Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

Citation: Plessy vs. Ferguson, Judgement, Decided May 18, 1896; Records of the Supreme Court of the United States; Record Group 267; Plessy v.

引用：普莱西诉弗格森案，判决，1896 年 5 月 18 日判决；美国最高法院的记录；唱片组267；普莱西诉。

Ferguson, 163, #15248, National Archives.

弗格森，163，#15248，国家档案馆。

View All Pages in the National Archives Catalog

查看国家档案目录中的所有页面

The ruling in this Supreme Court case upheld a Louisiana state law that allowed for "equal but separate accommodations for the white and colored races."

最高法院案件的裁决维持了路易斯安那州的一项法律，该法律允许“为白人和有色人种提供平等但单独的住宿”。

During the era of Reconstruction, Black Americans’ political rights were affirmed by three constitutional amendments and numerous laws passed by Congress.

在重建时期，美国黑人的政治权利得到了国会通过的三项宪法修正案和众多法律的肯定。

Racial discrimination was attacked on a particularly broad front by the Civil Rights Act of 1875.

1875 年的《民权法案》对种族歧视进行了特别广泛的攻击。

This legislation made it a crime for an individual to deny “the full and equal enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters and other places of public amusement; subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every race and color.”

这项立法规定，个人拒绝“充分和平等地享受旅馆、陆地或水上公共交通工具、剧院和其他公共娱乐场所的任何住宿、优惠、设施和特权；仅受法律规定的条件和限制的约束，并同样适用于各种种族和肤色的公民”，即构成犯罪。

In 1883, the Supreme Court struck down the 1875 act, ruling that the 14th Amendment did not give Congress authority to prevent discrimination by private individuals.

1883 年，最高法院推翻了 1875 年法案，裁定第 14 修正案没有赋予国会防止私人歧视的权力。

Victims of racial discrimination were told to seek relief not from the federal government, but from the states.

种族歧视的受害者被告知不要向联邦政府寻求救济，而应向各州寻求救济。

At the same time, state governments were passing legislation that codified inequality between the races.

与此同时，州政府正在通过立法，将种族之间的不平等编入法典。

Laws requiring the establishment of separate schools for children of each race were most common; however, segregation was soon extended to most public and semi-public facilities through “Jim Crow” laws.

要求为每个种族的儿童建立单独学校的法律最为常见；然而，种族隔离很快通过“吉姆·克劳”法扩展到大多数公共和半公共设施。

Beginning with passage of an 1887 Florida law, states began to require that railroads furnish separate accommodations for each race.

从 1887 年佛罗里达州通过一项法律开始，各州开始要求铁路为每个种族提供单独的住宿。

These measures were unpopular with the railway companies that bore the expense of adding Jim Crow cars.

这些措施不受铁路公司欢迎，因为它们承担了增加种族隔离车厢的费用。

Segregation of the railroads was even more objectionable to Black citizens, who saw it as a further step toward the total repudiation of three constitutional amendments.

铁路隔离更令黑人公民反感，他们认为这是彻底否定三项宪法修正案的又一步。

When such a bill was proposed before the Louisiana legislature in 1890, the Black community of New Orleans protested vigorously.

1890年，当这样的法案向路易斯安那州立法机关提出时，新奥尔良黑人社区提出了强烈抗议。

Nonetheless, despite the presence of 16 Black legislators in the state assembly, the law was passed.

尽管如此，尽管州议会中有 16 名黑人立法者，该法律还是获得了通过。

It required either separate passenger coaches or partitioned coaches to provide segregated accommodations for each race.

它需要单独的客车或分区的客车来为每场比赛提供隔离的住宿。

Passengers were required to sit in the appropriate areas or face a $25 fine or a 20-day jail sentence.

乘客必须坐在适当的区域，否则将面临 25 美元的罚款或 20 天的监禁。

Black nurses attending white children were permitted to ride in white compartments, however.

然而，照顾白人儿童的黑人护士被允许乘坐白色车厢。

In 1891, a group of concerned young Black men of New Orleans formed the “Citizens’ Committee to Test the Constitutionality of the Separate Car Law.” They raised money and engaged Albion W.

1891 年，一群关心此事的新奥尔良年轻黑人成立了“测试分车法合宪性公民委员会”。他们筹集了资金并聘请了 Albion W.

Tourgée, a prominent Radical Republican author and politician, as their lawyer.

图尔吉是一位著名的激进共和党作家和政治家，担任他们的律师。

On May 15, 1892, the Louisiana State Supreme Court decided in favor of the Pullman Company’s claim that the law was unconstitutional as it applied to interstate travel.

1892 年 5 月 15 日，路易斯安那州最高法院判决支持普尔曼公司的主张，即该法律适用于州际旅行，因此违宪。

Encouraged, the committee decided to press a test case on intrastate travel.

受到鼓舞，委员会决定对州内旅行进行测试。

With the cooperation of the East Louisiana Railroad, on June 7, 1892, Homer Plessy, a mulatto (7/8 white), seated himself in a white compartment, was challenged by the conductor, and was arrested and charged with violating the state law.

在东路易斯安那铁路公司的配合下，1892年6月7日，混血儿荷马·普莱西（Homer Plessy）（7/8白人）坐在白色车厢内，遭到售票员的质问，被捕并被指控违反州法律。

In the Criminal District Court for the Parish of Orleans, Tourgée argued that the law requiring “separate but equal accommodations” was unconstitutional.

在奥尔良教区刑事地方法院，图尔吉辩称，要求“隔离但平等的住宿”的法律违宪。

When Judge John H.

当法官约翰·H.

Ferguson ruled against him, Plessy applied to the State Supreme Court for a writ of prohibition and certiorari.

弗格森做出了败诉，普莱西向州最高法院申请了禁止令和调卷令。

Although the court upheld the state law, it granted Plessy’s petition for a writ of error that would enable him to appeal the case to the Supreme Court.

尽管法院维持了州法律，但还是批准了普莱西的错误令状申请，使他能够将此案上诉至最高法院。

In 1896, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Plessy v.

1896年，最高法院对普莱西诉美国一案做出了裁决。

Ferguson .

弗格森。

Justice Henry Brown of Michigan delivered the majority opinion, which sustained the constitutionality of Louisiana’s Jim Crow law.

密歇根州法官亨利·布朗发表了多数意见，维持了路易斯安那州种族隔离法的合宪性。

In part, he said:

他在某种程度上说：

We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff’s argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority.

我们认为原告论点的根本谬误在于这样的假设：两个种族的强制分离给有色人种打上了自卑的标记。

If this be so, it is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it…

如果是这样，那并不是因为该法案中发现的任何内容，而仅仅是因为有色人种选择将这种解释置于其之上……

The argument also assumes that social prejudice may be overcome by legislation, and that equal rights cannot be secured except by an enforced commingling of the two races…

该论点还假设社会偏见可以通过立法克服，并且除非通过强制两个种族的混合，否则平等权利无法得到保障……

If the civil and political rights of both races be equal, one cannot be inferior to the other civilly or politically.

如果两个种族的公民权利和政治权利是平等的，那么一个种族在公民权利或政治权利上就不能劣于另一个种族。

If one race be inferior to the other socially, the Constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane.

如果一个种族在社会地位上低于另一个种族，美国宪法就不能将他们放在同一平面上。

In the lone dissent, Kentuckian Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote:

在唯一的异议中，肯塔基州法官约翰·马歇尔·哈伦写道：

I am of the opinion that the statute of Louisiana is inconsistent with the personal liberties of citizens, white and black, in that State, and hostile to both the spirit and the letter of the Constitution of the United States.

我认为路易斯安那州的法规不符合该州白人和黑人公民的个人自由，并且违背美国宪法的精神和文字。

If laws of like character should be enacted in the several States of the Union, the effect would be in the highest degree mischievous.

如果联邦的几个州都颁布类似的法律，其后果将是极其恶劣的。

Slavery as an institution tolerated by law would, it is true, have disappeared from our country, but there would remain a power in the States, by sinister legislation, to interfere with the blessings of freedom; to regulate civil rights common to all citizens, upon the basis of race; and to place in a condition of legal inferiority a large body of American citizens, now constituting a part of the political community, called the people of the United States, for whom and by whom, through representatives, our government is administrated.

奴隶制作为法律所容忍的一种制度，确实会从我们国家消失，但各州仍然有权力通过险恶的立法来干涉自由的福祉；根据种族规范所有公民共同的公民权利；并将大批美国公民置于法律劣势地位，这些公民现在构成了政治共同体的一部分，被称为美国人民，我们的政府是由他们通过代表来管理的。

Such a system is inconsistent with the guarantee given by the Constitution to each State of a republican form of government, and may be stricken down by congressional action, or by the courts in the discharge of their solemn duty to maintain the supreme law of the land, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

这种制度不符合《宪法》对各州实行共和政体的保证，并且可能会被国会的行动或法院在履行其维护国家最高法律的庄严职责时所推翻，无论任何州的宪法或法律有任何相反的规定。

It was not until the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v.

直到最高法院对布朗诉特朗普一案作出裁决。

Board of Education and congressional civil rights acts of the 1950s and 1960s that systematic segregation under state law was ended.

1950 年代和 1960 年代教育委员会和国会民权法案结束了州法律下的系统性种族隔离。

In the wake of those Federal actions, many states amended or rewrote their state constitutions to conform with the spirit of the 14th Amendment.

在这些联邦行动之后，许多州修改或重写了州宪法，以符合第十四修正案的精神。

For Homer Plessy, the remedies came too late.

对于荷马·普莱西来说，补救措施来得太晚了。

This document is available on DocsTeach, the online tool for teaching with documents from the National Archives.

该文档可在 DocsTeach 上找到，这是一个使用国家档案馆文档进行教学的在线工具。

Find teaching activities that incorporate this document, or create your own online activity .

查找包含本文档的教学活动，或创建您自己的在线活动。

(Transcription of the Judgement of the Supreme Court of the United States in Plessy v.

（美国最高法院在普莱西诉美国最高法院的判决抄录）

Ferguson .)

弗格森。）

Supreme Court of the United States, No. 210, October Term, 1895.

美国最高法院，第 210 号，10 月条款，1895 年。

Homer Adolph Plessy, Plaintiff in Error, vs. J.H.

霍默·阿道夫·普莱西 (Homer Adolph Plessy)，错误原告，诉 J.H.

Ferguson, Judge of Section "A" Criminal District Court for the Parish of Orleans

弗格森，奥尔良教区刑事地方法院“A”组法官

In Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana

路易斯安那州最高法院的错误

This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana, and was argued by counsel.

这一理由随后出现在路易斯安那州最高法院的记录笔录中，并由律师进行了辩论。

On consideration whereof, It is now here ordered and adjudged by this Court that the judgement of the said Supreme Court, in this cause, be and the the same is hereby, affirmed with costs.

考虑到这一点，本法院现命令并裁定，上述最高法院在本案中的判决，并特此确认，并支付费用。

(Transcription of Opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in Plessy v.

（美国最高法院在普莱西诉美国最高法院的意见抄录）

Ferguson .)

弗格森。）

U.S. Supreme Court PLESSY v.

美国最高法院 PLESSY 诉。

FERGUSON, 163 U.S. 537 (1896)

弗格森，163 美国 537 (1896)

163 U.S. 537 PLESSY v.

163 美国 537 PLESSY 诉。

FERGUSON.

弗格森。

No. 210.

第210号。

May 18, 1896.

1896 年 5 月 18 日。

This was a petition for writs of prohibition and certiorari originally filed in the supreme court of the state by Plessy, the plaintiff in error, against the Hon.

这是一份请求禁止令和调卷令的请愿书，最初是由原告普莱西（Plessy）向州最高法院提出的针对议员阁下的错误申请。

John H.

约翰·H.

