p in io n

156 o» In a d d it io n to o th e r p e n a ltie s d* As o n ly p e n a lty e* In no case

I 'e s

“Yes

Ho "Ho

No o p in io n iTo o p in io n ~No o p in io n

IV* Q u e stio n s d e a lin g w ith employment# 55* Should the s t a t u t e fo r b id d is c r im in a t io n by la b o r o r g a n iz a ­ t i o n s on th e b a s is o f r a c e , c r e e d , o r c o lo r ? Ye s No No o p in io n 54# Should the s t a t u t e ( o r a n o th er) fo r b id d is c r im in a t io n In em ploym ent, assum ing adequacy o f q u a l if i c a t i o n s ? ( I f answer i s ^Yes”, p le a s e ch eck a p p ro p ria te sp aces* I f n o t , space a t bottom o f q u e s t io n * ) a* 1 ) on b a s is o f race ___________ , 2 ) on b a s is o f r e l i g i o n ^ 5 ) on b a s is o f c o lo r 4 ) on b a s is o f s e x _______ ________ b* 1 ) 2) 5) 4)

by by by by

s t a t e govern m ental a g e n c ie s ^ cou n ty governm ental a g e n c ie s m u n icip a l governm ental agencies^ o th e r governm ental a g e n c ie s

C* 1) 2) 5) 4) 0)

by p u b lic u t i l i t i e s ^ by s t a t e l i c e n s e e s ^ by county lic e n s e e s ^ by m u n icip a l l i c e n s e e s by p r iv a te b u s in e s s e s , lic e n s e d or un* lic e n s e d 6) by o th e r ( p le a s e s p e c if y I

a* In no case (n o t a t a l l ) e* No o p in io n

IS 6 NOTES Chapter I 1* Shambaugh, Jtnjam ln P*, The C o n s t it u t io n s o f Iowa. S ta te H i s t o r i c a l S o c ie t y o f Iowa, Iowa C it y ,f o w a ,1934. 2* In th© m a tter o f Ralph, a C olored Man, M orris 1 (1839)# 3* Dred S c o t t v» San dford, 19 Howard 393 (1857)* 4* C o n s tit u tio n o f Iow a, 1844, A r t i c l e , 2 , s e c t io n 22* 5* C o n s t itu tio n o f Iow a, 1 8 4 6 , A r t ic le 2 , s e c t io n 23* 6* Shambaugh, C o n s t it u t io n s o f Iowa, pp* 140-144* 7* Shambaugh, C o n s tltu tio n s o f Iowa, pp. 1 9 4 ,1 5,196* 8* C o n s titu tio n o f Iowa, 1857, A r t ic le 1 , s e c t io n 23* 9* C o n s titu tio n o f Iowa, 1857, A r t ic l e 1 , s e c t io n 1* 10* Shambaugh, C o n s tit u tio n s o f Iowa, p , 246* 11* C o n s titu tio n o f Iowa, 1857, A r t ic l e 2 , s e c t io n 1 . 12* C o n s titu tio n o f Iowa, 1857, A r t ic le 3 , L e g is la t iv e D epartm ent, s e c t io n s 4 ,5 ,3 3 ,3 4 ,3 5 * 13* 14*

C o n s titu tio n o f Iowa, 1857, A r t ic le 6, s e c t i o n

1*

Shambaugh, C o n s t it u t io n s o f Iowa* .pp* 245-246* The p r o v is o referred""to T s A r t ic le 1 , s e c t io n 4 , C o n s titu tio n o f 1857*

IS .

Shambaugh, C o n s t itu t io n s o f

16*

C o n s titu tio n o f Iowa, 1057, A r t ic l e 9 , E d u c a tio n ,s e c tio n

17*

Ioweu p* 248* 12*

Erbe, C arl li*, !,The 3111 o f R ig h ts in the IowaC o n s t it u t io n ,” u n p u b lish ed m a s te r ’s t h e s i s , S ta te U n iv e r s ity o f Iow c,1924, p* 48*

18* Amendments o f 1868s Laws o f Iowa»1868* Chapter 68, p* 93* Those were r a t i f i e d by 'the" v o te r s on November 3 , 1868* Amendment o f 1880s Laws of Iowa*1880* J o in t H osolu tion Ho* 6 , p« 214*

