The Good Samaritan Was Brave, But Not Stupid

Matthew 22:39 says, "Love your neighbor as yourself." That is foundational to Christian ethics. It's God's instructions to extend the same care, respect, and empathy they naturally afford themselves to all others. Simply known as the "Golden Rule" for behavior.

To me, "As Yourself" means that I can hope that other people have the same moral compass as I do. And like me, they already possess some natural sense of self-care and self-preservation. Hopefully, my neighbor is like me in that he's learned to respect others. And yes, to me, that means living a life with kindness and empathy for others. It means that sometimes there may be some sort of personal sacrifice involved to help those in need.

The parable in the Bible about the Good Samaritan, in Luke 10:25–37, talks about a Samaritan man who shows mercy to a Jewish traveler who was beaten up by robbers on the notorious "Way of Blood" between Jerusalem and Jericho. From what I gather reading about it, the road was notoriously dangerous, frequented by robbers and killers of all sorts.

The scene where the attack took place was a remote, desolate area, where the Samaritan himself could have also been easily attacked. The victim was beaten, stripped, and left for dead. The Samaritan acted in a situation that needed his bravery. The victim was left "half-dead." The Samaritan put himself in harm's way to help someone in need, a complete stranger. Yes, the victim was a total stranger. And worse, the victim was a Jew, in a time when Jews were seen as enemies of the Samaritan people and vice versa. So yes, that Samaritan knew the risks to himself but still helped someone when others walked past -- including a Rabbi who saw the victim needed help but instead refused to and kept walking.

The good Samaritan was a man who held himself to a standard. That personal standard, that sense of being true to your moral compass, included treating others with care and kindness. It's said that he did so because he felt that love for others is inseparable from one's love for God. 

But the Samaritan was not naive. He simply chose to act with compassion, and he chose to assist the Jewish man despite recognizing the extreme dangers. He chose to place his own physical safety aside for the sake of another human being. That takes guts. It also takes smarts. Wanting to help and being able to help without getting yourself killed doing so is key. He obviously took that into consideration when doing so. 

I had a friend who lived in a big city. He told me that most folks living in big cities have done the same thing, and simply walked by someone who's needed help. His belief was that people who walk past someone in need are not so worried about getting involved, as they are of becoming a victim also.

I can understand how people can prioritize their own safety and security by not immediately engaging directly with the assailant. If you intervene, you take the risk of also becoming a victim. Of course, if you see someone getting beaten up and don't confront the attacker, then you have to live with that. For me, I would have a hard time justifying to myself and others why I didn't do something if I saw someone being assaulted. Doing that would go against everything that I believe in. 

That's one reason why I'm always ready to assist a police officer in need. I'd have a really hard time justifying to myself why I didn't if I saw it happening and turned yellow. To men, our sense of personal responsibility and having a sense of moral obligation to aid others in need speaks directly to our character as people. It speaks directly to our moral compass. 

Having empathy and assisting someone in need, particularly when they are a stranger and in danger, is an act of compassion and humanity. Such a sense of responsibility reduces the likelihood of crime and increases safety for all when people know others will assist. As for living with not doing anything? Living with one's conscience? Supporting a victim is tied to our own value system and integrity. It is during such tests that we find out who we are and what we're made of.

Also, if someone didn't want to step in to help the side that was being beaten up, what excuse does a person have for not helping someone after the fact when the assailants had left? What excuse does someone have for not helping when the threat to themself isn't there?  

In the case of the Jewish man, he was beaten and left for dead. The Samaritan wasn't there when he was beaten up. He came along later after the victim was lying in the road "half dead." The Summaritan didn't have to, but he probably did take his surroundings into consideration. Would he have done helped the victim if he felt unsafe? Would he have intervened when it took place? We'll never know the answer to that. 

The road was notoriously dangerous. The robbers could still have been in the area. But, it's believed they did leave after attacking and robbing the Jewish man. The Jewish man was going to die if someone didn't help him. That's the situation. There was no such thing as calling 911 and letting trained individuals handle the situation. Someone needed to care for that man, and people were simply saying, it's not my concern. Frankly, I don't understand that sort of mentality. But there are people like that, there always have been, and there always will be.

Many feel a moral imperative, similar to the Good Samaritan, to aid those in crisis, regardless of differences in lifestyle, culture, or background. The Samaritan man showed courage to act in the face of danger. While the danger of being attacked by the same attackers as those who assaulted the victim may have passed, the danger to a Samaritan helping a Jew was enormous.

Jews in the first century despised Samaritans, often calling them "half-breeds" or "dogs" due to historic religious disputes. By saving a Jew, the Samaritan man showed mercy to an enemy, reversing the expected, hateful social order.

And no, the story is not about being stupid or naive to that danger. It's about having the courage to show kindness and mercy despite the risks involved. And let's remember, he helped a Jew in a time when that meant personal repercussions. His helping a Jew meant he positioned himself for problems from his own people. It meant his bravery in helping the victim was even more impressive when we consider the fact that the Samaritan acted against his own interests and safety. 

Matthew 5:44 says, "Love your enemies." But, to my knowledge, nowhere in the Bible does it say that God wants us to be stupid, reckless, or somehow passive and allow ourselves to be killed. The Christian perspective of trying to understand our enemy's motives does not mean that God is instructing us to put ourselves in harm's way.

Loving an enemy is often defined as praying for them. Loving our enemies does not mean the same as when we're talking about love as in that warm feeling we have for those we truly love. It is a deliberate choice of action rather than an affection. It is designed to overcome evil with good, transform enemies, and free ourselves from the negativity of hate.  

It's the same as forgiving an enemy. Regardless of our personal feelings toward them, it's all about us refusing to let hatred for an enemy burn at us. The Bible teaches this in Ephesians 4:31-32, when it says, "Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you."

But let's remember, "love your enemies" does not mean allowing yourself to be abused or for us to become "doormats." The Bible does not instruct Christians to be "doormats."

We do not need to allow anyone to harm us or those we love. Protecting yourself, your family, or your community from someone who intends to harm you is all about being a responsible person. It's not some sort of violation of our Christian duty to do like David and pick up a rock, or carry a gun. Defense of life is not stupid or anti-Christian. 

Helping others while being aware of your surroundings, being vigilant, is not a bad way to live. The Good Samaritan proved that, and that wisdom, prudence, and courage get things done. Proverbs 27:12 says, "The prudent see danger and take refuge, but the simple keep going and pay the penalty."

The prudent person prepares and takes precautions. The simple-minded person doesn't and pays for it in the end. It's not hard to understand how that works. 

True compassion is an active, sacrificial, and courageous virtue, not merely a feeling. By aiding a despised stranger, the Samaritan demonstrated that caring about your neighbor means having to step over social barriers, overcoming personal danger, and providing practical care to those in need.

The Samaritan stopped on the dangerous road to Jericho, a route notorious for robbery and violence. And yes, despite the risks of staying in that location and the risk that his actions to help a Jew may bring repercussions to himself later, he acted with careful, considered action to save a life rather than keep walking by as others did. 

 
His actions were practical, not just emotional. He "bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine," placed him on his own animal, took him to an inn, and paid for his care. So yes, the Samaritan man sacrificed his own time, energy, and money, paying for the inn and promising to cover any extra expenses. And no, I cannot emphasise enough how he risked facing huge problems for potentially violating ritual purity laws because his compassion defied the religious and cultural animosity of the time. 

Though being ostracized by his own people for "doing the right thing" was a real possibility, the parable doesn't say if the Good Samaritan was ostracized by his own people for helping the Jew. So no, there is no record of the Samaritan being shunned, avoided, ignored, banished, or cast out of his own group. Of course, there is also no record of him facing any sort of legal or social repercussions for helping the Jew. 

While Samaritans and Jews detested each other and lived under "walls of bitterness," the parable focuses on breaking through those prejudices to help a neighbor. Though it is not a historical account that goes into details about any sort of consequences of what happened to the Samaritan man among his peers, the parable is, more importantly, a moral lesson about how love, mercy, respect, and our willingness to follow God's teachings override social barriers -- all for the better. 

By "doing the right thing," he helped the Jewish man. And in doing so, the Samaritan broke down religious and social barriers. He proved that neighborly love is universal, not limited by any bias or ingrained hatred. He refused to be concerned about being judged or appearing foolish and was open to the social consequences. His act of compassion proved that true faith and morality are demonstrated through deeds and not just words.

The parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-37 teaches us that showing mercy and compassion is the defining action of a good neighbor. The Samaritan, whose people were considered enemies by the Jews, acted like a hero and crossed the line to help a wounded man whom others ignored. He proved that the old saying is right, "If you want a good neighbor, you have to be a good neighbor."

