STUDENTS!!!
You were given a copy of the article below. You were to read it. At the end of this post, you will find two (2) questions. Please respond to these questions in the comment section of this post. THIS WILL HELP YOU WITH YOUR JIM CROW ARTICLE.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Trials of Racial Identity in 19th Century America
Author: Ariela Gross, University of Southern California
Full Time Count: 05:12
In 1857 Alexina Morrison, a slave in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana ran away from
her master and threw herself on the mercy of the jailer of the county jail, or the parish jail
as it is known in Louisiana. She told him that she had been kidnapped into slavery and
did not belong in slavery, and he believed her. He told the court later that she had blue
eyes and flaxen hair, and he believed that she was white and that she had been wrongly
enslaved. He took her home to live with his family, and introduced her into white
society. She slept in bed with his daughter and went to balls with the neighbors, and by
the time that her master came to Jefferson Parish to file his answer to her lawsuit at the
local court, she had won over the community to so such an extent that he appealed for a
change of venue. He said he had been surrounded by a lawless mob and that he feared for
his life.
Alexina Morrison's lawsuit went through three trials in Jefferson Parish,
Louisiana. She won the first trial, the second ended in a hung jury, and we don't know
what happened in the final appeal because it was right when the Louisiana Supreme
Court doors were closed by the occupying Union Army. But Alexina Morrison's case –
while surprising I think to many people today who don't know about such cases – was not
an uncommon occurrence in local courts across the South. From the beginning of the
Republic through the Civil War, similar cases happened after the Civil War as well and
even in the North. They were cases where the central issue that the witnesses and
litigants were discussing in a courtroom was whether someone was black or white or
Indian. What was their racial identity?
These questions should have been decided simply by statutes. Louisiana, like
many southern states, defined a Negro by statute as a person with at least one grandparent
of African origin. This is the kind of statute that was on the books in not only southern
but many northern states as well. But in practice, statutory rules about ancestry couldn't
decide someone's racial identify. In fact, the witnesses and the jury couldn't see the
ancestors and the person's blood when they're put in terms of blood, because in fact all
our blood is red. So these factors couldn't decide the case, and what really mattered at
trial was not only how a person appeared, but how he or she behaved and who he or she
associated with. In particular for men, it was whether they performed acts of citizenship
and for women whether they upheld honor and virtue, particularly sexual virtue. In
Alexina Morrison's case, people came in and talked about how she looked, how she
carried herself, and how she had appeared at balls. They said she must be white because
she slept with our daughter, we would have known. As one witness in the case said, a
Louisiana native knows African blood the way an alligator knows a storm is coming. So
they had this idea of racial common sense.
We know it when we see it, and we know it based on performance, not really on
biology. We know it in the way people perform their identity. Performance for men was
tied up in ideas about citizenship – so long that a man who could prove that he had voted,
he had mustered in the militia, and he had sat on a jury was a man who must be white.
Whiteness was defined through exercise of the rights of citizenship, and it seems like a
strange kind of circularity in order to claim rights of freedom you have to be white. You
have to show that you behave like a citizen. But that circularity made sense to
Antebellum southerners because they believed so deeply in that equation of whiteness
and citizenship. That, I think, is the legacy of these racial identity trials that we still have
to reckon with today and break that link between the idea of whiteness and fitness.
QUESTIONS
1. How were nineteenth century court cases about racial identity suppose to be decided? How were they actually decided?
2. What does the history of nineteenth-century racial-identity trials suggest about how Americans understood “Race” in that era? What were some of the historical consequences of nineteenth-century definitions of race?
The cases were suppose to be determine by the Supreme Court who determines a huiman's Bill of Rights. This course were handled locally in the Jefferson Parish and they determined that she was free by the way she behaves instead of investigating her lineage. The trials of 19th century suggest that Black people were seen as ignorant and could not pocess characteristics of a good citizen. Some of the historical consequences of 19th century is that many people are ashamed to claim their true identity. they rather claim another race becuase they do not want to be looked down upon.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. In court cases of racial identity it was defined as a person having at least one Negro grandparent. But they it was decided based on how he or she behaved and who he or she associated with.
