Posted on 08/19/2002 5:48:34 AM PDT by one2many
I would characterize this as a sort of "countersuit" although it doesn't technically meet the criteria to be such.
I don't think your people are gonna get what they want this time; too many honest black folk are not going for this.
Eleven soldiers belonging to the 159th New York Regiment were tried for marauding and committing outrages too gross for public mention. Of these, two were perhaps 25 years of age, and the others were mere boys, varying from 17 to 20. One of the youngest of these boys turned State’s witness and pointed out those of his companions who were engaged in the outrage; the part he took being simply that of stealing fowls of which he obtained about fifteen.
According to the story of this witness, the young men went to the plantation of Mr. R. D. Darden, in Lafourche, and while he and another of his companions were engaged in stealing chickens from the negro cabins, some of the crowd broke into one of the cabins. Who broke the door in he did not know and what was done therein he did not witness. The inmates of the cabin were a negro of about 40 years in age, his wife, and his daughter, a dusky damsel of 18 or 20 summers.
For the credit of humanity we will suppose that illegal foraging was all that they first intended. When the negro found that his hen house was being despoiled of his pretty chickens, he mustered up a sufficiency of courage to put his head out of the window and beg that a few at least of the brood should be spared to him for breed. Thereupon he was assailed by foul speeches and rude threats; brickbats were sent flying against his windows, and some of them threatened to enter the house and kill the old son of _____ .
Finding that there was a movement to carry these threats into execution, the old negro climbed up into his loft where he could look down on them, as he said, “like a eagle looking down on carrion.” About the time that he got up on the loft the door was burst open and a demand was made for the man who had spoken to them from the window. The women, to shield husband and father, declared that there was no man there.
In an instant the cabin was filled, a light was struck, and as the man was no where to be seen, a purpose more fiendish than that which had induced them to enter the dwelling, took possession of the marauders. The girl was at once seized, and with violence, alike criminal and brutal, they accomplished their fiendish purposes, one after another, in the presence of the father and the mother.
They then stripped the girl of her jewelry, ear rings, finger rings, a bracelet, and some of her choicest articles of apparel, as trophies of their diabolical achievement, and having done so, left.
The Judge, in disposing of the case, said that the ringleader, one H. B. Hopkins, should be drawn and quartered, but he would only sentence him to Tortugas for life, there to labor with ball and chain; Jordan M. Lee, a youth who took an active part in the proceedings and stood at the girl’s head with the bayonet at her throat, was sent to Tortugas for ten years; the others were all sent to the same place for three years each. Their names are Henry Dennis, James Lee, D. Rafften, John Thorpe, R. Wheeler, R. Coons, J Horan and H. C. Nelson. J Reil, the boy who turned State’s witness, and G. W. Scoefield, who was proved not to have been in the crowd, were sent back to their regiments.
You argued in your post that when a leadership had no respect for the law, that opinion was sure to trickle down to the lower ranks. Given that the Northern leadership basically waged war on civilians, it is perhaps not surprising that Northern soldiers raped. The other posters may well be correct that rapes by Northern soldiers far outnumbered those by Southern soldiers. You appear to have identified the cause.
Yes, they are. I am in the U.S. military, and I speak of conservative values every opportunity I get. All hope is not lost! There are still good people in our country. I pray that God will continue to guide us.
"...they visited a second time the house of Lieut. White, and after abusing the family, took his daughter, an accomplished young lady of seventeen years. After having her hands tied in front of her and the rope thrown over her shoulders, she was driven by a big negro, with curses and abuse, in front of the command toward Norfolk. Within two miles of Norfolk, they met a regiment of New York white infantry, who, with its colonel at its head, knocked over the negro driver and rescued Miss White from the negro guard, and sent her to Norfolk in a carriage."
Rape was not involved here, or at least not reported. But could it be far behind if this sort of stuff happened when troops, black or white, were allowed to ravage the civilian population, as the Federal troops apparently were in situation after situation?
