In 1863 When a Black Man Refused to be Whipped Was He a Murderer if He Killed His Former Enslaver?


Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,860
#62
Most Southerners had no slaves---They were responding to threats . I doubt many folks would have approved of the actions of the master.
How sure are you? Disapprove or not, it has been demonstrated over and over that human nature in such circumstances is to 'ignore it' and 'mind your own business'.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,860
#64
"Two weeks after the murder, West Bogan was discovered by plantation neighbors hiding among the thousands of former slaves in the contraband camps around Helena. They handed him over to Union troops."
http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=7627

Sounds like the incident happened in Union controlled territory. Why was West Bogan (and others) still being held as slaves?
My reading of the passage is that he was among others being provided for in a contraband camp, what we have come to call 'refugee camps'.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,860
#65
Here’s my question. Say it’s 1860. If a sailor receives lashes for failing to, as described in this article, properly mark his clothes, is it OK if he kills the captain of his ship after receiving a severe flogging?
No.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Messages
639
Location
Pittsburgh
#67
It would be self defense to kill only if West believed his life was in danger, in my opinion, though I'm no legal expert. I agree with 19th Georgia, West's actions are probably best characterized as voluntary manslaughter.
People have died from whippings. We have seen legal cases where one person shot and killed an unarmed person because they thought their life was in danger. Why doesn’t West deserve the same benefit of the doubt? I’d hate to say that race plays a role, but if the shoe fits in the south, it fits...
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2012
Messages
811
Location
Georgia Coast
#68
How sure are you? Disapprove or not, it has been demonstrated over and over that human nature in such circumstances is to 'ignore it' and 'mind your own business'.
Perhaps---But I doubt if the facts were known the good folks would approve---Overseers were often not held in high esteem .
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
29,368
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
#69
OK, but you're not going to like it .... Exodus 20:21-22 If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.
This what I like about Bible quotes.

Pick a theme, topic, or subject, and God is on your side.

Matthew 6:14-15 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly father will also forgive you. But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
7,909
Location
South Carolina
#70
People have died from whippings. We have seen legal cases where one person shot and killed an unarmed person because they thought their life was in danger. Why doesn’t West deserve the same benefit of the doubt? I’d hate to say that race plays a role, but if the shoe fits in the south, it fits...
You'd have to explain that last remark. I'm not quite sure what you're driving at. In any case, I'll say it again, if he thought his life was in danger, it's self defense. But we don't know whether it was or not, and when someone has been killed, there's no giving the benefit of the doubt. We need all the facts to determine the truth, but as far as I know we don't have them, so it's an either/or scenario at this point. Either West felt his life was in danger, in which case he was justified in using lethal force to defend himself, or it was a crime of passion, and thus manslaughter.
 

matthew mckeon

Colonel
Retired Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
13,663
#72
In 1866, Nathan Bedford Forrest killed a freedman with an axe for having a loud argument with his wife(the freedman's own wife, not Forrest's) and speaking disrespectfully to Forrest.

I guess Forrest was guilty of manslaughter or some sort of awful crime and would pay the legal penalty? I guess the posters here thought he should have gone to fetch a policeman, or run away.

But I think we will hear some justifications for the old Klansman, and former slave dealer than it was perfectly OK.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Messages
639
Location
Pittsburgh
#74
You'd have to explain that last remark. I'm not quite sure what you're driving at. In any case, I'll say it again, if he thought his life was in danger, it's self defense. But we don't know whether it was or not, and when someone has been killed, there's no giving the benefit of the doubt. We need all the facts to determine the truth, but as far as I know we don't have them, so it's an either/or scenario at this point. Either West felt his life was in danger, in which case he was justified in using lethal force to defend himself, or it was a crime of passion, and thus manslaughter.
I’ll leave my comment as is, thank you.
 

19thGeorgia

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
2,824
#75
If you discount the statement by field hand Tom then it's...
Voluntary manslaughter- a form of homicide that occurs without premeditation, deliberation, or malice aforethought. It is defined as an intentional killing committed in a “heat of passion” that results from provocation.
justia.com
 

matthew mckeon

Colonel
Retired Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
13,663
#77
If you discount the statement by field hand Tom then it's...
Voluntary manslaughter- a form of homicide that occurs without premeditation, deliberation, or malice aforethought. It is defined as an intentional killing committed in a “heat of passion” that results from provocation.
justia.com
What's interesting is now that slavery's over, we are hearing the voices of African Americans, folks that weren't allowed to testify before.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,845
Location
District of Columbia
#78
On May 22, 1856, South Carolina Representative Preston Brooks savagely beat Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner into unconsciousness in the Senate chamber. Sumner had a long recovery. Sumner had said some very, let's put it this way, very provocative and insulting comments about Brooks' relative, Senator Andrew Butler of South Carolina.

Wiki notes: "Brooks was arrested for the assault. He was tried in a District of Columbia court, convicted, and fined $300 ($8,370 in today's dollars), but received no prison sentence. A motion for Brooks' expulsion from the House failed, but he resigned on July 15 in order to permit his constituents to ratify or condemn his conduct via a special election. They approved; Brooks was quickly returned to office after the August 1 vote, and then re-elected to a new term of office later in 1856, but he died of croup before the new term began."

This makes me wonder, what if a white employer made a credible threat to beat a white employee? Could the white employee defend himself in that case? I would also note that there were white men who even dueled each other simply because one man disrespected another man's honor.

- Alan
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2012
Messages
811
Location
Georgia Coast
#79
On May 22, 1856, South Carolina Representative Preston Brooks savagely beat Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner into unconsciousness in the Senate chamber. Sumner had a long recovery. Sumner had said some very, let's put it this way, very provocative and insulting comments about Brooks' relative, Senator Andrew Butler of South Carolina.

Wiki notes: "Brooks was arrested for the assault. He was tried in a District of Columbia court, convicted, and fined $300 ($8,370 in today's dollars), but received no prison sentence. A motion for Brooks' expulsion from the House failed, but he resigned on July 15 in order to permit his constituents to ratify or condemn his conduct via a special election. They approved; Brooks was quickly returned to office after the August 1 vote, and then re-elected to a new term of office later in 1856, but he died of croup before the new term began."

This makes me wonder, what if a white employer made a credible threat to beat a white employee? Could the white employee defend himself in that case? I would also note that there were white men who even dueled each other simply because one man disrespected another man's honor.

- Alan
There is an old saying that one would rather be judged by twelve than carried by six----now we can say do not try to whip a man holding an axe.
 

Malingerer

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
2,559
Location
Cullowhee, NC
#80
On May 22, 1856, South Carolina Representative Preston Brooks savagely beat Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner into unconsciousness in the Senate chamber. Sumner had a long recovery. Sumner had said some very, let's put it this way, very provocative and insulting comments about Brooks' relative, Senator Andrew Butler of South Carolina.

Wiki notes: "Brooks was arrested for the assault. He was tried in a District of Columbia court, convicted, and fined $300 ($8,370 in today's dollars), but received no prison sentence. A motion for Brooks' expulsion from the House failed, but he resigned on July 15 in order to permit his constituents to ratify or condemn his conduct via a special election. They approved; Brooks was quickly returned to office after the August 1 vote, and then re-elected to a new term of office later in 1856, but he died of croup before the new term began."

This makes me wonder, what if a white employer made a credible threat to beat a white employee? Could the white employee defend himself in that case? I would also note that there were white men who even dueled each other simply because one man disrespected another man's honor.

- Alan
Thanks for including the link to what croup is - I didn't (a) know quite what it was and (b) that you could die from it or that (c) Brooks died of it. Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.
 



Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top