How Animal Guts Gutted the 14th Amendment | The Slaughterhouse Cases
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
- I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court. Order your copy here: amzn.to/45Wzhur or visit www.iammrbeat.....
In episode 51 of Supreme Court Briefs, animal guts in the drinking water of New Orleans leads to the first major interpretation of the 14th Amendment by the Supreme Court. #supremecourtbriefs #slaughterhousecases #apgov
Patreon: / iammrbeat
Donate on Paypal: www.paypal.me/...
Merch: www.iammrbeat....
Reddit: / mrbeat
Mr. Beat's band: electricneedler...
Twitter: / beatmastermatt
Facebook: / iammrbeat
Instagram: / iammrbeat
Discord server: / discord
Produced by Matt Beat. All images by Matt Beat, found in the public domain, or used under fair use guidelines. Music by Electric Needle Room (Mr. Beat's band).
Electric Needle Room's new children's album, "Just Kidding Around:"
Bandcamp: tinyurl.com/yy...
Spotify: tinyurl.com/y5...
RUclips: tinyurl.com/y3...
Apple: tinyurl.com/y6...
Amazon: tinyurl.com/y5...
Check out cool primary sources here:
www.oyez.org/c...
Other sources used:
Age of Betrayal: The Triumph of Money in America, 1865-1900 by Jack Beatty
Race Matters, Animal Matters: Fugitive Humanism in African America, 1840-1930 by Lindgren Johnson
www.law.cornel...
en.wikipedia.o...
ij.org/center-...
constitutionce...
constitutionce...
lasc.libguides...
Photo credits/Creative Commons:
Tom Bastin
New Orleans, Louisiana, 1867
3,000 residents die from cholera, a horrible disease characterized by having violent diarrhea until you’re dehydrated. How did they get cholera? From drinking the water. This is not surprising, as New Orleans water at the time was filthy. The president of the Board of Health testified, “When the river is low, it is not uncommon to see intestines and portions of putrefied animal matter lodged immediately around the pipes.” Yep, animal guts were in the drinking water, and citizens were dying horrible deaths after drinking it.
So how did the animal guts get in the drinking water in the first place? Well, just outside of the city, around 1,000 butchers gutted over 300,000 animals per year. New Orleans begged the Louisiana state legislature to do something about it. They did, passing a law that granted a monopoly to the Crescent City Livestock Landing and Slaughtering Company, saying that only it could run a slaughterhouse in New Orleans. The company would not actually butcher animals, but rent out space to other butchers in the city for a fee.
Well, it turns out the Crescent City folks had bribed the Louisiana legislature to give them the monopoly, and a bunch of butchers didn’t like this so much. More than 400 butchers of the Butchers’ Benevolent Association- what a great name- joined up to sue the Crescent City Company, saying that their monopoly created involuntary servitude, which went against the 13th Amendment of the Constitution. They also argued the monopoly prevented them from getting property and hurt their freedom to make money, bringing up the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the recently ratified 14th Amendment.
There were many lawsuits, and the butchers lost every single one of them. However, six of the butchers appealed to the Louisiana Supreme Court, which agreed with the lower courts. So the butchers appealed again to the Supreme Court, since this is a Supreme Court Briefs episode, ya know, and the Court agreed to look at their cases, hearing oral arguments in January and February of 1873.
Remember, the 14th Amendment had passed less than five years prior, and the Court was still trying to figure out its implications. John A. Campbell, who represented the butchers and used to be a federal judge but stepped down due to his Confederate loyalties, argued that the 14th Amendment should be interpreted broadly to protect equality not just for the recently freed slaves, but all Americans. Matthew H. Carpenter, who represented Louisiana, argued the monopoly of the Crescent City Company was justified as a way to protect public health and safety.
The Court announced their decision on April 14, 1873. They sided with Louisiana. It was a close one. 5-4. The Court held the monopoly did not go against the 13th and 14th Amendments because the 13th was about ending slavery and the 14th was about then giving equality to former slaves. In other words, you couldn’t expand those two Amendments to all groups of people.
