State vs. Mann

The State Vs. Mann Trail

Elizabeth Jones was a slave that got shot in the back by a slave owner named John Mann, he rented Elizabeth Jones for a year.

The state argued that the incident violated his rights while the defendant argued it did not.

John “owned” the slave making that is argument to the state of violating his rights

Defendant: Elizabeth jones is the owner of Lydia, not John Mann

if Lydia did not recover from the shooting, Mann would be on trial for murder

argue on behave of the state:

morally wrong, shooting someone else property while renting (lydia)

believed he should be fined much more than 10$

slave ms. lydia was rented by Mr. Mann, shooting lydia was a case of vandalism, the full owner (elizabeth) should only have the full right to punish their slav in any way they wish, no one else

argument on behave on John Mann

John mann had full ownership of Lydia since he was “renting” her, with that being said he had the right to do anything he wanted to do since he had ownership at that time

Slaves are property, no legal rights

if damage to the “property” the owner at that time must recover all damages

1829, renting out for a year to john mann,

lydia tried to run away making her a target,

lydia should have known that when disobeying a punishment will result in further more harsher punishment which Mann did.

if not enough satisfaction, result is punishment

argument for the state, bailment argument

the judge ruled in favor of Mann