Abstract

abstract:

This article demonstrates that the verdicts reached in the 1808 murder trial of ex-slaves John Joyce and Peter Matthias applied procedural rules like that which applied to other inhabitants of the state as required by the 1780 Gradual Abolition Act. The defendants' trial used due process and equal treatment under the law that then prevailed. What did not occur was the fullest application of case precedents or of provisions available under the commonwealth's 1794 Better Preventing of Crimes Act, which were within the discretion of the presiding judge. That their sentence was not just and equitable in present-day terms should not surprise any readers, but neither should the fact that those verdicts went largely unchallenged by contemporaries both in the black community and among abolitionists. This article hopes to illuminate that difference as it examines the complexities of the early nineteenth-century courtroom in Pennsylvania.

pdf

Additional Information

ISSN
2153-2109
Print ISSN
0031-4528
Pages
pp. 155-194
Launched on MUSE
2019-04-11
Open Access
No
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.