A joint project of the Graduate School, Peabody College, and the Jean & Alexander Heard Library

Title page for ETD etd-03292013-113550


Type of Document Dissertation
Author Hardin, William Fernandez
Author's Email Address hardinw@gmail.com
URN etd-03292013-113550
Title Litigating the Lash: Quaker Emancipator Robert Pleasants, the Law of Slavery and the Meaning of Manumission in Revolutionary and Early National Virginia.
Degree PhD
Department History
Advisory Committee
Advisor Name Title
Richard Blackett Committee Chair
Dan Sharfstein Committee Member
Daniel Usner Committee Member
David Carlton Committee Member
Keywords
  • Freed slaves
  • estate law
  • George Wythe
  • Equity
  • Common Law
  • John Marshall
  • wills
  • Spencer Roane
  • Pendleton
  • free people of color
  • Curles
  • Henrico
  • rule against perpetuties
  • emancipation
  • Thomas Jefferson
  • African American
  • pacifism
  • proslavery
  • Benezet
  • Chancery
Date of Defense 2013-03-14
Availability unrestricted
Abstract
This dissertation seeks to throw open the courtroom doors and show how ordinary people—black and white, free and enslaved—shaped the law of manumission at a critical moment in American history. It is a detailed legal, cultural and family history of the Virginia case of Pleasants v. Pleasants (1799), in which Robert Pleasants sued his nieces, nephews, siblings and cousins for the freedom of over four hundred slaves in the Virginia Court of Appeals, the state’s highest tribunal in the largest manumission case in American history. The court upheld Pleasants’s claim that his father’s and brother’s wills had set the slaves free. During the dispute, the family members advanced legal arguments and notions of property that found their way into the legal proceedings. The background of the case—Quaker antislavery, the events of the Revolution, the actions of the enslaved, and popular understandings of law and justice—became the context in which judges had to apply the law. Formalistic property concerns helped to mask considerations of race and freedom, but could not completely cover the judges’ uncertainty as to the ambiguous relationship between law and slavery. The legal elite had to disentangle property rights from the principles of equality and by doing so, they fashioned the legal ligaments necessary for a slaveholding republic by defining manumission in terms of a master’s property interest, rather than a slave’s right to freedom.
Files
  Filename       Size       Approximate Download Time (Hours:Minutes:Seconds) 
 
 28.8 Modem   56K Modem   ISDN (64 Kb)   ISDN (128 Kb)   Higher-speed Access 
  HardinWF.pdf 1.30 Mb 00:05:59 00:03:05 00:02:41 00:01:20 00:00:06

Browse All Available ETDs by ( Author | Department )

If you have more questions or technical problems, please Contact LITS.