• Login
  • Register
  • FAQ
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Documents
  • Activities
  • Activity Tools
    • All Tools
    • Analyzing Documents
    • Discussion Topic
    • Compare and Contrast
    • Zoom/Crop
    • White Out / Black Out
    • Spotlight
    • Finding a Sequence
    • Making Connections
    • Mapping History
    • Seeing the Big Picture
    • Weighing the Evidence
    • Interpreting Data
  • Popular Topics
    • See All
    • National History Day
    • The Constitution
    • Labor History
    • Sports: All-American
    • Rights in America
    • American Indians
    • Women's Rights
    • American Revolution
    • The Civil War
    • World War I
    • World War II
    • The Vietnam War
    • 1970s America
    • Congress
    • Amending America
    • Elections
    • What Americans Eat
    • Signatures
    • Nixon and Ford Years
  • Resources
    • Getting Started
    • Document Analysis
    • Activity-Creation Guide
    • Manage Assignments
    • iPad App
    • Presentation Materials
    • Webinars
      • Recorded Webinars
      • Live Webinars
MENU
DocsTeachThe online tool for teaching with documents, from the National Archives National Archives Foundation National Archives

Petition of Edmund Kinney

5/2/1879

Print
Add to Favorites:
Add
Saving document...
Your document has been saved.
Add all page(s) of this document to activity:
1
2
3
4
5
6
Add only page 1 to activity:
Add only page 2 to activity:
Add only page 3 to activity:
Add only page 4 to activity:
Add only page 5 to activity:
Add only page 6 to activity:
Edmund and Mary Kinney (also known as Mary S. Hall) each petitioned the court for a writ of habeas corpus because they believed they were unjustly arrested for marrying as an interracial couple in Reconstruction-era Virginia. (A petition is a formal request to the court to take action.)

The county court had convicted them of "feloniously leaving the State of Virginia for the purpose of marrying and for having married in the District of Columbia...and for having returned to the State and cohabited." They were sentenced to five years of hard labor in the state penitentiary.

In their petitions, the Kinneys argued that marriage is a contract and that their freedom of contract, guaranteed in the Fourteenth Amendment, was violated. Their writs of habeas corpus were denied by the district court judge and the Kinneys served their five-year sentences.

Show/Hide Transcript

Transcript

In the Circuit Court of the United States 
For the Eastern District of Virginia

To the Honorable Judges of the said Court.

—

The petition of Edmund Kinney humbly sheweth that he is a citizen of the United States, and has resided for five years in the County of Hanover, in the State of Virginia; that your petitioner is a man of color, of the negro race, and that he is now unlawfully restrained of his liberty, within the jurisdiction of this Court, and in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that the following are the facts concerning the said unlawful detention.

That your petitioner is so restrained of his liberty by being kept, unlawfully, in the public jail and penitentiary house of the State of Virginia, at the City of Richmond, in the custody of Samuel A. Swann, the superintendent of said penitentiary, by virtue of a pretended sentence of the County Court of said County of Hanover, in the State aforesaid, pronounced on the 19th day of March A. D. 1879; That said pretended sentence was pronounced in a certain criminal prosecution, then pending in the said County Court, on the part of the Commonwealth of Virginia against your petitioner and one Mary S. Hall; and that the facts and circumstances attend–



ing said prosecution are as follows:

In the month of October last past, your petitioner and the said Mary S. Hall, the latter being, also, a citizen of the United States, and a white woman, visited the City of Washington in the District of Columbia, and were there, on the 8th day of the said month duly and in accordance with the laws of the United States prevailing in the said District, united in the bonds of matrimony. That soon thereafter your petitioner and the said Mary S. Hall returned to the State of Virginia and to the said County of Hanover and there lived together as man and wife until the institution of said prosecution, soon after which they were arrested and tried in the said County Court on a charge of feloniously leaving the State of Virginia for the purpose of marrying, and for having married in the District of Columbia as aforesaid and for having returned to the State and cohabited as aforesaid. a verdict of guilty was rendered upon which your petitioner and the said Mary S. Hall were sentenced to serve a term of five years at hard labor in the said penitentiary, where they are now confined as aforesaid.

