The Citing Slavery Project
LightNews LightNews
banner
citingslavery.bsky.social
The Citing Slavery Project
@citingslavery.bsky.social
170 followers 6 following 63 posts
The Citing Slavery Project provides a database of slave cases and the modern cases that continue to cite them as precedent.
Posts Replies Media Videos
citingslavery.bsky.social
Today, March 21, is the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. To learn more about how the Citing Slavery Project is fighting to end racial bias in the legal field, visit
citingslavery.org
and www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/ma...
The photo is a grey white background with dark grey text on top. The text reads: “INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION. MARCH 21, 2024. @CITINGSLAVERY”
March 22, 2024 at 12:40 AM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 29 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember the thousands upon thousands of enslaved persons impacted by the U.S. justice system, who remain unnamed in their case proceedings.
The photo is a blue teal solid background with white text. The text reads at the top in large letters: “Name Unknown.” Below is a text box that reads: American slavery generated thousands of legal disputes, for issues ranging from the inheritance of enslaved persons, recovering monetary damages after the injury or death of an enslaved person, conversion of enslaved persons, freedom suits, and many more. Thousands of these cases which decided the fate of the enslaved persons never include their names. Today, we remember the unnamed enslaved persons impacted by the legal system that refused to even mention their names.
February 29, 2024 at 3:16 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
⚠️ Content warning: death of an enslaved person. ⚠️ Day 28 of the Citing Slavery Projects “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember Lucinda. The court case revolved around liability for breach of warranty regarding Lucinda’s soundness. 🧵
The photo reads the name “Lucinda” in large letters. Below is a textbox that reads “Content Warning: Death of an enslaved person.” Below this text box the text reads: “Badgett v. Broughton, 1 Ga. 591 (1846): Badgett sold an enslaved girl, Lucinda, to Broughton for $275. When the sale was made, Badgett made a warranty to Broughton that Lucinda was in sound mind and body. Shortly after, Broughton sold Lucinda to a new buyer, Attaway, for $275. Instead of executing a new bill of sale, Broughton endorsed the bill of sale he received from Badgett. Further, he refused to make a warranty of Lucinda’s sound mind and body to Attaway, but instead agreed to assign the previous warranty and bill of sale from Badgett to Attaway. Broughton brought a breach of warranty claim against Badgett, alleging that Lucinda was not sound, and had a lung disease, which she died from shortly after being sold to Attaway.” - The photo reads the name “Lucinda” in large letters. The text box below reads: “The court held that “...the plaintiff below was entitled to recover at least the price paid to the defendant for the negro, proved to have been unsound at the time of the sale, and to have died afterwards.” Thus, the court said that Broughton could recover the $275 he paid for Lucinda. This case has been cited three times, most recently in 1964 ( Atlanta Tallow Co. v. John W. Eshelman & Sons, Inc., 110 Ga. App. 737 (1964)).”
February 28, 2024 at 4:04 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 27. Today, we remember Arnold. Arnold’s enslaver had the sheriff take custody over Arnold until he could be sold, but Arnold escaped from custody. His enslaver sued the sheriff for damages caused by his negligence, but we do not know what happened to Arnold from this case.
- The photo is a dark green solid background with white text. At the top, the text reads the name Arnold in large letters. Below the name the text reads: “Browne v. Johnson, 29 Tex. 40 (1867): An enslaver brought suit against the sheriff (Browne) in his personal capacity for damages caused by the sheriff’s negligence. Johnson, the plaintiff, enslaved a man named Arnold. Johnson gave Arnold to the sheriff to keep in custody until Arnold could be sold at auction. Arnold escaped custody and Johnson brought suit to recover the value of Arnold as an enslaved man. The suit was brought against Browne alone, not in his official capacity as sheriff.” - The photo is a dark green solid background with white text. At the top, the text reads the name Arnold in large letters. Below the name the text reads: “The lower court found for Johnson since Browne had been burdened to prove he had "exercised ordinary prudence" in holding Arnold. The Supreme Court of Texas held that the burden of demonstrating negligence should have been placed on Johnson. Thus, the Supreme Court of Texas remanded the case to be tried under the direction that Johnson needs to demonstrate that Browne was negligent by allowing Arnold to escape his custody.”