To do that, be selfless and care for anyone in need. True goodness is demonstrated through action. The parable reveals a human need for grace, as the wounded man was entirely helpless, making the Samaritan's rescue a divine act of sacrifice and caring. The phrase "Good Samaritan" has become a universal term for someone who helps a stranger in a time of need. The phrase "Good Samaritan" also carries the connotation of someone courageous and wise in their decision to help, rather than careless.

 

Italian "Cowboys" Challenged Buffalo Bill Cody's Wild West Cowboys In 1890

The Italian Butteri

Italian "Cowboys"? Yes, Italian cowboys, as in cowboys in Italy. And no, I'm not talking about my favorite singer, Dean Martin, who was a great cowboy in his own right. 

Also, I'm not talking about Spanish cowboys, known as "Spanish Vaqueros." Italian cowboys, known as "The Butteri," or "The Italian Butteri," are traditional Italian cowboys from Lazio and Tuscany. Italian cowboys, known as "the butteri," and Spanish cowboys, known as "vaqueros or vaqueros de alzada," are cowboys in their respective countries. Both share the same common purpose of managing cattle on horseback. But they are different in a lot of ways. 

Besides their significantly different histories, the geographic terrain, their clothing, and even their saddles and other "tools" of their trade. In fact, instead of using ropes, a lasso or a lariat, known as a reata, to rope cattle, Italian butteri use a long pole, known as a lancia to move cattle. 

The most traditional and well-known saddle of the Italian cowboy is the "Bardella." It is a treeless saddle, meaning that it doesn't have a rigid internal frame. Traditionally made of suede or smooth leather, it is padded with horsehair. It has a wide, comfortable seat and large, prominent rolls to keep the rider secure during fast movements or "spooks" when working wild livestock. Its color is described as having a predominantly "orange hue" because of its specific leather treatment. 

Italian cowboys of the Maremma region traditionally use specialized saddles like the Bardella, but they do not typically "dally" a rope in the same way American cowboys do. Instead of using a rope or a lariat for roping cattle, the butteri historically use a "mazzarella" which is sort of like a pike. It's a specialized wooden stick used to herd and control livestock. So while some modern Italian-made Western saddles include horns for roping or barrel racing, some traditional Italian military-style saddles known as "Scafarda" sometimes feature a removable stainless steel horn or lack a reinforced roping horn entirely.

Of course, because they don't use a rope, they have no need to dally a rope on a saddle, so their saddles are very different than our Western saddles. The front part of a Western saddle is primarily called the pommel. In Western riding, the raised post attached to this section is specifically known as the "horn." 

The saddle horn is there to dally a rope. "Dallying" is a specific Western technique for securing a rope. Ropers wrap a rope counter-clockwise around a saddle horn to secure a caught animal without tying a permanent knot. This allows the rider to give slack if needed.

Many of the techniques American cowboys use come from techniques developed by the Spanish vaquero. Their techniques are what directly founded the American cowboy tradition of roping. The Spanish vaquero tradition is centuries old and was exported to the Americas in the 1500s by way of Spain's first colony in Florida. They defined the foundational skills of roping, branding, and ranching for American cowboys. 

The Italian butteri are more localized to the coastal marshes of Tuscany.  Italian butteri cowboys are very distinctive for their elegant clothing, which is traditionally dark velvet jackets, corduroy trousers, and wide-brimmed fedora-style hats. Their clothing is practical and designed to withstand the thorns of the Maremma scrubland. On the other hand, Spanish vaquero cowboys wear more chaparreras, chaps, to protect their legs. Yes, they definitely influenced American cowboy leather gear.

Italian butteri are renowned for their ability to break wild horses and manage livestock in the Maremma region in Tuscany and northern Lazio. The hills and marshy landscapes of Tuscany and Lazio can be challenging, especially when going after wild horses. And yes, they are renowned for their skill in handling wild Maremman horses and cattle. In fact, their techniques of doing that is timetested, and they are seen as the "Guardians of an ancient, rugged tradition." The butteri are considered the oldest working cowboys in Western Europe, with traditions dating back centuries to rural Maremma. They certainly predate the American cowboy by a thousand years.

They operate in the coastal Maremma plains, a historically marshy, wild, and challenging landscape north of Rome. They spend their days in the saddle from dawn until dusk, often managing livestock in remote, difficult terrain. They are known for their typical corduroy and moleskin clothing, vests, and wide-brimmed hats. And rather than a lasso, they use the mazzarella — a hooked wooden staff used for managing cattle and navigating the landscape. Their horses, the Maremmano, are smaller horses known for their strength and suitability to the marshy, wooded, and challenging environment. The Italian "buttero" culture remains a deeply rooted, authentic symbol of the Maremma.

The Italian cowboys from regions like Tuscany and Lazio, are similar to American cowboys in that the butteri (singular: buttero) herd, gather, mark, tame, and manage cattle. 

As for the legend of the Italian "Cowboys" who challenged Buffalo Bill Cody's Wild West Cowboys in 1890?

When Buffalo Bill Wild West Show visited Rome during its European tour, cowboys in his crew were heard boasting of their superiority when it came to dealing with wild horses. Buffalo Bill himself boasted that his cowboys were unmatched. This prompted Italian Prince Onorato Caetani to arrange a challenge against the Maremma butteri. The challenge from the Italians was led by Italian cowboy Augusto Imperiali.

The challenge to Buffalo Bill Cody's Wild West Show cowboys in Rome was a contest of skill. And yes, the competition took place in Prati di Castello, Rome, on March 8, 1890. It featured horse-taming and livestock-handling contests. 

The challenge, known as "La Sfida," saw local Italian cowboys break wild horses. The Butteri won when they efficiently captured and saddled wild Italian stallions, a feat the Americans struggled with. In fact, by their account, the Italian cowboys did it faster than the American cowboys. 

The expert Italian horsemen used techniques that have been passed down for centuries to famously prove that their ranching skills were superior to those of the American cowboys. The Italian butteri supposedly won when they efficiently captured and saddled wild Italian stallions, something that the American cowboys struggled with. 

So yes, the story goes that a group of Italian butteri led by Augusto Imperiali famously defeated Buffalo Bill in a horse-breaking competition in Rome. Supposedly, they "proved their superior ranching skills." However, some American accounts suggest that the outcome was questioned because Buffalo Bill felt they were too slow. 

Though there was a bet made between Italian Prince Onorato Caetani and Buffalo Bill as to who had the better horsemen, it's said that Buffalo Bill supposedly refused to pay the 1000 Lire wager because the Italian cowboys were too slow. 

Though Buffalo Bill initially dismissed them, the Italian cowboys' skill was said to have been extremely impressive. For Europeans who have always looked down their nose at Americans, the Italian cowboy victory must have been a celebrated moment. Of course, today the event is a cornerstone of Italian cowboy history. Italian lore considers it a historic victory over the famous American Wild West Show.

According to Italian lore, the butteri easily defeated the American cowboys thanks to "their superior riding skills and a soft-spoken horseman named Augusto Imperiali." And supposedly, even to today, modern-day Italian cowboys still maintain that their ancestors won the bet. Imagine that for a moment, to this day, it's said that modern-day Italian cowboys still claim that they won the event and that Buffalo Bill never paid the 1000 Lire he owed from the original bet in 1890. That's what you call holding on to a point of national honor.

Tom Correa

John Devine, Alias "The Chicken," Hanged For Murder In 1873

John Devine, alias "The Chicken."

John Devine's alias was "The Chicken." Some say his alias was also "Chicken Devine." With a handle like "The Chicken," you wouldn't think he was the notorious character that he was. But in San Francisco in the early 1870s, "The Chicken" was considered a desperate criminal. One of the things that made him such a hard-nosed criminal was his over 70 arrests. Another thing was that he associated with other criminal sorts in, and could be found in any of the seedy saloons and gambling clip joints on that city's waterfront, yes, the dreaded Barbary Coast of San Francisco.

Born during the 1849 California Gold Rush, the Barbary Coast was San Francisco's original vice district. Its name, Barbary Coast, was coined in the mid-1860s. It was inspired by the Pirate reputation of the North African Barbary Coast. It was a lawless 40-square-block area notorious for extreme depravity, crooked gambling, violence, and kidnapping. The Barbary Coast of San Francisco was world-famous for its lawlessness and "shanghaiing," which was the practice of kidnapping intoxicated or drugged men to serve as crews on merchant ships. For nearly 70 years, the Barbary Coast in San Francisco remained a unique criminal enclave where "every vice known to man" was readily available.

