 In the matter of the Petition of William M. Parkinson for a Writ of Habeas Corpus |
|
The habeas corpus petition of William M. Parkinson shows legal challenges related to child custody in the nineteenth century. In this case, a father used habeas corpus in an attempt to retrieve his nine-year-old son from his ex-wife and her new husband. The child's fate is unknown.
|
| John Heo v. Robert H. Milroy |
|
In this habeas suit, John Heo was arrested by an Indian agent after he refused to reside on the reservation with his wife and children. Heo argued that he had severed his tribal relations, as had his parents, and that they never lived on a reservation or accepted government annuities. Despite "constantly living with the whites engaged in the pursuits of civilized life" and having "at no time lived with any tribe of Indians" or "acknowledged himself a member of any Indian tribe," the judge ruled in favor of the Indian agent, and Heo remained in custody.
|
| John Jones v. Robert F. Logan |
|
When John Jones was arrested as a fugitive from slavery, he petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus. Born free in Pennsylvania, upon hearing the facts of the case, Jones was released by the court.
|
| Julia, alias Mary Ann v. Robert Duncan |
|
This freedom suit was brought on behalf of Julia, a child under the age of 21 who was unlawfully enslaved in St. Louis by the man who sold her free mother into slavery in Louisiana. Although the court granted Julia her freedom, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by her mother two years later shows that Julia was still being held by her enslaver.
|
| Massachusetts Personal Liberty Act |
|
Passed in reaction to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, the Massachusetts Personal Liberty Act was among laws passed by Northern states in an attempt to protect Black residents from unwarranted arrest.
|
| Milly v. Mathias Rose |
|
In this freedom suit, Milly sued for her freedom on behalf of herself and her two children Eliza and Bob. Milly argued that she should be free on account of being held in slavery in the free Illinois Territory.
|
| Nan Oy v. Territory of Washington |
|
The habeas corpus petition of Nan Oy shows legal challenges related to carceral confinement and immigration in the nineteenth century. In this case, Nan Oy was arrested crossing the U.S. border to be with her husband, a U.S. citizen. She was ultimately deported.
|
| Opinion of Chief Justice Hornblower on the Fugitive Slave Law |
|
Justice Hornblower’s opinion in the State v. Sheriff of Burlington County called into question the authority of the Fugitive Slave Act. The opinion calls into question discrepancies between the federal law and state statute. This opinion is over the case of the Helmsley family. Alexander Helmsley and his wife, Nancy, were a free black couple living in New Jersey. Someone accused them of being fugitive slaves. Under the Fugitive Slave Act, the family should have been sent back to their former enslaver; however, New Jersey’s Personal Liberty Law protected them from being extradited from the state. Hornblower’s opinion advocated for following the state personal liberty law over following the federal law.
|
| Prigg v. Pennsylvania |
|
The case of Prigg v. Pennsylvania evaluated the legality of Pennsylvania's personal liberty laws. Margaret Morgan moved from Maryland to Pennsylvania after being granted her freedom. When relatives of her previous enslaver wanted to reclaim her, they sent Edward Prigg to Pennsylvania to find her. Pennsylvania courts found Prigg guilty of violating the state's personal liberty laws, but the Supreme Court ruled that the federal fugitive slave laws overrule state laws.
|
| Somerset v. Stewart |
|
This case heard before the English Court of King's Bench determined that slavery was unsupported by English Common Law and that no enslaved person could be forced out of England to be sold into slavery. James Sommerset was an enslaved person who had been purchased by Charles Stewart in Boston, Massachusetts, then taken to England. Sommerset later escaped, and Stewart had him captured and imprisoned on a ship headed to Jamaica. Sommerset's godparents applied for a writ of habeas corpus. Following the court’s decision, enslaved people in the American Colonies filed freedom suits on Mansfield's ruling.
|
| The True Facts in the Case of Felix Quander |
|
In August 1879, Felix Quander was shot and injured by law enforcement officers while evading arrest. In a letter to the Editor of the National Republican newspaper in D.C., Quander's attorney describes the event, as well as previous incidents that lead up to the shooting and capture of Quander. Related newspaper coverage of the ordeal and subsequent court case follows. While the National Republican and Evening Star tend to display varying degrees of sympathy for Quander, the Alexandria Gazette is harsh in its judgment of the man and his reputation.
|
| United States, ex rel. Standing Bear, v. George Crook |
|
In this case, Judge Elmer S. Dundy ruled that "an Indian is a person within the meaning of the laws of the United States," and that they were entitled to the right of expatriation. Standing Bear and 29 other Ponca had left their reservation in Indian Territory without the permission of the federal government and returned to Nebraska. They were later arrested and petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus, which was granted. Judge Dundy's opinion led to the release of the Ponca petitioners.
|
| Yarborough v. Alvarado |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court overturned a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that stated that youth and inexperience with law enforcement should be accounted for when evaluating custody. In the majority opinion, the Supreme Court held that previous rulings had rejected reliance on factors such as age and inexperience in custody analysis.
|