![[Limbus Company - PV] Chapter.7 - Oblivion](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VUpkXPkvoxU/mqdefault.jpg)
My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available!
Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS
Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680
Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680
Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss
Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b
Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023
Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495
Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
I’m sad Supreme Court briefs don’t get more views! They’re my favorite!
Well I'm so happy you like them! :D
@@iammrbeat I look forward to them!
They are S U P R E M E
Same
@@iammrbeat Do Ramos v. Louisiana
Supreme Court Briefs videos don't get that many views!?!? That makes me want to just binge watch the entire Supreme Court Briefs series.
I wouldn't be upset if you did. :) According to my calculations, that would take you about 6 hours.
@@iammrbeat Well Mr. Beat I did it! Just finished binge watching (or rather binge listening because I'm at work) the entire Supreme Court Briefs series! It did take about 6 hours but it was worth it. Gerrymandering, birthrite citizenship, Miranda, Amistad, Eugenics, etc., a lot of good topics were covered. Thanks Mr. Beat!
If this video gets 1,000 likes within 48 hours, I will walk into Starbucks with my Napoleon hat on and order a coffee.
Which Supreme Court case should I cover next?
Just sent $ for that coffee. Making history understandable is an art ! 👍
Coleman v. Miller!
You should do a supreme court case from the last 15 years.
@@ermesdallagasperina6136 try 3 years
Woah thanks!
Yes! Another Supreme Court Briefs! This is my favorite series of yours
Good to know! Glad you dig it. :D
As an indian law student , this series helped me a lot to understand American jurisprudence
Love this channel. Students in history class love how he brings out extra details!
Good to know! Thanks for the kind words. :D
I know you're not the "biggest" channel out there, but I get more excited when I see a posting from you than anyone else (esp. SCB). Keep up the good work!!!
Aww...you just made my day! I appreciate the kind words. :)
Great Video Mr Beat. It is weird how the animal remains somehow got in to the water ways.
Thanks Ermes! And yes, definitely weird, but New Orleans was kind of notorious for it back then. 😐
Mr Beat, I really love your Supreme Court briefs. To be fair, I love all your content.
I subscribed for the Briefs dude
Good to know! Well don't worry, more of them are coming in 2020.
I'm still fairly new to your channel. Six months maybe. Just in the past couple months have I started watching SCB. I enjoy them. I hope you keep making them.
Good to know! I will certainly keep making them. The only question is how often at this point. I love making them and actually use them in my own classroom, so as long as that's the case the series will stick around.
I was hoping you could do a piece on the second amendment and how it had nothing to do with citizens needing to be armed to protect themselves from the government and everything to do with protecting the rich white man from a slavery uprise and to defend themselves from the natives because for some reason they didn't like having their land stolen from them
This is my favorite series you have. I always look forward to watching to start my weekend off right.
That's good to know. Thank you so much! :D
Even though supreme court briefs don't get as many views, It seems like those who do watch it enjoy it alot.
Lovely work as always Mr Beat, very helpful.
Well that's good to hear. I do enjoy making them, and actually use them quite a bit in my classroom.
@@iammrbeat over all it's a positive. Thank you si much for making these videos, they're greatly helping me through APUSH and greatly appreciate it.
These are the most interesting types of video on your channel!
I'm glad you dig them! :D
Sounds like a government sanctioned monopoly. A few people are upset while the vast majority are better off. Also, can't imagine how pissed Bingham had to be to hear his amendment be misinterpreted just 5 years after he explained it. This country has a long history of protecting the problem while exposing the victims
Amazing video again! I love supreme court briefs! Keep them coming.
Thank you! And good to know you like the series. :D
My stages of reäction to this one:
>"gutted the 14th amendment"
>has heart attack
>reälizes it's from over a century ago
What's with the umlauts? ‹Ë›?
@@OpinionesDeJACCsOpinions en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaeresis_(diacritic)
@@Copyright_Infringement
U know what they are, but my question is your usage.
@@OpinionesDeJACCsOpinions I guess it's similar to e.g. "coördinate".