ReplyDelete2. Well it describes how race is not defined by blood, but by culture. Culture can be defined as the attitudes and behavior characteristic of a particular social group. Culture also involves the ethical dilemma of that particular group that measures right or wrong according to that race, which is a stereotype.
In stereotyping, it involves a public belief about specific social groups, or types of individuals. Thus, the historical consequence of nineteenth-century definitions of race is not having a clear definition of race because it is clouded by institutionalized ideas of a person, which tends to contradict the rules that are made up on the definition of being that particular race. For example, the statute is “a Negro by statute as a person with at least one grandparent”.
It is clear that Alexina Morrison is an African American, but she is passing. According to Anne Dalke and Laura Blankenship, “Racial passing is a phrase used to describe the act of a person of one ethnicity (usually a minority) choosing to identify with another ethnicity (usually white), thus, racial passing was done as a method of survival, or done to “level the playing field.” (para 5). This allowed for a person to have better opportunities to provide for themselves and their families.
1. The court cases of the 19th century about racial identity were to be decided based on blood fraction, invisible blackness or appearance and association. Cases were actually decided using the color line.
ReplyDelete2. The history of nineteenth-century racial-identity trials suggested that Americans didn't understand race in that era. The historical consequences of the definition of race reflects an acceptance of the deepest forms and degrees of divisiveness and carries the implication that differences among groups are so great that they cannot be transcended.
in the nineteenth century racial identity cases were supposed to be decided in court and in this case the supreme court. but it wasnt because they let her off cause of her blue eyes and flaxen hair. they let her off becuase of how she acted and cared herself. they understood race as not of blood or ancestry but of how they cared theirselves, how they acted, and who they associated with.
ReplyDelete1.In the nineteenth century racial identity cases were decided in court. In Morrison's case what really mattered was how she appeared and behaved and who she associated with during the time. Because she carried herself so well the people of Jefferson parish had no reason to believe she was anything other than white.
ReplyDelete2.Racial idenity was defined in many ways but in Louisiana people thought if at least one grandparent had a African orgin you were a negro.
Krystle Woods
ReplyDelete1. In the 19th Century,court cases about racial identity were decided based upon how a person acted and associated with others. Their behavior, association with others and their performance. Originally, one is supposed to be determined black if they had at least one grandparent who had African orgin, nevertheless, this was based on others feeelings about performance.
2. The racial idenity trials in the 19th century simply suggested that a clear understanding about race was not clear. There are many conseques that come to mind, however, I will only speak on one. People, still to this day, combind racial idenity with social acceptance. You have to act a certian way to considered "acting black" "acting white". These thoughts and actions have been passed down from actions in these types cases.
Jackqualine Barnes
ReplyDelete1. 19th century racial identity court cases were supposed to be determined by the courts. Color and association would be how they would determine ones racial identity. The demeanor of the person would count them as either white or black.
2. Racial identity trials in the 19th century's understanding of race was confusing, which made the determining unfair. Consequences were darker complexions being denied of work, and a fair skinned person being able to get the job. It caused a division between the black race which is still ugly and apparent today.
Malcolm Pearson
ReplyDelete1. The cases of racial identity in the days of Jim crow were purely based off color and the perception of white society. These cases and others like Plessy v. Ferguson enable the Willie Lynch theory the affect it had on the southern society. One just had to perceive that they acted like American citizens in ordered to be considered free.
2. The cases of racial identity placed the country and the court system under major scrutiny. The American society has always followed majority rule and the rules of christianity. Due to racism the case of Dred v. Scott and Plessy place civil rights in the supreme court until Brown v. Board in 1954 where Thurgood Marshall and fellow attorney's overtured the "seperate but equal" clause. The Civil Rights movemnt was created by these cases of racial injustice.
In the 19th century racial identity court cases were decided by the courts. Instead it was determined by culture.
ReplyDeleteDark skinned people were discriminated against more than people who were fair skinned. People who lived in Louisiana thought that if one grandparent had African origin then they were a negro.