Alonzo Bailey case
Encyclopedia
Bailey v. Alabama, , was a United States Supreme Court
case which overturned the peonage laws of Alabama
.
The Supreme Court considered the validity of the Alabama state court’s ruling that Alabama statute (§ 4730 of the Code of Alabama of 1896, as amended in 1903 and 1907) was constitutional. The law read:
Id. at 227-28.
Alonzo Bailey was an African American
from Alabama
who agreed to work for The Riverside Company for one year at $12 per month. He received an advance of $15. After working for a little over a month he stopped work, but did not refund any money. According to Alabama law such refusal to work and refund the money was prima facie
evidence of intent to defraud. The evidence presented against Bailey at trial was testimony that he stopped working, without cause, failed to repay the $15 advanced to him and that he was a Negro.
The United States Supreme Court found that holding a person criminally liable for taking money for work not performed was akin to indentured servitude, outlawed by the Thirteenth Amendment
, insofar as it required that person to work rather than be found guilty of a crime.
, by dismissing any importance of fact that the plaintiff was a black man. The Court then analyzed the statute at issue using the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision in Ex Parte Riley, 94 Ala. 82 (1892) and stated “[t]o justify conviction, it was necessary that this intent should be established by competent evidence, aided only by such inferences as might logically be derived from the facts proved, and should not be the subject of mere surmise or arbitrary assumption.” Bailey, 219 U.S. at 232. However, after the 1903 amendment to the Alabama law at issue here, the prosecution no longer had to prove intent to injure or defraud. The Court took issue with that change stating:
Id. at 234. The Court continued by stating that without the inference created by statute in this case, Bailey would not have been convicted. The Court then turned to the constitutionality of compulsory service as required by the law.
Id. at 238. The Court continued by discussing the meaning of the 13th Amendment and the broad reading of involuntary servitude
. Further, in discussing peonage, stated, [t]he essence of the thing is compulsory service in payment of a debt. A peon is one who is compelled to work for his creditor until his debt is paid.” Id. at 242. The Court again discussed the broad interpretation of the 13th Amendment, “in this explicit and comprehensive enactment, Congress was not concerned with mere names or manner of description . . . It was concerned with a fact, wherever it might exist; with a condition, however named and wherever it might be established, maintained, or enforced.” Analyzing the law by its effects rather than its pretense, the Court held that a contract may expose a debtor to the responsibility for his debt, but not enforced labor.
Finally, the Court states, “what the state may not do directly, it may not do indirectly.” Id. at 244. Thus, the creation of a statutory presumption to facilitate convictions for failure to pay a debt that could not be otherwise prosecuted was found to be invalid. Further, the peonage laws of Alabama were found to be contrary to the 13th Amendment and therefore unconstitutional.
Justice Oliver Holmes
dissented in this case. His analysis stated that adding a criminal sanction to a law with civil liability already in place goes to strengthen the law itself. Further, if a fine may be imposed, there must be punishment for non-payment, which in this case is prison. His logic continued by stating that indentured servitude as a punishment for a crime is expressly outside the reach of the 13th amendment. Justice Holmes summarized his own argument as:
Id. at 249-50.
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
case which overturned the peonage laws of Alabama
Alabama
Alabama is a state located in the southeastern region of the United States. It is bordered by Tennessee to the north, Georgia to the east, Florida and the Gulf of Mexico to the south, and Mississippi to the west. Alabama ranks 30th in total land area and ranks second in the size of its inland...
.
The Supreme Court considered the validity of the Alabama state court’s ruling that Alabama statute (§ 4730 of the Code of Alabama of 1896, as amended in 1903 and 1907) was constitutional. The law read:
"Any person who, with intent to injure or defraud his employer, enters into a contract in writing for the performance of any act of service, and thereby obtains money or other personal property from such employer, and with like intent, and without just cause, and without refunding such money, or paying for such property, refuses or fails to perform such act or service, must on conviction be punished. . . “
Id. at 227-28.
Alonzo Bailey was an African American
African American
African Americans are citizens or residents of the United States who have at least partial ancestry from any of the native populations of Sub-Saharan Africa and are the direct descendants of enslaved Africans within the boundaries of the present United States...
from Alabama
Alabama
Alabama is a state located in the southeastern region of the United States. It is bordered by Tennessee to the north, Georgia to the east, Florida and the Gulf of Mexico to the south, and Mississippi to the west. Alabama ranks 30th in total land area and ranks second in the size of its inland...
who agreed to work for The Riverside Company for one year at $12 per month. He received an advance of $15. After working for a little over a month he stopped work, but did not refund any money. According to Alabama law such refusal to work and refund the money was prima facie
Prima facie
Prima facie is a Latin expression meaning on its first encounter, first blush, or at first sight. The literal translation would be "at first face", from the feminine form of primus and facies , both in the ablative case. It is used in modern legal English to signify that on first examination, a...
evidence of intent to defraud. The evidence presented against Bailey at trial was testimony that he stopped working, without cause, failed to repay the $15 advanced to him and that he was a Negro.
