The results of one action can change the world. The Stewart v Somerset led to many things such as the anti-slavery movement. The case occurred in England during the colonial era and had a significant impact on the development of human rights and English jurisprudence. The case revolved around the predicament of James Somerset, a slave whose master had brought him to England but who, upon arriving, sought emancipation, so provoking a more comprehensive investigation of the system of slavery. This legal dispute took place in England. Stewart v Somerset illustrates how societal values and legal frameworks are evolving in England. While expanding its empire, England struggled with slavery and human rights as it became the dominant colonial power. …show more content…
In this case, England's dedication to individual freedom, fairness, and the rule of law rendered it justifiable. Somerset's freedom was upheld, and his servitude was ruled illegal in accordance with England's legal heritage of defending individual rights against arbitrary …show more content…
There was much control over legal matters in England since it was the most centralized colonial power. Compared to colonial American courts, which often acted in the interests of plantation owners and local elites, the English judiciary was more independent and autonomous, even if it was still subject to a great deal of political influence. Despite Stewart v. Somerset representing a crucial step towards the abolition of slavery in England, similar challenges were much less likely to occur in colonial America. Due to a variety of factors, including firmly established economic interests, a lack of precedent to challenge slavery, and varying societal attitudes regarding labor and race, the legal environments of colonial America and England differed during the colonial era. The theory of precedent and habeas corpus are two essential legal concepts that are pertinent to this case. A central theme of Somerset's legal battle was habeas corpus, which protects the ability to challenge unjust detention. Somerset's attorneys argued that his captivity amounted to an unlawful deprivation of liberty. Simultaneously, the law of precedent guaranteed that the court's decision set a legal precedent for later cases involving slavery, establishing a foundation for contesting the legitimacy of enslavement in subsequent
...his seemingly routine case of fornication and premarital pregnancy proved to be significant for early American legal history. The unfolding of this story and the legal changes that it brought about makes evident that by the end of the seventeenth century, The Eastern Shore had shaped a distinct legal culture. The characters involved in each case also revealed the extent the powerful players were able to shape the law to their own self-interests. The goal of the powers to be was to protect property interests, protect personal reputation and liberty, and to maintain social order.
The prosecution on the other hand,believed the case was a way to reaffirm independence from the influence of the Queen of Spain and, according to the movie, gave a supoort system for a civil war. This case could be utilized to unite the states and complete the American revolution. 3. The debate in court does not focus on the morality of the institution of slavery but of property. Describe the various positions in the courthouse.
The purpose of this essay is to compare three very similar cases, the Scottsboro Trials, Brown v. Mississippi, and the fictional trial of Tom Robinson in Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird; and to prove why the defendant of the third trial never had a chance. Each took place in the rural South in the 1920’s and 30’s and involved the unfair conviction of young black males by all-white juries pressured by the threat of mob violence. Each lacked the evidence sufficient for conviction, most especially for the death penalty. Last, heroes emerged from each trial and made small but solid steps towards equal justice for all.
This scandalous case centers on a woman named Katherine Watkins. On Friday, August 18, 1681, Katherine accused a slave by the name of John Long, also known as Jack, of rape. There was some evidence of violence, but there were also outstanding questions about her character and conduct. Those who testified, however, painted a different picture about certain events preceding the crime. They were John Aust, William Harding, Mary Winter, Lambert Tye, Humphrey Smith, Jack White (Negro), Dirk (Negro), and Mingo (Negro). Whether these individuals were so inclined because Katherine Watkins was a Quaker, rather than an Anglican, we can never really know. That certainly fueled the fire, though. The day in question involved an afternoon of cider drinking. Several of the witnesses in the testimonies recounted Mrs. Watkins sexual advances to multiple of Thomas Cocke 's slaves, particularly, a mulatto named Jack. John Aust pleaded that Katherine, at one point, had lifted the shirt of one slave and announced “Dirke thou wilt have a good long thing” (Sex and Relations, 53). She allegedly had thrown another on the bed, kissed him, and, “put her hand into his codpiece” (Sex and Relations, 53). The most interesting piece of evidence that Aust brings forward is that Jack was actually avoiding Watkins at the party, an apparent attempt at avoiding any intimate entanglement with her (Sex and Relations, 52). Finally, he reported that Watkins and Jack had gone into a side room (Sex and Relations, 53). Later in the trial, Humphrey Smith seemingly referred to Aust 's testimony. His deposition suggested that he and Aust had some reservations about Jack 's guilt (Sex and Relations 54). Clearly, the character of the plaintiff was considered important evidence in the trial of a slave for rape. The reasonable extenuating circumstances of the case might have granted the magistrates leave way
The Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850 were two acts that tried to solve the problems between the note and the south. However, the political action that the north took caused the creation of the “personal liberty” laws, which oddly changed north’s perspective towards slavery. The disagreement on the extension of slavery was not only the eyes of the north anymore. Although, the Compromise of 1850, put a more humane side to the solution, the problem towards slavery is yet to be solved..