2,1880*

T h is was r a t i f i e d , by t h e v o t e r s on N ovem ber

137 19# C lark v* Board o f D ir e c to r s o f Independent School D i s t r i c t o f M u sc a tin e , 2 4 low®. 2 6 6 (1888)* 20* C lark

v# Board o f D ir e c t o r s , 24

Iowa 266 a t 268*

21* C lark

v# Board o f D ir e c t o r s , 24

Iowa 266 a t 269*

22# C o n s t it u t io n o f Iowa, 1357, A r t ic l e 9 , s e c t i o n 12* Quoted In th e I n s ta n t c a se a t 271# I t a l i c s su p p lied toy the j u s t i c e fo r th e words " a l l the youths o f the s t a t e # 11 23# C lark v# Board o f D ir e c t o r s , 24 Iowa 266at 273,274# The c a se c i t e d by the c o u r t i s S ch ool D i s t r i c t v# C ity o f Dubuque, 7 Iowa 262 (1 8 5 9 ) 24# P le s s y v . F erguson, 163 U .S . 537 (1 8 9 6 ) 25* S&iltb v# Board o f D ir e c to r s o f Independent S ch o o l D i s t r i c t o f Keokuk, 40 Iowa 518 (1 8 7 4 ) and Dov© v# Boa d o f D ir e c to r s o f Independent School D i s t r i c t o f Keokuk, 41 Iowa 689 (1 8 7 5 ) 26*

Coger v# North West Union

Packet Company, 37 Iov/a

145 (1 8 7 3 )

27#

Coger v* N orth West Union

P acket Company, 37 Iowa

145 a t

152*

2S*

Coger v* North

Packet Company, 37 Iov/a

145 a t

152#

Coger v# North West Union Packet Company, 37 lo a 145 a t T his w as, o f c o u r s e , sa id b e fo r e the C i v i l Bight-s Cases were d e c id e d by the United S ta te s Supreme C ourt.

153*

29*

'e s t Union

30* d o n s t it u t lo n s o f Iowa, 1857, A r t ic le 1 , s e c t io n 1 , c it e d by the c o u r t in the I n s ta n t case a t 155* 31# Act o f C on gress, A p r il S , IBS6 , 14 S tat# 27, s e c t io n 1# C ited In Coger v# North w est I’n ion Packet Co* a t 136. This s e c t io n i s at p r e s e n t in fo r c e as 8 'J#s* 0 . 41* 32* The Sue, 22 P. 843 (1385)# T h is o p in io n , t h o u g h rendered tw elv e yea rs l a t e r than th a t In the Coger c a s e , sums up f a i r l y w e ll t h e r ig h t s o f I n d iv id u a ls . to e q u a l accommoda­ t io n by common c a r r ie r s # C ertain o f the c a s e s d e a lin g w ith d ls c r im in a t lo n are c o lle c t© ' th erein # C f* a ls o Story B a ilm e n ts, s e c t i o n s 475 and 476, fo r an a u t h o r i t y a t th e titte o f the Coger c a s e . 33* Coger v* N orth West Union Packet Co#, 37 Iowa 145 a t 157* The c o u r t 1s a t t i t u d e toward the c o n tr a c tu a l n atu re o f tr a n s p o r ta tio n t i c k e t s In t h is c a se r a is e s an i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s tio n as to the comparable n atu re o f th e a te r t ic k e t s *

138 54*

Jow lIn v* Lyon#

67 Iowa 5 5 6 , 25 M*W*

55*

Bowlin v* Lyon,

67 Iowa 536 a t 537*

56*

Bowlin v* Lyon,

67 Iowa 536 a t 537*

57*

Bowlin v* Lyon,' 67 Iowa 530 a t 538*

w? -hV, or*Y*>rinwol

H.rtrvAr=

tr«

‘PJr*Y*4?Vi

786 (1 8 8 5 )*

The c o u rt c i t e s

TTn1 /-\n C'Wa +-

Pt\ .

a s d e a lin g w ith the c la s s o f a c t i v i t y s u b je c t 58* Bowlin v» Lyon, 67 Iowa 536 a t 539* The c o u rt bases t h i s c o n c lu s io n upon th e presum ption w