Mock Trial Speech: Plessy v. Fergueson

 Good afternoon judge.

Ever since the aftermath of the civil war, and even prior, African Americans have been given the resources they needed from the government to function in their place in society. Now that they are no longer slaves, with masters to dutifully fulfill their needs and provide for themselves, they have been granted the generous privilege of working as a servant or farmer here in the state of Louisiana, where Mr. Homer Plessy is from. 

(blackthen.com)

This is more than enough needed for them to serve in society, yet they continue to rebel against the government, resulting in a dangerous environment to the white and law abiding residents here in the south. The Black codes were founded in order to grant these people facilities of their own so they can lead their own lives and culture without interfering with the white residents. Historically, these rules have kept black people in their place, and follow the intended changes of the restriction plan under Johnson's presidential authority. 

(billofrightsinstitute.org)

The fourteenth amendment grants everyone, including blacks, “equal protection of the law” under the power of the states. They have been granted numerous privileges, including purchasing property and even so far as getting to choose who they get to marry, which keeps them at a place in a functioning society where they have been able to contribute to the well being of their community for a number of years.

 There are limits set on their wages for a reason-  to prevent uprising when they should be grateful. They have even been given the privilege to vote, however even with all this they will not settle and continue to act against the government which has treated them as they should be, considering that they are black people. For example, the separate car act, which is one of the codes Mr. Homer Plessy has rebelled against, is intended to provide adequate transportation for both blacks and whites, and is yet another example of the structures put in place here in Louisiana to guarantee resources for non-whites. 

(ouramericannetwork.org)

The black residents should be grateful for this, but continue the pattern, beginning  in the era of slavery, where they have simply asked too much of the government, even though they have been granted generous rights throughout history.

https://blackthen.com/june-7-1892-homer-plessy-arrested-refusing-leave-whites-seat/

https://billofrightsinstitute.org/lessons/african-americans-gilded-age

http://www.ouramericannetwork.org/story?title=-Separate-but-Equal-The-Story-of-Supreme-Injustice

https://www.britannica.com/event/Plessy-v-Ferguson-1896

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/163/537

Reconstruction: America After the Civil War, Part 1 Reflection

 The Post Civil war era, also known as the Reconstruction era, was an effort mainly coming from the north to repair and reform the south after the Civil War. While we typically gloss over this portion of American history, it is important to look back and learn about the gruesome aftermath of a civil war. Aside from military authority in southern towns, all of the south was battered- buildings had been destroyed, cities left ransacked, and emancipated slaves struggled to find means for survival with their newfound freedom. In a desperate attempt to retain white supremacy, immediately after the civil war the Black Codes were put in place in order to keep black people as close to slave status as they could be.

(pbs.org)

When first enacted, these appeared to be real black progress. For example, black people could choose who to marry and own property. They had access to some courts, but could not testify against non-blacks and could not even vote. In reality, these were a facade presented to the northerners, and gave former slaves little freedom because they relied so heavily on these laws and were forced,once again, into submission to the white southerners merely just to survive.

(history.com)

White farmers were still trying to pull the slaves back for cheap labor in an attempt to keep a stable economy. The first black codes started in Mississippi and South Carolina in 1865, and they required proof of employment for all black people. If they were to leave their job, they would face arrest. Unless they paid a hefty tax, they were not permitted to work any other position besides a farmer or servant. If found homeless, they were severely punished, even to the extent of being forced back into plantation labor.

(slate.com)

As the era of reconstruction began, northerners, both carpetbaggers and soldiers, came down to regulate the south. The north’s heavy influence only had temporary effects, and as they left and turned the south back over to southern government leaders laws were put in place to hinder black people’s progress in society. This is why the reconstruction period is considered failed, and explains why it took so much longer to see even just a glimpse of black progress in the south after the civil war.

https://www.history.com/news/black-codes-reconstruction-slavery

https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/black-codes

https://www.pbs.org/tpt/slavery-by-another-name/themes/black-codes-and-pig-laws/

https://www.britannica.com/topic/black-code

State v. Mann

 In the case of State v. Mann (1829), Elizabeth Jones rented her slave Lydia to John Mann for about a year. As Lydia fled punishment from Mann, he shot her in the back, and she was wounded. Mann was found guilty of assault and battery in the Chowan County court in North Carolina, where the crime was committed. John Mann brought his case to the North Carolina Supreme Court and won based on “One who has a right to the labor of a slave, has also a right to all the means of controlling his conduct which the owner has (casetext.com).”These words were spoken by Thomas Ruffin of the North Carolina supreme court referring to the decision that because he was renting Lydia and she did not die, he is permitted to treat her as his private property.

(ncpedia.org)

In the county court, Attorney General Daniel ruled that Mann was guilty because the punishment was due to “cruel and unwarrantable, and disproportionate to the offense committed by the slave, that in law the Defendant was guilty, as he had only a special property in the slave (casetext.com).” The judge here took a more ethical approach. Although from a modern-day perspective he is right and his ruling would abide with the current law, slaves were property during this period, and so the question brought about by this case was the treatment of property rather than the treatment of a human being, although Lydia was brutally harmed.

(cwnc.omeka.chass.ncsu.edu)

“The Attorney-General contended that no difference existed between this case and that of the State v. Hall, 2 Hawks, 582. In this case, the weapon used was one calculated to produce death. He assimilated the relation between a master and a slave to those existing between parents and children, masters and apprentices, and tutors and scholars, and upon the limitations to the right of the superiors in these relations (cwnc.omeka.chass.ncsu.edu)...” This shows yet again how he was not approaching the case from a legal standpoint but rather an emotionally logistical standpoint. Because the case was ruled wrongly due to the judge's emotional influence, the case did make its way to the North Carolina Supreme Court. 

