Franklin v. South Carolina
Franklin v. South Carolina | |
---|---|
Holding | |
Franklin's rights were not violated since election commissioners are only required to select men of good moral character and that competent blacks are equally eligible with others | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinion | |
Majority | Day, joined by unanimous |
Franklin v. South Carolina, 218 U.S. 161 (1910) appealed the conviction of Pink Franklin for the murder of South Carolina
The case was the second time black South Carolina lawyers had appeared before the Supreme Court,
Events of the case
In 1907, African-American Pink Franklin was working as a contract farm laborer on the farm of Jake Thomas.[2] Thomas had given Franklin some of his wages in advance, but Franklin was unhappy with his contract and left the farm. Thomas asked the local police to intervene, and on July 29, 1907, at 3:00 AM, Constable Henry H. Valentine and Constable Carter came to Franklin's house.[3] A neighbor of Franklin's, Charles Spires, sometimes worked with Thomas and was on hand.[4] Upon the Constables' instruction, Spires asked Franklin to plow his field, possibly through a closed front door. Franklin said that he would not, and that he might later in the day.[5] Valentine broke into the house and was shot and killed by Franklin. Franklin, his wife, Patsy, and Constable Carter were also shot in the melee, all surviving.[6] Franklin's young son was also home.
The Franklins fled, afraid that they might be
The type of agricultural contract Franklin worked under was then and later called, "peonage laws". Franklin claimed that the constables broke into his house and did not identify themselves, and that he was acting in self-defense.[3] The prosecution claimed that the doors were open and that the constables did announce their presence and identify themselves.[4] Franklin's leaving the Thomas farm was legal, otherwise his contract would have, indeed, been illegal peonage, but the landowner had convinced officials to write a warrant for his arrest.[6] Franklin was sentenced to hang after the initial trial, a sentence that was confirmed in a resentencing in early September 1910, with a date set in December to give chance for further appeal – Moorer and Adams stated they would appeal.[7] The jury was all white and Moorer and Adams stated this was due to unconstitutional discrimination against blacks seeking to register to vote (and thus to be eligible for juries). It was reported that even trial judge Klugh believed that Franklin would not have been convicted if he were white.[2]
Appeal to the Supreme Court
The appeal was unsuccessful in South Carolina, and the case was appealed to the United States Supreme Court. Ex Attorney General
Sentence commuted
After the trial, Moorer and Adams were joined by many others in seeking other means to save Franklin. Moorer and Adams petitioned June 25, 1910 to commute Franklin's sentence from death to life in prison.
Franklin's death sentence was commuted to life on December 30, 1910 coming into effect January 6, 1911,
Aftermath
After his release, Franklin changed his name to Mack Rockingham and lived in Blackville, South Carolina with Patsy and two sons. He died in 1949.[2]
Pointing to the key role that Washington and his contacts played in the case, some point to the affair as a failure by
Peonage laws returned to the Supreme Court in 1911 when Alabama's peonage laws were overturned in Bailey v. Alabama.
See also
- Burke, Lewis W. Pink Franklin v. South Carolina: The NAACP's First Case July, 2014 American Journal of Legal History 54 Am. J. Legal Hist. 265
References
- ^ Burke, William Lewis. Matthew J. Perry: The Man, His Times, and His Legacy. Univ of South Carolina Press, 2004, p23
- ^ a b c d e f Hine, William C. Pink Franklin: NAACP’s first legal case, The Times and Democrat, Orangeburg, SC, May 18, 2014
- ^ a b c d Annual Report of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Issue 10 Front Cover National Association for the Advancement of Colored People N.A.A.C.P., 1920
- ^ a b c Franklin v South Carolina 218 US 161 1910 accessed on https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/218/161
- ^ Kim, Rose M. Violence and Trauma as Constitutive Elements in Racial Identity Formation, PhD in Sociology dissertation, CUNY, 2007
- ^ a b c d Kluger, Richard. Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education and Black America's Struggle for Equality. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, Aug 24, 2011, p 101
- ^ Pink Franklin to Hang He is Resentenced by Judge Sease and Date Fixed for December. State (Columbia, South Carolina). Wednesday, September 7, 1910, Page: 1
- ^ Smith, Jr, J. Clay. Emancipation: The Making of the Black Lawyer, 1844-1944. University of Pennsylvania Press, Jan 1, 1999 p 261
- ^ Adams on Franklin Case. Charleston News and Courier (Charleston, South Carolina). Thursday, April 7, 1910, Page: 1
- ^ Why Bonaparte Planned Butt-in Sought to Make Party Capital of Franklin Matter. Argument in Case. State (Columbia, South Carolina). Thursday, April 21, 1910 Issue: 6768 Page: 1
- ^ Franklin Lawyers Trying to Save Him Will Ask Jurors Who Convicted Negro to Sign Petition. State (Columbia, South Carolina). Sunday, June 26, 1910. Issue: 6833 Section: Part I Page: 1
- ^ Washington, Booker T. Harland, Louis R. The Booker T. Washington Papers, Volume 10. University of Illinois Press, 1981, p362-365
- ^ Tischauser, Leslie Vincent. Jim Crow Laws. ABC-CLIO, 2012, p 54
- ^ a b c Sullivan, Patricia. Lift Every Voice: The NAACP and the Making of the Civil Rights Movement. The New Press, Jul 29, 2009
- ^ DuBois, William Edward Burghardt. The Crisis, Volumes 17 Crisis Publishing Company, 1917, p231
- ^ James, Joy. Transcending the Talented Tenth: Black Leaders and American Intellectuals. Routledge, Jan 21, 2014, p 51.
External links
- Text of Franklin v. South Carolina, 218 U.S. 161 (1910) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress