|
| |
October 20
|
| |
1910
|
| |
January 3
|
| |
1911
|
| |
Bailey v State of Alabama
|
| |
211
|
| |
452
|
| |
29 S Ct 141 53 L Ed 278 219 US 219 (1911)
|
| |
Error to the Supreme Court of Alabama
|
| |
1910
|
| |
Hughes
|
| |
Harlan, Day, White, McKenna, Moody
|
| |
Holmes, Lurton
|
'', , was a
United States Supreme Court case which overturned the
Peonage laws of
Alabama . The ''Alonzo Bailey case'' is regarded as being the most important case of its kind after the ''
Dred Scott V. Sandford '' decision.
Alonzo Bailey was an
African American from
Alabama who agreed to work 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 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. The importance of the case is due to the fact that the peonage laws of the State of Alabama were found to be unconstitutional.