February 27, 2024 at 3:58 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 26. Today, we remember James. Even though James’s enslaver verbally freed him, because the enslaver failed to obtain approval from the county court, James could be tried for crimes as an enslaved man, rather than a freeman.

www.citingslavery.org/court_cases/...
James v. State, 28 Tenn. 308 (1848): This action was an appeal by James, a black man, of an indictment and conviction for selling spiritous liquors without a license. The question on appeal was whether James was actually indictable for the crime based on his asserted status as a free man or whether he was in fact still enslaved and should be treated as such under the law. James had previously been owned and enslaved by Benjamin Morrow, who, a few months before the indictment, had verbally freed James and allowed him to live as a free man. However, Tennessee law required the enslaver's assent and intent to free the enslaved person, plus approval from the county court to the enslaver's grant of manumission. In this case, Benjamin Morrow only offered a verbal grant of manumission to James without subsequently getting the action approved by the county court. The Court held that James had a sort of incomplete right to his freedom: Morrow could not reassert dominion over him and re-subjugate him to slavery, but James was also not a free member of society as a result of Morrow's failure to properly petition the court for James' freedom. Further, the Court held that "by failing to petition the county court and give bond according to law, [Morrow] remains liable to all the penalties of the law as though he had never consented to his freedom." Under the slavery law of Tennessee, the Court held that "the master may be indicted for permitting [James] to act as a freeman and is liable to all the other consequences that would have existed if he had not consented to [James'] freedom." Thus, the Court reversed and remanded the case to proceed against James as a slave, not a freeman.
February 26, 2024 at 2:49 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 25 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance.” Today we remember Nelly and Patsy who successfully asserted their right to freedom pursuant to their enslaver’s will, but may have been forced to leave the stay because of their free status.
February 26, 2024 at 1:31 AM
citingslavery.bsky.social
TW: assault on an enslaved person. Today, we remember David, an enslaved man who was injured in his escape from an attempted assault. The case brought by his enslaver to recover damages for David’s lost value as an enslaved person has been cited as recently as 1999 and 2016…🧵
Johnson v. Perry, 21 Tenn. 569 (1841): David was an enslaved man owned by Perry. A verbal altercation allegedly took place between David and Johnson, the defendant. In response, Johnson illegally apprehended David to “personally chastise” him. While Johnson was preparing to tie up David to punish him (i.e. assault him), David escaped and ran from the defendant. While David was running away, he fell off a four feet tall precipice and permanently injured his knee and leg. David’s enslaver, Perry, sued Johnson for trespass, because “the value of the slave was impaired by the injury.” The Tennessee Supreme Court held that Perry, David’s enslaver, could recover for damages caused by the deterioration of the value of the enslaved man caused by his permanent injury in lieu of recovering damages for the loss of service. This case has been cited nine times, most recently in 1999 and 2016. Swipe to read how the Tennessee Courts have cited to this case in modern times.
February 24, 2024 at 2:26 AM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Today is Day 22 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today we remember and honor Aleck, who successfully sued for his freedom as well as the value of his services for the time of his wrongful enslavement.

cite.case.law/ky/34/242/
The photo is a salmon solid background with black text. At the top in a box the text reads: “Day 22. Black History Month.” Below, in large letters, is the name Aleck. Below the name is a text box of smaller text. The text reads: “Aleck v. Tevis, 34 Ky. 242 (1836): A boy named Aleck filed suit for his freedom against his enslaver, Samuel Tevis. Aleck was previously enslaved by Cloe Pen, who emancipated Aleck in her last will prior to her death. The Court of Appeals of Kentucky held that Aleck was free when the defendant enslaved him, and that the defendant had no authority to "claim his services, or to control him." Not only did the Court restore Aleck's status as free, but it also held that the defendant owed to Aleck the value of his services for the entire time that defendant wrongfully enslaved Aleck.”