That is not to say that Southerners were all pure and virtuous. I imagine that a number of female slaves had been attacked by the lower sorts of masters. Set up a bad situation, like slavery or army attacks on civilians, and you reap the consequences.
"Mrs Charles Schmidt (...) whose husband is in the 26th Missouri regiment was ravished and her person violated by a number of the fiendish ghouls. This was done while Price had his headquarters in this town. Mrs S. Is now nearly dead. Mrs Schmich (...) was assaulted in her house not more than a square from Price's headquaters, by some of Shelby's men who took improper liberties with her and attempted to ravish her , but her cries excited the sympathies of some rebel soldiers less brutal than their fellows, who rescued the poor woman from their clutches. The cries of this woman must have reached the ears of Sterling Price but no guard was sent to arrest the brutes. (...) Mrs Frank Schryvor (...) whose husband died in the army , was another lady upon whom an outrage was attempted. Being a woman of great spirit and agility, she succeeded, by flight, in escaping from the fiends, and hid from them in the woods." - October 13, 1864 St Louis Democrat. article by "Waldo" upon Price's Missouri campaign of 1864.
Callan Samuel, pvt 15th Ohio vol. , attempted rape on "Mary" a colored girl in her cabin on Mr fenner's plantation at Victoria (Texas). The court-martial found him not guilty and release him.
Cole William H. pvt 109th NY vol. , At the end of 1863 he was accused for the rape of Mrs Alvisa Brown, 50, from Laurel, Prince George County (Md). Mrs Brown said the crime was committed last may, Cole received 10 years in the Albany state penitenciary (NY)
Eagan John, pvt, 4th US regulars, attempted rape on Mrs Bridget Kilkenny at Fort Schuley (NY) with an other unknown man. Eagan received dishonorable discharge and 5 years of jail.
Eliott William, pvt Co G 8th US infantry, attempted rape on Kate Brooks, a colored woman, on 7 november 1862 on Johnson's plantation at Rectortown (Va). Jail for life.
Forrest John, pvt Co M, 3rd Mass. Heavy art. attempted rape on Mrs Francis Parker near Fort Saratoga (DC) around 4 february 1865. Dishonorable discharge and 6 years of hard labour.
Jamison J W. Dr, asst surgeon, US navy, during the spring 1863 in NC, he made indecent proposal and attempted rape on Miss Margaret Harrell. He was seized but punishment is unknown.
Hakes George, Cpl, co F 6th Michigan cav. dishonorable discharge and 2 years of hard labour for the rape of Cornelius Robinson's wife, "loyal colored citizen" from Frederick county (Va) near Winchester, around 19 november 1864.
Harvey John, Lt, 49th Ohio vol. two years in state penitenciary for the rape of Mrs Catherine Farmer on a public road of Tennessee near Tullahoma.
Hays Edward, pvt, co L 4th Kentucky cav, 50, two years of hard labour in february 1865 for attempted rape on Miss Nancy Short, 12.
Hunter Charles C. pvt, Co I, 7th Kentucky cav. 18 years in Nashville penitenciary for the brutal rape of Mrs Mary Melissa Kirkesey in her home, on the morning of 18 may 1864.
Killgore Thomas, pvt 38th Ohio / Kunkle Daniel, pvt , co C, 38th Ohio vol., 10 and 4 years of hard labor for the rape of a colored woman in a cabin near Catawba river (SC), on 27 february 1865. Three other men of the same unit was in the gang but they stay unknown and not punished.
Leonhart Jacob, saddler in the 26th Independant Pa Battery, jail for the war duration in a penitenciary for attempted rape on "Sally" colored servant of Mrs Jane L. Young at McMinville, Warren county (Tennessee). He knocked down Mrs Young before.
McCarthy Arthur, sgt, Ohio, 2 years in a state jail and dishonorable discharge for the rape of a young girl near Bennetsville (SC) according three eyewitness from 11th Illinois. Coprs commander remitted the jail term and pdt Johnson dismissed the entire sentence after he received petitions from officiers and comrades of McCarthy.
