Where similar or substantially similar conveniences and comforts are offered, transportation companies, inns, theaters, and other public service companies may by law be permitted or required to provide separate accommodations to the different races, colored, Mongolian, or white.30

In Plessy v. Ferguson31 the court say: "The object of the Amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law; and in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinction based on color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political equality, or a commingling of the two races upon terms unsatisfactory to either. Laws permitting, or 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 state legislatures in the exercise of their police power. The most common instance of this is connected with the establishment of separate schools for white and colored children, which has 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."

30 Plessy v. Ferguson. 163 U. S. 537: 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1138; 41 L. ed 256; C. & O. Ry. Co. v. Kentucky. 170 U. S. 888; 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 101; 45 L. ed. 244. The States may not, however, thus attempt the regulation of interstate transportation. See ante, section 312.

31 163 U. S. 587; 16 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1138; 41 L. ed. 256.