Historical Investigation of the Jim Crow Laws
Brandon Fredrickson
Cory Anda
Connor Murphy
Joey Nowariak
Tori Nett
Introduction/Background
Imagine a place where you and your family were separated from everyone else because of your
hair color. You would have to use a separate bathroom that was not as good as the other one.
You would have to enter a restaurant through a different door and also sit in the dumpy part of
the bus. You had the right to vote, but people made it very hard for you to actually vote. People
would tell you; this is "separate but equal." But you knew that you were not treated equally. How
would this make you feel?
Would you feel ashamed? Mad? Sad? Upset?
Well unfortunately, in the United States' history from 1876-1965 this happened. When slaves
won their freedom after the Civil War, you would think they became free and equal. The 13th
Amendment ended slavery in the United States. The 14th Amendment made anyone born in the
US a citizen. You would think since black (men) had the right to vote, they would. But this was
not the case. Times were very hard in the South for Blacks. Racism ran deep in the South.
Racism then created disenfranchisement (not being able to vote) and Jim Crow Laws. Jim Crow
laws are laws that separate people because of their race. These Jim Crow laws and would then
make a court case. This case was called Plessey vs. Ferguson.
Thoughts and feelings that you may have had when reading about the "separate but equal" laws
were also feelings those experiencing it had. Blacks wanted to be treated just like the whites in
America. They wanted to exercise the right to vote and to be treated like equals. William E.B.
Du Bois (February 23, 1868 - August 27, 1963) an African American civil rights activist leader,
educator, historian, and writer. He was a graduate of Harvard University and the first African
American to receive a Ph. D. was also against these "separate but equal" laws.
Whites in the South were used to thinking that they were better than blacks because of slavery.
Slavery was in the Americas since 1619. It was the norm to think blacks were not as good as
whites. This meant that the white southerners wanted to be separated. "Separate but equal", there
were different bathrooms, restaurants, schools, and even drinking fountains.
In this unit, you will examine how Jim Crow laws affected society in the South.
Investigative Questions
9.4.4.20.5
Describe "Jim Crow" racial segregation and disenfranchisement in the South, the rise of
"scientific racism," the spread of racial violence across the nation, the anti-Chinese exclusion
movement in the West, and the debates about how to preserve and expand freedom and equality.
(Development of an Industrial United States: 1870-1920)
9.4.1.2.2
Evaluate alternative interpretations of historical events; use historical evidence to support or
refute those interpretations.
Historical Skill: Meta-Concepts
Essential Question:
How did the Jim Crow Laws impact the preservation of inequality?
3-5 Sub-Questions:
What were the Jim Crow Laws?
What does society in the South look like?
How did Jim Crow Laws affect society?
How did blacks and whites view the Jim Crow Laws?
Summary Question:
How would you describe the Jim Crow racial segregation and disfranchisement in the
South?
Activity 1
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/cph.3b48958
Using the picture above, answer the following questions.
What do you see in the picture? Provide seven items.
Where and when does this take place? Provide two pieces of evidence to support you answer.
How would you describe the scene and the people? Provide at least three examples to support
your answer.
How do you think the people in the picture feel about their situation? Provide support for your
answer using three pieces of evidence from the picture.
Activity 2 Part 1
Read the following and answer the questions below:
Examples of Jim Crow Laws
"It shall be unlawful for a negro and white person to play together or in company with each other
in any game of cards or dice, dominoes or checkers."
-Birmingham, Alabama, 1930
"It shall be unlawful for any white prisoner to be handcuffed or otherwise chained or tied to a
Negro prisoner."
-Arkansas, 1903
"No colored barber shall serve as a barber to white women or girls."
-Atlanta, Georgia, 1926
"Marriages are void when one party is a white person and the other is possessed of one-eighth or
more Negro, Japanese, or Chinese blood."
-Nebraska, 1911
"Any person...presenting for public acceptance or general information, arguments or suggestions
in favor of social equality or of intermarriage between whites and negroes, shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor and subject to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or imprisonment not
exceeding six months or both fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court."
-Mississippi, 1920
"Separate free schools shall be established for the education of children of African descent; and it
shall be unlawful for any colored child to attend any white school, or any white child to attend a
colored school."
-Missouri, 1929
"Any white woman who shall suffer or permit herself to be got with child by a Negro or
mulatto...shall be sentenced to the penitentiary for not less than eighteen months."
-Maryland, 1924
"All railroads carrying passengers in the state (other than street railroads) shall 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 cars by a partition, so as to secure separate
accommodations."
-Tennessee, 1891
"The Corporate Commission is hereby vested with power to require telephone companies in the
State of Oklahoma to maintain separate booths for white and colored patrons when there is a
demand for such separate booths."
-Oklahoma, 1915
http://americanhistory.si.edu/brown/history/1-segregated/jim-crow.html
Activity 2 Part 2
Niagara Movement Speech
Read the document provided and answer the following questions. These questions will help
guide you in writing your summary of the document. This should help you to form an opinion
on the Jim Crow Laws.
1905
In detail our demands are clear. First, we would vote. With the right to vote goes everything, our
freedom, manhood, the honor of your wives, and the safety of your daughters, the right to work,
and let no man listen to those who deny this.
We want full manhood suffrage (the right to vote), and we want it now, and forever.
