The fact remains, obfuscate and blow as much smoke at it as you wish, Indiana's 1820 Laselle ruling effectively made slavery illegal and resulted in Indiana's slave population being reduced by 98% over the next 10 years.
In fact, Indiana erected a memorial which states explicitly,
https://www.in.gov/history/state-historical-markers/find-a-marker/find-historical-markers-by-county/indiana-historical-markers-by-county/polly-strong-slavery-case/
Strong appealed to Indiana Supreme Court in Corydon which ruled in State v. Lasselle, July 22, 1820: “slavery can have no existence” in Indiana. This decision did not free remaining slaves in Indiana; it did establish 1816 Indiana Constitution as the authority for decisions in Indiana courts regarding slavery and involuntary servitude, including 1821 Mary Clark case.
Who are we to believe? Numbnuts with Wikipedia and unnamed sources, or the Indiana Historical Bureau?
The applied Northern Yankee Slaver Democrat logic of BroJoeK is equivalent to saying that the Los Angeles Lakers won the NBA Championship in 2001, resulting in the twin towers being attacked in September. There is no cause and effect demonstrated. The claimed effect is explicitly denied by the Indiana Historical Bureau.
[BroJoeK #85]: in 1820 the US Supreme Court freed any slaves in Indiana, in 1827 New York freed any remaining slaves and in 1845 Illinois supreme court freed any remaining indentured ex-slaves."
The U.S. Supreme Court played no role whatever in the case. According to the Indiana Historical Bureau, the decision in LaSelle did not free remaining slaves in Indiana either.
woodpusher quoting:
"Strong appealed to Indiana Supreme Court in Corydon which ruled in State v. Lasselle, July 22, 1820: 'slavery can have no existence' in Indiana.
This decision did not free remaining slaves in Indiana; it did establish 1816 Indiana Constitution as the authority for decisions in Indiana courts regarding slavery and involuntary servitude, including 1821 Mary Clark case."woodpusher: "The U.S. Supreme Court played no role whatever in the case.
According to the Indiana Historical Bureau, the decision in LaSelle did not free remaining slaves in Indiana either."
woodpusher: "Who are we to believe?
Numbnuts with Wikipedia and unnamed sources, or the Indiana Historical Bureau?"
I would believe the US census which reported a reduction in Indiana's slaves from 190 in 1820 to 3 in 1830.
Does our "numbnuts" woodpusher imagine that happened by accident, or magic, and not as a result to Indiana's Supreme Court 1820 ruling?
woodpusher: "The U.S. Supreme Court played no role whatever in the case.
According to the Indiana Historical Bureau, the decision in LaSelle did not free remaining slaves in Indiana either."
It appears that Laselle prepared an appeal to SCOTUS, but it's not clear what happened to that.
We know for certain the Indiana supreme court's ruling was not overturned and that slavery in Indian was reduced 98% by 1830, 100% by 1850.
Our FRiend woodpusher is determined, at all costs, to deny Indiana v Laselle credit for that, or even to acknowledge it happened.
Instead, he insanely wants us to think that Indiana remained a Northern slave state.
![]()