February 22, 2024 at 3:51 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Today is Day 21 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today we remember and honor Nancy, who successfully sued for her freedom.

cite.case.law/ky/34/236/
The photo is a black solid background with white text. At the top in a box the text reads: “Day 21. Black History Month.” Below, in large letters, is the name Nancy. Below the name is a text box of smaller text. The text reads: Boyce v. Nancy, 34 Ky. 236 (1836): Nancy was an enslaved woman who brought an action of trespass against Robert Boyce, who enslaved her despite the fact that she was emancipated. Nancy previously lived in Maryland, where she was enslaved by Rebecca Rings. When Nancy was six years old, Rebecca Ring's will declared that Nancy should be free when she turned twenty-one years old. It was undisputed that Nancy was older than twenty-one years old. The Court held for Nancy, restoring her freedom.”
February 22, 2024 at 1:21 AM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Today is Day 20 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember Edy, Fortune, Rody, Ferriby, and Littice. The ownership over these five enslaved individuals was at issue in Pournell v. Harris (1860).
Pournell v. Harris, 29 Ga. 736 (1860): An enslaver named James Haily executed a will, which lent to his granddaughter, Jincey Jordan, several enslaved persons. The enslaved persons were named Edy, Fortune, Rody, Ferriby and Littice. Once Jincey Jordan died, the will provided that her heir may make "use and service" of the enslaved persons. However, if Jordan died without any descendants, then the enslaved persons would be given to Hailey's other grandchildren. Pournell was a descendant of Jincey Jordan and argued that at Jincey's death, Pournell and his wife would be the heirs of Jincey, and thus entitled to ownership of the enslaved persons, not Haily's grandchildren. The Georgia Supreme Court held that there was a distinction between the gift Haily gave to his grandchildren and the "use of service" Haily allowed Jincey to have. The court affirmed Haily's will as valid, confirming Haily's grandchildren as the legal owners of the aforementioned enslaved persons.”
February 20, 2024 at 3:10 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 18 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember Maria. Maria’s enslaver unsuccessfully attempted to emancipate her by devising her and her four children to his nephew…
The text reads: “Day 18. Black History Month.” Below, in large letters, is the name Maria. Below this name is a smaller text box that reads: Sibley v. Maria, 2 Fla. 553 (1849): Maria brought an action of trespass against Sibley who enslaved Maria in spite of Maria’s prior emancipation. Maria had previously been enslaved by William Oliphant in South Carolina. Before his death, Oliphant created a will in which he devised to his nephew William C. Hollingsworth all of his property, including Maria and her four children. Oliphant’s will directed his nephew to ensure that Maria and her four children be allowed all the privileges of a free person, and also that Maria receive $250. While the Supreme Court of Florida acknowledged the testator’s intent, the Court held that the will provision giving Maria the privileges of a free person was void because it was a condition inconsistent with the gift, inconsistent with the laws of South Carolina, and incompatible with slavery.”
February 18, 2024 at 3:51 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 17 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember Letty and her seven unnamed children. Letty was hired out by her enslaver, and the issue for the court was who had the legal right to Letty and her children after the hirer died.
The photo is a dark blue solid background with white text. At the top in a box the text reads: “Day 17. Black History Month.” Below, in large letters, is the name Letty. Below this name is a smaller text box that reads: “Booth v. Terrell, 16 Ga. 20 (1854): This case involved an action of trover regarding an enslaved woman named Letty and her seven unnamed children. Letty and her children were enslaved by a man named Richmond Hodges, who loaned Letty to Mrs. Terrell. The dispute was whether the parties agreed that upon Mrs. Terrell’s death if Letty and her children were to be returned to Richmond and his heirs, or if Letty and her children were to be kept by Mrs. Terrell’s heirs. The Court held that the agreement between the parties was a loan, not a gift. Thus, Letty and her offspring needed to be returned to Richmond Hodges if living, or to his heirs if he was dead. This case has been cited nine times, and was most recently used as good legal precedent in 1987 (Cabral v. White, 181 Ga
February 17, 2024 at 3:42 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 16. Today, we remember and honor Stephen Cornish. In this case, the Court held that the estate executor could re-enslave and sell Stephen to settle estate debts. This case has been cited 20 times, most recently in 2015 (Cunningham v. Feinberg, 441 Md. 310 (2015)).