Second. We want discrimination in public accommodation to stop. Separation in railway and
streetcars, based on color, is un-American, un-democratic, and silly. We protest against all such
discrimination.
Third. We claim the right of freemen to walk, and talk to whom we want to. No man has a right
to choose another man's friends. To do so is a bold meddling with human privilege.
Fourth. We want the laws enforced against everyone. This means the rich as well as poor,
against white as well as black. We are not more lawless than the white race. We are more often
arrested, convicted, and mobbed. We want the Constitution of the country enforced. We want the
Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendment carried out to every State.
Fifth. We want our children educated. The Southern school system is a disgrace. In few towns
and cities are Negro schools are where they ought to be. We want the national government to
step in and wipe out illiteracy (not able to read) in the South. Either the US will destroy
ignorance or ignorance will destroy the US.
When we call for education we mean real education. We believe in work. We ourselves are
workers. But work is not education. Education is the development of power. We want our
children trained, as intelligent human beings should be. We won't accept educating black boys
and girls as servants.
All of these are what we want. How shall we get them? By voting, by sacrifice and work.
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/niagara-movement-speech/
Activity 2 Questions
1. What are the authors of the laws sayings about the rights of African Americans?
2. How does the Du Bois speech address the laws put into place in the south?
3. How do the Jim Crow laws support the division of people based on color in the region?
Activity 3
Read the following document and answer the following questions below:
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
In Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of a Louisiana
law passed in 1890 "providing for separate railway carriages for the white and colored races."
The law, which required that all passenger railways provide separate cars for blacks and whites,
stipulated that the cars be equal in facilities, banned whites from sitting in black cars and blacks
in white cars (with exception to "nurses attending children of the other race"), and penalized
passengers or railway employees for violating its terms.
Homer Plessy, the plaintiff in the case, was seven-eighths white and one-eighth black, and had
the appearance of a white man. On June 7, 1892, he purchased a first-class ticket for a trip
between New Orleans and Covington, La., and took possession of a vacant seat in a white-only
car. Duly arrested and imprisoned, Plessy was brought to trial in a New Orleans court and
convicted of violating the 1890 law. He then filed a petition against the judge in that trial, Hon.
John H. Ferguson, at the Louisiana Supreme Court, arguing that the segregation law violated the
Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which forbids states from denying "to
any person within their jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," as well as the Thirteenth
Amendment, which banned slavery.
The Court ruled that, while the object of the Fourteenth Amendment was to create "absolute
equality of the two races before the law," such equality extended only so far as political and civil
rights (e.g., voting and serving on juries), not "social rights" (e.g., sitting in a railway car one
chooses). As Justice Henry Brown's opinion put it, "if one race be inferior to the other socially,
the constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane." Furthermore, the
Court held that the Thirteenth Amendment applied only to the imposition of slavery itself.
The Court expressly rejected Plessy's arguments that the law stigmatized blacks "with a badge of
inferiority," pointing out that both blacks and whites were given equal facilities under the law
and were equally punished for violating the law. "We consider the underlying fallacy of
[Plessy's] argument" contended the Court, "to consist in the assumption that the enforced
separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority. 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."
Justice John Marshall Harlan entered a powerful -- and lone -- dissent, noting that "in view of the
Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of
citizens. There is no caste here. Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates
classes among citizens."
Until the mid-twentieth century, Plessy v. Ferguson gave a "constitutional nod" to racial
segregation in public places, foreclosing legal challenges against increasingly-segregated
institutions throughout the South. The railcars in Plessy notwithstanding, the black facilities in
these institutions were decidedly inferior to white ones, creating a kind of racial caste society.
However, in the landmark decision Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the "separate but equal"
doctrine was abruptly overturned when a unanimous Supreme Court ruled that segregating
children by race in public schools was "inherently unequal" and violated the Fourteenth
Amendment. Brown provided a major catalyst for the civil rights movement (1955-68), which
won social, not just political and civil, racial equality before the law. After four decades, Justice
Harlan's dissent became the law of the land. Following Brown, the Supreme Court has
consistently ruled racial segregation in public settings to be unconstitutional.
Using the court case Plessy vs. Ferguson answer the questions below.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_plessy.html
Activity 3 Questions
1. What law did Homer Plessy violate? How did Plessy violate this law?
2. What rights do the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution provide?
3. If you were Plessy's lawyer, how would you justify your claims that the "Separate Car
Act" violates the Thirteenth and Fourteenth amendments?
4. Is it possible for two races to remain separated while striving for equality? Are separation
and equality compatible? Why or why not?
5. What claim did Plessy make to the Louisiana State Supreme Court? How did his claim
reflect on his argument that his Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated?
6. Can you think of an example of situation where separation does not mean inequality?
Final Argument
Using knowledge and evidence from this historical investigation, please answer the following
question in 2 to 3 paragraphs.
How did the Jim Crow Laws impact the preservation of inequality?
CHECKLIST:
___ I have read and understand the historical background context for the inquiry activities.
___ I have interpreted the illustration, the For the Sunny South, and answered the questions using
evidence provided in the painting.
___ I have read the examples of the Jim Crow laws, and W.E.B. DuBois speech, and answered
the questions.
___ I have read the Plessy vs. Ferguson document and answered the questions provided.
___ I have made my final argument and cited evidence from the provided sources within my
argument.