Manning Patrick, pvt, co B, 8th New Hampshire. The victime, Miss Clara Grier, attested that Manning have tried to rape her at Natchez (Miss.) but the court don't accept this charge. Manning was punished by 3 years of hard labour for other offenses.
Merrill Robert L. , pvt, 1st DC cav. He raped Virginia Quarles, a colored woman, at Manchester (Va) in front of several witnesses but escaped justice in october 1865 and run away before the end of the trial.
O'Malley George W. 1st Lt, co E, 115th Pa, in may 1863 during a night, tried to rape Mrs Mercy M. Whippey from Camden (NJ) during her visit to her wounded son in the 2nd div. 3rd army corps hospital near Potomac creek . 6 years of hard labor with Lincoln's approval.
Robinson James, pvt, co G, 6th cav Mo state militia, / Stewart Samuel B, pvt same unit, 5 and 3 years of prison for attempted rape on Mrs Letta Vernon during a night in her home.
Rogers Charles R., pvt co E, 3rd Vt vol. , head shaved, dishonorable discharge and 5 years of hard labour for the brutal rape of Miss Pricey McCoy near Warrentown (Va).
Stillwell Stephen, pvt, 37th Kentucky Vol. 15 years of hard labor in state penitenciary for the rape of Mrs Sallie McKune in the home of Mrs Blair on 29 july 1863 near Lebanon (Ky) -
Van Buren William, pvt co B, 212th Illinois, one month in jail for "indecent proposals" to Mrs Ellie Farnan and daughter .
Wallenus François, 2nd Lt, NY ind. by dishonorable discharge for attempted rape on a comrade's wife. Drunken. "Courts martials and transfers jan. 1 to june 30 1864, war dpt 1864."
Walsh Charles, 2nd Lt, 1st NY dragoons, drunken at Port Tobacco, (Md) indecent proposals to Miss Eliza Quinn "five dollars to the right to rape your person". Dishonorable discharge.
Waxey Alfred, sgt, 8th Pa cav. , during summer 1865, violence to Mr William Johnson (colored citizen from Lynchburg Pa), indecent proposals and gesture to his wife. Degrade with lose of pay.
Wells Frederick D. pvt, co D, 90th batallion NY veteran vol. , 3 years of hard labor for attempted rape on Mary Harvey from Winchester (Va). Cornish John, co G , 30th USCT, attempted rape on Sarah Potter. Sentenced to death but commuted to life prison with Lincoln's approval. The only black soldier tried for rape but not executed !
Troest Louis P. pvt, by I, 1st NY light Artillery. Two years of hard labor for the rape of Polly Walker, slave of Mrs Swindler, a 60 years old widow living near Sperryville (Va). Jerry Spades, black servant of the unit captain, was found guilty of the same charge and received 5 years of hard labor.
But what you haven't shown is a similar belief in the confederate army. What about confederate soldiers who raped or robbed or murdered? We know that it happened - your own secretary of war was complaining about as early as November 1861. But he washed his hands of the matter, leaving it up to the civil authorities. That has been my point all along. Not that Union soldiers never raped anyone, that would be ridiculous. But that the Union army respected the rule of law while the confederate army did not. The Union army went after miscreants and brought them to trial and sentenced them to jail if convicted. Where is there any evidence that the confederate army was so diligent in punishing it's own? Even when they preyed on their own civilian population?
Do you mean evidence of rape by confederate soldiers? The evidence does exist and most of it is from southern sources themselves. Do you mean the confederate army punishing such actions? Again, the evidence exists that seems to suggest that the army washed it's hands of the actions of its soldiers. And far from the actions of a demoralized army, members of the confederate government were commenting on such activities as early as November 1861.
Non-Sequitur posted a couple of the Confederate cases that were mentioned on the above web site but didn't mention the numerous Union cases cited. Perhaps Non-Sequitur's Confederate examples came from some other web site.