The United States Supreme Court found that holding a person criminally liable for taking money for work not performed was akin to indentured servitude, outlawed by the Thirteenth Amendment
Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution officially abolished and continues to prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. It was passed by the Senate on April 8, 1864, passed by the House on January 31, 1865, and adopted on December 6, 1865. On...
, insofar as it required that person to work rather than be found guilty of a crime.
Detailed analysis
The Supreme Court began its majority analysis, written by Justice Charles HughesCharles Evans Hughes
Charles Evans Hughes, Sr. was an American statesman, lawyer and Republican politician from New York. He served as the 36th Governor of New York , Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States , United States Secretary of State , a judge on the Court of International Justice , and...
, by dismissing any importance of fact that the plaintiff was a black man. The Court then analyzed the statute at issue using the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision in Ex Parte Riley, 94 Ala. 82 (1892) and stated “[t]o justify conviction, it was necessary that this intent should be established by competent evidence, aided only by such inferences as might logically be derived from the facts proved, and should not be the subject of mere surmise or arbitrary assumption.” Bailey, 219 U.S. at 232. However, after the 1903 amendment to the Alabama law at issue here, the prosecution no longer had to prove intent to injure or defraud. The Court took issue with that change stating:
"[w]hatever the reason for leaving the service, if, judged by the terms of the contract, it is insufficient in law, it is not ‘just cause.’ The money received and repayable, nothing more being shown, constitutes a mere debt. The asserted difficulty of proving the intent to injure or defraud is thus made the occasion for dispensing with such proof, so far as the prima facie case is concerned.“
Id. at 234. The Court continued by stating that without the inference created by statute in this case, Bailey would not have been convicted. The Court then turned to the constitutionality of compulsory service as required by the law.
[A]lthought the statute in terms is to punish fraud, still its natural and inevitable effect is to expose to conviction for crime those who simply fail or refuse to perform contracts for personal service in liquidation of a debt; and judging its purpose by its effect, that it seeks in this way to provide the means of compulsion through which performance of such service may be secured."
Id. at 238. The Court continued by discussing the meaning of the 13th Amendment and the broad reading of involuntary servitude
Involuntary servitude
Involuntary servitude is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person's will to benefit another, under some form of coercion other than the worker's financial needs...
. Further, in discussing peonage, stated, [t]he essence of the thing is compulsory service in payment of a debt. A peon is one who is compelled to work for his creditor until his debt is paid.” Id. at 242. The Court again discussed the broad interpretation of the 13th Amendment, “in this explicit and comprehensive enactment, Congress was not concerned with mere names or manner of description . . . It was concerned with a fact, wherever it might exist; with a condition, however named and wherever it might be established, maintained, or enforced.” Analyzing the law by its effects rather than its pretense, the Court held that a contract may expose a debtor to the responsibility for his debt, but not enforced labor.
Finally, the Court states, “what the state may not do directly, it may not do indirectly.” Id. at 244. Thus, the creation of a statutory presumption to facilitate convictions for failure to pay a debt that could not be otherwise prosecuted was found to be invalid. Further, the peonage laws of Alabama were found to be contrary to the 13th Amendment and therefore unconstitutional.
Justice Oliver Holmes
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. was an American jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1902 to 1932...
dissented in this case. His analysis stated that adding a criminal sanction to a law with civil liability already in place goes to strengthen the law itself. Further, if a fine may be imposed, there must be punishment for non-payment, which in this case is prison. His logic continued by stating that indentured servitude as a punishment for a crime is expressly outside the reach of the 13th amendment. Justice Holmes summarized his own argument as:
"To sum up, I think that obtaining money by fraud may be made a crime as well as murder or theft; that a false representation, expressed or implied, at the time of making a contract of labor, that one intends to perform it, and thereby obtaining an advance, may be declared a case of fraudulently obtaining money as well as any other; that if made a crime it may be punished like any other crime; and that an unjustified departure from the promised service without repayment may be declared a sufficient case to go to the jury for their judgment; all without in any way infringing the 13th Amendment or the statutes of the United States."
Id. at 249-50.
See also
- Black Codes in the USABlack Codes in the USAThe Black Codes were laws put in place in the United States after the Civil War with the effect of limiting the basic human rights and civil liberties of blacks. Even though the U.S...
- Indentured servantIndentured servantIndentured servitude refers to the historical practice of contracting to work for a fixed period of time, typically three to seven years, in exchange for transportation, food, clothing, lodging and other necessities during the term of indenture. Usually the father made the arrangements and signed...
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 211