In 1869, John Devine, alias “The Chicken,” was mentioned in the newspaper as having been held to answer in the County Court for burglary with his bail fixed at $1,000. In 1871, John Devine was in the news again. That was when he was charged with first-degree murder for willfully killing August Kamp. He was caught, charged, tried, and after some court procedural problems, found guilty, retried, again found guilty, and sentenced to hang.

 

Reading the news story below, you may find it very interesting that The San Francisco Bulletin paints a serene picture of a man who found religion before being made to pay for what he did. That article stated that Chicken Devine's last escapade was when he invited August Kamp to accompany him to the southern part of the city, and upon arriving at a hill, he murdered Kamp. I found it interesting that the writers at The San Francisco Bulletin left out almost any mention of Devine's victim other than his name and where he was from. 

The San Francisco Bulletin newspaper published the following report of the legal hanging of John Divine, alias "The Chicken," on May 14, 1873:

THE DEATH PENALTY

The Execution of John Devine for the Murder of August Kamp

This day has been marked by an event of signal import in the history of this city, wherein the slow hand of justice, after a lapse of many years, has overtaken one of the class of reckless criminals who have reveled in rapine and bloodshed, bringing reproach on the fair fame of San Francisco, and red-handed murder has expiated its guilt by the righteous penalty of ignominious death upon the scaffold.

Whatever may be the abhorrence of capital punishment commonly experienced by a portion of the people, while contemplating the events of the past few years, the tardy and uncertain sway of justice, a sense of satisfaction and increased security will be inspired in the whole community by the announcement of John Devine, “The Chicken,” has met the fate which the law prescribes for the destroyer of human life, and there is one murderer less in San Francisco.

From the infamous character of this man, and the terror which his deeds of violence excited through a long course of comparatively unpunishable crime, ere consigning him to oblivion, the public will be interested in a brief sketch of the 

Career of the Murderer.

The man who has now paid the penalty of his last dark crime, leaves a record which has no parallel among the many depraved wretches who have figured in the brief but terrible criminal history of San Francisco, and perhaps the half has not been told.

The police officials considered him the most dangerous and unscrupulous criminal that infested the city, and hint at mysterious deeds of blood, never unravelled by the minions of justice, with which he is believed to have been connected. In truth, he was a fellow by the hand of nature marked, quoted and signed to do a deed of shame — apt, liable to be employed in danger with neither pity, love nor fear.

Devine was a native of Waterford, Ireland, where he was born in the year 1840, and was accordingly 33 years old at the time of his death.

He was of medium size, sharp features, dark-blue eyes, a low forehead, and a generally repulsive expression of countenance. He arrived in San Francisco in the year of 1863, as a seaman on the clipper ship Young America. On the voyage hither, he distinguished himself as a quarrelsome fellow and was frequently confined in irons to restore the discipline of the ship.

After squandering the wages he received in a short spell of carousing on shore, he was driven to the sea again and made a voyage to China, returning in the spring of 1865. He then obtained employment as a runner for sailor boarding-houses, in which capacity he perpetrated innumerable deeds of ruffianism in the “shanghaing” of sailors and citizens on outward-bound ships. Shortly after engaging in this vocation he received the title of 

“The Chicken.”

Which was endearingly conferred by one of his fellows, as significant of his prowess in a prize-fight. Devine had four notable encounters of this order, in the city and vicinity, and displayed remarkable endurance and determination, though not always successful.

His career from the time of setting himself on shore was one continuous round of crime, and he is well suspected of having a knowledge of the manner in which many a corpse found floating in the bay, with fractured skull and rifled pockets, yielded up i[t]s life. His record on the police register shows
Seventy-Nine Arrests! Up to May 16, 1871, when his final arrest for the crime of murder was made.

The charges against him embraced all manner of crimes, principally robberies and assaults with deadly weapons, it being his custom to assault his victims with slung-shot and brass-knuckles. His recorded crimes, however, are not supposed to embrace any near approach to the ull measure of enormities that were charged upon his guilty soul.

He was capable of the most savage treachery, and on one occasion attempted the murder of a prize-fighter named Tommy Chandler, by springing upon him from behind a door with a heavy iron bar. Being foiled in this, he subsequently shot Chandler, but not inflicting fatal injury, he got off with a short term of imprisonment on conviction of assault to murder.

A Characteristic Exploit. 

On the 8th of June, 1867, about 6 o’clock in the morning, Devine assailed an aged German lady, named Mary Martin, as she was walking along Merchant street, near Battery, tore the pocket from her dress, and robbed her of a purse containing a check for [obscure] and $25 in coin.

For this robbery, he was arrested and released on bail, for, notwithstanding the character he bore, he was usually enabled to find friends to go upon his bond in a certain part of the city. When the case came up for trial, officers went in search of Mrs. Martin, who had resided at a house on Powell Street, as the important witness for the prosecution of Devine. The lady had disappeared.

What became of her was never known, but it was possible that Devine might have told. Passing over a list of comparative minor offences, such as knocking down and robbing people, the next noticeable affair in which this remarkable criminal figured was the 

Attempted Murder of Miss McDonald.

On the night of the 9th, October, 1867, Miss Martha McDonald was standing in front of her place of residence, at the Mission, when she was suddenly seized by two men who were masked. 

She was gagged by a handkerchief being forced into her mouth, and prevented from giving any alarm. In this condition, the men dragged her a distance of two blocks and a half, to the bridge which crosses Mission Creek at Sixteenth Street. One of the two then started, according to the directions of his companion to “get the carriage.”

Being left in the custody of one only, Miss McDonald made a desperate effort to release herself. The fellow attempted to chloroform her, but the drug being spilled from the bottle, he then endeavored to secure her with a strap.

At this juncture, the other man returned, and she heard the exclamation, “Kill her, kill her!” A moment after she was pushed off the bridge, and she fell into the muddy waters of the creek, while the two men who had abducted her ran away.

Slowly and surely, she was sinking into the muddy bottom, with no assistance at hand, until the water was about her neck. Fortunately, an alarm of fire started some person past the locality, and her cries of distress being heard, she was discovered and rescued.

Devine was arrested as one of the participants in this crime, and Miss McDonald positively identified him by his voice. Devine extricated himself from the affair by proving an alibi, it appearing that he was serving a term in the County Jail at the time of the attempted murder.

It subsequently transpired, however, that he held the privileged position at the County Jail of “outside trusty,” and was permitted to travel to all parts of the city at will in the performance of errands for prisoners in more restricted limits. And more than this, he was abroad at the very time the abduction of Miss McDonald was made.

The Loss of a Hand.

In the month of May, 1868, Devine was indulging in one of his periodical carousing spells, and often bringing terror to several of the resorts on his beat at the city front, he entered a boarding house kept by William Maitland, on Battery Street. Here he flourished a huge knife with the recklessness of a savage, and caused a precipitate retreat of all who happened to be in the place.

The proprietor had been asleep in the second story of the house, and hearing the uproar, came down for a reconnaissance. Devine immediately started for him when he made his appearance, but Maitland was not of so yielding a disposition as to be driven from his own castle, and closing with Devine, he succeeded in disarming him. 

The latter then made an attempt to recover the knife, when Maitland with a powerful stroke cut him across the wrist. The blade, by wonderful chance, entered the wrist joint, and the completely severed hand fell to the floor.

Devine was appalled for once in his life, and hurriedly departed; but presently he returned and demanded his lost hand, which Maitland kicked out upon the sidewalk to him. Devine took the severed member and hastened to a drug store, where he implored a clerk to try and sew it on again. But the injury was irreparable.

Devine as a Merchant.

After a season of retirement in the County Hospital, Devine emerged as far repaired as medical science would permit, and being a cripple, his condition excited the pity of boarding-house masters and others at the city front with whom he had been associated. A contribution was made among them, amounting to $800, to enable Devine to establish himself in business by keeping a cigar stand.

He took the money, but instead of following the advice of his benefactors, he squandered the whole sum in a few weeks of dissipation, and again returned to the pursuit of crime with all his previous energy. 

He was associated with a woman named Mary Dolan, as bad as himself, and who was punished by terms of imprisonment in the County Jail and Penitentiary. From the time of losing his hand up to his final arrest, he perpetrated numerous larcenies, some of considerable amounts, and was always busily engaged in thieving when not confined in jail.

A complete history of this man and his offenses would be one of the most appalling in the annals of crime. Such was John Devine, and rarely has the slow grip of justice overtaken a criminal more richly deserving of the severest penalty known to the law.

Murder of August Kamp.

