P. Henry Dugro
P. Henry Dugro | |
---|---|
Associate Justice of the New York Supreme Court | |
In office 1896–1920 | |
Judge of the Superior Court of New York County | |
In office 1887–1896 | |
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from New York's 7th district | |
In office March 4, 1881 – March 3, 1883 | |
Preceded by | Edwin Einstein |
Succeeded by | William Dorsheimer |
New York State Assembly (New York Co., 14th D.) | |
In office 1879 | |
Personal details | |
Born | (1855年10月03日)October 3, 1855 New York City, New York |
Died | March 1, 1920(1920年03月01日) (aged 64) New York City, New York |
Resting place | Woodlawn Cemetery, Bronx, New York |
Political party | Democratic |
Education | Columbia College |
Philip Henry Dugro (October 3, 1855 – March 1, 1920) was an American lawyer, judge, and U.S. Representative from New York, serving from 1881 to 1883. He is best known for a 1909 ruling in which he argued that the reputations of African Americans had less legal value than those of whites.[1]
Biography
[edit ]Born in New York City, Dugro attended the public schools and was graduated from the school of arts of Columbia College, New York City, in 1876 and from the law department of the same institution in 1878. He was admitted to the bar in the latter year and commenced practice in New York City.
State legislature
[edit ]He was a member of the New York State Assembly (New York Co., 14th D.) in 1879.
Congress and judicial office
[edit ]Dugro was elected as a Democrat to the Forty-seventh Congress (March 4, 1881 – March 3, 1883). He was not a candidate for reelection.
He resumed the practice of law in New York City and also entered the real estate business. He declined the office of state commissioner of immigration in 1885. He served as judge of the Superior Court of New York County from 1887 to 1896, when the Superior Court was merged into the state Supreme Court. He was elected to the New York Supreme Court in 1896.
Racist ruling in Griffin v. Brady
[edit ]In 1909, Dugro gained national attention for his decision in a case involving George W. Griffin, an African American Pullman porter.[2] [3] On a train headed to Montreal, a railroad executive named Daniel N. Brady (a brother of Diamond Jim Brady) accused Griffin of stealing his wallet. Griffin was pulled off the train and detained for hours before being released for lack of evidence.[4]
Griffin then sued Brady in Dugro's New York court for false arrest and imprisonment. A jury found in Griffin's favor and awarded him 2,500ドル in damages (equivalent to 84,778ドル in 2023). Dugro said the amount was excessive and ordered it reduced to 300ドル because of Griffin's race — that a Black man's reputation is not as harmed by a false accusation as a white man's:
He would not be hurt just as much if put in prison as every other man would be. That depends on a man's standing, what his circumstances are, and if he is a Colored man, the fact that he is a Colored man is to be considered. You cannot say he is just the same as a white man when you come to say how much shame he will suffer. Is it likely that when a Colored man is arrested and imprisoned he feels just as much shame as a white man might? In this sort of community, I dare say the amount of evil that would flow to the Colored man from a charge like this would not be as great as it probably would be to a white man.[4]
The ruling spurred outrage among African Americans nationwide, who called it "perhaps the most infamous opinion in a Northern court of law during the present generation" and Dugro a "20th century Judge Taney," after Roger Taney, author of the notorious Dred Scott decision.[5] [6]
Griffin appealed the ruling three times, seeking restoration of the 2,500ドル judgment, but he was denied each time; however, the final appeal, in an opinion written by Edward Everett McCall, resulted in the damages being raised to 1,000ドル.[4] [7] [6] Two later legal scholars called the case "perhaps the most celebrated instance of racial devaluation in early-20th-century tort litigation."[1] The writer and activist James Weldon Johnson wrote of Dugro:
He has been on the bench for a great many years. He is, without doubt, learned in the law and versed in judiciary proceedings; but I, as a Negro, would vote for a candidate who didn't know the difference between a law book and a telephone directory before I would vote for any man holding such opinions as those expressed by Judge Dugro.[3]
Death
[edit ]Dugro remained on the New York Supreme Court bench until his death in New York City on March 1, 1920. He was interred in Woodlawn Cemetery.
References
[edit ]- ^ a b Chamallas, Martha; Wriggins, Jennifer B. (1 May 2010). The Measure of Injury: Race, Gender, and Tort Law. NYU Press. ISBN 978-0-8147-1733-2 . Retrieved 4 February 2025.
- ^ Wriggins, Jennifer (2005). "Torts, Race, and the Value of Injury, 1900-1949". Howard Law Journal. 49 (1). Retrieved 4 February 2025.
- ^ a b Johnson, James Weldon (29 October 1914). "JUDGE DUGRO AND HIS OPINION OF COLORED PEOPLE". The New York Age. p. 4. Retrieved 4 February 2025.
- ^ a b c "NEGRO NOT EQUAL TO WHITE; Suffers Less Humiliation in False Arrest, Court Holds". The New York Times. May 22, 1909. p. 16. Retrieved 4 February 2025.
- ^ "BRADY IS FINED". The Washington Bee. 31 December 1910. p. 5. Retrieved 4 February 2025.
- ^ a b "JUDGE Dugro's notorious decision..." The Journal. 29 December 1910. p. 2. Retrieved 4 February 2025.
- ^ "BLACK LAW AND WHITE! JUDGE SUSTAINED IN OPINION DRAWING COLOR LINE". Lancaster Intelligencer. 26 May 1909. p. 6. Retrieved 4 February 2025.
- United States Congress. "P. Henry Dugro (id: D000520)". Biographical Directory of the United States Congress .
Public Domain This article incorporates public domain material from the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress
External links
[edit ]U.S. House of Representatives | ||
---|---|---|
Preceded by | Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from New York's 7th congressional district 1881 - 1883 |
Succeeded by |