• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Yale
    • Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Yale
    • Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of openYLSCommunitiesPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Pandora's Box: Slave Character on Trial in the Antebellum Deep South

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    18_7YaleJL_Human267_1995_.pdf
    Size:
    3.017Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Author
    Gross, Ariela
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/7672
    Abstract
    Jurists in the antebellum American South considered slaves to have the "double character of person and property" under the law, which generally meant that slaves were persons when accused of a crime, and property the rest of the time. Indeed, when slave buyers felt their newly acquired human property to be "defective" physically or morally, they sued the sellers for breach of warranty - just as they would over a defective horse or piece of machinery. Similarly, slave owners sued hirers, overseers, and other white men who beat or neglected their slaves for damage to their property. Yet in these mundane civil disputes, the parties in the courtroom brought into question, and gave legal meaning to, the "character" as well as the resistant behavior of enslaved people who persisted in acting as people. Of course, horses could run away or be recalcitrant without being human, leading one historian to suggest that slaves influenced the law merely in the way that horses influenced the law. Indeed, some legal historians have denied the existence of any "person/property" tension in the law of slavery at all, arguing that slaves were simply property with human qualities. From this perspective, any contradictions in slavery law can be explained by slaveholders' efforts to shape the law instrumentally to serve their own economic interests. Yet to argue that there were tensions in the law is not to suggest that the law did not bolster the slave economy, nor is it to suggest that the typical Southern slaveholder or jurist suffered great angst over treating people as things. Rather, I will argue that slaves themselves influenced the law far more than things or horses ever could. In civil disputes such as warranty suits, slaves forced the law to consider their character, challenging slaveholders' self-conception as masters and statesmen. In other words, these cases mattered to white Southerners because their self-understandings as white masters depended on their relationships to black slaves; putting black character on trial called white character into question as well.
    Collections
    Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.