Prigg v Pennsylvania Case Brief PDF

Preview

Summary

professor metroka...

Description

Prigg v. Pennsylvania 41 U.S. 539 (1842) Characters: The defendant in error, Edward Prigg, with Nathan S. Bemis, and two others, were indicted by the Grand Jury of York county, Pennsylvania, for that, on the first day of April, 1837, upon a certain negro woman named Margaret Morgan, with force and violence they made an assault, and with force and violence feloniously did take and carry her away from the county of York, within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, to the state of Maryland, with a design and intention there to sell and dispose of the said Margaret Morgan, as and for a slave and servant for life. Behavior: Denfendant was convicted of having taken a woman and her children from Pennsylvania, with the intention of placing them into slavery in Maryland, contrary to a statute of Pennsylvania. The woman and some of her children had previously escaped from Maryland. A writ of error was brought from that judgement to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, where the judgement was, pro forma, affirmed. From the latter judgement, defendant prosecuted a writ of error. A woman and her children escaped from slavery and resided in Pennsylvania. The woman gave birth to another child more than a year after her escape. Defendant forcibly seized the woman and all her children and took them to Maryland in violation of Pennsylvania law. The trial court convicted defendant, and the state supreme court affirmed. On a writ of error, the court reversed, holding that the Pennsylvania statute was unconstitutional and void. Maryland gave the slave holder the right to seize and repossess the slave, which Maryland conferred upon him as property, and this right was acknowledged in all slaveholding states. No other state’s law could in any way qualify, regulate, or restrain the slave holder’s property rights. The Law(s) Involved: Article IV, section 2, clause 2. Article IV, section 2, clause 3 (Fugitive Slave Clause). The Fugitive Slave Act of 1793  called for alleged fugitives to be brought before a judge (state or federal) who would rule on the slave’s identity. “Personal Liberty Laws”  two components: (a) they updated the states’ fugitive slave laws to incorporate greater procedural protections for the alleged slaves; and (b) they made it a crime to kidnap a black person into slavery without going through a judicial process. Federalist Paper 43  “A right implies a remedy, and where else would the remedy be deposited than where it is deposited by the Constitution?”. The Specific Constitutional Provision Involved: “A person charged in any state with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, and be found in another state, shall, on demand of the executive authority of the state from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the state having jurisdiction of the crime.” [Art. IV, sec. 2, cl. 2]. “No person held to service or labor in on state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.” [Art. IV, sec. 2, cl. 3]. The Arguments: Prigg and Bemis declared Margaret a runaway slave – seized Morgan and her children and brought them back to Maryland. Morgan suggests that she did not see herself as a fugitive slave and had never tried to hide her whereabouts from Ashmore or his niece. Morgans lived along the Maryland border also suggests they believed Margaret was a free person. Justice of the Peace Henderson refused to issue the necessary papers allowed for the Morgans removal from Pennsylvania… Prigg and Bemis then acted on their own. After releasing Jerry Morgan, they took Margaret and her children to Maryland where “they were sold to a negro trader for shipment to the south.” Violated Personal Liberty Laws “crime to kidnap a black person into slavery without going through a judicial process”. Her children were free under Pennsylvania law and were not subject to the Fugitive Slave Act; they did not fit the constitutional definition of fugitive slaves. Parents released from slavery – free blacks – according to Ashmore (never formally emancipated them)  Was Margaret free? Slavery in the family, if mother was a slave, children were slaves too. BUT… Her children were free under Pennsylvania law and were not subject to the Fugitive Slave Act. The Constitutional Issue: Although Ashmore allowed Morgan’s parents to live as free blacks – though not formally emancipating them – was it constitutionally acceptable for Bemis and Prigg to “kidnap” Morgan and her family and sell them to a negro slave trader?

The Legal History: A Pennsylvania grand jury subsequently indicted the slave-catchers under Pennsylvania’s Personal Liberty Law. Initially Maryland refused to comply with an extradition requisition from the governor of Pennsylvania. However, negotiations between the two states led to a compromise. Maryland sent Prigg to Pennsylvania for trial after Pennsylvania officials agreed that in the event of a conviction he would not be incarcerated until the Supreme Court had ruled on the constitutionality of the relevant state and federal laws. Pennsylvania also guaranteed an expedited appeals process from the trial court to the state supreme court. Thus, a trial court convicted Prigg of kidnapping, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed in a pro forma opinion, and Prigg appealed to the United States Supreme Court. Unique Background or Contextual Factors: Margaret Morgan’s parents had been the slaves of a Maryland master names Ashmore. Although he never formally emancipated them, sometime before 1812 Ashmore allowed Margaret’s parents to live as free blacks. Ashmore “constantly declared he had set them free.” Margaret was born after her parents had been informally set free. Married Jerry Morgan, a free black, and in 1832 they moved just across the Maryland border to Pennsylvania. Their children were free under Pennsylvania law and were not subject to the Fugitive Slave Act. Ashmore died and his estate passed to his niece, Margaret Ashmore Bemis. Margaret’s husband, Nathan S. Bemis, Edward Prigg, and two others went to Pennsylvania to find Morgan and bring her back to Maryland. Seized Morgan and her children and brought them to Maryland. (The fact that Bemis and Prigg were immediately able to locate Morgan suggests that she did not see herself as a fugitive slave and had never tried to hide her whereabouts). Prigg and Bemis obtained a warrant from Justice of the Peace Thomas Henderson to apprehend Morgan under Pennsylvania’s 1826 [Personal Liberty Law]. They seized Morgan, her children, and her husband Jerry Morgan, even though he was indisputably a free person. When Bemis and Prigg brought the Morgans to Justice of the Peace Henderson, he refused to issue the necessary papers allowing for the Morgans’ removal from Pennsylvania… Bemis and Prigg then acted on their own. After releasing Jerry Morgan, they took Margaret and her children to Maryland where “they were sold to a negro trader for shipment to the South”. The Court’s (Majority) Holding and Dispensation:

The Court’s Expressed Reasoning (The Majority Opinion):

Concurring and Dissenting Opinions: Omitted

Personal Notes:...