Corporal Punishment In Schools: What Does The Past Teach Us

Corporal Punishment In American Schools In The 1960s

I've been asked about bringing back harsher physical punishment in schools since the level of violence in American schools is higher than ever. So let's look at what corporal punishment is and what its purposes are. Let's also look at a few incidents in schools in the 1800s to see if they teach us anything.

Let's understand that "corporal punishment" is a form of physical punishment that involves causing pain or discomfort to correct or punish someone's behavior. How long has it been in existence? Well, it's been around so long that it predates the birth of Jesus Christ. In fact, the nailing of Christ to the cross was a form of corporal punishment and capital punishment, used by the Romans. It was a way of showing others what physical punishment awaited them if rules weren't followed. 

Judicial corporal punishment, such as whipping or caning, as part of a criminal sentence ordered by a court of law, has been around for centuries. And yes, it is still practiced in some countries. Prison corporal punishment has always been considered disciplinary punishment. In the old days, it's what took place when prison authorities directed their officers to beat inmates for misconduct while in custody. And yes, some countries still practice such things. 

Sacramento Daily Union, Volume 7, Number 1048, 3 August 1854

WHIPPING — The Placer Democrat newspaper says that a youth of 20 summers, convicted of petit larceny, on two distinct indictments, was sentenced for the first offense to be imprisoned in the County Jail for thirty days, and for the second to receive twenty-five lashes on his bare back. On Friday, the sentence of the Court was carried into execution in the presence of a crowd of spectators.

Corporal punishment in the military was routinely handed out for many centuries. Canning, whipping, and floggings at the mast aboard ships were commonplace even into the 1930s. Some say it went on past that. 

And yes, in case you're wondering, Slave Owners practiced corporal punishment on the slaves for things like not working hard enough, stealing, trying to escape, and violating their rules. Slave-owning nations in Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia, including in China's work camps still practice such things. 

Corporal punishment in schools with students receiving paddlings by teachers and school administrators still goes on today in America, but nothing like it once was. Back when I was a kid, I remember being in the First and Second Grades and attending a Catholic school, the Nuns would hit us with yardsticks and pointers. If we misbehaved, the Nun, our teacher, would do it herself or send us to Mother Superior, the principal.

I still remember being in the First Grade and being frightened about being sent to Mother Superior who would pull up my shirt and have me bent forward, then she gave me 10 whacks with a yardstick across my lower back. 

I also remember later in the 7th Grade when I was attending a Public school, being sent to the vice principal's office. He used a paddle on me and actually hit me so hard that he broke the paddle in three pieces. For me, all it did was make me hate going to school. And yes, it seemed as though I was always being sent to the principal's office. For a long time, I started to feel like I had a target on me for every teacher who was having a bad day. 

In the case of children or teenagers in schools in America receiving corporal punishment, spanking a student, slapping them, hitting them with a belt, stick, cane, or a yardstick, some schools actually made youngsters kneel facing a corner or wall for long periods, made students eat soap, and of course shaming the student in front of the whole class, were all commonplace throughout America for many years. In some cases where communities had small schools, teachers would beat and shame students in front of the whole school. 

Please understand, that the purpose of corporal punishment is to stop unwanted behavior, stop it from happening again, instill fear and intimidation into the minds of all, assert power, and use the punishment as an example to others. 

I can still remember the looks on the faces of the other students and even the satisfaction on at least one teacher's face when I returned from a principal's office hurting after being whipped with a belt or after being paddled. 

Corporal punishment solved some problems because it certainly did change someone's behavior. In societies, the fear of corporal punishment kept many citizens in line. In jails and prisons, it served as intimidation to keep the inmates in line. In the military, it served as intimidation to keep soldiers, sailors, and Marines in line. In schools, it served as intimidation to keep students in line. In all those cases, physical punishment was a great persuader to make people do what those in authority wanted. 

As for changing someone's behavior, or creating fear in students, trust me when I say that it changed my behavior when I was a little kid attending a Catholic school. As a kid, I became terrified of teachers.    

Some say corporal punishment, such as paddling, wouldn't be bad in our schools today. With all of the violence in our schools today, many believe that bringing back some "consequences" to one's poor behavior wouldn't be bad. Of course, as is the case today, many worry about returning to the days of child abuse in schools. 

So what do we do about the violence taking place in schools today? Would bringing back more physical punishment remedy the situation or worsen it? Let's look at a few newspaper stories from the 1800s and the two news stories I chose to represent the opening of the 1900s. 

