Description:

Slavery - Massachusetts Supreme Court Justice R.A. Chapman discusses 1860s court case Edmund Jackson vs. Wendell Phillips, slavery, and women's rights.

Archive comprised of 25pp AM regarding the 1860s court case of Edmund Jackson vs. Wendell Phillips, along with two ALS dated from Springfield, MA in 1857 and 1858, and both signed by the judge Reuben Atwater Chapman (1801-1873) as "R.A. Chapman".

25pp manuscript, probably a draft of legal document, inscribed entirely in Chapman's hand, subtitled "Edmund Jackson Ex. Vs. Wendell Phillips + al". All written on lined likely notebook paper with embossed "Congress G & T Mfg. Co" blind stamp in upper left corner. In near fine condition, with some darkening to top page. Loose handwriting, cross-outs, and several addenda suggest these were notes on the court case. Each manuscript page measures 7.75" x 9.75".

Chief Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Court Horace Gray (1828-1902) adjudicated the court case of Edmund Jackson vs. Wendell Phillips et al first introduced in January 1867, but his predecessor on the Supreme Court Reuben Atwater Chapman (1801-1873) had many things to say about the matter. This court case is the subject of our manuscript which touches upon issues of slavery, women's rights, and universal suffrage. Chapman had served as Massachusetts Supreme Court Chief Justice between 1868 and 1873, and Gray was his successor on the bench.

In 1861, Boston abolitionist Francis Jackson (1789-1861) died, leaving a $17,000 bequest in trust for the promotion of abolition and women's rights. Francis Jackson appointed significant and influential New England activists like Susan B. Anthony (1820-1906), William Lloyd Garrison (1805-1879), Wendell Phillips (1811-1884), Lydia Maria Child (1802-1880), Lucy Stone (1818-1893), and others as his trustees.

Francis Jackson's last will and testament committed $10,000 "for the preparation and circulation of books, newspapers, the delivery of speeches, lectures, and such other means, as, in their judgment, will create a public sentiment that will put an end to negro slavery in this country"; $2,000 "for the benefit of fugitive slaves who may escape from the slaveholding states of this infamous Union from time to time"; and $5,000 "to secure the passage of laws granting women, whether married or unmarried, the right to vote; to hold office; to hold, manage, and devise property; and all other civil rights enjoyed by men; and for the preparation and circulation of books, the delivery of lectures, and such other means as they may judge best ... ".

Following the 1863 abolition of slavery, Francis Jackson's brother Edmund and other family members tried to overturn parts of his bequest. They argued that, since slavery was now a non-issue, parts of the bequest were void and that the money should revert to Jackson's heirs. Chief Justice Gray ultimately ruled that Jackson's bequest was still valid. Gray's ruling was based on the cy-pres legal principle, which allowed the bequest to be changed so that it followed the testator's original intent. In 1861, Jackson's bequest funded abolitionist lectures and sheltered fugitive slaves; after 1867, Jackson's bequest was adapted by the court to serve recently freed slaves and persons of African descent in Boston.

In his manuscript, Chapman explored the legal precedents which supported the upholding of Francis Jackson's bequest. He posed such questions as: what constituted public charity? what is the judiciary's role in modern American society? what is the role of public policy? Chapman resolved that the Courts should preserve the values in the Constitution and interpret its laws, not reverse public policy or influence opinion. " ... the Court will refuse its aid as to any bequest the object of which appears to be in contamination of public policy as it is now established, and will declare the bequest void ... it would be sufficient to declare it void as being contrary from existing policy ... It is not the province of courts to ? into the alleged defects of an existing system", Chapman wrote.

Chapman's law theories can be abstruse and overly rhetorical at times, but he offered some well-defined opinions about slavery and women's rights. Regarding slavery, Chapman cited the court case of the Commonwealth vs. Aves, in which his fellow Massachusetts justice Lemuel Shaw (1789-1861) ruled that any enslaved persons traveling to free states became free based on "the customs of the country". Chapman was legally opposed to slavery, as he also was personally; he attempted to help John Brown after the aborted raid at Harper's Ferry. In Chapman's Massachusetts, public opinion largely held that slavery was abhorrent, and thus disseminating anti-slavery literature would not change public policy and "must be regarded as public charity". "As to the states where slavery exists, if the [Jackson's] trustees violate their laws, they can enforce them within their own limits. But surely no state can claim a legal or moral right to restrain liberty of speech or liberty of the press in Massachusetts".

Chapman's views on women's rights inclined him to disagree strongly with the third codicil of Jackson's will. Chapman advocated for traditional gender roles, and feared that granting more rights to women, such as enabling them to vote or hold property, would "make women more masculine and men more feminine". To Chapman, gender equity was an "infidel philosophy" imported from Europe that was "contrary to the existing probity of the law".

A fascinating archive treating the controversial issues behind the Edmund Jackson vs. Wendell Phillips court case!

Accepted Forms of Payment:

American Express, MasterCard, Money Order / Cashiers Check, Paypal, Personal Check, Visa, Wire Transfer

Shipping

Applicable shipping and handling charges will be added to the invoice. ***PLEASE NOTE: IF YOU WOULD LIKE YOUR SHIPMENT TO BE SENT TO AN ADDRESS OTHER THAN THE ONE YOU HAVE ON FILE WITH INVALUABLE, YOU WILL NEED TO INFORM US OF THIS AS SOON AS PAYMENT IS SUBMITTED FOR YOUR WINNINGS*** Shipping and handling costs are competitive as we maintain discounted contracts with FedEx. If you have any questions, contact University Archives prior to bidding. After payment has been made in full, University Archives will ship your purchase within 5 business days following receipt of full payment for item. We currently ship via FedEx but if your purchase is shipping to a P.O. Box, we ship via USPS. All items are insured. We ship from our offices in Westport, CT. We may opt to use a third party shipper for very fragile, bulky or oversized items. Items requiring third party shipping will be denoted in the item description. Packages shipped internationally will have full value declared on shipping form. International buyers will be responsible for any customs fees incurred.

Please remember that the buyer is responsible for all shipping costs from University Archives' offices in Westport, CT to the buyer's door. Please see full Terms and Conditions of Sale.

University Archives

You agree to pay a buyer's premium of 20% and any applicable taxes and shipping.

View full terms and conditions

Bid Increments
From: To: Increments:
$0 $99 $10
$100 $299 $20
$300 $499 $25
$500 $999 $50
$1,000 $1,999 $100
$2,000 $2,999 $200
$3,000 $4,999 $250
$5,000 $9,999 $500
$10,000 $19,999 $1,000
$20,000 $49,999 $2,500
$50,000 + $5,000