The crime which John Devine has now expiated with his life was one of the most cruel and wanton ever recorded in a civilized community, and could only have been accomplished by one utterly depraved. It was in perfect keeping with the whole life and character of Devine, who had become callous to every impulse that elevates a man above the merest savage.

August Kamp was an unsuspecting young German without relatives in the country. On the 10th of May, 1871, he arrived in San Francisco from Antioch, where he had been employed, bringing with him his savings -- to the amount of about $120. He started immediately in search of employment, and while making his inquiries along the city front, he was met by Devine, who offered to procure him a situation on a fishing vessel.

Elated with this promise, young Kamp was persuaded to loan $20 to Devine, on the understanding that it would be repaid to him the following day. The money was not returned as agreed, and Kamp finally suspecting the true character of his debtor, importuned him earnestly for his pay. Devine put him off repeatedly, at one time pretending that he had nothing but greenbacks on hand, and again making some other excuse.

On the 15th of May, Kamp, having again demanded his pay, Devine told him that if he wanted the money very bad, he must go with him to his mother’s ranch, beyond Bay View. Accordingly, the two started for the imaginary ranch, walking as far as Long Bridge, when they boarded one of the Bay View cars. On reaching the terminus of the railroad, the two got off the car and walked along the road. 

After passing the Five-Mile House, Devine pointed off to one side, saying that his mother’s ranch was in that direction, and by striking off across the fields instead of following the road, they might save a distance of one mile out of two. Young Kamp assented, and the two started across a lonely stretch of land, through vales and over hills, until a point was reached which the murderer thought sufficiently secluded for carrying out his design.

Kamp stooped down to crawl between the rails of a fence, Devine walking behind him, when the latter suddenly drew a pistol and fired the fatal shot, the ball entering Kamp’s skull behind the right ear. Devine then ran away, supposing he had effectually dispatched his victim, and was seen hastening back alone to the railroad terminus.

Kamp was shortly after discovered by a Spaniard, who was herding sheep in the locality, and being still able to walk, he was assisted to a saloon on the road, and from thence brought into the city and given in charge of the authorities. From the representations which the mortally wounded youth could make, and other circumstances, the police were immediately confident that Devine was his murderer, and measures were at once instituted for his arrest.

He was traced to various places in the city, where he had boasted of obtaining money by an easy method, admitted to several that he had shot a man and endeavored to dispose of a revolver. He was finally captured on board a steamer at Meiggs’ wharf, which was just about crossing over to Marin County, and the revolver, with two chambers discharged, was still in his possession.

At the City Prison, he was placed in the midst of fifteen or twenty persons, and Kamp, who was yet rational, readily singled him out as the murderer. He walked up and placed his hand on Devine, saying, “You are the man that shot me.” Kamp was taken to the County Hospital, and every effort was made to save his life, but without avail. 

Just before his death, which occurred on the 5th of May, an effort was made to take his ante-mortem deposition, but unfortunately, the Coroner arrived too late, and the important evidence of the murdered man was not secured in the case.

The chain of circumstances presented in the several trials, however, made out a case against the accused as strong circumstantial evidence could be drawn, and a doubt of his guilt was hardily admissible.

The First Trial

Was brought in the Twelth District Court, before Judge McKinstry, on the 20th of February, 1872, and occupied eight days, resulting in a verdict according to the indictment of “murder in the first degree.” The Court sentenced Devine to be executed on the 25th of April, 1872.

Judge Tyler, counsel for the condemned, appealed to the Supreme Court for a new trial on mere technical grounds, his principal point having reference to a minor discrepancy of evidence of one witness as taken before the Coroner at the trial. Although the several points did not affect the merits of the case in the least, the appeal was successful, and to the efforts of most indefatigable counsel, the wretched man was indebted to an extension of his lease of life a full year.

The case was brought to a second trial in March last, in the same court. In the meantime, an important witness had died, and the prisoner and his counsel were exceedingly hopeful of finding complications on this circumstance equal to another successful appeal to the Supreme Court.

After another tedious trial, the inevitable verdict of “guilty” fell upon the ear of the doomed man for the second time, and he was again sentenced to be executed on Friday, the 9th of May.

Hope was still buoyant in his breast, relying upon the determined goal of his counsel, until the 7th, when the announcement was made that the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court, and his fate was sealed beyond the further probability of human interference.

By the earnest intercession of the spiritual adviser of the condemned prisoner, the Governor was persuaded to grant a brief reprieve of five days, in the hope that the guilty wretch, with the certainty of speedy death before him, might finally yield to the ministrations of his anxious spiritual adviser, Rev. Father Spreckles, and meet his end in a penitential spirit.

During his long term of imprisonment, Devine manifested a bearing of bravado, never believing that merited retribution would finally overtake him, and on several occasions, he laughed to scorn kindly persons who ought to impress him with a realization of his terrible position, and turn him to preparation for another life. 

By A Remarkable Coincidence

His execution occurred two years to a day from the commission of the murderous act that consigned him to death at the hands of justice, and in his case, it may be said, “God’s mills grind slow but sure.” 

After receiving his brief reprieve from the Governor, Devine realized that no earthly interference could avail him further, and he relinquished all hope of life. At his own solicitation, all visitors were excluded from his cell with the exception of his spiritual advisers, and he gave himself earnestly to preparations for the awful change that awaited him in the few hours that still remained.

At times, he wept bitterly when exhorted to a contemplation of his guilty life and true repentance, and the consolations of religious faith seemed to reconcile him to his fate and enable him to await his end with fortitude. 

On Monday, he received the Sacrament of Communion from Rev. Father Spreckles, and Archbishop Alemany conferred upon him confirmation in the Roman Catholic Church. ,On the succeeding days Devine assumed an air of cheerfulness. On Tuesday, he asked permission of the Sheriff to be shaved, which was granted, the precaution first being taken to bind him securely to guard against any suicidal designs. His ostensible wife, Mary Dolan, was in jail at the time of the execution, having been committed a few weeks since for her common offence of habitual drunkenness.

Parting With His Son.

Devine also had a son, a child of six years of age, whom he had not seen for several years, and he expressed an earnest desire to see him before his death. The Sheriff and his deputies were anxious to gratify this last request, and visited the various charitable institutions in the city yesterday, endeavoring to find the child.

Devine last heard of him at the Protestant Orphan Asylum, where he had caused him to be placed immediately after his arrest for murder, the mother, Mary Dolan, being unfit to care or provide for him in consequence of her continual drunkenness and frequent detentions in jail. The lad had been removed from the Orphan Asylum, but the Sheriff happily discovered him in charge of the Ladies’ Relief Society, comfortably provided for.

When the child arrived at the cell of his wretched father last evening, Devine was much affected and exhibited instincts of humanity he had never known before. He embraced his offspring tenderly, wept over him, and implored him to shun the evil ways that had brought his father to ignominious death, and when the lad was finally removed, he clung to him with convulsive throbs, as if parting with the only object that had ever awakened the emotion of affection in his breast.

Last Hours of the Doomed Man.

Devine retired at about 10 o’clock last night after devotion with his spiritual adviser. He slept soundly through the night until 5 o’clock this morning, when he was awakened by the Jailor. In reply to the inquiries of the officer, he said that he had enjoyed refreshing slumber, as one could who had a clear conscience. He dressed himself with care and gave much attention to combing his hair neatly and arranging his toilet, having been provided with a new black suit and a pair of slippers.

At 8 o’clock, he ate a hearty breakfast, and shortly after his spiritual adviser, Rev. Father Spreckles, Archbishop Alameney, and two Sisters of Mercy arrived. The doomed man devoted the remaining few hours of his life to fervent supplications for mercy.

As the hour for the execution approached, the wickets in all the cells were closed, and the “trustees” allowed the limits of the Jail were locked up. At 11 o’clock, the reporters of the press were admitted and allowed to inspect the preparations for the execution.

The Scaffold

Was laid across the railings of the upper corridor at the north end, the trap in the centre permitting the body to drop to the lower corridor within about three feet of the floor, the rope allowing a fall of six feet. The gallows beam was extended above under the skylights, the ends resting in the ventillating apertures on either side.

On the west side of the scaffold, an iron rod ran up, to which was attached a cord, secured to a ring in one of the cell doors, the slipping of which drew the bolt by a weight and allowed the trap to fall. The gallows was the same used in previous executions, the last murderer who had stood thereon being the Chinaman, Chung Wong, who was executed in 1865.

At twenty minutes to 12, the Sisters of Mercy took their leave of Devine, and shortly after, attended by the Sheriff and the priests, Devine was conducted from the No. 1 cell near the entrance of the lower corridor, which he had occupied since his fate became sealed, to No. 41 cell in the second corridor, which was located nearly opposite the steps leading upon the scaffold. He looked pale and haggard, but a smile rested upon his countenance as he passed the group of reporters at the foot of the stairway.