American students, both small children and teens, were taken to task pretty regularly. But as you will see below, violence in schools may not have been as widespread as it is today, but it was present -- and came from students and teachers. Imagine that.

The Daily Dispatch, August 16, 1856:

School Master Murdered

An atrocious murder has just been committed in Florence, Alabama. A correspondent of the Mobile Morning Herald thus furnishes the particulars: A schoolmaster had a tame sparrow of which he was very fond, and he had warned his scholars that if any of them killed it, they should die by his hands. 

By accident, or intentionally, one of the boys stepped on the bird and killed it. Alarmed at the threats of the master, the boy was afraid to return to school, but the master tranquilized the boy's mind, and begged him to come back. He did so, and after the lessons were finished, he took him into a private room and strangled him. 

Upon the boy's father hearing what had occurred, he loaded his gun and went and shot the schoolmaster dead.

The Cleveland Tri-Weekly Leader, February 06, 1864:

Murder In Ashland County

The Ashland Times of this week, states that a young man named Alfred Desem was shot at Pyfer's School House, near Ashland, by George W. Longfelt, and killed instantly. The murderer was the school teacher of the district, and still at large, having left immediately on the commission of the deed. 

No particulars are given as to why the teacher shot his student. His parents reside in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. He is described as about five feet six inches high, weighing about one hundred and sixty
pounds, with dark curly hair, and black eyes, about nineteen years old. He has a hat and cap with him, and wears a grey shawl. 

George W. Longfelt, the school teacher of the Pyfer's School House, killed student Alfred Desem and fled.

Nebraska Advertiser, February 26, 1874:

One day this week a school teacher, called Prof. Hayes, near Agency, Missouri, was shot three times in the abdomen, and fatally injured, by one of his pupils, a young man of about twenty years, named Thomas Squires. Squires had been ejected from the schoolroom for disobedience, when, a day or two
afterward, meeting Prof. Hayes some distance from the schoolhouse, he shot him without warning.

Daily Evening Bulletin, December 22, 1881:

Charles J Gregory a school teacher in Shelby County, Indiana, shot at a pupil because he refused to write on a slate. The bullet missed the boy but his face was filled with powder. The teacher was arrested and great excitement prevailed.

The New York Times, June 12, 1887:

In Cleveland, Tennessee, excitement over the shooting of Miss Irene Fann by Will Guess. It was first believed that Guess playfully turned his rifle on Fann and it accidentally went off. But now it is believed he shot the teacher for whipping his little sister in class over an infraction of the rules of the school. A case of cold-blooded murder.

The New York Times, February 28, 1903:

Boy Shot by Teacher is Dead

On February 24, 1903, in Inman, South Carolina. Edward Foster, a 17-year-old student at Inman High School, was fatally wounded by his teacher Reuben Pitts after jerking a rod from Pitts' hands to avoid punishment. It is reported that several students attacked Pitts while he was whipping Foster. During the scuffle to try to stop the teacher from whipping Foster, Pitts drew a pistol and shot 17-year-old Edward Foster dead. The story of the teacher does not agree with what the students reported. According to the teacher, Foster struck the pistol that Pitts had drawn and caused it to fire. Pitts was acquitted of murder on grounds of self-defense.

Los Angeles Herald, September 12, 1909:

TEACHER SLAYS PUPIL WHO WOULD RUN SCHOOL

Bully Who Told Pedagogue Session Must Cease Is Shot and Killed by the Master

In Gravette, Arkansas, on September 11, John Bufram, a pupil, was slain yesterday by his teacher, A. T. Kelly, at the edge of McDonald County, Missouri. Butram had caused the teachers of the Bear Hollow school considerable trouble and had succeeded in thrashing two of them. When Kelly took the school he "went prepared." 

Young Butram is said to have announced there would be no school yesterday, and Kelly insisted the session would continue as usual. During the discussion, Butram drew a knife, whereupon Kelly shot him. Kelly surrendered to authorities.

-- end of news articles.

So now, can you image a student, a bully, demanding that a school shut down operations because he said so? And really, can anyone blame the schoolmaster for arming himself? Not me. I stand behind what that teacher did. He did right.

