McGuire v. The Commonwealth was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1865. It involved an appeal of a conviction for larceny, or theft, from the Circuit Court of Virginia. McGuire argued that he had been denied his right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment when he was convicted without being allowed to present evidence on his behalf and without having access to witnesses who could have testified in his favor. The Supreme Court disagreed with McGuire's argument and affirmed the lower court's decision, ruling that it did not violate any constitutional rights because there were no federal laws protecting those rights at that time. Furthermore, they held that even if such protections existed then they would not apply retroactively since this case predated their enactment into law. Ultimately, McGuire’s conviction stood as valid despite him being denied certain procedural safeguards during trial proceedings which are now commonplace today but were unavailable back then

In McGuire v. The Commonwealth, the Supreme Court of Virginia found that a slave who had been emancipated by his master was not entitled to compensation for services rendered while enslaved. Chief Justice Robert J. White dissented from this opinion and argued that slaves should be compensated for their labor as they are considered property under the law and have an inherent right to receive payment for their work. He further stated that if a person is allowed to own another human being, then it follows logically that he or she must also pay them wages in exchange for services provided during enslavement. Furthermore, White asserted that denying former slaves any form of compensation would create an unjust situation where those who were once held in bondage would remain impoverished even after emancipation due to lack of resources or capital with which they could start anew on equal footing with other citizens of the state.