He ascended the stairway with a light, elastic step and seemed to look carelessly at the gallows as he tripped along the gallery. At half past 12 o’clock, an immense crowd had gathered in the street in front of the jail, and on all sides of the building where a position might be obtained to observe even the grim walls within which the dread scene of violent death was being enacted.

The Sheriff then admitted all those who had received permission to be present, amounting to about two hundred. The spectators included several Sheriffs from adjoining counties, members of the Board of Supervisors, physicians, city officials, and upwards of thirty reporters of the press, among the latter being representatives of some of the Eastern papers, and artists for the New York illustrated journals.

The reporters were assigned a position directly in front of the scaffold, in the west gallery of the upper corridor, and the physicians took their places within the line on the floor of the lower corridor. The prisoner remained in his cell engaged in his final devotions, while the tramping of many feet and the subdued murmur of voices without reminded him of the relentless hand of Justice, eager to close his career.

The corridors, above and below, were greatly crowded, while the side openings, below the skylights, in either direction, were completely occupied, their appearance suggestive of the private boxes of a public exhibition.

The Execution.

At a quarter to 1 o’clock, the Sheriff directed his deputies to their positions upon the scaffold, and immediately after, he entered the cell of the doomed man for a parting interview of brief duration. On emerging, Sheriff Adams mounted the scaffold and stated to the spectators that it was the wish of Devine that all should preserve silence and ask him no questions.

At two minutes before 1 o’clock, the Sheriff opened the door of the cell, and Devine emerged, carrying a crucifix in his hand, followed by Father Spreckles. He ascended the steps to the scaffold with closed eyes, manifesting symptoms of weakness, and though bearing up with great power of nerve, the expression of his countenance and the twitching muscles of his throat indicated the welling up of inexpressible agony of soul. While standing upon the scaffold, his eyes remained closed, while Father Spreckles, taking the crucifix, continued whispering the consolations of the Church in his ear. 

The death-warrant was hurriedly read by Deputy Lamott, but Devine gave no heed thereto, attending closely to the ministrations of Father Spreckles and frequently kissing the crucifix with much fervor as it was placed to his lips.

At the conclusion of the reading of the warrant, Jailor McKenzie bound the doomed man with straps. One was passed round his breast and pinioned the arms at the elbows, another at the waist pinioned the wrists, and two other straps were secured about the knees and the ankles. The rope was then placed about his neck, the large knot of the noose fixed under the left ear.

Last Scene of All.

The murderer now stood upon the verge of the unknown. He opened his eyes for the first time upon the scaffold ere quitting the warm precincts of the cheerful day, and cast one longing, lingering look behind. The bright sunshine shimmered through the skylights into the gloomy corridor, and wrought the shadow of the gallows-beam before him. Loud laughter and the murmur of the thoughtless crowd without disturbed the awful stillness that reigned within.

Nerving himself for the last moment, Devine exclaimed with a loud voice, “Oh, my sweet Jesus, unto thy hands I commend my spirit. Amen.” He kissed the crucifix again, and the black cap was drawn over his head. The spectators awaited with bated breath.

A moment more, and a dull grating sound, like the swinging of a gate, broke the solemn stillness, and the soul of the murderer had passed out. 

As the trap swung, Devine dropped about six feet, a sharp snap indicating that his neck was broken. A few convulsive throes succeeded for a moment with drawing up of the knees, and death resulted speedily with little pain. The physicians made the usual observations and pronounced life entirely extinct in less than 15 minutes. The execution was most successfully carried out in every detail.

The spectators commenced leaving the jail immediately after the fall of the drop, excepting the few whose presence was required to sign as witnesses of the due execution of the sentence. The large crowd lingered until the afternoon was well advanced, in morbid curiosity, discussing the death and career of the departed murderer.

-- end of The San Francisco Bulletin article. 

What that article doesn't say is that John Devine shot August Kamp in the neck, and the young man lingered in excruciating pain for 10 days until he died from Devine's attack. In fact, in court, Dr. Edwin Bentley, Assistant Surgeon of the United States Army, who made a post-mortem examination of the body thirty-six hours after death, testified in reference to the wound, giving a full description of its extent. 

He said that by the time he saw August Kamp, his condition was "very much diseased and of a dark color; my opinion is that the cause of this man's death was pyemice, induced by the pistol shot wound in his neck. This wound was in a gangrenous condition; he lived about ten days after he was shot. After all the searching, I was unable to find the ball. My conclusion was that the ball passed out of the nose or through the mouth." Dr. Bentley also testified in court that he took "nearly seven hours" to make the examination of the victim.

So while The San Francisco Bulletin article talks about Devine's child, how he had a "spiritual advisor," and the murderer's supposed repentance, that news article never mentions the victim's family, if they were notified of his murder, their loss, or the loss that the murdered man suffered, how that young man's life was snuffed out early, cut short by a callous killer. It seems that the newspaper used its voice to fight against Capital Punishment rather than to report what happened to the victim. 

As for who John Devine was, with over 70 arrests to his name, he may have had a reputation for being "criminal smart." Like many criminals, Devine could have been "criminal smart," or "con-artist smart," meaning he could engage in illegal activities while avoiding detection, arrest, or prosecution. 

As for being a "con artist," short for confidence artist or confidence trickster, someone who gains a victim's trust — their "confidence" — to manipulate, deceive, or cheat them out of money or valuables, like all con-artists he was a scammer who build rapport before executing a dishonest scheme, or, in the case of John Devine, execute a plan to commit murder. 

As for Devine's whole act of crying "bitterly when exhorted to a contemplation of his guilty life and true repentance, and the consolations of religious faith seemed to reconcile him to his fate and enable him to await his end with fortitude"? I think that was a con job, just a scam to game the system and gain his freedom, or have his sentence reduced to life in prison. 

Let's remember that he'd already had a trial, a retrial, and a 5-day stay of execution ordered by the Governor. Knowing this, he may have thought his sentence could be commuted to life in prison instead of dancing on the end of a rope for what he did — especially if there were witnesses in high places, such as an Archbishop who would say he showed remorse and repentance. 

A few days after Devine was hanged, a short article described how "It is generally believed that Devine was one of the men who were hired to murder Miss Martha McDonald, during the prosecution of Stevenson, of Stevenson’s block, in San Francisco, for rape. He said he was in the county jail the night of the attempted murder, but it was afterwards ascertained that he was outside as a trusty and that he left the jail the same night. His last offence was the murder of August Kamp, in May, 1871."

  

Another newspaper article titled "The Criminal Career of John Devine, alias 'The Chicken," was published after he was hanged. In that article, Devine's criminal career is described as "most remarkable." According to that news story, Devine "started out as a prize fighter in San Francisco, and fought four or five battles. His first arrest was for an assault with a deadly weapon. He later shot Tommy Chandler, the pugilist, twice, and had been arrested seventy-nine times altogether."

For the murder of August Kamp, John Devine, alias "The Chicken," was convicted and finally hanged in the San Francisco County jail on May 14, 1873. A very deserving end to a cowardly murderer. 

Tom Correa

57 Times Sick, Unhinged Democrats Declared War on Law Enforcement

The report below is from The White House. It was published on The White House webpage on January 9th, 2026.

On National Law Enforcement Appreciation Day, the Trump Administration proudly honors the brave patriots of ICE and all law enforcement who put their lives on the line to protect America. In stark contrast, unhinged Radical Left Democrats have escalated their torrent of vicious, inflammatory attacks on these very heroes — branding them as Nazis, terrorists, and Gestapo thugs while inciting their delusional supporters to unleash violence.

