The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1849-03-21
Supreme Court of louisiana.


Act of 1876, establishing tribunal composed of two
justices Of the peace and ten SHAREHOLDERS for the trial of
slaves charged with offences crimes not in conflict
with that article of the Constitution Slaves
titled peremptoy challenges, but they may challenge
for cause that night. however must be exercised before
the Court is So far crimes misdemeanoE and
offences concerned slaves considered persons
by the laws of Louisiana Objections to Jurors,
moned to sit upon the trial of slaves for of the
legal qualifications must be made before the tribunal is
sworn, otherwise they will be considered as waived
THE STATE OF LOUISIANA u.s. SLAVE Dick. .
/ Appeal from Tribunal composed of t,co Justices Of
the Peace and ten OF Slapes, of the Parish of
81. Idmmany. ;. No 1924. -. KING, J. Per Gu
riam: The defendant was convicted of the crime
of murder, alledged to have been committed upon
the person of slave, and has appealed from the
sentence pronounced upon him.
After the Court, composed of two justices and
ten owners of slaves, had been sworn and organ
lied, the defendant, by his counsel, excepted to IFS
jurisdiction on the ground that the law creating
the tribunal violated the constitution of the State
which guarantees to all persons an impartial trial
by jury of the vicnage, and that the only jury
known to the constitution is one composed of
twelve jurors in the selection of whom the accused
is entitled to the right of peremptorv challenge.
The plea was overruled and bill of exceptions
was taken to the opinion OF the Court.
The 10th article OF the Constitution of the State
is relied on in support of this position. One of its
clauses provides that the accused shall have a
speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the
vicinage." The same provision is found in the
constitution Of 1872 Art 6, Sec IS, and was taken
from the constitution of the u S., Art. g. Sec. 2,
and amendments Art s.
AT the time that the constitution of 1912 wa
adopted, the Act of the 4th May, 1905, Sec. 80,
introducing the Common Law method of trial,
rules of evidence and other proceedings in the
prosecution of crimes, was in force. The 47th
section of the act limited its operation to free per-
sons and declared that its provisions should not
eytend tn slaves There aluO ste1
Code of laws declaring the offences Of slaves and
creating tribunal for the trial of offenders COM
posed of the county judge and not less than three
nor more than five freeholders in capital cases.
The tribunal provided by this act was several
times modified by different acts of the Legislature,
commencing in 1925 and extending down 10 1913.
But no one of the amendments accorded to slaves
a trial by jury in the in which that term is
used in the constitution. See B. and C. Dig, PIP.
81, Sec. IL SO, Sec. |; Acts of $780, D. l46 Sec.
8 Acts of 1843 p. 81.
The article of the Civil Code of 1903, which de-
cared that the rules for the police of slaves and
the punishment of their crimes are fixed by spe-
cia laws, was also in force when the old constitu-
ton was adopted. and has since been incorporated
into the Code of 1925, art. IT,
Thus, from the commencement of our legislation,
two distinct methods of trial have existed one ap-
plying exclusively 10 free persons, granting them
trial by jury; and the other extending to slaves to
whom jury has been denied. This distinction
existed when The constitution of 1912 was adopted
and continued down TO 1915, notwithstanding the
article which declared that :" the accused shall
have speedy public trial by an impartial jury of
the vicinage." The Uniform Interpretation given
to that article by the repeated legislative acts
which we have REFERRED and by tie tribunals a,
different times, created for the trial of slaves has
been that it does not extend to that class of often.
ders. The corresponding provision of the consttu-
ton of lS45 was adopted with full knowledge of
the Interpretation which it had received for more
thon md 81, il,
adopting the language of the old constitution, it
intended to adopt the Interpretation which it
had previously received. See the cases of McKer
Us. Ellis, 2 Annual, 1877, and Colt Us. O'Caaghan,
ibid, 100.
The act of 1916, under which the tribunal was
organized for the trial of the defendant in our opin
ion, stands in conflict with the constitution.
Under its provisions, slaves not entitled to per-
emptOry challenges. They may challenge for
cause, but the right must be exercised before the
Court is sworn. The State Us. Isaac, 3 Annual,
mot vet reported
The next position assumed is that slaves are not
treated as persons by our laws-that the statutes
providing for the punishment of their crimes are
all special and none of them declare the killing of
one slave by another7to be murder
The repeated acts of the Legislature declaring
slaves capable Of committing crimes, annexing
punishments to their offences, and creating tribu-
nails for the trial of the Offences must be considered
many recognitions that they are persons 1t is
difficult to conceive how crime be committed
by slave unless he be considered in law person.
But not left to inference on this point. The
first section of the Black Code speaks of slaves as
persons. They classed as persons in the Louis
lana Code, in the title treating of The distinction
Of persons" and were so classed in the Code of
1908, p. 10, art IL. They were also held to be |
persons by the late Court of Errors and Appeals in
the case of the State Us. Moore, Rob 52l
Considered as persons, there are at least two stat
utes under which the offence charged against the
ho richo no fret 10 III
section of the Black Code, B. & C. Dig, p. SO:
the second, the act of the 9TH of June 1906, B. &
c. Dig, p. 25l, annexing the punishment of death |
to the crime of murder There is no clause in the
act last referred to combining its operation to free
persons.
1t is next urged that it does not appear that the
two justices, or either of them, selected the ten
slaveowners to assist at the trial. that the per-
sons who sat the trial were slave-owners of the
Parish. These objections were not made in the |
Court below The prisoner had the right to object
to the want Of qualification of the jurors, and to
insist the tribunal being organized as directed
by law. But these objections must be urged before
the tribunal is sworn, or otherwise they will be
considered to have been waived. State ps Isaac, |
Annual 1t has further been objected that it does
not appear that the ten jurors were all sworn. We
think that The objection is not sustained by the |
record The judgement appealed from is therefore |
affirmed with costs. Attorney General Elmore |
for the State, appellee; Alfred Hennen for the de-
leUudHt anu dpptildut.
creditor whose debt has matued may sequerate
the property on which he has lien privilege, when
he can make the affidavit required by law.
WIN. GARDNER Us. SAMUEL H. SIMPLIFY.
Appeal from the Sirth Judicial District Court Par
ISL Of East Baton Rouge. No. l247. SLlDELL,
j.. Plaintiff was employed by defendant as his
overseer, in January l848 for the year ending on
the 4th January, lS49. 1.-The 9TH December,
1913, he sued out writ of sequestration, upon
affidavit charging that the crop of the preceding
year had been entirely removed that portion Of |
crop of the then present year had been shipped by
defendant, and that he was shipping and disposing
of the balance as fast as it was made: that the |
plaintiff had just to fear and believe that I'M
less writ of sequestration should be issued, the
entire crop would be removed beyond the jurisdcs
ton of the Court, in all probability out of the
State that sequestration was necessary to secure
his privilege, ETC. The affidavit also stated among
the reasons for the plaintiffs apprehension, that
the defendant had refused to give him any security
in case the property was removed.
laTav H.