Ferguson, judge of the criminal district court for the parish of Orleans, and setting forth, in substance, the following facts:

奥尔良教区刑事地区法院法官弗格森，实质上陈述了以下事实：

That petitioner was a citizen of the United States and a resident of the state of Louisiana, of mixed descent, in the proportion of seven-eighths Caucasian and one-eighth African blood; that the mixture of colored blood was not discernible in him, and that he was entitled to every recognition, right, privilege, and immunity secured to the citizens of the United States of the white race by its constitution and laws; that on June 7, 1892, he engaged and paid for a first-class passage on the East Louisiana Railway, from New Orleans to Covington, in the same state, and thereupon entered a passenger train, and took possession of a vacant seat in a coach where passengers of the white race were accommodated; that such railroad company was incorporated by the laws of Louisiana as a common carrier, and was not authorized to distinguish between citizens according to their race, but, notwithstanding this, petitioner was required by the conductor, under penalty of ejection from said train and imprisonment, to vacate said coach, and occupy another seat, in a coach assigned by said company for persons not of the white race, and for no other reason than that petitioner was of the colored race; that, upon petitioner's refusal to comply with such order, he was, with the aid of a police officer, forcibly ejected from said coach, and hurried off to, and imprisoned in, the parish jail of New Orleans, and there held to answer a charge made by such officer to the effect that he was guilty of having criminally violated an act of the general assembly of the state, approved July 10, 1890, in such case made and provided.

该请愿者是美国公民和路易斯安那州居民，具有混血血统，其中八分之七是白种人，八分之一是非洲人血统；他身上看不出有色人种的混血，他有权获得美国宪法和法律赋予白人公民的一切承认、权利、特权和豁免权； 1892 年 6 月 7 日，他预订并支付了东路易斯安那铁路从新奥尔良到同一州卡温顿的头等车厢票价，随后登上了旅客列车，并占据了一辆容纳白人乘客的车厢的空座；该铁路公司是根据路易斯安那州法律成立的公共承运人，无权根据种族区分公民，但尽管如此，售票员仍要求请愿人腾出所述车厢，并在所述公司为非白人种族的人分配的车厢内占据另一个座位，否则，除请愿人是有色人种外，不得有其他原因；由于请愿人拒绝遵守这一命令，他在一名警察的帮助下被强行从所述车厢中弹出，并匆忙前往新奥尔良教区监狱并被监禁，并在那里回答该警察提出的指控，大意是他犯有刑事违反州议会1890年7月10日批准的法案，在这种情况下提出和提供。

The petitioner was subsequently brought before the recorder of the city for preliminary examination, and committed for trial to the criminal district court for the parish of Orleans, where an information was filed against him in the matter above set forth, for a violation of the above act, which act the petitioner affirmed to be null and void, because in conflict with the constitution of the United States; that petitioner interposed a plea to such information, based upon the unconstitutionality of the act of the general assembly, to which the district attorney, on behalf of the state, filed a demurrer; that, upon issue being joined upon such demurrer and plea, the court sustained the demurrer, overruled the plea, and ordered petitioner to plead over to the facts set forth in the information, and that, unless the judge of the said court be enjoined by a writ of prohibition from further proceeding in such case, the court will proceed to fine and sentence petitioner to imprisonment, and thus deprive him of his constitutional rights set forth in his said plea, notwithstanding the unconstitutionality of the act under which he was being prosecuted; that no appeal lay from such sentence, and petitioner was without relief or remedy except by writs of prohibition and certiorari.

随后，请愿人被带到市立法院进行初步审查，并提交奥尔良教区刑事地区法院受审，该法院就上述事项向他提出了指控，指控其违反上述法案，请愿人确认该法案无效，因为与美国宪法相抵触；请愿人以大会法案违宪为由，对此类信息提出抗辩，地方检察官代表国家对此提出了抗辩；在对此类抗辩和抗辩进行争论时，法院支持抗辩，驳回抗辩，并命令请愿人就信息中提出的事实进行抗辩，并且，除非该法院的法官收到禁止进一步审理此类案件的令状，否则法院将继续处以罚款并判处请愿人监禁，从而剥夺他在其上述抗辩中规定的宪法权利，尽管该法案违宪他据此受到起诉；不得对这一判决提出上诉，除禁止令和调卷令外，请愿人无法获得任何救济或补救。

Copies of the information and other proceedings in the criminal district court were annexed to the petition as an exhibit.

刑事地区法院的信息和其他诉讼程序的副本作为证据附在请愿书中。

Upon the filing of this petition, an order was issued upon the respondent to show cause why a writ of prohibition should not issue, and be made perpetual, and a further order that the record of the proceedings had in the criminal cause be certified and transmitted to the supreme court.

在提交本请愿书后，向被告发出了一项命令，要求被告说明为什么不应发布禁止令并将其永久化，并进一步命令要求对刑事诉讼中的诉讼记录进行认证并将其转交给最高法院。

To this order the respondent made answer, transmitting a certified copy of the proceedings, asserting the constitutionality of the law, and averring that, instead of pleading or admitting that he belonged to the colored race, the said Plessy declined and refused, either by pleading or otherwise, to admit that he was in any sense or in any proportion a colored man.

被告对此命令做出了答复，转交了诉讼程序的核证副本，声称法律符合宪法，并断言，上述普莱西没有辩解或承认他属于有色人种，而是通过辩解或其他方式拒绝承认他在任何意义上或在任何比例上是有色人种。

The case coming on for hearing before the supreme court, that court was of opinion that the law under which the prosecution was had was constitutional and denied the relief prayed for by the petitioner (Ex parte Plessy, 45 La.

该案正在最高法院审理，该法院认为起诉所依据的法律符合宪法，并拒绝了请愿人所请求的救济（Exparte Plessy，45 La.

Ann.

安.

80, 11 South.

80、11 南。

948); whereupon petitioner prayed for a writ of error from this court, which was allowed by the chief justice of the supreme court of Louisiana.

第948章）；因此，请愿人请求本法院发出错误令状，路易斯安那州最高法院首席法官允许了这一请求。

A.

A.

W.

W.

Tourgee and S.

图吉和S.

F.

F。

Phillips, for plaintiff in error.

菲利普斯，原告的错误。

Alex.

亚历克斯.

Porter Morse, for defendant in error.

波特·莫尔斯（Porter Morse），被告犯了错误。

Mr. Justice BROWN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, delivered the opinion of the court.

布朗法官用上述语言陈述了事实后，宣读了法院的意见。

This case turns upon the constitutionality of an act of the general assembly of the state of Louisiana, passed in 1890, providing for separate railway carriages for the white and colored races.

本案涉及路易斯安那州议会 1890 年通过的一项法案是否符合宪法，该法案规定为白人和有色人种提供单独的火车车厢。

Acts 1890, No. 111, p.

使徒行传 1890 年，第 111 期，第 14 页。

152.

152.

The first section of the statute enacts 'that all railway companies carrying passengers in their coaches in this state, shall provide equal but separate accommodations for the white, and colored races, by providing two or more passenger coaches for each passenger train, or by dividing the passenger coaches by a partition so as to secure separate accommodations: provided, that this section shall not be construed to apply to street railroads.

该法规第一节规定，“本州所有用客车载客的铁路公司，应为白人和有色人种提供平等但独立的住宿，方法是为每列旅客列车提供两辆或更多客车，或用隔板分隔客车以确保单独的住宿：前提是，本节不得解释为适用于街道铁路。”

No person or persons shall be permitted to occupy seats in coaches, other than the ones assigned to them, on account of the race they belong to.'

除因所属比赛而分配给他们的座位外，任何人不得占用教练座位。

By the second section it was enacted 'that the officers of such passenger trains shall have power and are hereby required to assign each passenger to the coach or compartment used for the race to which such passenger belongs; any passenger insisting on going into a coach or compartment to which by race he does not belong, shall be liable to a fine of twenty-five dollars, or in lieu thereof to imprisonment for a period of not more than twenty days in the parish prison, and any officer of any railroad insisting on assigning a passenger to a coach or compartment other than the one set aside for the race to which said passenger belongs, shall be liable to a fine of twenty-five dollars, or in lieu thereof to imprisonment for a period of not more than twenty days in the parish prison; and should any passenger refuse to occupy the coach or compartment to which he or she is assigned by the officer of such railway, said officer shall have power to refuse to carry such passenger on his train, and for such refusal neither he nor the railway company which he represents shall be liable for damages in any of the courts of this state.'

第二条规定，“此类旅客列车的官员有权并据此要求将每位乘客分配至该乘客所属比赛所用的车厢或车厢；任何乘客坚持乘坐与比赛不属于的车厢或车厢，应处以二十五美元的罚款，或代替在教区监狱中监禁不超过二十天的监禁，任何铁路官员坚持将乘客分配到该乘客所属比赛专用车厢或车厢以外的车厢或车厢，应处以二十五美元的罚款，或代替在教区监狱中监禁不超过二十天的监禁。教区监狱；如果任何乘客拒绝乘坐该铁路官员指定的车厢或车厢，则该官员有权拒绝在火车上搭载该乘客，并且对于这种拒绝，他或他所代表的铁路公司均不对本州任何法院的损害承担责任。

The third section provides penalties for the refusal or neglect of the officers, directors, conductors, and employees of railway companies to comply with the act, with a proviso that 'nothing in this act shall be construed as applying to nurses attending children of the other race.' The fourth section is immaterial.

第三节规定了对铁路公司管理人员、董事、售票员和雇员拒绝或疏忽遵守该法案的处罚，但附带条件是“本法案中的任何内容均不得解释为适用于照顾其他种族儿童的护士。”第四部分无关紧要。

The information filed in the criminal district court charged, in substance, that Plessy, being a passenger between two stations within the state of Louisiana, was assigned by officers of the company to the coach used for the race to which he belonged, but he insisted upon going into a coach used by the race to which he did not belong.

刑事地区法院提交的信息实质上指控，普莱西是路易斯安那州内两个车站之间的乘客，公司官员将他分配到他所属比赛所使用的教练上，但他坚持乘坐他不参加的比赛所使用的教练。

Neither in the information nor plea was his particular race or color averred.

在信息和请求中，都没有明确他的特定种族或肤色。

The petition for the writ of prohibition averred that petitioner was seven-eights Caucasian and one-eighth African blood; that the mixture of colored blood was not discernible in him; and that he was entitled to every right, privilege, and immunity secured to citizens of the United States of the white race; and that, upon such theory, he took possession of a vacant seat in a coach where passengers of the white race were accommodated, and was ordered by the conductor to vacate said coach, and take a seat in another, assigned to persons of the colored race, and, having refused to comply with such demand, he was forcibly ejected, with the aid of a police officer, and imprisoned in the parish jail to answer a charge of having violated the above act.

禁止令请愿书断言请愿人有七分之八的白人血统和八分之一的非洲血统；他身上看不出有色血液的混合物；他有权享有美国白人公民所享有的一切权利、特权和豁免权；根据这一理论，他占据了一辆载有白人乘客的车厢的空座，售票员命令他离开该车厢，并坐在另一辆分配给有色人种乘客的车厢上，由于拒绝遵守这一要求，他在一名警察的帮助下被强行驱逐出境，并被关进教区监狱，以回应对违反上述行为的指控。

The constitutionality of this act is attacked upon the ground that it conflicts both with the thirteenth amendment of the constitution, abolishing slavery, and the fourteenth amendment, which prohibits certain restrictive legislation on the part of the states.

该法案的合宪性受到攻击，因为它与废除奴隶制的宪法第十三修正案和禁止各州某些限制性立法的第十四修正案相冲突。

1.

1.

That it does not conflict with the thirteenth amendment, which abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, except a punishment for crime, is too clear for argument.

它与废除奴隶制和非自愿奴役（除对犯罪的惩罚除外）的第十三修正案并不冲突，这一点是显而易见的，无需争论。

Slavery implies involuntary servitude,-a state of bondage; the ownership of mankind as a chattel, or, at least, the control of the labor and services of one man for the benefit of another, and the absence of a legal right to the disposal of his own person, property, and services.

奴隶制意味着非自愿的奴役——一种束缚状态；人类作为动产的所有权，或者至少是为了另一个人的利益而控制一个人的劳动和服务，并且缺乏处置自己的人身、财产和服务的合法权利。

This amendment was said in the Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall.

