State v. Mann

In class today, we witnessed a recreation of the famous Supreme Court case between the state of North Carolina and John Mann. The facts agreed upon were that John Mann, a slave owner shot a slave named Lidia in the back when she ran away. The state of North Carolina charged Mann with a fine of ten dollars. Mann, however, was not pleased because he believes his rights were violated as a slave owner. When the argument began, I had an immediate bias towards State; I did not want Mann to win this lawsuit. Being that slavery is now considered one of the greatest evils of mankind and a painful stain on America's legacy, it's easy to think the way I did. But when arguing this case through the lens of their time (1830), it's not as easy to pick sides.

State's biggest argument was that Mann was not the owner of the slave, and no white man has the right to harm a slave that is not their own. They also focused on cases outside of the U.S. like the one between William Hodge and his slave that took place in the British Virgin Islands.

Mann stated that punishment is in order because it keeps slaves in line. Most importantly, he looked at older cases or precedents, and used the law in his favor. Slavery was legal in the South at this time. Punishing a slave was also legal. Since Lidia was not acting in accordance to the law by trying to escape, she is at fault. This means Mann has the right to take action. Man won this case, and his fine of ten dollars was returned by the state.

In the end, the law is the law. It is imperative that you set aside your own feelings to stand by the law or else the validity of all laws, and the very foundation of America, is at stake.