John Brown & Secession

[rivrrat]

You also have to remember that the scope of Federal Jurisdiction in criminal cases was much less than it is today.

[ole]

Generally, we're going to need an opinion of someone who's studied Brown's raid and its aftermath. I'm not sure we're getting the intricacies of a Federal Crime being prosecuted in a state court. It was clearly an action against Federal property and was dealt with by Federal Troops. Anyone out there conversant with the laws in such a case?

Brown held very strong abolitionist beliefs -- so strong, in fact, that he laid a crushing sacrifice on the altar of that belief (not, I might add, unlike those radicals answering the call for jihad). He (take your pick: unerringly/accidentally) struck at the most terrifying nerve in the southern psyche: slave uprising. He may well have caused less trouble if he'd invaded South Carolina and wasted both Rhetts.

Just a thought.
Ole

[Admiral_Porter]

I'm not sure we're getting the intricacies of a Federal Crime being prosecuted in a state court. It was clearly an action against Federal property and was dealt with by Federal Troops.

That's what I don't understand. How can Brown be charged with treason against Virginia when he was not a citizen of the state?

[MobileBoy]

Porter,
Me either.I think maybe Virginia was mentioned because the federal property he seized was in Virginia.Somebody find Cash he'll be able to explain this in detail.

[cash]

Originally Posted by Alabaman

Wouldn't you pro-unionist think John Brown took an unlawful calculated risk and lost?

Yes. He had the right goal, ending slavery, but the wrong method.

Originally Posted by Alabaman

...and.....
The Southern Confederacy first seceeded/declared independence in a legal manner (interpreted by the US Gov't per the Constitution as unlawful),

No.

Originally Posted by Alabaman

then were provoked into firing the fist shot?

No.

Originally Posted by Alabaman

Re: Treason against a state:??
Either this is proof of true southern belief in States Rights or the Federal Gov'ts (possible?) manipulation through inaction, in allowing a Federal crime to be prosecuted as a State offense?

I'd say neither. It was Gov. Wise ensuring Brown would hang by taking control of things.

Here's a NY Times article on Brown's trial showing that Brown's lawyer objected to Brown's being charged with treason against Virginia.

http://www.thejessejamesscrapbook.com/civilwar/trial/

Regards,
Cash

[matthew mckeon]

Cash,
You state that Brown's goal was good(end of slavery), but his method wrong.
How so? Because of his use of violence, in general, or just that this particular scheme failed?

"God said let there be light, and there was light
Man said let there be blood, and there's a sea!"
Lord Bryon

[Alabaman]

Hi Cash,

All this new terminology "pro union" & "pro lost causer" etc..is new to me. I'd never heard of it and now I'm using it. Go figure? ;-)

Are you saying the Feds might have turned John Brown loose if a Federal indictment and trial been convened...or not? I'm a tad confused. Would you please clarify? Thanks.

Sincerely,
Rob Adams

[elektratig]

Here is an article indicating that there is good reason to doubt whether Virginia properly exercised jurisdiction.

http://www.wvculture.org/history/jou...vh/wvh1-1.html

[unionblue]

From the book, Lincoln, by David H. Donald:

Lincoln explained the Republican party's view on the actions of John Brown's raid stage in October 1859 in his Cooper Union speech of 1860:

"At that time Lincoln denounced Brown's attempt to stir up an insurrection among the slaves as "wrong for two reasons. It was a violation of the law and it was, as all such attacks must be, futile, as far as any effect it might have on the extinction of a great evil." Though he had paid tribute to Brown's "great courage, rare unselfishness" and sympathized with his hatred of slavery, he concluded that the old abolitionist was "insane."

Unionblue

[MobileBoy]

Thanks for the excerpt Neil.I don't believe Lincoln hated slavery at that point nor did leading abolitionist.I see that as a typical political statement.