State V. Mann

State v. John Mann | NCpedia

 The State V. Mann's case was about an individual named John Mann, who had hired Lydia, who was a slave of Elizabeth Jones. After he had chastised her, she ran off. Mann ended up shooting Lydia and wounded her, however, she was still alive after the attack. 

The state of North Carolina ended up charging Mann with assault. 

The trial judge charged the Jury, that if they believed the punishment inflicted by Mann was cruel and uncalled for, that in the law the Defendant was guilty, as he only had a special property in the slave. The jury convicted the Defendant, and Mann appealed the conviction.  

My group and I looked at all aspects of this case. This included religion, ethics, emotions, history, law, and economics. 

My viewpoints however were solely based on the religious aspect of this case. 

Religion does not support slavery by any means. In fact, It has been opposed on religious grounds.

Throughout most religions slavery was accepted as an institution however, at the same time, kindness towards slaves was encouraged along with manumission. Early Christian authors maintained the spiritual equality of slaves and free persons.

How can we as children of God sit back and let the plague of slavery ravish our nation? Was it not God who led the enslaved Jews out of Egypt under the guidance of Moses. Was it not God who told us to care for the disenfranchised among us.

Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many. Do not oppress a foreigner; you yourselves know how it feels to be foreigners, because you were foreigners in Egypt.

For one, Lydia has been robbed of her liberties. But to deal with such cruelty is far beyond what the soul can endure.

We are not here today to discuss the legitimacy of slavery but rather the type of treatment a slave deserves. Slavery itself is unpleasant and upholding this fine sets a precedent for the treatment of slaves. Improving the treatment of slaves is the first step to emancipating them.


https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-state-v-mann


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EOTO

Image
In the Reconstruction Era, the Freedmen's Bureau was beneficial for the time being.  It was a lso known as the Bureau of Refugees. It was a U.S. government agency from 1865 to 1872. The Bureau was placed under the authority of the War Department and the majority of its original employees were soldiers from the Civil War.  It was established on March 3rd, 1865 by Congress to help millions of former black slaves and poor whites in the South as a result of the Civil War.  With the Freedmen's Bureau came food, housing, medical aid, established schools, and offered legal assistance. The Freedmen's Bureau was organized into districts covering the 11 former rebel states, the border states of Kentucky, Maryland, and West Virginia, and Washington, D.C. Each district was headed by an assistant commissioner.  While the Bureau was active, it was underfunded and understaffed. With only 900 agents at its peak, some were corrupt or incompetent and others were brave and hardworking ...
Read more

Plessy V. Ferguson

Image
 In the Plessy V. Ferguson case,  Louisiana has a law adopted in 1892 requiring all private railroad companies to have separate accommodations for black and white passengers. Homer Plessy, who is 1/8ths black, got a first-class ticket. Apparently doing this broke the law. He ended up suing under the 14th amendment. There were two sides to this case. It was the state (Ferguson) against Homer Plessy. According to Homer Plessy's side, it e stablished the constitutionality of racial segregation. Plessy should not have been required to give up his right or access his train car. The Constitution should be colorblind so they don’t have to view color as a reason for treating other people differently.  Plessy had every right to not move because his rights were violated. The equal protection clause was violated and P lessy did nothing wrong. On the state's side (Ferguson), s ince slavery ended the state has tried to include blacks into society without violence, fear, or hate....
Read more