1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

The Belle case, in Belle vs. Maryland, we had
a private proprietor of a restaurant who had opened up
his private property to the public, and was subject to
all of the statutory regulations of the city and state,
health and otherwise, because he had opened it up to the
public, and the court hold there that though this was
a private proprietor, the more he opens it up to the
public the more the 14th Amendment protections apply, and
the court held that, therefore, if that private property
opened up and dedicated to a public use was open to
the general public, then that private proprietor could
not refuse to serve any member of the general public
because of that member's race; so here is an element where
you had a private ownership but the service that was
offered was offered to the public.
However, in Belle vs. Maryland, in a decision
concurred in by Chief Justice Warren, Justice Goldberg and
Justice Douglas, there is this statement, and this came
down in 1964: "Prejudice and bigotry in any form are
regrettable, but it is the Constitutional right of every
person to close his home or private club to any person or