cite.case.law/gill/6/299/
“Cornish v. Willson, 6 Gill 299 (1848): Stephen Cornish filed a petition to the court alleging that he was a freed man held in bondage and enslaved by Jacob Willson. In response, Jacob Willson alleged that Stephen was not entitled to his freedom. Stephen was previously enslaved by Beachamp Harper, who provided for Stephen’s manumission in his will. Stephen lived for several years as a free man following Harper’s death, and Stephen worked and supported himself. The County Court held that because the decedent’s estate still had outstanding debts to be paid, there was nothing restricting the estate executor from selling the manumitted enslaved persons to pay off the estate debts. The Court of Appeals of Maryland affirmed this holding. This case has been cited twenty times, most recently in 2015 (Cunningham v. Feinberg, 441 Md. 310 (2015)).”
February 16, 2024 at 9:58 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 15 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember and honor Josias Price. His enslaver provided in her will that the estate executor could hire out the enslaved persons to pay off her estate’s debts, and afterwards…🧵
“Maddox vs. Negroes Price, 17 Md. 413 (1861): Josias Price and several other unnamed persons were enslaved by Eleanor W. Turner before her death. In her will, she bequeathed her enslaved persons to her estate executor, to be held in trust, to be hired out from year to year to pay off her debts and legacies. After her debts were settled, her will stated that if the executor wished, he could take the willing enslaved persons to a different state where he could manumit them. If any of his enslaved persons refused to be taken out of Maryland, then they could be sold. Josias Price, and eleven others, petitioned for their freedom under her will. The Circuit Court found that the petitioners were entitled to their freedom in Maryland, and the defendant appealed. The Maryland Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s decision, holding that “the petitioners do not become entitled to freedom unless they are removed out of the State of Maryland.”
February 15, 2024 at 2:39 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 14 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember Mary, who was enslaved and imported from her home country of Madagascar to the States. 🧵
The photo is a salmon orange solid background with black text. At the top in a box the text reads: “Day 14. Black History Month.” Below, in large letters, is the name Mary. Below the name is a text box of smaller text. The text reads: “Mary v. Vestry of William & Mary's Parish, 3 Md. 501 (1796): Mary was imported from her home of Madagascar to the United States and enslaved. Mary filed a freedom petition, citing to a law that stated whenever an individual is bought from a country where slavery is not commonly practiced and is sold within the United States, the individual is not a slave under the laws of Maryland. However, the Court dismissed her freedom petition, holding that since slavery was practiced in Madagascar, the burden was on Mary to establish that her ancestors were free in Madagascar in order to claim her freedom in the United States.”
February 14, 2024 at 2:48 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 13. Today, we honor Susan, who was freed in the will of her deceased enslaver. Despite the years she lived in freedom, the estate executor recaptured and enslaved Susan, arguing that the date on the decedent’s will was incorrect, thus she was not free.
The photo is a cream solid background with black text. At the top in a box the text reads: “Day 13. Black History Month.” Below, in large letters, is the name Susan. Below the name is a text box of smaller text. The text reads: “Susan v. Ladd, 36 Ky. 30 (1837): Susan was emancipated by her enslaver’s will and lived as a free woman for six to seven years. However, one of the will executors recaptured her claiming the will was invalid because the date on the will was wrong. The circuit court agreed with the executor, but the Kentucky Court of Appeals reversed the prior decision and ordered a remand. The Court held that because the wrong date was clearly an accident, it didn't invalidate a will considering the witnesses and other evidence supported this conclusion. Thus, the Kentucky courts restored Susan’s status as a free woman.”
February 13, 2024 at 2:56 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 12 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember and honor Sam Thomas, a 12 year-old boy who was wrongfully taken from the care of his grandfather to be made an apprentice by his former enslaver.
