State v Mann

In class we discussed the case of North Carolina V John Mann. In the case John Mann is accused of wounding a slave that was rented out to him. In class we discussed both sides of the argument and how we interpret their arguments with the law. According to the state he battered Lydia, the enslaved woman, but since she was someone else's property Mann was liable for the damages. In Manns defense he claimed that he was protected under the law that a runaway slave is allowed to be disciplined. 

The rights to a slave owner to beat and recapture their slaves if disobedient were somewhat spotty. In regards to the ownership of Lydia, it was technically Manns at the time. Therefore the issue becomes solely based on if Mann had the right to discipline her. 

The court ruled that the authority of the owner is absolute and she was Manns property at the time. This would be a landmark case as it allowed for no slave owner to be found guilty of committing violence against them.

I personally am not fond of discussing the legality regarding how ownership of a rented person works, but the fact that this case brought more violence to enslaved people disgusts me. 

I believe the States first argument was valid, it identified that he shot her when it was not necessary. The fact that he was held slightly accountable at first was better than nothing and this case was a stain in our judicial process. This case is a moment in history we can all learn from but understand both sides in the case were very wrong.
State v. John Mann | NCpedia

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

My Opinion of our Inclass Debate

Supreme Court

EOTO Blog 07/14