As ICE valiantly defends our sovereignty and communities, here are 57 times Democrats have recklessly, deliberately stoked hatred and division against them:

1. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz smeared ICE officers as a “threat” to the public, called ICE “reckless,” suggested the state is at “war” with federal officers and “under attack” by ICE, and smeared ICE as the “modern-day Gestapo.”
2. California Gov. Gavin Newsom likened ICE to “secret police,” calling them “authoritarian” and calling for people to “push back.”
3. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker claimed ICE is turning the country into “Nazi Germany.”
4. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul accused ICE is “terrorizing people.”
5. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro claimed ICE officers “make our neighborhoods less safe.”
6. Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan said ICE officers cause “chaos and terror.”
7. Sen. Chuck Schumer declared that ICE “does not belong in our neighborhoods.”
8. Sen. Tina Smith called ICE “a clear and present threat.”
9. Sen. John Hickenlooper smeared ICE as “a reign of terror.”
10. Sen. Jeff Merkley likened ICE operations to “fascism” and claimed officers are “doing nothing” but “terrorizing our communities.”
11. Sen. Bernie Sanders asked people to “stop ICE from what they are doing as soon as possible.”
12. Sen. Elizabeth Warren claimed ICE is “intentionally stok[ing] fear” and “tear[ing] communities apart.”
13. Sen. Ruben Gallego said ICE exists to “scare the American public.”
14. Sen. Mark Warner equated ICE officers to a brutal dictator.
15. Sen. Dick Blumenthal accused ICE of spreading “lawlessness and recklessness.”
16. Sen. Alex Padilla accused ICE of “indiscriminate violence.”
17. Sen. Dick Durbin accused ICE officers of committing “atrocities.”
18. Rep. Ilhan Omar said ICE is “state violence,” called officers “vile and beyond cruel,” and stated “[a]bolishing ICE is not enough.”
19. Rep. Pramila Jayapal called ICE officers “deranged,” accused them of “kidnapping,” said “resistance” to ICE is “inspiring,” and claimed ICE officers will “shoot at you and kill you.”
20. Rep. Eric Swalwell smeared ICE officers “masked thugs,” called them “terrorizing bandits,” said it was his “priority” to ensure officers “are no longer faceless,” compared them to the KGB, and demanded they “stay the fuck out of California.”
21. Rep. Jasmine Crockett compared ICE to “slave patrols” and called them “thugs.”
22. Rep. Delia Ramirez said ICE is the “single biggest threat to public safety right now” and attacked ICE as “a terror force.”
23. Rep. Summer Lee said ICE is “out of control” and a “police state.”
24. Rep. Ayanna Pressley called ICE “a rogue, violent agency that “has no business in our communities” and “must be abolished,” and accused ICE of “terrorizing our communities.”
25. Rep. Mark Pocan demanded ICE “get the f*ck out of our cities.”
26. Rep. April McClain Delaney called ICE “lawless.”
27. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortes called ICE an “anti-civilian force” and said ICE “should not exist.”
28. Rep. Rashida Tlaib said ICE is “terrorizing our communities” and “turning our country into a fascist police state,” called it a “rogue agency,” and called for it to be abolished.
29. Rep. Julie Johnson excused violence against ICE as people “channeling that frustration.”
30. Rep. Laura Friedman said ICE officers are “terrorizing our friends and neighbors” and “bringing chaos and violence to our streets.”
31. Rep. Shri Thanedar called to end legal protections for ICE officers.
32. Rep. Janelle Bynum said ICE is “state-sponsored terrorism.”
33. Rep. Sylvia Garcia referred to ICE officers as “thugs.”
34. Rep. Jan Schakowsky urged people to “fight back” against ICE’s “abuse.”
35. Rep. Robin Kelly smeared ICE as the “Gestapo” and a “betrayal.”
36. Rep. LaMonica McIver incited people to “shut down the city” because “we are at war.”
37. Rep. Max Frost compared ICE operations to “the worst horrors and crimes against humanity.”
38. Rep. John Larson said ICE is “the SS” and “the Gestapo.”
39. Rep. Stephen Lynch smeared ICE officers as “the Gestapo” and “nondescript thugs.”
40. Rep. Dan Goldman compared federal officers to “secret police” who must be unmasked.
41. Rep. Becca Balint called ICE “vigilantes.”
42. Rep. Chuy Garcia said ICE brings “nothing but terror and violence” and warned ICE officers they “will be held accountable” for “terrorizing my community.”
43. Rep. Nikki Budzinski called ICE officers “dangerous and reckless.”
44. Rep. Gil Cisneros claimed ICE has “terrorized” people through “racial profiling.”
45. Rep. Lauren Underwood accused ICE of a “horrifying campaign to spread fear… and violently snatch people from our streets.”
46. Rep. Steve Cohen accused “out-of-control” ICE officers of “misusing their authority.”
47. Rep. Joaquin Castro called ICE “a rogue organization” that “should be disbanded.”
48. Rep. Maxine Waters said ICE was causing “mayhem and death.”
49. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey demanded ICE “get the fuck out” of the city and accused officers of “terrorizing our communities.”
50. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said ICE enforcement “is an attack on us all.”
51. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson accused ICE of being “secret police” who are “terrorizing our communities” and said ICE was a “lawless, racist force.”
52. Boston Mayor Michelle Wu compared ICE officers to a neo-Nazi group.
53. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass excused violent anti-ICE protests as just like a “Lakers championship.”
54. New Jersey State Sen. Britnee Timberlake threatened that ICE officers “will find themselves in the same position as those who carried out the illegal acts in Nazi Germany.”
55. Minneapolis City Council Member Robin Wonsley claimed ICE is carrying out “terrorist attacks.”
56. Los Angeles County Supervisor Janice Hahn called ICE “dangerous.”
57. Cudahy (California) Vice Mayor Cynthia Gonzalez implored the violent 18th Street and Florencia 13 gangs to “help out and organize” against ICE.

The above report outlines the hate speech and threats coming out of the Democratic Party. While we can see what Democrats are doing and saying to stoke the fires of hate and violence in our country, we should all understand that their campaign of violence is being extremely successful. Working with the Democrat-controlled mainstream media, Democrats are very successful in recruiting the ignorant to fight for criminals. 

A Murderous Plot To Massacre All The Whites Of Choctaw County, Alabama 1882

Here's an interesting news story I found while looking through the 1882 newspaper archives. It's a story that seemed incredible on the face of it. Too hard to believe. And no, it's not every day that I find a story in newspaper archives that has me researching for more information like this one did. 

As for what I found? Well, it made me wonder what drives such people to do such heinous things. I made me wonder why things change yet in many ways stay the same.  

The report of a murder plot by blacks in Alabama to kill every white man in Choctaw County, Alabama, made the news in August 1882. Yes, indeed, it was nationally circulated by telegraph. In fact, the Los Angeles Herald published it in Volume XVII, Number 156, on August 23, 1882, as follows:

A MURDEROUS PLOT 

A Conspiracy among Negroes to Massacre all the Whites of Choctaw County, Alabama — The Ringleader Hanged. 

Mobile, Aug. 22.— In Choctaw County, Alabama, on the 15th, a bundle of papers disclosing a well-organized plot among negroes to kill the entire White population of that county was found on the 18th. 

A quiet meeting of the citizens was called to consider the best mode of suppressing the intended outbreak and massacre. After discussion, it was agreed that the ringleaders were Jack Turner, K D. Barney, Jesse Wilson, Peter Hill, and Willis Lyman. Aaron Scott and Range West, to whom had been assigned the duties of leading their respective squads to Butler Mount, Sterling, De Sotorillc, and other places, and killing all the Whites at each place, should be arrested and lodged in jail. 

Their arrest was effected on the 17th without disturbance or bloodshed. The same day, a mass meeting of the citizens of all classes was called to decide the fate of the prisoners. 

The plot has been in existence since 1878, and the conspirators now number 400. They have powder, shot, and guns, and think themselves sufficiently strong to accomplish their fiendish design. Sunday night, the 17th of September, had been appointed for its consummation. 

The meeting brought together about 700 men, among whom were about 150 negroes, who, after hearing the papers read, by an almost unanimous vote, decided that Jack Turner was a dangerous and turbulent character, a regular firebrand in the community, and that the public good demanded his immediate death.

He was accordingly hanged at a quarter past one o'clock the same afternoon, in the presence of the multitude. The crowd then dispersed. The other prisoners are still in jail to await further developments.

-- end of report. 

But wait, this couldn't have been the end of the story. After they hanged Jack Turner, and the crowd simply "dispersed," what happened to the others who were still in jail? Did they hang them? Were they simply set free? Was that the end of it? It didn't make sense to me. There had to be more to this story. 

Then, I found this news story published in the Morning Press in Volume XI, Number 46, from August 23, 1882:

Bulldozing and Terrorism. 

New York, August 23.— The Tribune's Washington special says the conviction prevails that the remarkable story telegraphed from Alabama about an alleged conspiracy among the Blacks to murder all the Whites in Choctaw County, is the invention of bulldozers and that the hanging of Jack Turner, without trial, is only the beginning of another season of political terrorism.

-- end of report.

Political terrorism? Why did they make reference to his lynching being political? This made me even more interested in finding out what really happened, or at least how the situation with the others in jail was resolved. So again, I researched for a follow-up story. And yes, I found it. 

Published in the Sacramento Daily Union in Volume 16, Number 15, on September 7, 1882, was an in-depth follow-up to what happened on August 22nd in Choctaw County, Alabama. 