这项修正案在《屠宰场案件》中有所提及，16 Wall。

36, to have been intended primarily to abolish slavery, as it had been previously known in this country, and that it equally forbade Mexican peonage or the Chinese coolie trade, when they amounted to slavery or involuntary servitude, and that the use of the word 'servitude' was intended to prohibit the use of all forms of involuntary slavery, of whatever class or name.

第 36 条，其主要目的是废除奴隶制，正如该国以前所知道的那样，它同样禁止墨西哥劳役或中国苦力贸易，因为它们相当于奴隶制或非自愿奴役，并且使用“奴役”一词的目的是禁止使用任何形式的非自愿奴隶制，无论其类别或名称如何。

It was intimated, however, in that case, that this amendment was regarded by the statesmen of that day as insufficient to protect the colored race from certain laws which had been enacted in the Southern states, imposing upon the colored race onerous disabilities and burdens, and curtailing their rights in the pursuit of life, liberty, and property to such an extent that their freedom was of little value; and that the fourteenth amendment was devised to meet this exigency.

然而，在这种情况下，有人暗示，当时的政治家认为这项修正案不足以保护有色人种免受南方各州颁布的某些法律的影响，这些法律给有色人种带来了沉重的残疾和负担，并限制了他们追求生命、自由和财产的权利，以至于他们的自由没有什么价值；第十四修正案就是为了满足这种迫切需要而制定的。

So, too, in the Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3, 3 Sup.

在民权案件中也是如此，109 U.S. 3, 3 Sup.

Ct.

CT。

18, it was said that the act of a mere individual, the owner of an inn, a public conveyance or place of amusement, refusing accommodations to colored people, cannot be justly regarded as imposing any badge of slavery or servitude upon the applicant, but only as involving an ordinary civil injury, properly cognizable by the laws of the state, and presumably subject to redress by those laws until the contrary appears.

第 18 条指出，单纯个人、客栈、公共交通工具或娱乐场所的业主拒绝向有色人种提供住宿的行为，不能被公正地视为对申请人施加任何奴役或劳役标志，而只能视为涉及普通民事伤害，可以由国家法律适当承认，并可能受到这些法律的补救，直到出现相反情况为止。

'It would be running the slavery question into the ground,' said Mr. Justice Bradley, 'to make it apply to every act of discrimination which a person may see fit to make as to the guests he will entertain, or as to the people he will take into his coach or cab or car, or admit to his concert or theater, or deal with in other matters of intercourse or business.'

布拉德利法官说，“如果一个人认为适合对他所招待的客人，或他将带上他的马车、出租车或汽车，或允许参加他的音乐会或剧院，或处理其他交往或生意事务的人，采取适当的歧视行为，那么这将把奴隶制问题彻底解决。”

A statute which implies merely a legal distinction between the white and colored races-a distinction which is founded in the color of the two races, and which must always exist so long as white men are distinguished from the other race by color-has no tendency to destroy the legal equality of the two races, or re-establish a state of involuntary servitude.

一项仅仅意味着白人和有色人种之间的法律区别的法规——这种区别是建立在两个种族的肤色基础上的，只要白人通过肤色与其他种族区分开来，这种区别就必须一直存在——并没有破坏两个种族的法律平等或重新建立非自愿奴役状态的倾向。

Indeed, we do not understand that the thirteenth amendment is strenuously relied upon by the plaintiff in error in this connection.

事实上，我们不明白原告在这方面错误地过分依赖第十三修正案。

2.

2.

By the fourteenth amendment, all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are made citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside; and the states are forbidden from making or enforcing any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, or shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or deny to any person within their jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

根据第十四修正案，所有在美国出生或归化并受其管辖的人均成为美国及其居住州的公民；禁止各州制定或执行任何剥夺美国公民的特权或豁免权的法律，或未经正当法律程序剥夺任何人的生命、自由或财产，或剥夺其管辖范围内任何人受到法律平等保护的法律。

The proper construction of this amendment was first called to the attention of this court in the Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall.

该修正案的正确解释首先在屠宰场案件 (Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall) 中引起本法院的注意。

36, which involved, however, not a question of race, but one of exclusive privileges.

36，然而，这涉及的不是种族问题，而是排他性特权问题。

The case did not call for any expression of opinion as to the exact rights it was intended to secure to the colored race, but it was said generally that its main purpose was to establish the citizenship of the negro, to give definitions of citizenship of the United States and of the states, and to protect from the hostile legislation of the states the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, as distinguished from those of citizens of the states.

该案没有要求就其旨在保障有色人种的具体权利发表任何意见，但一般说，其主要目的是确立黑人的公民身份，给出美国和各州公民身份的定义，并保护美国公民区别于各州公民的特权和豁免权，使其免受各州敌对立法的影响。

The object of the amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law, but, in the nature of things, it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguish d from political, equality, or a commingling of the two races upon terms unsatisfactory to either.

修正案的目的无疑是要强制两个种族在法律面前绝对平等，但就事物的本质而言，它的目的不可能是废除基于肤色的区别，或者强制社会上的平等（区别于政治上的平等），或者在对任何一个都不满意的条件下强制两个种族的混合。

Laws permitting, and even requiring, their separation, in places where they are liable to be brought into contact, do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race to the other, and have been generally, if not universally, recognized as within the competency of the state legislatures in the exercise of their police power.

法律允许，甚至要求他们在可能接触的地方分开，并不一定意味着任何一个种族比另一个种族低劣，并且已经普遍（如果不是普遍）被承认属于州立法机关行使其警察权力的职权范围。

The most common instance of this is connected with the establishment of separate schools for white and colored children, which have been held to be a valid exercise of the legislative power even by courts of states where the political rights of the colored race have been longest and most earnestly enforced.

最常见的例子是为白人和有色人种儿童建立单独的学校，即使是那些有色人种政治权利历史最悠久、最认真执行的州的法院也认为这是立法权的有效行使。

One of the earliest of these cases is that of Roberts v.

其中最早的案件之一是“罗伯茨诉美国”案。

City of Boston, 5 Cush.

波士顿市，5 Cush。

198, in which the supreme judicial court of Massachusetts held that the general school committee of Boston had power to make provision for the instruction of colored children in separate schools established exclusively for them, and to prohibit their attendance upon the other schools.

198，其中马萨诸塞州最高法院裁定，波士顿总学校委员会有权规定有色人种儿童在专门为他们设立的单独学校接受教育，并禁止他们就读其他学校。

'The great principle,' said Chief Justice Shaw, 'advanced by the learned and eloquent advocate for the plaintiff [Mr. Charles Sumner], is that, by the constitution and laws of Massachusetts, all persons, without distinction of age or sex, birth or color, origin or condition, are equal before the law.

首席大法官肖尔说，“这项伟大的原则是由原告的博学而雄辩的辩护人[先生]提出的。”查尔斯·萨姆纳]，根据马萨诸塞州的宪法和法律，所有人，不分年龄或性别，出生或肤色，出身或状况，在法律面前一律平等。

...

...

But, when this great principle comes to be applied to the actual and various conditions of persons in society, it will not warrant the assertion that men and women are legally clothed with the same civil and political powers, and that children and adults are legally to have the same functions and be subject to the same treatment; but only that the rights of all, as they are settled and regulated by law, are equally entitled to the paternal consideration and protection of the law for their maintenance and security.' It was held that the powers of the committee extended to the establish- ment of separate schools for children of different ages, sexes and colors, and that they might also establish special schools for poor and neglected children, who have become too old to attend the primary school, and yet have not acquired the rudiments of learning, to enable them to enter the ordinary schools.

但是，当这一伟大原则应用于社会中人们的实际和各种状况时，就不能保证男人和女人在法律上具有相同的公民和政治权力，并且儿童和成人在法律上具有相同的职能并受到相同的待遇；但只有所有人的权利，因为它们是由法律规定和规范的，因此平等地有权得到父亲般的考虑和法律的保护，以维持和安全。”有人认为，该委员会的权力可以扩大到为不同年龄、性别和肤色的儿童设立单独的学校，也可以为那些年龄太大而无法上小学、但尚未获得基本学习能力的贫困和被忽视的儿童设立特殊学校，使他们能够进入普通学校。

Similar laws have been enacted by congress under its general power of legislation over the District of Columbia (sections 281- 283, 310, 319, Rev.

国会根据其对哥伦比亚特区的一般立法权力颁布了类似的法律（《修订案》第 281-283、310、319 条）。

St. D.

圣D.

C.), as well as by the legislatures of many of the states, and have been generally, if not uniformly, sustained by the courts.

C.）以及许多州的立法机构，并且得到法院的普遍支持（如果不是一致的话）。

State v.

国家诉。

McCann, 21 Ohio St. 210; Lehew v.

麦肯，俄亥俄州街 21 号 210；勒休诉。

Brummell (Mo.

布鲁梅尔 (Mo.

Sup.) 15 S.

上）15 S。

W.

W.

765; Ward v.

第765章沃德诉。

Flood, 48 Cal.

洪水，48 卡尔。

36; Bertonneau v.

36；贝尔托诺诉。

Directors of City Schools, 3 Woods, 177, Fed.

城市学校董事，3 Woods，177，Fed。

Cas.

卡斯。

No. 1,361; People v.

第 1,361 号；人们诉。

Gallagher, 93 N.

加拉格尔，北纬 93 号

Y.

Y。

438; Cory v.

438；科里诉。

Carter, 48 Ind.

卡特，印第安纳州 48 号

337; Dawson v.

337；道森诉。

Lee, 83 Ky.

李，83 岁。

49.

49.

Laws forbidding the intermarriage of the two races may be said in a technical sense to interfere with the freedom of contract, and yet have been universally recognized as within the police power of the state.

禁止两个种族通婚的法律从技术意义上来说可能会干扰契约自由，但已被普遍认为属于国家警察权力范围。

State v.

国家诉。

Gibson, 36 Ind.

吉布森，印第安纳州 36 号

389.

389.

The distinction between laws interfering with the political equality of the negro and those requiring the separation of the two races in schools, theaters, and railway carriages has been frequently drawn by this court.

该法院经常区分干涉黑人政治平等的法律和要求在学校、剧院和火车车厢中将两个种族分开的法律。

Thus, in Strauder v.

因此，在斯特劳德诉。

West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303, it was held that a law of West Virginia limiting to white male persons 21 years of age, and citizens of the state, the right to sit upon juries, was a discrimination which implied a legal inferiority in civil society, which lessened the security of the right of the colored race, and was a step towards reducing them to a condition of servility.

西弗吉尼亚州，100 U.S. 303，认为西弗吉尼亚州的一项法律限制 21 岁以上的白人男性和该州公民担任陪审团的权利，这是一种歧视，暗示着公民社会在法律上处于劣势，削弱了有色人种权利的保障，是使他们沦为奴役状态的一步。

Indeed, the right of a colored man that, in the selection of jurors to pass upon his life, liberty, and property, there shall be no exclusion of his race, and no discrimination against them because of color, has been asserted in a number of cases.

事实上，在许多案件中都主张有色人种的权利，即在选择陪审员传递其生命、自由和财产时，不得排除他的种族，也不得因肤色而歧视他们。

Virginia v.

弗吉尼亚诉。

Rivers, 100 U.S. 313 ; Neal v.

里弗斯，100 美国 313；尼尔诉。

Delaware, 103 U.S. 370 ; ush v.

特拉华州，103 美国 370；乌什河谷

Com., 107 U.S. 110 , 1 Sup.

Com.，107 美国 110，1 Sup。

Ct.

CT。

625; Gibson v.

625;吉布森诉。

Mississippi, 162 U.S. 565 , 16 Sup.

密西西比州，162 美国 565，16 Sup。

Ct.

CT。

904.

904.

So, where the laws of a particular locality or the charter of a particular railway corporation has provided that no person shall be excluded from the cars on account of color, we have held that this meant that persons of color should travel in the same car as white ones, and that the enactment was not satisfied by the company providing cars assigned exclusively to people of color, though they were as good as those which they assigned exclusively to white persons.

因此，如果特定地区的法律或特定铁路公司的章程规定任何人不得因有色人种而被排除在车厢之外，我们认为这意味着有色人种应与白人乘坐同一辆车，而公司提供专门分配给有色人种的车厢并不满足该法律的要求，尽管这些车厢与专门分配给白人的车厢一样好。

Railroad Co. v.