A certified copy of the record in the said criminal prosecution is herewith filed, marked "A" & prayed to be taken as a part of this petition. —



Your petitioner avers that there was no lawful impediment whatever to the marriage of your petitioner with the said Mary S. Hall; that both your petitioner and the said Mary S. Hall were, at the time of their marriage of lawful age, and in every way qualified under the laws of the United States, in force in the District of Columbia, to intermarry as they did; and that they were tried and convicted as aforesaid, and are now confined in the penitentiary as aforesaid, for no other reason than that your petitioner, being a negro man, and the said Mary S. Hall being a white woman, left the State of Virginia, and were married as aforesaid, and returned to the State and lived together as man & wife as aforesaid. —

Your petitioner insists that his conviction and detention as aforesaid is illegal, and that she is unlawfully restrained of his liberty, in consequence, in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States. He insists that the Statutes of the State of Virginia prohibiting the intermarriage of Whites and negroes, and prescribing penalties for such persons leaving the state to marry and returning to the state after having gone out of it and married, are unconstitutional and void and especially so



because they impose restriction upon the constitutional right of citizens of the United States to freely contract among themselves irrespective of race or color, and are otherwise oppressive, unequal, and in violation of the Constitution of the United Sates. 

Your petitioner further insists that his detention as aforesaid is illegal, and in violation of his rights under the Constitution and laws of the United States, because he says – that he and the said Mary S. Hall having been lawfully married in the District of Columbia, according to the forms prescribed by, and under the sanction of, the laws of the United States, in force in the said District, the said marriage was valid there, at the place where celebrated, and must, therefore be held to be valid throughout the territory of the United States; that it was a privilege which belonged to your petitioner and the said Mary S. Hall, as citizens of the United States, to leave the state of Virginia and go into the District of Columbia as aforesaid, that it was equally their privilege as such citizens while there to enter into the marriage contract as they did, that it was equally their privilege as such citizens to return to the State of Virginia as they did, and that therefore their conviction and detention as aforesaid is an abridgment of their privileges as citi –



zens of the United States by the State of Virginia which is forbidden by the Constitution of the United States.

Wherefore your petitioner prays that this Honorable Court will be pleased to award the writ of Habeas Corpus, directed to the said Samuel A. Swann, superintendent of the said penitentiary, requiring him to bring before this Honorable Court the body of your petitioner, with the cause of her detention, so that the same may be enquired into and such relief afforded as shall be agreeable to law and justice.

And your petitioner will ever pray

Edmund Kinney 
X his mark

Witness
Thos. S. Atkins
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2nd day of May 1879.

Thos. S. Atkins
U.S. Commr E. Dist. of Va.
This primary source comes from the Records of District Courts of the United States.
Full Citation: Petition of Edmund Kinney; 5/2/1879; Habeas Corpus Case Files, 1867 - 1938; Records of District Courts of the United States, Record Group 21; National Archives at Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA. [Online Version, https://www.docsteach.org/documents/document/petition-edmund-kinney, June 23, 2025]
Return to ResultsReturn

Rights: Public Domain, Free of Known Copyright Restrictions. Learn more on our privacy and legal page.

  • Explore Primary Source Documents
  •  
  • Discover Activities You Can Teach With
  •  
  • Create Fun & Engaging Activities
Follow us on X:X
Follow us on Facebook:facebook
Please enter a valid email address

View our webinars:youtube

Get our iPad app:apple
New Documentsshare
New Activitiesshare

The National Archives

DocsTeach is a product of the National Archives education division. Our mission is to engage, educate, and inspire all learners to discover and explore the records of the American people preserved by the National Archives.

The National Archives and Records Administration is the nation's record keeper. We save documents and other materials created in the course of business conducted by the U.S. Federal government that are judged to have continuing value. We hold in trust for the public the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights — but also the records of ordinary citizens — at our locations around the country.
  • All Education Programs
  • Student Visits
  • Distance Learning
  • Professional Development
  • National Archives Museum
  • Presidential Libraries
  • Archives.gov
  • National Archives Foundation




Creative Commons License

Except where otherwise noted, DocsTeach is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Primary source documents included on this site generally come from the holdings of the National Archives and are in the public domain, except as noted. Teaching activities on this site have received the CC0 Public Domain Dedication; authors have waived all copyright and related rights to the extent possible under the law. See our legal and privacy page for full terms and conditions.
Safest and most reliable Czech online casinos! isitfair.eu – a trusted platform with expertly ratings & reviews, and top choise exclusive bonuses for Czech players.