THE OLD SPIRIT STILL AT WORK IN THE SOUTH

A dispatch was published in our columns a short time ago relating the particulars of an alleged negro conspiracy in Choctaw County, Alabama. It was said that certain negroes had formed a plan to murder all the White men in the county; that a bundle of papers had been found describing the whole plot; and that on the strength of the information thus obtained, a thousand White citizens had assembled, seized six of the negro ringleaders, and hanged their alleged leader, one Jack Turner. 

The whole story was so incredible on its face that the Record Union at once pronounced it a fiction, and expressed the opinion that when the truth was ascertained, the hanging of Jack Turner would prove to have been a political crime, perpetrated by the Bourbons of Choctaw County to rid themselves of an intelligent and active colored Republican. 

The details of the case are now at hand, and they show that our estimate was singularly correct. The facts are as follows: Jack Turner was the leading negro of Choctaw County. He was a preacher, a man of great native force of character, a Republican, and a natural leader of his people. 

For some time past, it had been the practice of certain Bourbon planters to compel the colored men who worked for them to vote the Democratic Party ticket. On an election day, one of these Bourbons, named Carnathan, hitched up his horses and went to take his hands to the polls as usual. One of them, named Manning, however, declined to vote the Democratic ticket, saying that he had done so for years, and could not see that any good had come to him from it. 

Carnathan became furious, took Manning into a stable, tied him np, and flogged him most brutally with a leather trace, having an iron hook at the end. Manning's back was terribly cut up, and he was for a long time disabled. 

Turner heard of the outrage and persuaded the victim to prosecute the ruffian Carnathan in the Federal Court, for the State Courts have no justice for negroes as yet. Carnathan was indicted, through the energetic work of Jack Turner, and of course, he became the bitter enemy of the man who had brought him to justice. 

This, however, might have been passed over had not Turner had the audacity to act on the theory that colored citizens possess equal political rights in Alabama. He [Turner] organized the colored vote in Choctaw County for the Republican ticket, and he proved himself so good a politician that at the election of August 7th, the Bourbons had a majority of only 20. It was evident that if this active colored leader was not stopped in his political career, he would carry the county next time. 

Turner was Chairman of the Republican County Committee, and his word was law with his followers. So, ten days after the election, a mob of White scoundrels collected under cover of night, took Turner and his principal followers, hanged the former, and flogged and tortured the latter, under the thin pretense of a conspiracy. 

It was, as we surmised from the first, one of those cowardly political outrages by the commission of which the Southern people have succeeded in retarding their own progress, keeping capital and enterprise out of their section, and sustaining in the Northern mind the profound conviction that they cannot be trusted with power again in the councils of the nation. 

Jack Turner was as much a martyr as John Brown. 

He was engaged in a noble cause. He was organizing his people politically, and enabling them to utilize the suffrage conferred upon them by the nation. For this, he was brutally murdered by a mob of cowardly White loafers, who, possessing no deserts of any kind, swagger and strut about their slovenly holdings, and because they are lazy and ferocious and dissolute and profane, flatter themselves that they are "gentlemen" and the very salt of the country. 

One man like poor Jack Turner is worth a battalion of such "White trash" as the mob that murdered him, and until the better elements of the South realize that truth, and act upon it; until public opinion in those States enables justice to be done in the Courts, and accords to every honest man, no matter what his color, equal protection and respect; the South will continue to languish, will cry in vain for capital, and will be doomed to appear at each Presidential election as the "shocking example" which justifies the country in voting down the Democratic Party ticket. 

Here was a man who was doing nothing, which it was not his right to do. He was simply exercising the political attributes which are the heritage of every American citizen. He was working towards higher and better things in politics. He was sustaining and advancing that Republican Party policy which every colored man in the Union must support if he understands his own interests. 

And for this he was seized at midnight, taken from his family and friends, and basely murdered under every accompaniment of insult and humiliation that the mingled cruelty and mendacity of his enemies could devise. The contemptibly silly story which the Choctaw County Bourbons invented as an apology for their foul crime shows what sort of creatures intellectually they are. 

Every schoolboy knew that the account of a "Negro Conspiracy" which was alleged to have been proceeding for six years was a clumsy fiction. Negroes do not enter into conspiracies. Negroes do not prepare elaborate written accounts of what they intend. 

The story of the bundle of papers is even more preposterous than the other. The plain truth, now first disclosed, is as we have stated it. Jack Turner was murdered by the Bourbons because he was a good citizen, not because he was a bad one. He was killed because he had proved himself more enlightened, intelligent, and energetic than the worthless White "canaille" [scoundrel or crook] which arrogates to itself political supremacy in the nest of barbarian-ridden counties which lies in that section. 

For Choctaw County is in the midst of a veritable "dark and bloody ground." It adjoins Sumter County, the scene of the Billings and Ivey assassinations, and that again abuts on Kemper County, Mississippi, made infamous by the Chisolm Massacre. The southwestern portion of Alabama is, in fact, nearly all missionary ground, but the missionaries who go there ought to be well armed with self-cocking revolvers and repeating rifles. 

The murder of Turner and the outrage upon his lieutenants shows that the old detestable Bourbon spirit still lives at the South. The same spirit still lives at the South. The same spirit has been exhibited at the Arkansas election, where the Republican voters were driven from the polls, and a negro was killed. 

Crimes like this, however, react with disastrous effect upon the Counties and States which permit and condone them. The North will never trust the national party, which is in political alliance with the South, so long as such atrocities continue to be perpetrated. For it is only too apparent that under a Democratic Party Administration there would not be even the pretence of fair play toward the colored voters, but that they would, by common consent, be reduced to a state of serfdom and terrorism more galling and intolerable even than the slavery of old.

-- end of report. 

Sadly, the story of "A Murderous Plot" was all made up. All just a hoax fabricated by Democrats in 1882 to cover-up their murder of a Black Republican. By not just any Black Republican, he was responsible for organizing Black voters to vote for the Republican Party that freed them, instead of voting for the Democratic Party that fought a Civil War to keep them in chains. He was a Preacher who used his influence to take power away from those who wanted control of the lives of people they once owned as slaves. 

"Bourbons" were the elite Democrats, the wealthy planters and landowners who dominated post-Reconstruction politics in the South. They sought to maintain control and refused to let go of the pre-Civil War social order that put Black Americans at the bottom of the social ladder. Acting as the local power structure, they violently opposed political alliances of freed slaves with the Whites Republicans who fought to free them. 

Democrats have a legacy of trying to control others. Democrats created Black Codes in Southern states in 1865 and 1866, immediately after the Civil War. The Black Codes were designed to restrict the freedom of emancipated Black Americans and force them back into labor. These laws enforced vagrancy penalties, mandated yearly labor contracts, restricted property ownership, and essentially sought to restore a slave-like economy by passing restrictive laws to do so. 

Laws mandated that Blacks sign yearly labor contracts, often with their former Slave Masters. Failure to do so could result in arrest, fines, or being forced into unpaid labor. Being unemployed was criminalized. Those convicted of "vagrancy" were fined and, if unable to pay, their labor was hired out to Democrat planters. 

Democrats made sure Black people were prohibited from owning firearms, serving on juries, testifying against Whites, and in some areas, owning land outside of designated towns. As for Black orphans or children of parents deemed unable to support them, those children were forced into "apprenticeships" with Democrats planters -- who were often former their former owners.

Democrats created Black Codes to ensure that they'd have a cheap, reliable labor force for Southern agriculture. The oppressive nature of these codes outraged Republicans in the North, leading to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment, which aimed to secure equal rights.

While most Black Codes were repealed during Congressional Reconstruction in 1866-1867, Democrats resurrected many aspects of the Black Codes when the Democrats created Jim Crow laws. Democrats instituted Jim Crow laws in the disenfranchised1870s after Reconstruction. Their laws enforced strict racial segregation and disenfranched Black citizens. Democrats kept control over Blacks in the South through state and local statutes until the 1960s. It's hard to believe, but it's true. It took almost 100 years for the legal system of the Democratic Party's Jim Crow Laws to be finally dismantled by federal legislation in the 1960s, specifically the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965

 
When Democrats regained political control of the South in the 1870s, they established discriminatory laws to reverse any sort of Civil Rights gains for Blacks. They used laws enforcing segregation, while poll taxes, literacy tests, and intimidation were used to stop Black people from voting. During all of this, the unofficial militant arm of the Democratic Party, like today's ANTIFA, was the KKK and other terrorist groups, created to terrorize and keep Blacks in line. That's why they murdered Jack Turner in 1882. He stood up to them.