铁路公司诉。

Brown, 17 Wall.

布朗，17 墙。

445.

445.

Upon the other hand, where a statute of Louisiana required those engaged in the transportation of passengers among the states to give to all persons traveling within that state, upon vessels employed in that business, equal rights and privileges in all parts of the vessel, without distinction on account of race or color, and subjected to an action for damages the owner of such a vessel who excluded colored passengers on account of their color from the cabin set aside by him for the use of whites, it was held to be, so far as it applied to interstate commerce, unconstitutional and void.

另一方面，路易斯安那州的一项法规要求，从事各州之间客运的人员应给予从事该业务的所有在该州内旅行的人员在船舶的所有部分均享有平等的权利和特权，不因种族或肤色而有所区别，并且该船舶的船东因其肤色而将有色人种乘客排除在他为白人使用的客舱之外而受到损害赔偿诉讼，只要它适用于州际贸易，就被认为是，违宪且无效。

Hall v.

霍尔诉。

De Cuir, 95 U.S. 485 .

德奎尔，95 美国 485。

The court in this case, however, expressly disclaimed that it had anything whatever to do with the statute as a regulation of internal commerce, or affecting anything else than commerce among the states.

然而，在本案中，法院明确否认该法规与作为内部商业法规的法规有任何关系，也不影响州际贸易以外的任何其他事物。

In the Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 , 3 Sup.

在民权案件中，109 U.S. 3 , 3 Sup.

Ct.

CT。

18, it was held that an act of congress entitling all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances, on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement, and made applicable to citizens of every race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude, was unconstitutional and void, upon the ground that the fourteenth amendment was prohibitory upon the states only, and the legislation authorized to be adopted by congress for enforcing it was not direct legislation on matters respecting which the states were prohibited from making or enforcing certain laws, or doing certain acts, but was corrective legislation, such as might be necessary or proper for counter-acting and redressing the effect of such laws or acts.

18 号法案认为，国会法案赋予合众国管辖范围内的所有人充分和平等地享有旅馆、陆地或水上公共交通工具、剧院和其他公共娱乐场所的住宿、优惠、设施和特权，并适用于各种种族和肤色的公民，无论先前的奴役条件如何，该法案是违宪且无效的，理由是第十四修正案仅对各州禁止，而立法国会授权通过并执行该法律的，不是针对禁止各州制定或执行某些法律或实施某些行为的事项的直接立法，而是纠正性立法，例如可能是必要或适当的，以对抗和纠正此类法律或行为的影响。

In delivering the opinion of the court, Mr. Justice Bradley observed that the fourteenth amendment 'does not invest congress with power to legislate upon subjects that are within the domain of state legislation, but to provide modes of relief against state legislation or state action of the kind referred to.

布拉德利法官在发表法院意见时指出，第十四修正案“并未赋予国会对州立法范围内的主题进行立法的权力，而是提供针对所提及的州立法或州行动的救济方式。”

It does not authorize congress to create a code of municipal law for the regulation of private rights, but to provide modes of redress against the operation of state laws, and the action of state officers, executive or judicial, when these are subversive of the fundamental rights specified in the amendment.

它并不授权国会制定一部国内法来规范私人权利，而是提供针对州法律的运作以及国家官员、行政或司法人员的行为的补救模式，当这些行为颠覆了修正案中规定的基本权利时。

Positive rights and privileges are undoubtedly secured by the fourteenth amendment; but they are secured by way of prohibition against state laws and state proceedings affecting those rights and privileges, and by power given to congress to legislate for the purpose of carrying such prohibition into effect; and such legislation must necessarily be predicated upon such supposed state laws or state proceedings, and be directed to the correction of their operation and effect.'

第十四修正案无疑保障了积极的权利和特权；但这些权利和特权是通过禁止影响这些权利和特权的州法律和州诉讼程序以及赋予国会为实施此类禁令而立法的权力而得到保障的；此类立法必须以假定的州法律或州程序为基础，并旨在纠正其运作和效果。

Much nearer, and, indeed, almost directly in point, is the case of the Louisville, N.

北路易斯维尔的案例更接近，而且实际上几乎直接切中要害。

O.

奥。

& T.

＆T。

Ry.

瑞。

Co. v.

有限公司诉。

State, 133 U.S. 587 , 10 Sup.

州，133 美国 587，10 Sup。

Ct.

CT。

348, wherein the railway company was indicted for a violation of a statute of Mississippi, enacting that all railroads carrying passengers should provide equal, but separate, accommodations for the white and colored races, by providing two or more passenger cars for each passenger train, or by dividing the passenger cars by a partition, so as to secure separate accommodations.

第 348 号法案，其中铁路公司被指控违反密西西比州的一项法规，该法规规定所有载客的铁路都应为白人和有色人种提供平等但分开的住宿，方法是为每列旅客列车提供两辆或更多客车，或用隔板将客车分开，以确保单独的住宿。

The case was presented in a different aspe t from the one under consideration, inasmuch as it was an indictment against the railway company for failing to provide the separate accommodations, but the question considered was the constitutionality of the law.

该案件的提出方式与正在审议的案件不同，因为它是对铁路公司未能提供单独住宿的起诉，但所考虑的问题是法律的合宪性。

In that case, the supreme court of Mississippi (66 Miss.

在此案中，密西西比州最高法院（66 Miss.

662, 6 South.

662，南6。

203) had held that the statute applied solely to commerce within the state, and, that being the construction of the state statute by its highest court, was accepted as conclusive.

203）认为该法规仅适用于州内的商业，并且该法规是由最高法院对州法规的解释，因此被认为是结论性的。

'If it be a matter,' said the court (page 591, 133 U.

“如果这是一个问题，”法院说（第 591 页，133 U.

S., and page 348, 10 Sup.

S.，第 348 页，第 10 页。

Ct.), 'respecting commerce wholly within a state, and not interfering with commerce between the states, then, obviously, there is no violation of the commerce clause of the federal constitution.

Ct.），“完全尊重州内的商业，并且不干涉州之间的商业，那么，显然，不存在违反联邦宪法的商业条款。”

...

...

No question arises under this section as to the power of the state to separate in different compartments interstate pas- sengers, or affect, in any manner, the privileges and rights of such passengers.

根据本节规定，国家有权将州际乘客分隔在不同的车厢，或以任何方式影响此类乘客的特权和权利。

All that we can consider is whether the state has the power to require that railroad trains within her limits shall have separate accommodations for the two races.

我们只能考虑的是，国家是否有权力要求在其管辖范围内的铁路列车必须为两个种族提供单独的住宿。

That affecting only commerce within the state is no invasion of the power given to congress by the commerce clause.'

仅影响州内的商业并不侵犯商业条款赋予国会的权力。

A like course of reasoning applies to the case under consideration, since the supreme court of Louisiana, in the case of State v.

类似的推理过程也适用于正在审议的案件，因为路易斯安那州最高法院在“州诉”一案中。

Judge, 44 La.

法官，44 La。

Ann.

安.

770, 11 South.

770，11 南。

74, held that the statute in question did not apply to interstate passengers, but was confined in its application to passengers traveling exclusively within the borders of the state.

74，认为该法规不适用于州际乘客，而仅限于仅在该州境内旅行的乘客。

The case was decided largely upon the authority of Louisville, N.

此案主要是根据北卡罗来纳州路易斯维尔市的权威做出的裁决。

O.

奥。

& T.

＆T。

Ry.

瑞。

Co. v.

有限公司诉。

State, 66 Miss.

州，66 小姐。

662, 6 South, 203, and affirmed by this court in 133 U.S. 587 , 10 Sup.

662, 6 South, 203，并由本法院在 133 U.S. 587 , 10 Sup. 中确认。

Ct.

CT。

348.

348.

In the present case no question of interference with interstate commerce can possibly arise, since the East Louisiana Railway appears to have been purely a local line, with both its termini within the state of Louisiana.

在本案中，不可能出现干扰州际贸易的问题，因为东路易斯安那铁路似乎纯粹是一条地方线路，其终点站都在路易斯安那州内。

Similar statutes for the separation of the two races upon public conveyances were held to be constitutional in Railroad v.

在“铁路诉”一案中，关于公共交通工具上两个种族分开的类似法规被认为是符合宪法的。

Miles, 55 Pa.

迈尔斯，55 帕。

St. 209; Day v.

圣209；日诉。

Owen 5 Mich.

欧文 5 密歇根州

520; Railway Co. v.

520;铁路公司诉。

Williams, 55 Ill.

威廉姆斯，55 岁。

185; Railroad Co. v.

185；铁路公司诉。

Wells, 85 Tenn.

威尔斯，85 田纳西州。

613; 4 S.

613； 4 S。

W.

W.

5; Railroad Co. v.

5；铁路公司诉。

Benson, 85 Tenn.

本森，85 岁，田纳西州。

627, 4 S.

627, 4 S.

W.

W.

5; The Sue, 22 Fed.

5；苏，22 美联储。

843; Logwood v.

第843章洛格伍德诉。

Railroad Co., 23 Fed.

铁路公司，23 Fed。

318; McGuinn v.

318；麦吉恩诉。

Forbes, 37 Fed.

福布斯，37 美联储。

639; People v.

639；人们诉。

King ( N.

王（N.

Y.

Y。

App.) 18 N.

应用。） 18 N.

E.

E.

245; Houck v.

245；霍克诉。

Railway Co., 38 Fed.

铁路公司，38 Fed。

226; Heard v.

226；赫德诉。

Railroad Co., 3 Inter St. Commerce Com.

铁路公司，3 Inter St. Commerce Com。

R.

R。

111, 1 Inter St. Commerce Com.

111, 1 Inter St. Commerce Com。

R.

R。

428.

428.

While we think the enforced separation of the races, as applied to the internal commerce of the state, neither abridges the privileges or immunities of the colored man, deprives him of his property without due process of law, nor denies him the equal protection of the laws, within the meaning of the fourteenth amendment, we are not prepared to say that the conductor, in assigning passengers to the coaches according to their race, does not act at his peril, or that the provision of the second section of the act that denies to the passenger compensation in damages for a refusal to receive him into the coach in which he properly belongs is a valid exercise of the legislative power.

虽然我们认为，适用于国家内部贸易的强制种族隔离，既不剥夺有色人种的特权或豁免权，未经正当法律程序剥夺他的财产，也不否认他受到法律的平等保护，但在第十四修正案的含义内，我们不准备说售票员根据种族将乘客分配到车厢时不会承担自己的危险，或者该法案第二部分的规定因拒绝乘客乘坐其应有的车厢而拒绝向该乘客赔偿损失，是对立法权的有效行使。

Indeed, we understand it to be conceded by the state's attorney that such part of the act as exempts from liability the railway company and its officers is unconstitutional.

事实上，据我们了解，州检察官承认该法案中免除铁路公司及其官员责任的部分是违宪的。

The power to assign to a particular coach obviously implies the power to determine to which race the passenger belongs, as well as the power to determine who, under the laws of the particular state, is to be deemed a white, and who a colored, person.

分配给特定教练的权力显然意味着确定乘客属于哪个种族的权力，以及根据特定州的法律确定谁被视为白人、谁被视为有色人种的权力。

This question, though indicated in the brief of the plaintiff in error, does not properly arise upon the record in this case, since the only issue made is as to the unconstitutionality of the act, so far as it requires the railway to provide separate accommodations, and the conductor to assign passengers according to their race.

这个问题虽然在原告的陈述中指出了错误，但在本案的记录中并没有正确出现，因为唯一的问题是该法案是否违宪，因为它要求铁路提供单独的住宿，售票员根据种族分配乘客。

It is claimed by the plaintiff in error that, in an mixed community, the reputation of belonging to the dominant race, in this instance the white race, is 'property,' in the same sense that a right of action or of inheritance is property.

原告错误地声称，在混合社区中，属于主导种族（在本例中为白人）的声誉是“财产”，就像诉讼权或继承权是财产一样。

Conceding this to be so, for the purposes of this case, we are unable to see how this statute deprives him of, or in any way affects his right to, such property.

