List of court cases in the United States involving slavery

Last updated

The following is a list of court cases in the United States concerning slavery.

DateCaseCourtRuling
1779Brakkee v. Lovell Vermont Superior Court Pompey Brakkee had been held as a slave by Elijah Lovell after slavery was made illegal in Vermont. Lovell failed to appear and Brakkee was awarded 400 pounds sterling. [1]
1781 Brom and Bett v. Ashley Berkshire County Court of Common PleasSlaves Brom and Bett (Elizabeth Freeman) were freed on the basis that the Massachusetts constitution provided that "all men are born free and equal." This case was a precedent for the following one.
1781 Quock Walker v. JennisonWorcester County Court of Common PleasJennison's slave, Quock Walker, was found to be a freedman on the basis that slavery was contrary to the Bible and the Massachusetts Constitution.
1783 Commonwealth v. Jennison Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Justice William Cushing instructs jury that "slavery is in my judgment as effectively abolished as it can be by the granting of rights and privileges wholly incompatible and repugnant to its existence." [2]
1792 Guardian of Sally v. Beatty Supreme Court of South Carolina A slave owned by Beatty had bought a slave girl Sally and manumitted her. Chief Justice John Rutledge instructed the jury that such an act of generosity on Sally's behalf should not be overturned.
1806 Hudgins v. Wright Virginia Supreme Court Jackey Wright and her two children were freed based on her claim of maternal descent from Native American women. Indian slavery had been prohibited in Virginia since 1705.
1818 Harry v. Decker & Hopkins Supreme Court of Mississippi Decker's slave Harry was freed, and slaves residing in the Northwest Territory become free as per the Ordinance of 1787, and may assert their rights in court.
1820 Polly v. Lasselle Supreme Court of Indiana Indiana gave freedom to blacks in the state who had been held as slaves in the territory prior to Indiana's state constitutional ban on slavery.
1830 North Carolina v. Mann Supreme Court of North Carolina Slaveowners were ruled to have absolute authority over their slaves and could not be found guilty of committing violence against them.
1834 Rachel v. Walker Supreme Court of Missouri A freedom suit of Rachel, a slave who sued for freedom from John Walker in the Supreme Court of Missouri, and won based on his having held her in the free state of Illinois.
1834North Carolina v. Negro WillSupreme Court of North CarolinaJudge William Gaston held that slaves who killed their owner or overseer in self-defense could not be found guilty of murder, but at most manslaughter (cf. North Carolina v. Mann (1830) above) [3] [4]
1836 Commonwealth v. Aves Massachusetts Supreme Judicial CourtA slave named Med was freed on the grounds that any slave brought to a free state by his or her owner was thereby set free.
1838 Hinds v. Brazealle Supreme Court of MississippiDenied a deed of manumission in Ohio for a citizen of Mississippi's mixed-race son and his slave mother, because it was against Mississippi statutes (which required an act by the state legislature), and was considered fraud
1838North Carolina v. ManuelSupreme Court of North CarolinaJudge William Gaston held that free blacks, including former slaves, were citizens of North Carolina and could not be denied any rights guaranteed under the state constitution, including that of declaring insolvency to avoid imprisonment or forced labor for debt. [5] (The decision was cited in Justice Benjamin Curtis's dissent in Dred Scott, below.) [4]
1841 United States v. Libellants and Claimants of the Schooner Amistad Supreme Court of the United States As the Africans in question were never legal property, they were not criminals and had rightfully defended themselves in mutiny. They were unlawfully kidnapped, and the Court directed the President to transport them in return to Africa.
1842 Prigg v. Pennsylvania Supreme Court of the United StatesOverturned the conviction of slavecatcher Edward Prigg in Pennsylvania based on the ruling that Federal law (which provides for recovery of fugitive slaves) supersedes State law.
1851 Strader v. Graham Supreme Court of the United StatesThe status of three slaves who traveled from Kentucky to the free states of Indiana and Ohio depended on Kentucky slave law rather than Ohio law, which had abolished slavery.
1852 Lemmon v. New York Superior Court of the City of New YorkGranted freedom to slaves who were brought into New York by their Virginia slave owners, while in transit to Texas.
1853Northup v. EppsRecognized that Solomon Northup, who had been abducted from New York and sold as a slave in Louisiana, was free.
1853 Holmes v. Ford Oregon Territorial Supreme CourtGranted freedom to a family of slaves who had been brought to Oregon with their master from Missouri, as this action violated the Organic Laws of Oregon, which did not allow slavery.
1857 Dred Scott v. Sandford Supreme Court of the United StatesPeople of African descent imported into the United States and held as slaves, or their descendants whether or not they were slaves were not included under the Constitution and could never be citizens of the United States.
1859 Ableman v. Booth Supreme Court of the United StatesHeld that state courts cannot issue rulings that contradict the decisions of federal courts, in this case overturning the unconstitutionality ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.
1985United States vs. Sante Kimes U.S. District CourtCharged with "conspiracy to violate slavery laws" after offering to employ illegal immigrants and then keeping them as prisoners after Kimes was unwilling or unable to pau them. Kimes was sentenced to five years in prison for violating federal anti-slavery laws
2021 Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Doe Supreme Court of the United StatesHeld that respondents improperly sought extraterritorial application of the Alien Tort Statute, as the petitioner's domestic conduct investing in and doing business with plantations which employ child slave labor constituted general corporate activity, and conduct which directly caused injury occurred outside of the United States.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Governor of North Carolina</span> Head of state and government of the U.S. state of North Carolina

