"Amount of Negro and Other Colored Blood Illegal in Various States for Marriage to Whites: 1929," by W.A. Plecker, Eugenical News (vol. 14:8)
Pages:1 of 1
University of Albany, SUNY, Estabrook, SPE,XMS 80.9 Bx 2 C18
View this image in our new website.
&quote;Amount of Negro and Other Colored Blood Illegal in Various States for Marriage to Whites: 1929,&quote; by W.A. Plecker, Eugenical News (vol. 14:8)

Eugenical News 121 [tabular material set, for the most part, broadside] Amount of Negro and Other Colored Blood Illegal in Various States for Marriage to Whites: 1929. [NOTE: I will type by individual columns][column 1] None Permissible 1. Alabama 2. Georgia (or W. Indian, Asiatic Indian or Mongolian) New Act not being enforced for lack of appropriation 3. Virginia [second column] Negro or Negro Descent 1. Arizona (or Mongolian-Indian) Caucasian or descendants with Negro, Mongolian, Indian and descendants. 2. Louisiana (or Indian) Persons of color include those belonging in whole or in part to the African race 3. Montana (or Negro - Chinese - Japanese in whole or in part) 4. Nevada (or brown-yellow-red races) 5. Oklahoma (Persons of African descent with persons not of African descent whether white or Indian) 6. South Dakota (or Korean - Malay - Mongolian) 7. Utah (or Mongolian) 8. West Virginia [third column] 1/8 1. Florida 2. Indiana 3. Maryland 4. Mississippi (or Mongolian) 5. Missouri (or Mongolian) 6. Nebraska (1/8 Japanese or Chinese) 7. North Carolina (or Indian) 8. North Dakota 9. South Carolina (or Indian) 10. Tennessee 11. Texas [fourth column] 1/4 1. Kentucky (if one grandparent was a Negro, or a white woman with a "colored" man) 2. Oregon (or Mongolian, or white with one more one-half Indian) [set sideways between the fourth and fifth columns] Legal Limits of Negro and Other Colored Blood In Colored-White Marriages. Dr. W. A. Plecker, Registrar of Vital Statistics of the Commonwealth of Virginia, who has been the principal leader in the recent movement to secure the enactment of the so-called Racial Integrity Laws by several states, has compiled the accompanying table showing the present status of legislation in reference to the legal limits of intermarriages between the white and colored races. [fifth column]Mulattoes 1/2 1. Arkansas 2. California (or Mongolian) 3. Colorado 4. Delaware 5. Idaho (or Mongolian) 6. Wyoming (or Mongolian or Malay) [sixth column] No Restriction 1. Connecticut 2. District of Columbia 3. Illinois 4. Iowa 5. Kansas 6. Maine (an act of 1786 made marriage of a white person and negro or mulatto void) 7. Massachusetts (A former Act made marriage of a white and negro or mulatto illegal) 8. Michigan (Mixed marriage formerly void now legal) 9. Minnesota 10. New Hampshire 11. New Jersey 12. New Mexico 13. New York 14. Ohio (A former statute forbade marriage of a pure white and a person of visibly African blood) 15. Pennsylvania 16. Rhode Island 17. Vermont 18. Washington 19. Wisconsin [end]

Copyright 1999-2004: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; American Philosophical Society; Truman State University; Rockefeller Archive Center/Rockefeller University; University of Albany, State University of New York; National Park Service, Statue of Liberty National Monument; University College, London; International Center of Photography; Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Berlin-Dahlem; and Special Collections, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
The images and text in this Archive are solely for educational and scholarly uses. The materials may be used in digital or print form in reports, research, and other projects that are not offered for sale. Materials in this archive may not be used in digital or print form by organizations or commercial concerns, except with express permission.