承认这一点，就本案而言，我们无法看出该法规如何剥夺或以任何方式影响他对此类财产的权利。

If he be a white man, and assigned to a colored coach, he may have his action for damages against the company for being deprived of his so-called 'property.' Upon the other hand, if he be a colored man, and be so assigned, he has been deprived of no property, since he is not lawfully entitled to the reputation of being a white man.

如果他是一名白人，并被分配给一名有色人种教练，他可能会因剥夺他的所谓“财产”而向公司提起损害赔偿诉讼。另一方面，如果他是一个有色人种，并被如此分配，他就不会被剥夺任何财产，因为他没有合法权利享有白人的声誉。

In this connection, it is also suggested by the learned counsel for the plaintiff in error that the same argument that will justify the state legislature in requiring railways to provide separate accommodations for the two races will also authorize them to require separate cars to be provided for people whose hair is of a certain color, or who are aliens, or who belong to certain nationalities, or to enact laws requiring colored people to walk upon one side of the street, and white people upon the other, or requiring white men's houses to be painted white, and colored men's black, or their vehicles or business signs to be of different colors, upon the theory that one side of the street is as good as the other, or that a house or vehicle of one color is as good as one of another color.

在这方面，错误原告的博学律师还指出，证明州立法机关要求铁路为两个种族提供单独住宿的合理性的同一论点也将授权他们要求为特定颜色的人、外国人或属于某些国籍的人提供单独的车厢，或颁布法律要求有色人种在街道的一侧行走，白人在另一侧行走，或要求对白人的房屋进行粉刷白人和有色人种的黑色，或者他们的车辆或商业标志的颜色不同，基于这样的理论：街道的一侧与另一侧一样好，或者一种颜色的房屋或车辆与另一种颜色的房屋或车辆一样好。

The reply to all this is that every exercise of the police power must be reasonable, and extend only to such laws as are enacted in good faith for the promotion of the public good, and not for the annoyance or oppression of a particular class.

对这一切的回答是，警察权力的每一次行使都必须合理，并且只适用于出于善意而颁布的法律，以促进公共利益，而不是为了骚扰或压迫特定阶级。

Thus, in Yick Wo v.

因此，在益和诉。

Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 , 6 Sup.

霍普金斯，118 美国 356，6 Sup。

Ct.

CT。

1064, it was held by this court that a municipal ordinance of the city of San Francisco, to regulate the carrying on of public laundries within the limits of the municipality, violated the provisions of the constitution of the United States, if it conferred upon the municipal authorities arbitrary power, at their own will, and without regard to discretion, in the legal sense of the term, to give or withhold consent as to persons or places, without regard to the competency of the persons applying or the propriety of the places selected for the carrying on of the business.

根据第 1064 条，本法院认为，旧金山市一项旨在规范本市范围内公共洗衣店经营的市政法令，如果它赋予市政当局任意权力，按照自己的意愿，不考虑法律意义上的自由裁量权，对个人或地点给予或拒绝同意，而不考虑申请者的能力或所选地点的适当性，则违反了美国宪法的规定为了业务的开展。

It was held to be a covert attempt on the part of the municipality to make an arbitrary and unjust discrimination against the Chinese race.

这被认为是市政府暗中企图对华裔进行任意和不公正的歧视。

While this was the case of a municipal ordinance, a like principle has been held to apply to acts of a state legislature passed in the exercise of the police power.

虽然这是市政法令的情况，但类似的原则也适用于州立法机关在行使警察权力时通过的法案。

Railroad Co. v.

铁路公司诉。

Husen, 95 U.S. 465 ; Louisville & N.

胡森，95 美国 465；路易斯维尔 & N.

R.

R。

Co. v.

有限公司诉。

Kentucky, 161 U.S. 677 , 16 Sup.

肯塔基州，161 美国 677，16 Sup。

Ct.

CT。

714, and cases cited on page 700, 161 U.

714，以及第 700 页引用的案例，161 U.

S., and page 714, 16 Sup.

S.，第 714 页，第 16 页。

Ct.; Daggett v.

CT；达吉特诉。

Hudson, 43 Ohio St. 548, 3 N.

哈德逊，43 俄亥俄州街 548，3 N.

E.

E.

538; Capen v.

538；卡彭诉。

Foster, 12 Pick.

福斯特，12号秀。

485; State v.

485；国家诉。

Baker, 38 Wis.

威斯康星州 38 号贝克

71; Monroe v.

71；门罗诉。

Collins, 17 Ohio St. 665; Hulseman v.

柯林斯，俄亥俄州街 17 号，665 号；赫尔斯曼诉。

Rems, 41 Pa.

雷姆斯，41 宾夕法尼亚州。

St. 396; Osman v.

圣 396；奥斯曼诉。

Riley, 15 Cal.

莱利，15 岁

48.

48.

So far, then, as a conflict with the fourteenth amendment is concerned, the case reduces itself to the question whether the statute of Louisiana is a reasonable regulation, and with respect to this there must necessarily be a large discretion on the part of the legislature.

那么，到目前为止，就与第十四修正案的冲突而言，案件本身就归结为路易斯安那州的法规是否是一项合理的法规的问题，对此，立法机关必然有很大的自由裁量权。

In determining the question of reasonableness, it is at liberty to act with reference to the established usages, customs, and traditions of the people, and with a view to the promotion of their comfort, and the preservation of the public peace and good order.

在确定合理性问题时，可以自由地参考人民的既定习惯、习俗和传统，以增进人民的舒适、维护公共和平和良好秩序为目的。

Gauged by this standard, we cannot say that a law which authorizes or even requires the separation of the two races in public conveyances is unreasonable, or more obnoxious to the fourteenth amendment than the acts of congress requiring separate schools for colored children in the District of Columbia, the constitutionality of which does not seem to have been questioned, or the corresponding acts of state legislatures.

按照这个标准来衡量，我们不能说一项授权甚至要求在公共交通工具上将两个种族分开的法律是不合理的，或者比国会要求在哥伦比亚特区为有色人种儿童设立单独学校的法案（其合宪性似乎没有受到质疑）或州立法机关的相应法案更令人讨厌。

We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff's argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority.

我们认为原告论点的根本谬误在于这样的假设：两个种族的强制分离给有色人种打上了自卑的标记。

If this be so, it is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it.

如果是这样，那并不是因为该法案中发现的任何内容，而仅仅是因为有色人种选择对此进行解释。

The argument necessarily assumes that if, as has been more than once the case, and is not unlikely to be so again, the colored race should become the dominant power in the state legislature, and should enact a law in precisely similar terms, it would thereby relegate the white race to an inferior position.

这一论点必然假设，如果有色人种应该成为州立法机构中的主导力量，并且应该以完全相同的条款颁布法律，就像不止一次发生的情况一样，并且不太可能再次发生这种情况，那么它就会将白人种族置于劣等地位。

We imagine that the white race, at least, would not acquiesce in this assumption.

我们想象白人至少不会默许这个假设。

The argument also assumes that social prejudices may be overcome by legislation, and that equal rights cannot be secured to the negro except by an enforced commingling of the two races.

该论点还假设社会偏见可以通过立法克服，并且除非通过强制两个种族的混合，否则无法确保黑人享有平等权利。

We cannot accept this proposition.

我们不能接受这个提议。

If the two races are to meet upon terms of social equality, it must be the result of natural affinities, a mutual appreciation of each other's merits, and a voluntary consent of individuals.

如果两个种族要在社会平等的条件下相遇，那必须是天然的亲和力、相互欣赏彼此的优点以及个人自愿同意的结果。

As was said by the court of appeals of New York in People v.

正如纽约上诉法院在“人民诉”一案中所说的那样。

Gallagher, 93 N.

加拉格尔，北纬 93 号

Y.

Y。

438, 448: 'This end can neither be accomplished nor promoted by laws which conflict with the general sentiment of the community upon whom they are designed to operate.

438, 448：“如果法律与其所针对的社区的普遍情感相冲突，则既不能实现也不能促进这一目标。

When the government, therefore, has secured to each of its citizens equal rights before the law, and equal opportunities for improvement and progress, it has accomplished the end for which it was organized, and performed all of the functions respecting social advantages with which it is endowed.' Legislation is powerless to eradicate racial instincts, or to abolish distinctions based upon physical differences, and the attempt to do so can only result in accentuating the difficulties of the present situation.

因此，当政府确保每个公民在法律面前享有平等的权利以及改进和进步的平等机会时，它就完成了其组织的目的，并履行了其所赋予的尊重社会优势的所有职能。立法无力消除种族本能，也无力废除基于身体差异的区别，而试图这样做只会导致加剧当前形势的困难。

If the civil and political rights of both races be equal, one cannot be inferior to the other civilly or politically.

如果两个种族的公民权利和政治权利是平等的，那么一个种族在公民权利或政治权利上就不能劣于另一个种族。

If one race be inferior to the other socially, the constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane.

如果一个种族在社会地位上低于另一个种族，美国宪法就不能将他们放在同一平面上。

It is true that the question of the proportion of colored blood necessary to constitute a colored person, as distinguished from a white person, is one upon which there is a difference of opinion in the different states; some holding that any visible admixture of black blood stamps the person as belonging to the colored race (State v.

确实，关于构成有色人种与白人的区别所需的有色人种血的比例的问题，不同州存在着不同的意见。一些人认为，任何明显的黑人血统都表明该人属于有色人种（State v.

Chavers, 5 Jones [N.

查弗斯，5 琼斯 [N.

C.] 1); others, that it depends upon the preponderance of blood ( Gray v.

C.] 1);其他人则认为这取决于血统的优势（格雷诉。

State, 4 Ohio, 354; Monroe v.

4 俄亥俄州，354；门罗诉。

Collins, 17 Ohio St. 665); and still others, that the predominance of white blood must only be in the proportion of three-fourths (People v.

柯林斯 (Collins)，俄亥俄州街 17 号，665 号）；还有人认为，白种人的比例只能占四分之三（People v.

Dean, 14 Mich.

迪恩，14 岁，密歇根州。

406; Jones v.

406;琼斯诉。

Com., 80 Va.

弗吉尼亚州 80 号

544).

544）。

But these are questions to be determined under the laws of each state, and are not properly put in issue in this case.

但这些都是根据各州法律确定的问题，在本案中没有得到适当的讨论。

Under the allegations of his petition, it may undoubtedly become a question of importance whether, under the laws of Louisiana, the petitioner belongs to the white or colored race.

根据他请愿书的指控，根据路易斯安那州的法律，请愿人是否属于白人或有色人种，这无疑可能成为一个重要问题。

The judgment of the court below is therefore affirmed.

故维持本院判决。

Mr. Justice BREWER did not hear the argument or participate in the decision of this case.

BREWER法官没有听取辩论，也没有参与本案的判决。

By the Louisiana statute the validity of which is here involved, all railway companies (other than street-railroad companies) carry passengers in that state are required to have separate but equal accommodations for white and colored persons, 'by providing two or more passenger coaches for each passenger train, or by dividing the passenger coaches by a partition so as to secure separate accommodations.' Under this statute, no colored person is permitted to occupy a seat in a coach assigned to white persons; nor any white person to occupy a seat in a coach assigned to colored persons.

根据此处涉及其有效性的路易斯安那州法规，所有在该州运送乘客的铁路公司（街道铁路公司除外）都必须为白人和有色人种提供单独但平等的住宿，“通过为每列旅客列车提供两辆或更多客车，或通过隔板将客车分开，以确保单独的住宿。”根据该法规，任何有色人种不得在分配给白人的车厢中占据座位；任何白人也不得在分配给有色人种的车厢中占据座位。

The managers of the railroad are not allowed to exercise any discretion in the premises, but are required to assign each passenger to some coach or compartment set apart for the exclusive use of is race.

铁路管理人员不得在场地内行使任何自由裁量权，但必须将每位乘客分配到专为比赛使用的车厢或车厢。

If a passenger insists upon going into a coach or compartment not set apart for persons of his race, he is subject to be fined, or to be imprisoned in the parish jail.