“Thomas v. Newcom, 64 Ky. 83 (1866): Sam Thomas was a 12-year old boy who was free. The law at the time gave the court the power to put orphans or neglected minors under apprenticeship. If the minor was black or a person of color, the court could give preference to the former owner of the minor, if the owner was a suitable person and requested the minor as an apprentice. Newcom, the former enslaver of Sam, successfully motioned the circuit court to make Sam his apprentice. However, the Kentucky Court of Appeals found that Sam was wrongfully taken from the custody of his grandfather by Newcom to be bound to him as an apprentice. The evidence fully established that Sam’s grandfather, Lewis Smith, was qualified and willing to raise Sam. Thus, the Kentucky Court of Appeals held that the lower court had no authority to make Sam the apprentice of his former enslaver, thus returning him to the care of his grandfather.”
February 12, 2024 at 3:02 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 11. Today, we remember and honor Clansey and Dawson, who were mother and son. Even though their enslaver executed a deed of manumission for both, the court held the deed void because their enslaver was allegedly drunk and attempting to defraud his creditors.
“Dulany v. Green, 4. Del. 285 (1845): Clansey and her son Dawson were enslaved by a man named Jesse Green Jr. Jesse executed a deed in which he granted manumission to Clansey but retained ownership over Dawson. Specifically, the deed stated that if Jesse ever call upon Dawson, he would need to answer; if Jesse never called upon him, then Dawson be free like his mother. Jesse left the state shortly after executing the deed and died several years later, never having called upon Dawson. Upon Jesse's death, his widow Eliza claimed ownership over Dawson, alleging that the deed executed by Jesse was invalid as a drunken and manic attempt to defraud his creditors. The Delaware Superior Court held for Eliza Green, stating that Jesse's deed of manumission was void because he was drunk, insane, and insolvent, attempting to defraud his creditors. It is unknown what happened next to Clansey and Dawson, but the Court case informs us that Eliza prevailed on her claims of ownership over Dawson.”
February 11, 2024 at 7:56 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 10. Today, we remember Dick and Edith, both of whom were enslaved. We also remember Esther, Dudley, and Nancy Jane, three grandchildren of Edith, who were doomed to slavery due to the technical language of Edith’s enslaver’s will.
The text reads: “Day 10. Black History Month.” Below, in very large letters, the text lists the following names: “Dick, Edith, Esther, Dudley, and Nancy Jane.” Below these names is a text box that reads: ESTHER V. AKINS' HEIRS, 42 KY. 60 (1842): DAVID RICE WAS THE ENSLAVER OF DICK, EDITH, AND EDITH'S CHILDREN. DAVID DEVISED DICK TO ONE OF HIS SONS, THE "USE OF EDITH" TO HIS DAUGHTER, AND MADE THE DEVISE THAT THE MALE CHILDREN OF EDITH BE MADE FREE UPON TURNING 25 YEARS OLD, AND THE FEMALE CHILDREN OF EDITH BE MADE FREE UPON TURNING 23 YEARS OLD. THE PRESENT CASE WAS FILED BY THREE OF EDITH'S GRANDCHILDREN, EACH BEING BORN BEFORE THEIR MOTHER REACHED 23 YEARS OF AGE. BECAUSE OF THE UNAMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE OF THE DEVISE, THE COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY DECIDED THAT IT MUST "DOOM[] ESTHER, DUDLEY, AND NANCY JANE TO SLAVERY, BECAUSE, AT THEIR BIRTHS, THEIR MOTHERS WERE SLAVES, AND THE WILL CONTAINS NO PROVISION AS TO THEMSELVES."
February 10, 2024 at 3:58 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 9 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember and honor Narcissa. While Narcissa did receive a signed deed of manumission for her freedom, she was defrauded out of a $13,000 estate and died before she could receive justice from the courts.
