New York and Civil Rights

The Planet responds to comments about the “New Civil Rights Law of New York” stating that a public servant “cannot discriminate against a citizen on account of his race or skin color.”

We have read with care the comments of the Democratic press of this city upon the “New Civil Rights Law of New York.” The Richmond Va., Daily Times, usually conservative and generally right upon all questions affecting the public welfare in the issue of the 21st inst., goes wide of the mark upon this New York legislation by confounding civil rights with private social ones. Let us see. Any person enjoying the benefits accruing from a franchise or a license granted by the public is morally and legally bound to accommodate the members of the body politic in accordance with conditions upon which he secured this consideration. We contend that this is an inherent right which every citizen should enjoy, and that no man conducting a public place has a right to discriminate against a citizen on account of his race or his color. That any legislation at all was necessary is the astounding part of the whole matter. The principle stated is self-evident. A man who opens a place of business becomes a public servant and he cannot discriminate against those whose servant he is, save upon the grounds of public decency, safety etc., but not on account of color. No colored man would force himself into the private home circle, or either upon a private party. Each man selects his own companions and associates. Prejudice has existed during all ages against one class of people or the other, and it has been broken down only by the most uncompromising fighting all lines.
Prices alone should govern the accommodations, and when any white man or black man places a bar to a man’s privileges and declares that he shall not come over it, simply on account of his color, it will not be tolerated by a free and independent people. Hon. Frederick Douglass, with education, wealth, influence, a representative of the government was discriminated against, not because of his condition but his color. Hon. John M. Langston, the diplomatic scholar, a man who was at one time dean of a university is discriminated against simply on account of his color. Hon. B. K. Bruce, an ex-Senator of the United States, ex-Register of the Treasury with learning, money and property is discriminated against in the public places on account of his color. The lowly and the illiterate do not specially desire to exercise the privileges, because they have neither money, the education nor the time to enjoy the, but there are others who do.
We have a class of colored people, the “New Negro” who have arisen since the war, with education, refinement and money. They refuse to be kept in the relative condition once occupied by their ancestors, the slave of 250 years. The same delicate sensibilities that exist in the white man are present with them. They are as blooded as the famed Arabian steed and will not tolerate slight or the lash. The Democratic press should know how to discriminate and not mistake one for the other. We demand no “social equality.” We insist upon our civil rights. The one relate to the private household; the other to public places. When the citizen relinquishes inherent rights, then is indeed the day of his complete undoing at hand.
Mr. Charles W. Anderson is a brilliant young New Yorker, second to no white man of similar opportunities in this country. We know him well and his effort to secure for himself and his people the full recognition to which they are entitled under the law will receive our cordial and enthusiastic support.

“New York and Civil Rights,” Black Virginia: The Richmond Planet, 1894-1909, accessed February 14, 2026, https://blackvirginia.richmond.edu/items/show/1421.