如果乘客坚持乘坐未为其种族的人预留的车厢或车厢，他将被罚款，或被监禁在教区监狱中。

Penalties are prescribed for the refusal or neglect of the officers, directors, conductors, and employees of railroad companies to comply with the provisions of the act.

铁路公司的管理人员、董事、售票员和雇员拒绝或疏忽遵守该法案的规定，将受到处罚。

Only 'nurses attending children of the other race' are excepted from the operation of the statute.

只有“照顾其他种族儿童的护士”才不受该法规的管辖。

No exception is made of colored attendants traveling with adults.

与成人同行的有色人种服务员也不例外。

A white man is not permitted to have his colored servant with him in the same coach, even if his condition of health requires the constant personal assistance of such servant.

白人不得让有色人种仆人与他同坐一辆马车，即使他的健康状况需要该仆人的持续个人协助。

If a colored maid insists upon riding in the same coach with a white woman whom she has been employed to serve, and who may need her personal attention while traveling, she is subject to be fined or imprisoned for such an exhibition of zeal in the discharge of duty.

如果一名黑人女佣坚持与她受雇服务的白人妇女乘坐同一辆马车，并且在旅行时可能需要她的个人照顾，那么她会因为在履行职责时表现出如此热心而被罚款或监禁。

While there may be in Louisiana persons of different races who are not citizens of the United States, the words in the act 'white and colored races' necessarily include all citizens of the United States of both races residing in that state.

虽然路易斯安那州可能有不同种族的人不是美国公民，但该法案中的“白人和有色人种”一词必然包括居住在该州的所有美国公民。

So that we have before us a state enactment that compels, under penalties, the separation of the two races in railroad passenger coaches, and makes it a crime for a citizen of either race to enter a coach that has been assigned to citizens of the other race.

因此，我们面前有一项州立法，根据处罚规定，在铁路客运车厢中强制将两个种族分开，并将任一种族的公民乘坐分配给另一种族公民的车厢定为犯罪。

Thus, the state regulates the use of a public highway by citizens of the United States solely upon the basis of race.

因此，国家仅根据种族来规范美国公民对公共高速公路的使用。

However apparent the injustice of such legislation may be, we have only to consider whether it is consistent with the constitution of the United States.

无论这种立法多么明显不公正，我们只需要考虑它是否符合美国宪法。

That a railroad is a public highway, and that the corporation which owns or operates it is in the exercise of public functions, is not, at this day, to be disputed.

铁路是一条公共高速公路，拥有或经营铁路的公司正在履行公共职能，这一点在今天是没有争议的。

Mr. Justice Nelson, speaking for this court in New Jersey Steam Nav.

尼尔森法官先生在新泽西州 Steam Nav 法庭上发言。

Co. v.

有限公司诉。

Merchants' Bank, 6 How.

招商银行，6 如何。

344, 382, said that a common carrier was in the exercise 'of a sort of public office, and has public duties to perform, from which he should not be permitted to exonerate himself without the assent of the parties concerned.' Mr. Justice Strong, delivering the judgment of this court in Olcott v.

第 344、382 条规定，公共承运人正在行使“某种公职，并有公共职责要履行，未经有关各方同意，不得允许他免除自己的责任”。斯特朗法官宣读本院对奥尔科特诉美国一案的判决。

Supervisors, 16 Wall.

主管，16 墙。

678, 694, said: 'That railroads, though constructed by private corporations, and owned by them, are public highways, has been the doctrine of nearly all the courts ever since such conveniences for passage and transportation have had any existence.

678, 694，说：“铁路虽然是由私人公司建造并归他们所有，但属于公共公路，自从这种便利的通行和运输存在以来，几乎所有法院都遵循这一原则。

Very early the question arose whether a state's right of eminent domain could be exercised by a private corporation created for the purpose of constructing a railroad.

很早就出现了一个问题：国家的征用权是否可以由为修建铁路而创建的私人公司行使。

Clearly, it could not, unless taking land for such a purpose by such an agency is taking land for public use.

显然，它不能，除非这样的机构为此目的征用土地属于公共用途。

The right of eminent domain nowhere justifies taking property for a private use.

征用权并不能证明征用财产用于私人用途是合理的。

Yet it is a doctrine universally accepted that a state legislature may authorize a private corporation to take land for the construction of such a road, making compensation to the owner.

然而，普遍接受的原则是，州立法机构可以授权私人公司征用土地用于建设此类道路，并向所有者给予补偿。

What else does this doctrine mean if not that building a railroad, though it be built by a private corporation, is an act done for a public use?' So, in Township of Pine Grove v.

如果这条原则不是说修建铁路，尽管它是由私人公司建造的，但属于公共用途的话，那么它还有什么意义呢？因此，在松林镇诉。

Talcott, 19 Wall.

塔尔科特，19 墙。

666, 676: 'Though the corporation [a railroad company] was private, its work was public, as much so as if it were to be constructed by the state.' So, in Inhabitants of Worcester v.

666, 676：“虽然该公司（一家铁路公司）是私营的，但其工作是公开的，就好像它是由国家建造的一样。”因此，在伍斯特居民诉。

Western R.

西R。

Corp., 4 Metc.

公司，4 Metc。

(Mass.) 564: 'The establishment of that great thoroughfare is regarded as a public work, established by public authority, intended for the public use and benefit, the use of which is secured to the whole community, and constitutes, therefore, like a canal, turnpike, or highway, a public easement.' 'It is true that the real and personal property, necessary to the establishment and management of the railroad, is vested in the corporation; but it is in trust for the public.'

（马萨诸塞州）564：“这条大道的建立被视为一项公共工程，由公共当局建立，旨在供公众使用和受益，其使用受到整个社区的保护，因此，像运河、收费公路或高速公路一样，构成公共地役权。” “确实，建立和管理铁路所必需的不动产和个人财产均属于公司；但这是公众的信任。”

In respect of civil rights, common to all citizens, the constitution of the United States does not, I think, permit any public authority to know the race of those entitled to be protected in the enjoyment of such rights.

关于所有公民共有的公民权利，我认为，美国宪法不允许任何公共当局了解有权在享有此类权利时受到保护的人的种族。

Every true man has pride of race, and under appropriate circumstances, when the rights of others, his equals before the law, are not to be affected, it is his privilege to express such pride and to take such action based upon it as to him seems proper.

每个真正的人都有种族自豪感，在适当的情况下，当其他人的权利，即法律面前与他平等的人的权利不受影响时，他有权利表达这种自豪感，并据此采取他认为适当的行动。

But I deny that any legislative body or judicial tribunal may have regard to the race of citizens when the civil rights of those citizens are involved.

但我否认任何立法机构或司法法庭在涉及公民权利时可以考虑公民的种族。

Indeed, such legislation as that here in question is inconsistent not only with that equality of rights which pertains to citizenship, national and state, but with the personal liberty enjoyed by every one within the United States.

事实上，此类立法不仅不符合公民、国民和州的权利平等，而且也不符合美国境内每个人享有的个人自由。

The thirteenth amendment does not permit the withholding or the deprivation of any right necessarily inhering in freedom.

第十三修正案不允许扣留或剥夺自由必然固有的任何权利。

It not only struck down the institution of slavery as previously existing in the United States, but it prevents the imposition of any burdens or disabilities that constitute badges of slavery or servitude.

它不仅废除了美国先前存在的奴隶制制度，而且还防止施加任何构成奴隶制或奴役标志的负担或障碍。

It decreed universal civil freedom in this country.

它颁布了这个国家普遍公民自由的法令。

This court has so adjudged.

本院遂如此判决。

But, that amendment having been found inadequate to the protection of the rights of those who had been in slavery, it was followed by the fourteenth amendment, which added greatly to the dignity and glory of American citizenship, and to the security of personal liberty, by declaring that 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside,' and that 'no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' These two amendments, if enforced according to their true intent and meaning, will protect all the civil rights that pertain to freedom and citizenship.

但是，该修正案被认为不足以保护那些曾遭受奴隶制的人的权利，随后提出了第十四修正案，该修正案极大地增加了美国公民的尊严和荣耀，并保障了个人自由，宣布“所有在美国出生或入籍并受其管辖的人都是美国及其居住州的公民”，并且“任何州不得制定或执行任何会削弱美国公民的特权或权利的法律”。美国公民的豁免权；任何国家不得未经正当法律程序剥夺任何人的生命、自由或财产，也不得拒绝其管辖范围内的任何人受到法律的平等保护。这两项修正案如果按照其真实意图和意义得到执行，将保护与自由和公民身份有关的所有公民权利。

Finally, and to the end that no citizen should be denied, on account of his race, the privilege of participating in the political control of his country, it was declared by the fifteenth amendment that 'the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude.'

最后，为了使任何公民都不应因其种族而被剥夺参与其国家政治控制的特权，第十五修正案宣布，“美国或任何州不得因种族、肤色或先前的奴役状况而否认或剥夺美国公民的投票权。”

These notable additions to the fundamental law were welcomed by the friends of liberty throughout the world.

对基本法的这些值得注意的补充受到了全世界自由之友的欢迎。

They removed the race line from our governmental systems.

他们从我们的政府系统中取消了种族界限。

They had, as this court has said, a common purpose, namely, to secure 'to a race recently emancipated, a race that through many generations have been held in slavery, all the civil rights that the superior race enjoy.' They declared, in legal effect, this court has further said, 'that the law in the states shall be the same for the black as for the white; that all persons, whether colored or white, shall stand equal before the laws of the states; and in regard to the colored race, for whose protection the amendment was primarily designed, that no discrimination shall be made against them by law because of their color.' We also said: 'The words of the amendment, it is true, are prohibitory, but they contain a necessary implication of a positive immunity or right, most valuable to the colored race,-the right to exemption from unfriendly legislation against them distinctively as colored; exemption from legal discriminations, implying inferiority in civil society, lessening the security of their enjoyment of the rights which others enjoy; and discriminations which are steps towards reducing them to the condition of a subject race.' It was, consequently, adjudged that a state law that excluded citizens of the colored race from juries, because of their race, however well qualified in other respects to discharge the duties of jurymen, was repugnant to the fourteenth amendment.

正如本法院所说，他们有一个共同的目的，即确保“一个最近获得解放的种族，一个世代以来一直处于奴隶制地位的种族，享有优越种族所享有的所有公民权利。”他们宣称，在法律上有效，本法院进一步表示，“各州的法律对于黑人和白人应是相同的；”所有人，无论有色人种还是白人，在各州法律面前一律平等；至于有色人种，该修正案主要是为了保护有色人种而设计的，法律不得因其肤色而对他们进行歧视。我们还表示：“修正案的措辞确实是禁止性的，但它们包含了积极豁免或权利的必然含义，这对有色人种来说最有价值，即免受针对有色人种的不友好立法的权利；”免受法律歧视，这意味着在民间社会中处于劣势，降低了他们享有其他人享有的权利的保障；以及歧视，这是将他们降格为臣民种族的步骤。因此，法院裁定，一项因种族原因而将有色人种公民排除在陪审团之外的州法律，无论在其他方面多么有资格履行陪审员的职责，都与第十四修正案相抵触。

Strauder v.

斯特劳德诉。

West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303, 306 , 307 S.; Virginia v.

西弗吉尼亚州，100 U.S. 303、306、307 S；弗吉尼亚诉。

Rives, Id.

里维斯，Id.

313; Ex parte Virginia, Id.

313；单方面弗吉尼亚州，爱达荷州。

339; Neal v.

339；尼尔诉。

Delaware, 103 U.S. 370 , 386; Bush v.

特拉华州，103 美国 370、386；布什诉。

Com., 107 U.S. 110, 116 , 1 S.

com., 107 美国 110, 116, 1 S.

Sup.

高级。

Ct.

CT。

625.

625.

At the present term, referring to the previous adjudications, this court declared that 'underlying all of those decisions is the principle that the constitution of the United States, in its present form, forbids, so far as civil and political rights are concerned, discrimination by the general government or the states against any citizen because of his race.