To show you how the Democratic Party playbook has not changed, though the original story of "A Murderous Plot" was disproved by September of that year, Democrat-controlled newspapers kept running the lie of "A Murderous Plot," as it was first circulated in August, through the end of 1882. 

As for those people who would say that the Democrats in 1882 would never have killed a Black Republican because he was a political threat, here's this: Democrats were defeated in the 1882 local elections in Choctaw County, Alabama, by a coalition organized by Black Republican Jack Turner. 

What can we learn from this?

Well, we know the reason why Democrats lynched Jack Turner. He was a political threat, and they killed him. Of course, it's the same reason why Democrats today have incited assassination attempts against Republican President Donald Trump and violent attacks against Republican Trump supporters. It's what they do to political threats. It's what Democrats have always done. Whether it was inciting the assassination of Republican President Abraham Lincoln or lynching Republicans like Jack Turner, it's just what Democrats do. 

History teaches us a great deal about how people conduct themselves, good and bad. As for the bad, history teaches us how people fake changes, how they pretend to be something they are not, how they game the system, and how they return to the same old playbook time and time again. If we look at things for what they are, then we will always see the particular way or method that people do things -- especially things that are characteristic or well-established by them. 

Among the timeless options of the Democratic Party is that of accusing their political opponents of what they are guilty of. Another is their use of authoritarianism to control others. It's their old slave master mentality. And yes, whether we like it or not, Democrats are violent and resort to violence whenever they feel the need to intimidate or cajole people into following them. 

Rather than using honesty and good faith reasoning, Democrats have a history of deception and false promises to trick and manipulate people into doing things -- even to the point of lynching someone like Jack Turner, who they deemed "a dangerous and turbulent character, a regular firebrand in the community, and that the public good demanded his immediate death."

History teaches us that Democrats have always demonized their political opponents and used violence to attack and assassinate them to subvert the will of the people. History teaches us that that's the case. That's all part and parcel of how the Democratic Party has always operated. 

Tom Correa 

What Made Marriages Work On An 1858 American Homestead

In 1858, American pioneer couples faced incredible challenges during America's Westward expansion. Nothing about their lives was what we today would call "easy." Even the journey itself was arduous and cruel. The journey West often lasted six to eight months with little time for rest, even during childbirth along the trail.

The journey West in the 1850s was a 2,000-mile, six-month ordeal of extreme physical hardship. Those coming West endured brutal weather, freezing nights, scorching heat, unforgiving terrain, scorching deserts, treacherous river crossings, and disease -- especially cholera and dysentery. 

As for the disease? It's true. While accidents and deaths involving wagons, firearms, hostiles, and rattlesnakes were common, it was cholera, dysentery, and measles that were the primary killers of American pioneers coming West. The reason for that is that those diseases were spread by poor sanitation and inadequate nutrition. 

Wagons moved slowly, only about 8 to 20 miles per day. And yes, this pace forced many to walk the entire journey. Pioneers faced broken wagons, scarce water, and dangerous terrain, with mortality rates estimated between 4% and 10%. If wagons broke down, travelers were often left to fend for themselves since the wagon train couldn't wait for people to make needed repairs or find fresh oxen. This led to the separation of family members who had to push on ahead.

Food supplies often ran low, forcing families to abandon possessions or face starvation. But, despite the perils and the risks, the promise of a better life drove thousands to undertake this journey. That is what drove pioneer married couples to face extreme hardships, physically demanding labor, isolation, and constant danger. It was not romantic or an adventure. It was toughing it out when things weren't easy. It was striving for a better life and working toward a dream of having your own place.

As for women who faced pregnancy and childbirth, most times, whether it was while enduring the long journey West walking beside wagons, or giving birth in wagons with no springs, women often faced childbirth without medical assistance and were considered fortunate to have whatever help they could get from the other ladies in a wagon train. 

On homesteads, the mortality rate for women was high. And yes, that is also the reason that some men were married to multiple wives during their lifetime; many women died during childbirth or from frontier conditions. The isolation meant there was no trained medical assistance nearby. Births were typically handled by midwives or family members, if available. Women often delivered alone or with only family present, making any sort of complication fatal for either or both in some cases.

Let's remember, besides a lot of other things that can go wrong, those pioneer women went without access to antiseptic techniques. That in itself led to high rates of infection. And yes, just as it would be today, with infections, there was the possibility of sepsis.

And here's something else: pioneers worked hard. The extreme physical labor, combined with poverty, meant that life required relentless work to survive. So, along with clearing land, building log cabins, growing crops, tending to livestock, and maintaining things, exhaustion was commonplace. And really, why shouldn't they be exhausted? Their daily life involved working from sunup until sundown.

Chores on an 1858 homestead were relentless, sun-up to sun-down tasks focused on survival, involving heavy manual labor, livestock care, and food production. Daily routines centered on milking cows, feeding animals, tending gardens, chopping wood, hauling water, and repairing tools, with women managing cooking, cleaning, and laundry.

On homesteads, cows and goats required milking twice daily. Livestock was fed, and water was made available by hauling buckets. There's also the chore of cleaning stalls and gathering eggs. And as for the field work, there was plowing, tilling, planting, and harvesting crops, often with horses or oxen. There was seasonal planting in spring, haying in summer, and harvesting in autumn. Harvesting food was usually a family affair, with everyone doing their part.

And let's not forget that a homesteader in 1858 still built and repaired fences. They also built and repaired their tools and harnesses for their horses, mules, or oxen. And in winter, there was still the job of breaking ice for water. As for facing food shortages and poor sanitation, that was a constant fear and a constant problem. Of course, settlers also dealt with the constant strain of cold, insects, and the fear of injury. An injury that kept a man or a woman from working their homestead would have been catastrophic.

Household chores also had to be done. There was carrying water for cooking and cleaning, chopping wood for heating, and using in a cookstove. Doing laundry was all about rubbing clothes on a washboard, boiling, and wringing them by hand. Sewing, mending, and repairing clothing to maximize their use was normal for everyone. So was food preservation like canning, smoking meat, curing, and making soap from lard. Baking bread, churning butter, preparing meals from scratch, and tending the fire.

As for children, they learned that shirking was not tolerated. Some children did fieldwork, milked cows, tended animals, churned butter, helped make soap, brought in wood to keep a fire going, and hauled water. And yes, carrying water, often from distant sources, a task that became harder in winter. The youngest were usually assigned to gathering eggs, weeding the family gardens, and maybe fetching water.

It took a tremendous amount of grit to farm, build a homestead, and navigate the hardships of the frontier. There are reasons that we refer to stalwart Americans as folks who have a "pioneer spirit." Their typical life was all about hard work and being self-sufficient. The couples, back in the day, demonstrated remarkable resilience in carving out lives on the American frontier, often with minimal resources. Frankly, they had limited resources for comfort.

Homesteaders faced constant threats, including harsh weather, illness, and in some areas there was the problems of hostiles of all colors. Daily life required, as one settler noted, living on "work and love," sometimes spending years without basic amenities like a fireplace or stove, relying on wood fires against cabin logs. Wives, while managing the home, played a crucial role in farm labor and managing the homestead itself. 

The irony is that in the 1850s, married women were legally subordinate in the eyes of the law. That meant they had to rely on their husbands for legal standing regarding property, while in fact serving as the emotional backbone of the home.

Life on an 1858 homestead was defined by constant, labor-intensive chores that spanned from dawn until dusk, leaving little time for leisure. Family members, including children, worked from morning until night, leaving few opportunities for rest or comfort. Daily survival required endless tasks. So no, there's no doubt that an 1858 homestead was demanding. But, though that was the case, a lot of families made them work. 

Marriages on homesteads in 1858 required immense strength, grit, and dependence on each other. Often described as "toughing it" through a lifestyle that combined extreme physical labor, isolation, and a lack of basic shelter or resources. Marriage was a partnership essential for surviving the harsh realities of the American frontier.  

Those homesteads succeeded through a survival-based partnership in which traditional roles were respected and encouraged. It was a world where men focused on breaking ground and planting crops to provide for their families, while women managed the home, which included cooking and raising their children. It was all about love and working together with your wife, who shared the same goal, that common objective of building a permanent homestead of their own. Being self-sufficient was just part and parcel of the times. But even though that was the case, chores and having to do for yourself created a strong collaborative family bond.  

 

So when asked, what made marriages work, and ultimately stronger, on an 1858 American homestead? The answer might simply be that, like today, life and marriage require immense emotional fortitude and a strong belief in God on the part of both the husband and the wife. That sort of resilient, clear-headed, purposeful resolve can hold things together through anything.  

Tom Correa