Page:History of Public School Education in Arizona.djvu/91

Rh

On March 17, 1909, Mr. Long as Territorial superintendent was succeeded by Kirke T. Moore, who continued to hold the reins of office until the Territory became a State. There was during these years little of moment or significance. The schools had been given their peculiar turn and were now developing steadily. There was little educational legislation, but it was of no slight significance. One act provided for uniform courses of study in the normal schools at Tempe and Flagstaff, and these were to be prescribed by the board of education. The training schools provided at the normal schools as part of their regular work were now formally recognized as a part of the public school system.

It was now provided also that negro pupils might be segregated when the proper authorities thought it desirable and the number of such pupils exceeded eight in any school district, provided they were furnished equal accommodations. In the earlier reports there is only one record of negro children—28 in 1883. Later reports begin in 1902–3 and run as follows:

These pupils, scattered throughout the Territory, had been taught with other pupils, but as their numbers increased, an agitation for segregation began. The matter was taken up in the assembly of 1909 and discussed. The bill was vetoed by the governor, but was passed over his veto. Then it was taken to the courts, coming up on appeal from the third judicial district (Maricopa County), where a suit for injunction had been tried before Judge Edward Kent and granted. The case was taken to the highest court by the school board and is reported as Dameron, et al., appellants, v. Samuel F. Bayless, appellee. It is reported in 14 Arizona, 180. The constitutionality of the act of 1909 was attacked on the ground that it was “a denial of the equal protection of the law.” It was shown that the building used for the negro school was the newest, best constructed, and most sanitary of all the school buildings in the district; that its equipment was equal if not superior to the others and that the pupils received more attention, because the attendance was smaller, than they received in the white schools; and that the course of study was the same. The conclusion of the court was in substance that “equality and not identity of privileges and rights is what is guaranteed to the