The photo is a salmon orange solid background with black text. At the top of the photo, the text reads: Day 9. Black History Month. Below, in very large letters, the text reads: “Narcissa” Below these two names is a text box. The text reads: “NARCISSA'S EXECUTORS V. WATHAN, 41 KY. 241 (1842): AUSTIN HUBBARD, THE DECEDENT, DEVISED HIS ENTIRE ESTATE TO NARCISSA, AN ENSLAVED WOMAN, UNDER THE CONDITION THAT HER FREEDOM COULD BE PURCHASED ON REASONABLE TERMS FROM HER ENSLAVER, DR. ELLIOT. HUBBARD'S ESTATE WAS ESTIMATED TO BE AROUND $13,000. TWO MEN, ACTING AS FIDUCIARIES FOR THE ESTATE AND INTERESTED IN THE ESTATE FOR THEMSELVES DEFRAUDED NARCISSA AND CONVINCED HER TO RELINQUISH THE ESTATE TO THEM FOR $350 IN EXCHANGE FOR HER FREEDOM. WHILE NARCISSA DID RECEIVE A SIGNED DEED OF EMANCIPATION FROM ELLIOT, THE VALUE OF THE ESTATE WAS CONCEALED FROM HER AND SHE WAS DEFRAUDED INTO RELINQUISHING HER RIGHTS TO IT. NARCISSA DIED BEFORE THE CASE WAS RESOLVED. THE COURT OF APPEALS DETERMINED THAT THE
February 9, 2024 at 3:57 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 8 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we honor Ann Bell and her unnamed children, who attempted, unsuccessfully, to claim their freedom by submitting to the Court the will of their deceased enslaver.
The photo is a cream solid background with black text. At the top in a box the text reads: “Day 8. Black History Month.” Below, in large letters, is the name Ann Bell. Below the name is a text box of smaller text. The text reads: “BELL V. GREENFIELD, 5 D.C. 669, 5 CRANCH 669 (1840): ANN BELL, AN ENSLAVED WOMAN, AND HER CHILDREN, CLAIMED THEIR FREEDOM BY SUBMITTING A PAPER PURPORTING TO BE THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF THEIR ENSLAVER, GABRIEL GREENFIELD. HOWEVER, THE U.S. CIRCUIT COURT IN D.C. REFUSED TO ALLOW THE PAPER TO BE READ FOR THE JURY FOR THE MANUMISSION OF ANN BELL AND HER CHILDREN.” Below the text box is the social media handle @CitingSlavery and the website www.citingslavery.org.
February 8, 2024 at 2:36 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 7 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember Albert, who was allowed to escape his enslavement while being hired out to the defendants.

To learn more, visit: cite.case.law/ky/41/465/ (pending upload to CSP database)
The photo is a blue solid background with white text. At the top of the photo, the text reads: “Day 7. Black History Month.” Below, in very large letters, the text reads: “Albert.” name is a larger text box, which reads: “EWING V. GIST, 41 KY. 465 (1842): THE PLAINTIFF HIRED THE ENSLAVED PERSON ALBERT TO THE DEFENDANTS FOR FIVE DAYS WORK FOR $110. THE DEFENDANTS FAILED TO RETURN ALBERT TO HIS ENSLAVERS, SO THE PLAINTIFF FILED THIS SUIT TO RECOVER FOR DAMAGES. DURING TRIAL, THE JURY FOUND ONE OF THE DEFENDANTS NEGLIGENT AS HE ALLOWED ALBERT TO ESCAPE. BECAUSE ALBERT "COULD NOT BE DISTINGUISHED FROM A WHITE MAN,” HIS VALUE WAS HIGHER THAN OTHER ENSLAVED PERSONS. THE LOWER COURT'S VERDICT IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFF AND AMOUNT RECOVERED BY PLAINTIFF WAS AFFIRMED BY THE COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY.”
February 7, 2024 at 1:42 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Day 6 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we honor Monroe, whose monetary value as a hired enslaved person was at issue in Brooks v. Smith (1857). Monroe died during his one-year term of being hired out to the Plaintiff.