The governor of North Carolina is the head of government of the U.S. state of North Carolina. Seventy-five people have held the office since its inception in 1776. The governor serves a term of four years and chairs the collective body of the state's elected executive officials, the Council of State. The governor's powers and responsibilities are prescribed by the state constitution and by law. They serve as the North Carolina's chief executive and are tasked by the constitution with faithfully carrying out the laws of the state. They are ex officio commander in chief of the North Carolina National Guard and director of the state budget. The office has extensive powers of appointment of executive branch officials, some judges, and members of boards and commissions. Governors are also empowered to grant pardons and veto legislation.

<i>North Carolina v. Mann</i> 1830 criminal case involving slave owners and slaves

North Carolina v. Mann, 13 N.C. 263, is a decision in which the Supreme Court of North Carolina ruled that slave owners had absolute authority over their slaves and could not be found guilty of committing violence against them.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peon</span> Social category

Peon usually refers to a person subject to peonage: any form of wage labor, financial exploitation, coercive economic practice, or policy in which the victim or a laborer (peon) has little control over employment or economic conditions. Peon and peonage can refer to both the colonial period and post-colonial period of Latin America, as well as the period after the end of slavery in the United States, when "Black Codes" were passed to retain African-American freedmen as labor through other means.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fugitive Slave Act of 1850</span> Act of the United States Congress

The Fugitive Slave Act or Fugitive Slave Law was a law passed by the 31st United States Congress on September 18, 1850, as part of the Compromise of 1850 between Southern interests in slavery and Northern Free-Soilers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">North Carolina State Treasurer</span> North Carolina Elected Official

The North Carolina State Treasurer is a statewide elected office in the U.S. state of North Carolina responsible for overseeing the financial operations of state government. The current state treasurer is Dale Folwell.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fugitive slaves in the United States</span> Aspect of history

In the United States, fugitive slaves or runaway slaves were terms used in the 18th and 19th centuries to describe people who fled slavery. The term also refers to the federal Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850. Such people are also called freedom seekers to avoid implying that the enslaved person had committed a crime and that the slaveholder was the injured party.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Free Negro</span> Emancipated people of color

In the British colonies in North America and in the United States before the abolition of slavery in 1865, free Negro or free Black described the legal status of African Americans who were not enslaved. The term was applied both to formerly enslaved people (freedmen) and to those who had been born free, whether of African or mixed descent.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fugitive slave laws in the United States</span> Laws passed by the United States Congress in 1793 and 1850

The fugitive slave laws were laws passed by the United States Congress in 1793 and 1850 to provide for the return of enslaved people who escaped from one state into another state or territory. The idea of the fugitive slave law was derived from the Fugitive Slave Clause which is in the United States Constitution. It was thought that forcing states to deliver fugitive slaves back to enslavement violated states' rights due to state sovereignty and was believed that seizing state property should not be left up to the states. The Fugitive Slave Clause states that fugitive slaves "shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due", which abridged state rights because forcing people back into slavery was a form of retrieving private property. The Compromise of 1850 entailed a series of laws that allowed slavery in the new territories and forced officials in free states to give a hearing to slave-owners without a jury.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">American Missionary Association</span> New York-based abolitionist movement