(northcarolinahistory.org)

In the Court, Judge Thomas Ruffin (northcarolinahistory.org) leaned the same way towards slavery as Daniel did: "The moral wrong of slavery is . . . admitted, along with the most resolute determination to support it, by not allowing the rights of the master to come under judicial investigation."(ncpedia.org) however, in a rather unsurprising ruling for this period, Mann was ruled as not guilty by the North Carolina Supreme Court. This is because Ruffin followed the laws of property regarding slavery- slaves were property, and since he was trying to control his property, he was not guilty. This best explains his ruling on the case, despite his moral compass: “Hence one who has hired a slave is not liable to an indictment for a battery on him, committed during the hiring (casetext.com).” While he disagreed with it, he fulfilled his duties as justice and made sure the law was carried out as intended. This case is helpful in our understanding of the antebellum period and how slavery was normalized. This also points to a common theme throughout American history of legislation being blatantly against slave's rights, including after their emancipation.

https://casetext.com/case/state-v-mann-129

https://cwnc.omeka.chass.ncsu.edu/items/show/44

https://www.ncpedia.org/state-v-john-mann

https://northcarolinahistory.org/encyclopedia/state-v-mann/

EOTO-The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854

 Prominent up-and-coming politician, Stephen Douglas, senator of Illinois (senate.gov),was planning to expand the transcontinental railroad and advocated for it to cross through Chicago, not only providing transportation to eager gold-seekers but creating an economic boom in his state. To accomplish this, the railroad would have to go through the Nebraska and Kansas territories to get straight across to California. To win support from southerners voters, he proposed the Kansas-Nebraska act. 

(chicagotribune.com)

This act would repeal the Missouri Compromise of 1820 (ushistory.org) which stated that any states above the 36°30' line would be free states, while anything below that would be slave states. Douglas was well aware that by making the Kansas and Nebraska territories states, these two large, new free states would enrage the south because it would no longer be as balanced. To please the southern voters, he proposed a new plan, the Kansas-Nebraska Act (history.com), which would allow Kansas and Nebraska to be either slave or free states based on popular sovereignty-even though Kansas was over the 36°30'  line. 

(loc.gov)

Northerners were enraged, but the law was passed in 1854, ultimately resulting in the transcontinental railroad being able to go through Chicago, then straight through Kansas, as Douglas had originally intended (cop.senate.gov). By the power of popular sovereignty, Kansas was voted a slave state, and Nebraska was voted to be a free state. This sent both the north and the south into a tailspin. Now that slavery was in the hands of popular sovereignty over the 36°30' line, slaveholders rushed to Kansas to influence the vote and keep it a slave state. 

(loc.gov)

To counteract this, northerners migrated to Kansas in an attempt to swing popular sovereignty as it was above the 36°30' line (britannica.com). This intense aftermath stained Douglas's political career, resulting in extreme backlash from those in the north. Although he achieved his goal of getting the transcontinental railroad through Chicago, the cost was much greater- the violent time period infamously know as ‘bleeding Kansas.’ The conflict between the pro and anti-slavery residents of Kansas resulted in not only political and social tension but the Pottawatomie massacre, where abolitionists murdered five pro-slavery people (civilwaronthewesternborder.org). 

(britannica.com)

This bloodshed over slavery was the ultimate spark to the Civil War. In addition, the northerners feared that this would lead to other compromises not being obeyed, such as the compromise of 1850, which limited slavery in certain states. This chaos ensued by the Kansas-Nebraska act was only a glimpse of what was to come in the future.

Aside from leading to a key event that sparked the Civil War, the Kansas-Nebraska act is yet another example of how, from the beginning of the colonies until even after the emancipation proclamation, slavery has always been a source of tension in the united states. From the colonies, where slavery was faced with opposition from religious groups, to bleeding Kansas, where the tension between the pro and anti-slavery resulted in a violent massacre, and ultimately the Civil War. Douglas, in an attempt to create an industrial boom in his state and further his political career, severely underestimated the power of this explosive tension and it leading to a rapid chain of events, resulting in South Carolina influencing the other southern states to secede in 1860. 

This was the last law with the intentions of keeping the balance of slavery and ultimately failed, not only by doing away with the effective legislation of the Missouri Compromise but by allowing for the pro-slavery and freesoilers to unleash their pent-up anger over the slavery debate on each other.

https://www.history.com/topics/19th-century/kansas-nebraska-act

https://www.cop.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Kansas_Nebraska_Act.htm

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Kansas-Nebraska-Act

https://www.ushistory.org/us/31a.asp

https://www.britannica.com/event/Bleeding-Kansas-United-States-history

https://civilwaronthewesternborder.org/encyclopedia/pottawatomie-massacre

https://www.senate.gov/senators/FeaturedBios/Featured_Bio_Douglas_Stephen.htm

https://www.ushistory.org/us/23c.asp

https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-stephen-douglas-defense-20200710-6j4wi67rmvaxdd5jdtne57wbjq-story.html

https://www.loc.gov/resource/g3701sm.gct00483/?sp=22&r=0.221,0.01,0.718,0.322,0

https://www.loc.gov/item/2008661578/