A larger version of this object is available to teachers and students for free. Others can subscribe for $25/year.
Larger images are also available to schools and libraries via subscription to American History, 1493-1943. Check to see if your school or library already has a subscription or click here for more information.
- GLC#
- GLC09124
- Type
- Books & pamphlets
- Date
- 1834
- Author/Creator
- Garrison & Knapp
- Title
- Report of the arguments of counsel, in the case of Prudence Crandall, Plff. in error, Vs. State of Connecticut, before the Supreme Court of Errors, at their session at Brooklyn, July Term, 1834.
- Place Written
- Boston, Massachusetts
- Pagination
- 34 p. :
- Primary time period
- National Expansion and Reform, 1815-1860
- Sub-Era
- Age of Jackson
Prudence Crandall, having allowed black children into her school, was tried by the State of Connecticut for violating a law against the education of colored children who were not inhabitants of the State, which required consent of the town of jurisdiction. The judge, holding that blacks were not citizens and were devoid of constitutional rights, ruled in favor the State. Here, before the Supreme Court, her counsel argues that "A distinction founded in color, in fundamental rights, is novel, inconvenient and impracticable."
Citation Guidelines for Online Resources
For reproductions and permissions, please visit our Rights and Reproductions Page.
- Copyright Notice
- The copyright law of the United States (title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specific conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.