State v. Mann

-





 Our defendant John Mann was charged with battery against Lydia for shooting her and was fined $10, but Lydia is in fact an African American slave. If Mann is being charged with assault? Assault towards what? Today African American slaves are not considered United States Citizens, but how can a person be charged with battery if it’s towards someone who is not considered a citizen of the United States let alone not a person at all? Slaves are owned by masters and have been considered as property. If Lydia is considered property why should there be a charge for shooting something that is your own property? Although Mann did not formally own Lydia. She was hired by Mann from Elizabeth Jones. Meaning Mann did have authority over Lydia. Therefore, Lydia is Mann’s for the time he rents her and he should be free to do what he likes. Property owners are entitled to the authority of using their property how they choose. 
 

In our state of North Carolina, it was subjective for slaves to entitle their lives around their work. This means they go over ends to obey their masters in the work of their choosing. In Mann’s defense, he gave Lydia the resources to live, food, water, shelter; He should be allowed discipline in his choosing. Lydia fled minor punishment. Mann reacted how he could. You can’t charge a man for dealing with his own property. As our North Carolina Supreme court judge Thomas Ruffin stated “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.” In our time era, slavery is legal; The property of our own should be regulated if it becomes a disturbance. 


In my opinion, I feel as if it is more than okay for a slave owner to have complete and utter control over what his property is. He was simply disciplining the wrong actions of a slave; if you have a child who did something that was wrong you would punish them; and if you didn't push them they would learn that they would be able to get away with anything. No, that’s what we do, we punish them so they know that their actions have consequences. They need to know that their choice in wrong actions will have a punishment. Not for the sake of punishing them but for the sake of that they need to know to not do what they did again. So in my conclusion, John Mann should be found not guilty of the act of shooting Lydia. His demeanor was in the right place of just showing what would happen if you disobey. Lydia was in the wrong for refusing light punishment and running away. Resulting in a greater punishment than what she would have gotten. I believe the John vs Mann of North Carolina should agree with my statement; for it would be ridiculous for Mann to be charged $10 dollars for dealing with his property.



 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What I learned from today's EOTO presentations

-
Image
  What I learned about the Positives and negatives of the Reconstruction era. I learned that the 13th Amendment immediately freed over 100,000 slaves from the states of Kentucky to Delaware and that this Amendment was a response to President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. Which was brought on January 1,1863 where Lincoln gave the authority to employ African Americans in a military capacity.  Freedmen’s Bureau, this act was considered one of the key factors of the Reconstruction era. Where it created a great improvement for the lives of a lot of freed slaves by providing protection. Including food, shelter, land, and other hospitality aspects. They also provided school establishments and offered legal assistance. Though their major goal was to give slaves rights and the ability to participate in political parties.  The reconstruction policies are known as “40 Acres and a Mule” would offer long-awaited economic justice to African Americans. Was a promise by Union Gene...
Read more

Slavery and the Bible

-
Image
One of the biggest things people turn to in hard times and decisions is religion. While the bible is open for interpretation; one issue about the Bible, for those who look into it, is whether the Bible condemns slavery or not. There have been many arguments about how the bible almost seems like it supports and encourages slavery. However, depending on how you look at it and in what parts of the bible you look in, I feel, make a huge impact on your opinion. I am a strong believer in Christianity; my whole life I grew up as a Roman Catholic so I was intrigued by what research I would find working on this assignment. I started out looking through the Old Testament of our Bible and what I found was honestly quite confusing. There was a time the Bible encouraged slavery, specifically in the Old Testament. While in the New Testament the idea of slavery made a turnaround where I would find religious text such as Exodus 21:16 , where it says, "And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, ...
Read more

Gone with the Wind

-
Image
  Instead of us having a regular class day, we got to watch Gone with the Wind in the HPU theater. I remember watching the first part of this movie a long time ago, but I think I was too young to understand the movie; so I was happy we had the opportunity to watch it again. To start it off, since the movie is around four hours we only had the option of watching the first part; but it starts off before the civil war. In Georgia, a girl known as Scarlett O’Hara appeared to be a selfish, young woman who mostly wrapped her life around partying and flirting with men. The movie involves a predicament where Scarlett is deeply in love with a man, Ashley, that is bound to marry his cousin. Scarlett is extremely upset about this and decides to get dressed up and go confess her love to him, but her plans did not go her way. Ashley respectfully tells Scarlett that he can not marry her; she gets even more upset and angry about this rejection and goes on to marry Charles Hamilton in a blink of a...
Read more