Race Distinctions in American LawStephenson, Gilbert Thomas
History
Race Distinctions in American Law
Stephenson, Gilbert Thomas
African Americans -- Politics and government; Law -- United States -- History; United States -- Race relations
The Constitution[604] of Maryland of 1867 provided that no person should
be incompetent as a witness on account of race or color unless
thereafter so declared by an act of the general assembly. The general
assembly appears not to have acted.
Mississippi,[605] in 1865, provided that freedmen, free Negroes, and
mulattoes, should be competent in all civil cases to which a freedman,
free Negro, or mulatto was a party, and in criminal cases in which the
crime charged was alleged to have been committed by a white person upon
a freedman, free Negro, or mulatto. But in 1867, Negroes were given the
right to testify on the same terms as white people.[606] In 1865, South
Carolina[607] declared that Negroes might testify in cases to which a
person of color was a party. Tennessee,[608] the same year, provided
that Negroes and Indians should be competent as witnesses “in as full
measure as such persons are by an act of Congress competent witnesses in
all the courts of the United States.”
The Constitution[609] of Texas of 1866 contains the following section:
“Africans and their descendants shall not be prohibited, on account of
their color or race, from testifying orally, as witnesses, in any case,
civil or criminal, involving the right of injury to, or crime against,
any of them in person or property, under the same rules of evidence that
may be applicable to the white race; the credibility of their testimony
to be determined by the court or jury hearing the same; and the
legislature shall have power to authorize them to testify as witnesses
in all other cases, under such regulations that may be prescribed, as to
facts hereafter occurring.” In pursuance of this authority, the
legislature[610] enacted that persons of color should not testify except
where a prosecution was against a person of color or where the alleged
offence was against the person or property of a person of color. But in
1868, the Supreme Court[611] of Texas held that the first section of the
Civil Rights Bill gave Negroes the right to testify, and in 1871 the
legislature[612] said that in the courts of that State there shall be no
exclusion of any witness on account of color.
Virginia,[613] in 1866, provided that Negroes and Indians should be
competent to testify in cases in which a Negro or Indian was a party.
The testimony of Negroes had to be “_ore tenus_, and not by deposition.”
The next year, this law was repealed and a statute[614] enacted that
colored persons should be competent to testify “as if they were white.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account