The photo is a dark green solid background with white text. At the top in a box the text reads: “Day 6. black History Month.” Below, in large letters, is the name Monroe. Below the name is a text box of smaller text. The text reads: “BROOKS V. SMITH, 21 GA. 261 (1857): THE PLAINTIFF RENTED OUT THE LABOR OF AN ENSLAVED PERSON NAMED MONROE, TO COME WITH HIS BLACKSMITH TOOLS, TO THE DEFENDANT FOR ONE YEAR FOR THE SUM OF $400. MONROE DIED TWO MONTHS INTO THAT YEAR. THE LEGAL DISPUTE CONCERNED A CLAUSE STATING THAT IF MONROE DIED DURING THAT YEAR WITH DEFENDANT, THE DEFENDANT WOULD ONLY HAVE TO PAY FOR THE TIME MONROE LIVED, RATHER THAN THE ENTIRE TERM. ON APPEAL, THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA HELD FOR THE PLAINTIFF, CITING TO PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE AND HUMANITY TO ENSURE THAT HIRERS WILL CARE FOR THE ENSLAVED PERSONS THEY HIRE.”
February 6, 2024 at 3:35 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
⚠️ Trigger Warning for assault upon an enslaved person ⚠️

Today is Day 5 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember Nat, who was assaulted by her enslaver and received no justice through the U.S. legal system.
The photo is a white solid background with black text. At the top of the photo, the text reads: “Day 5. Black History Month.” Below, in very large letters, the text reads: “Nat.” Below this name is text that reads in bold italics: “Trigger Warning: Assault.” Two caution symbols are on either side of this text warning. Below the text warning is a larger text box, which reads: “IN U.S. V. BROCKETT, 2 D.C. 441 (1823) NAT'S ENSLAVER WAS CHARGED FOR CRUELLY, INHUMANLY, AND MALICIOUSLY ASSAULTING HER. THE JURY RETURNED THE FOLLOWING VERDICT: "WE OF THE JURY FIND THE TRAVERSER NOT GUILTY OF THE COUNTS AS STATED IN THE INDICTMENT, BUT RECOMMEND THAT THE COURT SHOULD EXPRESS THEIR STRONG DISAPPROBATION OF SIMILAR CONDUCT. C. GRIFFITH, FOREMAN.'”Below the text box is further information about the Project, including the social media handle @CitingSlavery and website www.citingslavery.org.
February 5, 2024 at 2:00 PM
citingslavery.bsky.social
Today is Day 4 of the Citing Slavery Project’s “29 Days of Remembrance for Black History Month.” Today, we remember Nancy and Ben — two children who were enslaved and sold.
www.citingslavery.org/court_cases/...

#citingslaveryproject #legalhistory #blackhistory #blackhistorymonth #blackhistory365
The photo is a light blue solid background with black text. At the top of the photo, the text reads: “Day 4. Black History Month.” Below, in very large letters, the text reads: “Nancy & Ben.” Below this name is a text box that reads: DYE V. WALL, 6 GA. 584 (1849) WAS A BREACH OF WARRANTY CASE. THE PLAINTIFF PURCHASED FROM THE DEFENDANT TWO YOUNG ENSLAVED CHILDREN, NAMED NANCY (12 YEARS OLD) AND BEN (11 YEARS OLD). THE PLAINTIFF PAID $680 IN TOTAL. THE PLAINTIFF ALLEGED THAT THE DEFENDANT SELLER FALSELY WARRANTED BEN TO BE OF SOUND MIND WHEN THIS WAS NOT THE CASE. THE ISSUE BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA WAS WHETHER THE WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF THE SALE, CONTAINING THE WARRANTY, WAS ADMISSIBLE IN TRIAL. THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA RULED THAT THE BILL OF SALE WAS ADMISSIBLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVING THE SALE OF THE ENSLAVED OCCURRED. THIS CASE HAS BEEN CITED 8 TIMES, MOST RECENTLY IN 2000 IN ALBANY UROLOGY CLINIC, P.C. V. CLEVELAND (272 GA. 296).”
February 4, 2024 at 8:53 PM