在当前任期内，提及先前的裁决，本法院宣布“所有这些裁决的基础是，就公民权利和政治权利而言，美国宪法目前的形式禁止联邦政府或各州因种族而对任何公民进行歧视”。

All citizens are equal before the law.' Gibson v.

所有公民在法律面前一律平等。吉布森诉。

State, 162 U.S. 565 , 16 Sup.

州，162 美国 565，16 Sup。

Ct.

CT。

904.

904.

The decisions referred to show the scope of the recent amendments of the constitution.

上述决定显示了最近宪法修正案的范围。

They also show that it is not within the power of a state to prohibit colored citizens, because of their race, from participating as jurors in the administration of justice.

它们还表明，国家无权因种族原因而禁止有色公民作为陪审员参与司法。

It was said in argument that the statute of Louisiana does not discriminate against either race, but prescribes a rule applicable alike to white and colored citizens.

有人在辩论中表示，路易斯安那州的法规并不歧视任何一个种族，而是规定了一条同样适用于白人和有色人种公民的规则。

But this argument does not meet the difficulty.

但这种说法并不能解决困难。

Every one knows that the statute in question had its origin in the purpose, not so much to exclude white persons from railroad cars occupied by blacks, as to exclude colored people from coaches occupied by or assigned to white persons.

大家都知道，该法规的起源与其说是为了将白人排除在黑人占用的火车车厢之外，不如说是为了将有色人种排除在白人占用或分配给白人的车厢之外。

Railroad corporations of Louisiana did not make discrimination among whites in the matter of accommodation for travelers.

路易斯安那州的铁路公司在旅客住宿问题上没有歧视白人。

The thing to accomplish was, under the guise of giving equal accommodation for whites and blacks, to compel the latter to keep to themselves while traveling in railroad passenger coaches.

要做的事情是，在为白人和黑人提供平等住宿的幌子下，迫使后者在乘坐铁路客车旅行时保持独处。

No one would be so wanting in candor as to assert the contrary.

没有人会如此坦率地提出相反的观点。

The fundamental objection, therefore, to the statute, is that it interferes with the personal freedom of citizens.

因此，对该法规的根本反对意见是，它干涉了公民的个人自由。

'Personal liberty,' it has been well said, 'consists in the power of locomotion, of changing situation, or removing one's person to whatsoever places one's own inclination may direct, without imprisonment or restraint, unless by due course of law.' 1 Bl.

俗话说得好，“个人自由包括行动的能力、改变处境的能力，或者将一个人转移到他自己的意愿所指的任何地方的能力，而不受监禁或限制，除非通过适当的法律程序。” 1 BL。

Comm.

通讯。

*134.

*134。

If a white man and a black man choose to occupy the same public conveyance on a public highway, it is their right to do so; and no government, proceeding alone on grounds of race, can prevent it without infringing the personal liberty of each.

如果白人和黑人选择在高速公路上使用同一辆公共交通工具，这是他们的权利；任何政府都不能在不侵犯每个人的个人自由的情况下，以种族为由单独采取行动。

It is one thing for railroad carriers to furnish, or to be required by law to furnish, equal accommodations for all whom they are under a legal duty to carry.

铁路承运人为所有有法律义务运送的人提供平等的住宿，或者法律要求其提供平等的住宿是一回事。

It is quite another thing for government to forbid citizens of the white and black races from traveling in the same public conveyance, and to punish officers of railroad companies for permitting persons of the two races to occupy the same passenger coach.

政府禁止白人和黑人公民乘坐同一辆公共交通工具，并惩罚允许两种种族的人乘坐同一辆客车的铁路公司官员，则完全是另一回事。

If a state can prescribe, as a rule of civil conduct, that whites and blacks shall not travel as passengers in the same railroad coach, why may it not so regulate the use of the streets of its cities and towns as to compel white citizens to keep on one side of a street, and black citizens to keep on the other?

如果一个国家可以作为民事行为规则规定白人和黑人不得作为乘客乘坐同一列火车车厢，那么为什么它不能规范城镇街道的使用，迫使白人公民留在街道的一侧，黑人公民留在街道的另一侧呢？

Why may it not, upon like grounds, punish whites and blacks who ride together in street cars or in open vehicles on a public road or street?

为什么它不能以同样的理由惩罚在公共道路或街道上一起乘坐有轨电车或敞篷车辆的白人和黑人？

Why may it not require sheriffs to assign whites to one side of a court room, and blacks to the other?

为什么不要求治安官将白人分配到法庭的一侧，将黑人分配到另一侧？

And why may it not also prohibit the commingling of the two races in the galleries of legislative halls or in public assemblages convened for the consideration of the political questions of the day?

为什么它不能禁止两个种族在立法大厅的旁听席上或在为考虑当今政治问题而召开的公共集会中混合呢？

Further, if this statute of Louisiana is consistent with the personal liberty of citizens, why may not the state require the separation in railroad coaches of native and naturalized citizens of the United States, or of Protestants and Roman Catholics?

此外，如果路易斯安那州的这项法规符合公民的个人自由，那么该州为什么不要求美国本土公民和归化公民、或者新教徒和罗马天主教徒在铁路车厢上分开呢？

The answer given at the argument to these questions was that regulations of the kind they suggest would be unreasonable, and could not, therefore, stand before the la .

在对这些问题的争论中给出的答案是，他们所建议的那种规定是不合理的，因此不能在法律面前站得住脚。

Is it meant that the determination of questions of legislative power depends upon the inquiry whether the statute whose validity is questioned is, in the judgment of the courts, a reasonable one, taking all the circumstances into consideration?

这是否意味着立法权问题的确定取决于对有效性受到质疑的法规在考虑到所有情况后在法院的判断中是否合理的调查？

A statute may be unreasonable merely because a sound public policy forbade its enactment.

一项法规可能仅仅因为健全的公共政策禁止其颁布而变得不合理。

But I do not understand that the courts have anything to do with the policy or expediency of legislation.

但我不明白法院与立法的政策或权宜之计有什么关系。

A statute may be valid, and yet, upon grounds of public policy, may well be characterized as unreasonable.

一项法规可能是有效的，但根据公共政策，很可能被认为是不合理的。

Mr. Sedgwick correctly states the rule when he says that, the legislative intention being clearly ascertained, 'the courts have no other duty to perform than to execute the legislative will, without any regard to their views as to the wisdom or justice of the particular enactment.' Sedg.

塞奇威克先生正确地阐述了这一规则，他说，在明确确定立法意图的情况下，“法院除了执行立法意愿外，没有其他义务要履行，而不考虑他们对特定立法的明智或正义的看法。”塞吉。

St. & Const.

圣与康斯特。

Law, 324.

法，324。

There is a dangerous tendency in these latter days to enlarge the functions of the courts, by means of judicial interference with the will of the people as expressed by the legislature.

近来存在一种危险的趋势，即通过司法干预立法机关表达的人民意愿来扩大法院的职能。

Our institutions have the distinguishing characteristic that the three departments of government are co-ordinate and separate.

我国机构的显着特点是三部门并举、分业。

Each much keep within the limits defined by the constitution.

每一项都保持在宪法规定的范围内。

And the courts best discharge their duty by executing the will of the law-making power, constitutionally expressed, leaving the results of legislation to be dealt with by the people through their representatives.

法院最好通过执行宪法所表达的立法权意志来履行其职责，将立法结果留给人民通过其代表来处理。

Statutes must always have a reasonable construction.

法规必须始终具有合理的结构。

Sometimes they are to be construed strictly, sometimes literally, in order to carry out the legislative will.

有时要严格解释，有时按字面解释，以执行立法意愿。

But, however construed, the intent of the legislature is to be respected if the particular statute in question is valid, although the courts, looking at the public interests, may conceive the statute to be both unreasonable and impolitic.

但是，无论如何解释，如果有关特定法规有效，立法机关的意图就应得到尊重，尽管法院考虑到公共利益，可能会认为该法规既不合理又不政治。

If the power exists to enact a statute, that ends the matter so far as the courts are concerned.

如果存在制定法规的权力，那么就法院而言，这件事就结束了。

The adjudged cases in which statutes have been held to be void, because unreasonable, are those in which the means employed by the legislature were not at all germane to the end to which the legislature was competent.

那些因不合理而被判定法规无效的案件，是指立法机关所采用的手段与立法机关有权实现的目的根本没有密切关系的案件。

The white race deems itself to be the dominant race in this country.

白人认为自己是这个国家的主导种族。

And so it is, in prestige, in achievements, in education, in wealth, and in power.

在声望、成就、教育、财富和权力方面也是如此。

So, I doubt not, it will continue to be for all time, if it remains true to its great heritage, and holds fast to the principles of constitutional liberty.

因此，我毫不怀疑，如果它仍然忠于其伟大的遗产，并坚守宪法自由的原则，它将永远如此。

But in view of the constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens.

但从宪法来看，从法律的角度来看，这个国家不存在优越的、占主导地位的、统治的公民阶级。

There is no caste here.

这里没有种姓。

Our constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.

我们的宪法是无肤色歧视的，既不了解也不容忍公民中的阶级。

In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law.

在公民权利方面，所有公民在法律面前一律平等。

The humblest is the peer of the most powerful.

最卑微的人是最有权势的人。

The law regards man as man, and takes no account of his surroundings or of his color when his civil rights as guarantied by the supreme law of the land are involved.

法律将人视为人，当涉及国家最高法律保障的公民权利时，法律不考虑他的周围环境或他的肤色。

It is therefore to be regretted that this high tribunal, the final expositor of the fundamental law of the land, has reached the conclusion that it is competent for a state to regulate the enjoyment by citizens of their civil rights solely upon the basis of race.

因此，令人遗憾的是，这个国家基本法的最终解释者的高级法庭得出的结论是，国家有权仅根据种族来规范公民对其公民权利的享有。

In my opinion, the judgment this day rendered will, in time, prove to be quite as pernicious as the decision made by this tribunal in the Dred Scott Case.

我认为，随着时间的推移，今天作出的判决将被证明与本法庭在德雷德·斯科特案中做出的判决一样有害。

It was adjudged in that case that the descendants of Africans who were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, were not included nor intended to be included under the word 'citizens' in the constitution, and could not claim any of the rights and privileges which that instrument provided for and secured to citizens of the United States; that, at time of the adoption of the constitution, they were 'considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the government might choose to grant them.' 17 How.

该案判决，被进口到美国并被卖为奴隶的非洲人后裔不包括也不打算包括在宪法中的“公民”一词中，并且不能主张该文书为美国公民规定和保障的任何权利和特权；在宪法通过时，他们“被视为从属和低等阶级，被占主导地位的种族所征服，无论是否获得解放，仍然受制于他们的权威，除了掌握权力和政府可能选择授予的权利或特权外，他们没有任何权利或特权。” 17 如何。

393, 404.

393、404。

The recent amendments of the constitution, it was supposed, had eradicated these principles from our institutions.

人们认为，最近的宪法修正案已经从我们的机构中消除了这些原则。

But it seems that we have yet, in some of the states, a dominant race,-a superior class of citizens,-which assumes to regulate the enjoyment of civil rights, common to all citizens, upon the basis of race.

但在一些州，我们似乎还存在一个占主导地位的种族，即一个优越的公民阶层，它假定以种族为基础来规范所有公民共同的公民权利的享有。

The present decision, it may well be apprehended, will not only stimulate aggressions, more or less brutal and irritating, upon the admitted rights of colored citizens, but will encourage the belief that it is possible, by means of state enactments, to defeat the beneficent purposes which the people of the United States had in view when they adopted the recent amendments of the constitution, by one of which the blacks of this country were made citizens of the United States and of the states in which they respectively reside, and whose privileges and immunities, as citizens, the states are forbidden to abridge.

很可能可以理解，目前的决定不仅会刺激对有色公民公认的权利的或多或少残酷和令人恼火的侵犯，而且会鼓励人们相信，通过州立法，有可能挫败美国人民在通过最近的宪法修正案时所抱有的善意目的，其中一项修正案使这个国家的黑人成为美国及其各自居住州的公民，并且作为公民，国家不得剥夺特权和豁免权。

Sixty millions of whites are in no danger from the presence here of eight millions of blacks.