On the other hand, Non-Sequitur's objectivity, or lack thereof, is fully illustrated with his statement, "...the Union army respected the rule of law while the confederate army did not." While I have enjoyed discussions with Non-Sequitur, that statement takes the cake. It is worthy of a Whiskeypapa award.
So answer my original question, if you please. Show me where the confederate army was as conscientious about protecting the virtue of southern womenhood as the Union army was. Or, failing that, show me where rape was unheard of among the confederate soldiers. Either they didn't do it, or they didn't have to worry about being punished for it. One or the other. And if your answer is that they didn't do it, well, then who would qualify for the WhiskeyPapa Whopper award then?
CHAP. XXXVI.--An Act to organize military courts to attend the Army of the Confederate States in the field, and to define the powers of said courts.
SEC. 4. The jurisdiction of each court shall extend to all officers now cognizable by courts martial under the rules and articles of war and the customs of war, and also to all offences defined as crimes by the laws of the Confederate States or of the several States, and when beyond the territory of the Confederate States, to all cases of murder, manslaughter, arson, rape, robbery and larceny, as defined by the common law, when committed by any private or officer in the army of the Confederate States, against any other private or officer in the army, or against the property or person of any citizen or other person not in the army: Provided, Said courts shall not have jurisdiction of offenders above the grade of colonel. For offences cognizable by courts martial the court shall, on conviction, inflict the penalty prescribed by the rules and articles of war, and in the manner and mode therein mentioned; and for offences not punishable by the rules and articles of war, but punishable by the laws of the Confederate States, said court shall inflict the penalties prescribed by the laws of the Confederate States; and for offences against which penalties are not prescribed by the rules and articles of war, nor by the laws of the Confederate States, but for which penalties are prescribed by the laws of a State, said court shall inflict the punishment prescribed by the laws of the State in which the offence was committed: Provided, That in cases in which, by the laws of the Confederate States, or of the State, the punishment is by fine or by imprisonment, or by both, the court may, in its discretion, inflict any other punishment less than death; and for the offences defined as murder, manslaughter, arson, rape, robbery and larceny, by the common law, when committed beyond the territorial limits of the Confederate States, the punishment shall be in the discretion of the court. That when an officer under the grade of brigadier general or private shall be put under arrest for any offence cognizable by the court herein provided for, notice of his arrest and of the offence with which he shall be charged shall be given to the Judge Advocate by the officer ordering said arrest, and he shall be entitled to as speedy a trial as the business before said court will allow.
By your logic that you can't find records of Confederates tried for rape, therefore the Confederacy did not respect the rule of law, I suppose that my Georgia ancestors must not have existed either because Sherman destroyed the courthouses and court records on his march to the sea. As a genealogist, I am reminded of Sherman whenever I search Georgia records.
The confederate government had a history of abiding by the law, when the law was convenient. The confederate constitution required a Supreme Court yet no such court was ever established. The confederate constitution outlawed protective tariffs yet such tariffs were implemented in May 1861. The confederate history is full of instances where they said one thing and did another. Why should I believe that this was any different?
That was true in the interim constitution adopted in February 1861. But for their permanent government they adopted the same three branches that the United States government had: executive, legislative, and judicial. The final constitution adopted in March called for a separate supreme court and such inferior courts that the congress may establish. Davis and his government never bothered to form and seat a supreme court. They ignored an entire branch of government that was required by their constitution.
Did the Confederate Constitution outlaw all tariffs including those for revenue or just protective tariffs that promoted or fostered one branch of industry over others?
It's true that the constitution forbade protective tariffs. I suppose that would depend on what one considered a protective tariff. The tariff enacted in May 1861 slapped a tariff on virtually every conceivable import including things like all types of clothing, iron goods, tobacco products, and cotton fabrics. All goods for which there happened to be fledgling confederate industries. Considering that the confederacy was at war one would expect that items like these should have come in duty free. What other reason is there, unless there were local industries to be protected?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.