@@seneca983
That's rather old spelling, if anything.
What do you call a cow with legs? GROUND BEEF! Great Vid, can’t wait for the next briefs!
With no legs you mean?
Mr. Beat Oh yes yes, nothing like screwing up a joke HAHAHAHAHA.
Love SCBs - it's the reason why I subscribed in the first place.
Well that's awesome
SCB
Secure.
Contain.
Brief.
Thanks for covering this case! I am no legal scholar, but it appears as though Justice Thomas is trying to revive the Privileges or Immunities Clause.
Supreme Court Briefs are my favorite, when I found your channel I bing watched all of them.
I’m surprised Supreme Court Briefs is unpopular. they are my favourite videos on your channel. Maybe because I’m not from the USA and I didn’t learn about this stuff is why I find them so interesting.
Trust me, most Americans didn't learn about this stuff, either. :) But so glad you dig them! Don't worry, this series is sticking around regardless of its success.
I teach in Australia and my students and I love your channel. Very informative and we are appreciative of your efforts mate
good evening Mr. Beat. I hope you and yours had a wonderful Christmas. I'm a huge fan of your Supreme Court briefs Mister beat. I commend you for doing these in enlightening me on the history of cases heard in the higher court. You are amazing.
Incredible how such a close vote had such a monumental impact on American society
Could you do Carpenter v. United States (No. 16-402)? I think this is especially important today regarding increasing tendencies to electronic surveillance.
Giving a private slaughterhouse company a monopoly seems like a dumb way to solve an issue of of butcher waste causing unsafe drinking water. Better to legislate to control what the slaughter industry can and cannot do to keep them from contaminating the water. Or just nationalize the industry outright.
Well there were bribes so....
This is Louisiana we're talking about. They actually seem to manage more historical and present-day bribability than the government of Texas.
I live in Texas. This is an accomplishment.
...Public safety in the drinking water, air and sundry is low on the state agenda to this day. Google "Louisiana cancer alley."
I think the so-called justification was that it would be easier for New Orleans and Louisiana to hold one company accountable for the animal guts in the water.
@Michael Benedict Works short term. Long-term the monopoly would've led exhoberent prices and unhuman wages. Oh. And also more guts in the water now that you have to deal with a single powerful corporation that is influencing the government instead of a couple of powerless butchers.
Please order your coffee as "Napoleon I; The Nightmare of Europe"
Perfect. I will totally do this.
Mr. Beat consider doing Davis v. Washington. It's a quite interesting case
Can you do a video comparing Tulsa, OK and Wichita, KS or Tulsa, OK and Oklahoma City, OK?
Everybody, like this video now.
Mrbeat, I assume you'll record this if it happens...😀😀
Thanks for the interesting videos.
Thanks so much. :D And heck yeah, I will definitely record it. I'll probably put it on all my social media.
@@iammrbeat sweet. Fingers crossed.
Interestingly enough, Justice Stephen Field is why "Corporate Personhood" exists
Great video for civics classes!
I hope teachers find it useful!
Would you do circuit court case as well? Meaning those cases that haven't been reviewed by the Supreme Court but are still important even when say the 9th Circuit Court was the highest one?
Great video!
This is my favorite series yet!
Well awesome. Glad to hear it. :D
& I thought I’d heard it all
Excellent work Thanks.
Do one on "Star'e decisis" ( stand by not to change former decision of higher court rulings).
*psst* babe, wake up, there’s another supreme court briefs vid.
Best teacher hands down
do a city comparison between Montgomery and Birmingham or mobile and huntsville
You need to do more of these, I love the SCB's... The arbitrary "x vs y" is pretty meh to me, not that you don't do them well, but loads of channels pump those out.
Im sad to hear that Supreme court brief doesnt do well in your channel. They are my favorite
Well thank you Juan!
classic episode
Aw :)
Can you do US v. Cruikshank?
At 4:37 I thought that was the cover to Carter 4 at first
warning to squeamish people, don't watch this while eating, it starts out very very gross. great video though!