...upreme Court case was soon lost to history amongst the rest of those entrapped in the institution of slavery.
188 It is also possible that his original lawyer Samuel Mansfield Bay saw opportunities for a large reward due to his services to Scott, and initiated litigation. For example, some feel that Bay’s “object was to pave the way for a suit against the Emerson estate for the twelve years’ wages to which Scott would be entitled,” (Herda, 29) should he win the case. This shows that, money could have been the driving force behind this case. This also shows that Scott may have been persuaded by another person’s reasons for pursuing the case. In addition, if this was true, Scott “had been illegally held as a slave since 1834.”
Robinson trial; (2) prejustice and its effects on the processes of the law and society; (3)
The court system in Puritan New England was an unfair and unjust system, stemming from the general court of Massachusetts. Many of the trials and procedures were ludicrous. General life in the Puritan communities was centered around religion and the judicial system reflected this. Religion crept into laws and the courts until they were practically combined. Puritan's valued their religion zealously and it became part of everyday life in the colony.
In this paper I will explain and discuss the historical events that took place in a small rural town in early Massachusetts. The setting for which is Irene Quenzler Brown's and Richard D. Brown's, The Hanging of Ephraim Wheeler. I will explain the actions and motives of Hannah and Betsy Wheeler in seeking legal retribution of husband and father Ephraim Wheeler. I will also discuss the large scope of patriarchal power allowed by the law and that given to husbands and masters of households. Of course, this will also lead to discussions of what was considered abuse of these powers by society and the motivation for upholding the Supreme Court's decision to hang Ephraim Wheeler.
The English Bill of Rights is an Act of the Parliament of England that deals with constitutional matters and sets out certain basic civil rights. This constitution was passed on December 16, 1689.The Bill was passed to declare laws and liberties of the people. Also the people wanted separation of powers and limits the of power to the king and queen. It guarantees the rights of enhancing the democratic election and to get more freedom of speech. No armies should be raised in peacetime, no taxes can be levied, without the authority of parliament. Laws should not be dispensed with, or suspended, without the consent of parliament and no excessive fines should imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. King James the 2nd, had abused his
... American Memory. Library of Congress. 2 Feb. 2002 http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/ncps:@field(DOCID+@lit(ABL5306-0013-91))::>. "The Fugitive Slave Law; Shall it be Enforced?"
The antebellum period was filled with important Supreme Court rulings that had an influential impact on the U.S. The case of Dred Scott vs. Sandford is a perfect example of a ruling that highly affected the U.S. In Dred Scott vs. Sandford the Supreme Court ruled that African Americans, whether a slave or free, were not American citizens and were unable to sue in federal court. The Court also ruled that Congress did not have the power to ban slavery and in the U.S territories. In addition to, the Court also ruled that the Fifth Amendment protected the rights of slave owners because slaves were not classified as humans but as pieces of property. The devastating outcome of this court case had multiple effects on the U.S.; it gave more power to the National Government, it took away some of the sovereignty of states, overturned the Missouri Compromise, instigated the Civil War, and opened eyes of the Northerners.
During the period of time between 1789 and 1840, there were a lot of major changes occurring on the issue of slavery such as the impact it had towards the economy and the status of slaves in general. There were two types of African Americans slaves during the era, either doing hard cheap labor in a plantation usually owned by a white and being enslaved, or free. Undoubtedly, the enslaved African Americans worked vigorously receiving minimal pay, while on the other hand, the free ones had quite a different lifestyle. The free ones had more freedom, money, land/power, are healthier, younger and some even own plantations. In addition, in 1820 the Missouri compromise took into effect, which made it so states North of the 36°30′ parallel would be free and South would be slave and helped give way to new laws regarding the issue of slavery.
In Conclusion, the decision handed down by The United States Supreme Court in Dred Scott v. Sanford. That African American slaves "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever profit could be made by it." This was a grave mistake made by the Supreme Court and could only add fuel to the fire of the issue of slavery.