Journal Of The Proceedings By Serena R. Zabin

The Conspiracy Trails of 1741, Daniel Horsmanden’s Journal of the Proceedings by Serena R. Zabin is a very interesting read when learning about what happened in New York in 1741. The journal conveys the true story of what happened according to the author. The journal does an excellent job in showing the traits of people in that time period. The people of New York had paranoia circling around the ideal of a secret catholic government takeover, the integration of races and most importantly slaves rising to power. The book starts off with a brief introduction by Zabin that simply lays out what has happened leading up to the trials. It does a good job of really setting the scene of the panic some citizens had but also the citizens who were

Some historians believe that there had been an uprising planed in New York and it was just part of a surge of slave uprisings across the early modern Atlantic (p. 31). Others agree there was a conspiracy but not with the intention to burn down the whole city of New York and take the citizens prisoner. Some believe that it was constructed by the British government to unite white New Yorkers against others who were different by their religion, class or color. The last group of historians believe that it was all just a frenzy because people were paranoid about slaves or Catholics taking over. Its hard to argue which is true because in 1911 a fire at the New York State Library destroyed many legal documents that could have proven or disproven Horsmanden’s

I believe that Zabin thought these events were significant because we learn that mass paranoia can cause a city to go into a state of chaos and also that these events will eventually help evolve the justice system that we have today. It evolves the justice system because in 1741 the court of law did not have a defense attorney so the accused did not stand a chance at a fair trial. Also the priority of the case was placed on solely the defendants testimony, even when the evidence was proven false. Lastly the judge had the final say in what evidenced was used and what evidence was discarded. All three of these facts had given the defendants an unfair trial, which would not have been the case if this same trial had taken place in present