I'm glad I decided to not use animal guts after all. :)
why was this case not used in the posioned waters of Flint Michigan
Mexico city x Sao Paulo
next do Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners' Labor Union
You should compare Minneapolis's to Winnipeg
and nobody is surprised they sided with the company over the workers
I want Nepal and Bhutan compared
Mr Beat explains the cases that made Libertarians a thing in the United States
Can you do Calgary vs Edmonton
Can you now do Virginia and Maryland Compared it's Taking so Long
If I did RUclips full-time, it would have happened by now. I have another full-time job that takes up a lot of time, combined with my other obligations.
Mr Beat is a high school teacher.
Where did the guts go after that ruling? Did they just render them ["cook"]?
@2:35 Did I hear that right? An ex-Confederate loyalist judge? You can't say that without further elaboration
*+*
Do Shelby v Holder
That's a good one. I hope to get to it eventually.
How on earth was the 14th Amendment ratified if its author wrote it to defy the 10th Amendment? Definitely thankful that the Supreme Court was able to limit its reach.
So how do you feel about Brown v. The Board of Education?
Can you make Newark vs Jersey City like if you agree
Lol I mostly watch supreme court briefs.
So temporary monopolies are good? sometimes? 🤷♂️
Still waitng for Brown V. Entertainment Merchants Association.
Thanks for the reminder!
What happened after 1879 when the monopoly was made illegal?
It’s a pretty safe bet... :( (the whole hat thing)
It's a safe bet that I WILL get 1,000 likes or not?
Minneapolis vs St. Paul
Since corporations are people wouldn't Louisiana's case be weaker today?
Probably so? Yeah that precedent wasn't set until later.
You forgot to go to new orleans and hand out money
wait wrong channel
Why they want to ban slaughterhouse?
However Former President Trump allow immigrants work in slaughterhouse even and other jobs forbid for immigrants they increase security boarder. Why America have religions influenced about forbidden killing animals.
I like civil rights, but I also like not having hog intestines in my drinking water ... so I'm not sure how to feel about this one. :)
holy shit! didnt know diharrea was so violent that whole foot-long intestine sections were part of the shits ejecta
lol
you can just, eat the guts you know
This is what I was thinking: they could either learn from cultures who use every part of the animal for consumption or sell it to zoos or pet food companies.
@@GottlikeDamon Exactly. It's delicious too. And helps lower the carbon emission because you'll be raising less cattles overall
In the Netherlands, we have the saying:
'De slager keurt zijn eigen vlees'
The butcher inspects his own meat? What does that mean?
@@iammrbeat I am terribly sorry Mr. Beat! I have never responded to you. I don't know why, but I am sorry.
This Dutch saying means that the company who makes the product, also checks the product themselves ("the butcher inspects his own meat or "the slager keurt zijn eigen vlees").
So in short: it is a saying for corruption.
Ah, the good old gunpoint amendments. Very shady
i thought this might be about animal rights, a bit dissapointed lol
Yeah, me too. Instead it's the 1800s, when not even all humans had rights. Not disappointed, though, still pretty interesting.
lol yeah the name can be misleading
Yeah the monopoly didn’t make water safer the threat of the monopoly being removed did. You could simply pass a law about where animal carcasses could be done away to. I mean that’s what the monopoly did after all.
Could you do a video on Iraq's presidents, the latest one actually resigned because of protests that are happening in iraq,
I am once again just doing the decision:
5-4 in favor of Crescent City
Ily
I think this is the oldest case you’ve reviewed damn
He’s done much older ones, like United States V. The Amistead.
@@the4tierbridge And gibbons v ogden (1824)
@@teoanselmi581 He did a case from the 1700s actually.
@@the4tierbridge oh yes which one?
@@teoanselmi581 I forget.
Not a good case for 14th Amendment.
Did you just say salty and def?
Dang straight.
Yes he did mrs beat
Mr beast
The
#RUclipsHistoryRewind2019
14th comment
14th for a 14th Amendment video. Niiccceee
Third
30th