The American Missionary Association (AMA) was a Protestant-based abolitionist group founded on September 3, 1846 in Albany, New York. The main purpose of the organization was abolition of slavery, education of African Americans, promotion of racial equality, and spreading Christian values. Its members and leaders were of both races; The Association was chiefly sponsored by the Congregationalist churches in New England. The main goals were to abolish slavery, provide education to African Americans, and promote racial equality for free Blacks. The AMA played a significant role in several key historical events and movements, including the Civil War, Reconstruction, and the Civil Rights Movement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">George Davis (American politician)</span> American politician (1820–1896)

George Davis was a Confederate politician and railroad counsel who served as attorney general of the Confederate States for 480 days in 1864 and 1865.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Secession in the United States</span> A state leaving the Union

In the context of the United States, secession primarily refers to the voluntary withdrawal of one or more states from the Union that constitutes the United States; but may loosely refer to leaving a state or territory to form a separate territory or new state, or to the severing of an area from a city or county within a state. Advocates for secession are called disunionists by their contemporaries in various historical documents.

Admission to the Union is provided by the Admissions Clause of the United States Constitution in Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1, which authorizes the United States Congress to admit new states into the Union beyond the thirteen states that already existed when the Constitution came into effect. The Constitution went into effect on June 21, 1788, in the nine states that had ratified it, and the U.S. federal government began operations under it on March 4, 1789, when it was in effect in 11 out of the 13 states. Since then, 37 states have been admitted into the Union. Each new state has been admitted on an equal footing with those already in existence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anti-miscegenation laws in the United States</span> Laws against interracial marriage

In the United States, anti-miscegenation laws were passed by most states to prohibit interracial marriage, and in some cases also prohibit interracial sexual relations. Some such laws predate the establishment of the United States, some dating to the later 17th or early 18th century, a century or more after the complete racialization of slavery. Nine states never enacted such laws; 25 states had repealed their laws by 1967, when the United States Supreme Court ruled in Loving v. Virginia that such laws were unconstitutional in the remaining 16 states. The term miscegenation was first used in 1863, during the American Civil War, by journalists to discredit the abolitionist movement by stirring up debate over the prospect of interracial marriage after the abolition of slavery.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Government of North Carolina</span> Government of the U.S. state of North Carolina

The government of North Carolina is divided into three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. These consist of the Council of State, the bicameral legislature, and the state court system. The Constitution of North Carolina delineates the structure and function of the state government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abolitionism in the United States</span> Movement to end slavery in the United States

In the United States, abolitionism, the movement that sought to end slavery in the country, was active from the late colonial era until the American Civil War, the end of which brought about the abolition of American slavery for non-criminals through the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The law of North Carolina consists of several levels, including constitutional, statutory, regulatory, case law, and local law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of slavery in North Carolina</span> Aspect of history

Slavery was legally practiced in the Province of North Carolina and the state of North Carolina until January 1, 1863, when President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation. Prior to statehood, there were 41,000 enslaved African-Americans in the Province of North Carolina in 1767. By 1860, the number of slaves in the state of North Carolina was 331,059, about one third of the total population of the state. In 1860, there were nineteen counties in North Carolina where the number of slaves was larger than the free white population. During the antebellum period the state of North Carolina passed several laws to protect the rights of slave owners while disenfranchising the rights of slaves. There was a constant fear amongst white slave owners in North Carolina of slave revolts from the time of the American Revolution. Despite their circumstances, some North Carolina slaves and freed slaves distinguished themselves as artisans, soldiers during the Revolution, religious leaders, and writers.

References

  1. Mello, Robert A. (2014). Moses Robinson and the Founding of Vermont. Vermont Historical Society. ISBN   978-0934720656.
  2. "The Quock Walker Case". Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (mass.gov). Archived from the original on December 4, 2009. Retrieved October 4, 2009.
  3. Brinkley, Martin H. "State v. Negro Will". NCPedia. North Carolina Government & Heritage Library at the State Library of North Carolina. Retrieved 2021-06-09.
  4. 1 2 Martin, Jonathan. "State v. Negro Will (1834) and State v. Manuel (1838)". North Carolina History Project. John Locke Foundation. Retrieved 2021-06-09.
  5. Stoesen, Alexander R. "State v. Manuel". NCPedia. North Carolina Government & Heritage Library at the State Library of North Carolina. Retrieved 2021-06-09.