六千万白人不会因为八百万黑人的存在而面临任何危险。

The destinies of the two races, in this country, are indissolubly linked together, and the interests of both require that the common government of all shall not permit the seeds of race hate to be planted under the sanction of law.

在这个国家，两个种族的命运是紧密相连的，两个种族的利益要求所有人的共同政府不得允许在法律的制裁下播下种族仇恨的种子。

What can more certainly arouse race hate, what more certainly create and perpetuate a feeling of distrust between these races, than state enactments which, in fact, proceed on the ground that colored citizens are so inferior and degraded that they cannot be allowed to sit in public coaches occupied by white citizens?

有什么比国家立法更能引起种族仇恨，更能在这些种族之间制造和延续不信任感？事实上，这些国家的立法是基于有色公民如此低劣和堕落，以至于不能允许他们乘坐白人公民乘坐的公共车厢？

That, as all will admit, is the real meaning of such legislation as was enacted in Louisiana.

所有人都会承认，这就是路易斯安那州颁布的此类立法的真正含义。

The sure guaranty of the peace and security of each race is the clear, distinct, unconditional recognition by our governments, national and state, of every right that inheres in civil freedom, and of the equality before the law of all citizens of the United States, without regard to race.

每个种族的和平与安全的可靠保证是我们的国家和州政府明确、明确、无条件地承认公民自由所固有的每一项权利，以及美国所有公民在法律面前一律平等，不分种族。

State enactments regulating the enjoyment of civil rights upon the basis of race, and cunningly devised to defeat legitimate results of the war, under the pretense of recognizing equality of rights, can have no other result than to render permanent peace impossible, and to keep alive a conflict of races, the continuance of which must do harm to all concerned.

在承认权利平等的幌子下，以种族为基础规范公民权利的享受并巧妙地制定旨在破坏战争合法结果的国家法律，除了使永久和平成为不可能，并使种族冲突持续下去之外，不会有任何其他结果，而这种冲突的持续必然对所有有关方面造成伤害。

This question is not met by the suggestion that social equality cannot exist between the white and black races in this country.

这个国家的白人和黑人之间不可能存在社会平等的建议并不能解决这个问题。

That argument, if it can be properly regarded as one, is scarcely worthy of consideration; for social equality no more exists between two races when traveling in a passenger coach or a public highway than when members of the same races sit by each other in a street car or in the jury box, or stand or sit with each other in a political assembly, or when they use in common the streets of a city or town, or when they are in the same room for the purpose of having their names placed on the registry of voters, or when they approach the ballot box in order to exercise the high privilege of voting.

如果这个论点可以被正确地视为一个论点，那么它几乎不值得考虑。因为，当乘坐客车或公共高速公路时，两个种族之间并不存在社会平等，正如同一种族的成员在有轨电车或陪审团席上并排坐着，或者在政治集会中站着或坐在一起，或者当他们共同使用一个城市或城镇的街道时，或者当他们在同一个房间里为了将自己的名字登记在选民登记册上时，或者当他们接近投票箱以行使投票的崇高特权时，社会平等并不存在。

There is a race so different from our own that we do not permit those belonging to it to become citizens of the United States.

有一个种族与我们自己的种族如此不同，以至于我们不允许属于该种族的人成为美国公民。

Persons belonging to it are, with few exceptions, absolutely excluded from our country.

除了少数例外，属于它的人被绝对排除在我国之外。

I allude to the Chinese race.

我指的是中国人种。

But, by the statute in question, a Chinaman can ride in the same passenger coach with white citizens of the United States, while citizens of the black race in Louisiana, many of whom, perhaps, risked their lives for the preservation of the Union, who are entitled, by law, to participate in the political control of the state and nation, who are not excluded, by law or by reason of their race, from public stations of any kind, and who have all the legal rights that belong to white citizens, are yet declared to be criminals, liable to imprisonment, if they ride in a public coach occupied by citizens of the white race.

但是，根据有关法规，中国人可以与美国白人公民乘坐同一辆客车，而路易斯安那州的黑人种族公民，其中许多人可能冒着生命危险保卫联邦，依法有权参与国家和民族的政治控制，不因法律或种族原因而被排除在任何类型的公共车站之外，并且拥有属于白人公民的所有合法权利，但仍被宣布为罪犯，如果他们乘坐白人公民乘坐的公共马车，将面临监禁。

It is scarcely just to say that a colored citizen should not object to occupying a public coach assigned to his own race.

这不仅仅是说有色公民不应该反对占用分配给他自己的种族的公共教练。

He does not object, nor, perhaps, would he object to separate coaches for his race if his rights under the law were recognized.

如果他的法律权利得到承认，他不反对，也许他也不会反对为他的比赛安排不同的教练。

But he does object, and he ought never to cease objecting, that citizens of the white and black races can be adjudged criminals because they sit, or claim the right to sit, in the same public coach on a public highway.

但他确实反对，而且他不应该停止反对，认为白人和黑人公民可以因为坐在公共高速公路上的同一辆公共车厢或声称有权坐在公共高速公路上而被判定为罪犯。

The arbitrary separation of citizens, on the basis of race, while they are on a public highway, is a badge of servitude wholly inconsistent with the civil freedom and the equality before the law established by the constitution.

当公民在公共高速公路上时，基于种族的任意隔离是一种奴役的标志，完全不符合宪法规定的公民自由和法律面前人人平等。

It cannot be justified upon any legal grounds.

任何法律依据都不能证明其合理性。

If evils will result from the commingling of the two races upon public highways established for the benefit of all, they will be infinitely less than those that will surely come from state legislation regulating the enjoyment of civil rights upon the basis of race.

如果两个种族在为所有人的利益而建立的公共高速公路上混合所造成的罪恶，那么它们肯定比国家立法规范基于种族的公民权利的享有所带来的罪恶要小得多。

We boast of the freedom enjoyed by our people above all other peoples.

我们夸耀我们的人民比其他各国人民享有的自由。

But it is difficult to reconcile that boast with a state of the law which, practically, puts the brand of servitude and degradation upon a large class of our fellow citizens,-our equals before the law.

但很难将这种夸耀与法律状态相调和，法律实际上给我们的一大批同胞——法律面前的平等人——打上了奴役和堕落的烙印。

The thin disguise of 'equal' accommodations for passengers in railroad coaches will not mislead any one, nor atone for the wrong this day done.

铁路客车上乘客“平等”住宿的薄弱伪装不会误导任何人，也不会弥补今天所犯下的错误。

The result of the whole matter is that while this court has frequently adjudged, and at the present term has recognized the doctrine, that a state cannot, consistently with the constitution of the United States, prevent white and black citizens, having the required qualifications for jury service, from sitting in the same jury box, it is now solemnly held that a state may prohibit white and black citizens from sitting in the same passenger coach on a public highway, or may require that they be separated by a 'partition' when in the same passenger coach.

整个事件的结果是，虽然本法院经常判决，并且目前已经承认这一原则，即根据美国宪法，一个州不能阻止具有陪审员资格所需的白人和黑人公民坐在同一个陪审员席上，但现在郑重地裁定，一个州可以禁止白人和黑人公民在公共高速公路上坐在同一辆客车上，或者可以要求他们在同一辆客车上时用“隔断”分开。

May it not now be reasonably expected that astute men of the dominant race, who affect to be disturbed at the possibility that the integrity of the white race may be corrupted, or that its supremacy will be imperiled, by contact on public highways with black people, will endeavor to procure statutes requiring white and black jurors to be separated in the jury box by a 'partition,' and that, upon retiring from the court room to consult as to their verdict, such partition, if it be a movable one, shall be taken to their consultation room, and set up in such way as to prevent black jurors from coming too close to their brother jurors of the white race.

现在，我们是否可以合理地预期，占主导地位的种族的精明人士，假装对白人种族的完整性可能因在公共高速公路上与黑人接触而受到破坏或其至高无上的地位可能受到威胁而感到不安，会努力制定法规，要求在陪审团席上将白人和黑人陪审员分开，并在从法庭退休后就他们的判决进行协商时，这种划分，如果它是一个可移动的，应被带到他们的咨询室，并以防止黑人陪审员与白人兄弟陪审员走得太近的方式设置。

If the 'partition' used in the court room happens to be stationary, provision could be made for screens with openings through which jurors of the two races could confer as to their verdict without coming into personal contact with each other.

如果法庭使用的“隔断”恰好是固定的，则可以提供带有开口的屏幕，两个种族的陪审员可以通过该开口就他们的裁决进行协商，而无需彼此进行个人接触。

I cannot see but that, according to the principles this day announced, such state legislation, although conceived in hostility to, and enacted for the purpose of humiliating, citizens of the United States of a particular race, would be held to be consistent with the constitution.

我只能认为，根据今天宣布的原则，这样的州立法，尽管是出于敌对特定种族的美国公民而制定的，并且是为了羞辱特定种族的美国公民而制定的，但仍将被认为与宪法一致。

I do not deem it necessary to review the decisions of state courts to which reference was made in argument.

我认为没有必要审查辩论中提到的州法院的判决。

Some, and the most important, of them, are wholly inapplicable, because rendered prior to the adoption of the last amendments of the constitution, when colored people had very few rights which the dominant race felt obliged to respect.

其中一些，也是最重要的，是完全不适用的，因为在宪法最后修正案通过之前，当时有色人种几乎没有占主导地位的种族认为有义务尊重的权利。

Others were made at a time when public opinion, in many localities, was dominated by the institution of slavery; when it would not have been safe to do justice to the black man; and when, so far as the rights of blacks were concerned, race prejudice was, practically, the supreme law of the land.

另一些则是在许多地方的舆论以奴隶制为主导的时期制定的。当公正对待黑人是不安全的；就黑人权利而言，种族偏见实际上是这个国家的最高法律。

Those decisions cannot be guides in the era introduced by the recent amendments of the supreme law, which established universal civil freedom, gave citizenship to all born or naturalized in the United States, and residing ere, obliterated the race line from our systems of governments, national and state, and placed our free institutions upon the broad and sure foundation of the equality of all men before the law.

这些决定不能成为近期最高法修正案所引入的时代的指南，该修正案确立了普遍的公民自由，赋予所有在美国出生或入籍并居住在美国的公民公民权，消除了我们政府、国家和州制度中的种族界限，并将我们的自由制度建立在法律面前人人平等的广泛而可靠的基础上。

I am of opinion that the state of Louisiana is inconsistent with the personal liberty of citizens, white and black, in that state, and hostile to both the spirit and letter of the constitution of the United States.

我认为路易斯安那州不符合该州白人和黑人公民的个人自由，并且敌视美国宪法的精神和文字。

If laws of like character should be enacted in the several states of the Union, the effect would be in the highest degree mischievous.

如果联邦的几个州都颁布类似的法律，其后果将是最严重的。

Slavery, as an institution tolerated by law, would, it is true, have disappeared from our country; but there would remain a power in the states, by sinister legislation, to interfere with the full enjoyment of the blessings of freedom, to regulate civil rights, common to all citizens, upon the basis of race, and to place in a condition of legal inferiority a large body of American citizens, now constituting a part of the political community, called the 'People of the United States,' for whom, and by whom through representatives, our government is administered.

奴隶制作为一种法律所容忍的制度，确实会从我们国家消失。但是，各州仍然有权力通过险恶的立法，干涉充分享受自由的福祉，根据种族规范所有公民共有的公民权利，并将大批美国公民置于法律上的劣等地位，这些公民现在构成了政治共同体的一部分，被称为“美国人民”，我们的政府是由他们管理的，也是由他们通过代表来管理的。

Such a system is inconsistent with the guaranty given by the constitution to each state of a republican form of government, and may be stricken down by congressional action, or by the courts in the discharge of their solemn duty to maintain the supreme law of the land, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

这种制度不符合宪法对各州的共和政府形式的保证，并且可能会被国会的行动或法院在履行其维护国家最高法律的庄严职责时所推翻，无论任何州的宪法或法律有任何相反的规定。

For the reason stated, I am constrained to withhold my assent from the opinion and judgment of the majority.

由于上述原因，我不得不不同意大多数人的意见和判断。