Also, can you imagine a teacher in the previous news story? He tried to "whip" a student, but then the other students tried to stop the teacher. Then the teacher pulls a handgun and shoots the student he was trying to discipline. Then the teacher is acquitted of murder on the grounds of self-defense? Can you imagine if that were to happen today? Can you imagine if teachers felt so compelled to beat a student that the teacher created chaos in the classroom? I can't help but wonder how that would go over today.

So, is there something other than physical punishment as an option for creating a safe place where students learn to respect others -- especially those in authority? What can we do about teaching young people that there are consequences for bad behavior? And by the way, how about we start teaching what bad behavior is? Let's define it in schools so there's no question what people are being asked to do. 

Let's be honest here, some schools refuse to teach manners and civility. Some only teach what is offensive to their political agenda. That's especially true in ultra-Liberal states where disdain for authority is encouraged. Yes, I said encouraged. If you don't think so, ask yourself what the whole "Defund the Police" movement is all about. 

Sadly, some states push Leftist agendas which teach students that conforming with generally accepted standards of respectable and morally right behavior is bad and not necessary.  

So while much of the focus is on how to discipline students as it should be, let's also remember that unbridled power in the hands of teachers can lead to an abuse of power. And please don't kid yourself, there are a lot of examples of teachers abusing their power in the classroom. They are in the news almost every day.

While school violence is a huge problem, today we see another problem with what's taking place in schools across America -- teachers indoctrinating students with their Leftist ideology instead of teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic. Which, by the way, as test scores are showing, American students are failing.

And really, besides the drug and violence in Public schools today, teachers indoctrinating students with their Leftist ideology is why Homeschools are becoming so popular. Parents don't want their children indoctrinated by political activists who happen to be in the position of teachers. Let's also recognize that parents are fighting teachers and local boards over what their kids should not be getting in schools. 

Many parents today don't like that their kids are being deluged by a Leftist agenda that focuses on sexual orientation concerns instead of focusing on a student's scholastic achievement. Parents are rightfully concerned that their kids aren't measuring up and aren't getting what they need before graduating. Leftist teachers negatively impact a student's potential. Activist teachers significantly impact a student's home life, relationships with others, sense of citizenship, and professional development.

So while I believe that there must be something that can be done that doesn't border child abuse, I also believe parents need to monitor teachers and school administrators. Parents need to find out if a chaotic classroom is their kid's fault, or if it is the fault of an apathetic teacher who allows such chaos to take place. 

Also, we need to find out why students would think it's okay to raise Hell in school. We need to find out if they see their actions as being permissible by their teachers. We need to find out if those kids see being jerks as something that's okay with their parents. 

Finding the root cause of why a bully thinks he can bully others is one way of stopping such behavior. If teachers allow it, then we need to stop them. The same goes for parents. If parents are allowing their kids to be jerks in school, maybe we should figure out ways to get their parents to step up and help resolve the problem. 

As for bringing back some sort of physical punishment, even by a small degree of what used to be condoned in schools, because the level of violence in American schools is higher than ever, I don't see that happening with today's sensitivities. Though that's the case, the question is still the same: What should we, as a society, do to stop our schools from turning into even worse war zones than they are today? And if it's not "corporal punishment," then what other ways of persuasion can we use to change a bully's shitty attitude?

We must ensure our actions ensure students understand that acting out rage, threats, or intimidation is not okay. We must let those with attitude problems know we don't live in a savage society. As with many young people today, school age or older, we need to teach them that there are real consequences for their bad behavior or out-and-out criminal acts. 

History tells us that both students and teachers can take things to extremes. History also teaches us that enforcing rules is the only way to rein in the bad apples. We must demonstrate to everyone that breaking the rules has consequences. The problem today is that people feel there aren't consequences to their bad behavior or criminal acts.  

Tom Correa

Never Again Volunteer Yourself (NAVY)

So here we go, let's talk about "volunteering" with very different organizations and how your experience with each can be very different from the others.  But before I go on, let me just state for the record that I still volunteer for a few organizations these days. Some of them I've been with for many years. 

All in all, for the most part, I enjoy volunteering. Of course, as is the way with many things, I've found that volunteering for some groups can be a lot better than volunteering for others. Part of that also depends on what these groups do and who's running them. 

For almost 30 years, starting back in 1995, I've volunteered my time with several different groups. I remember the first group that I volunteered for was a therapeutic riding group. When it was still going, it specialized in horse therapy for handicapped children. I was "Tom the Wrangler." I helped care for the horses and I'd lead the horses and kids around. It was extremely rewarding. 

Later I volunteered with PTSD groups, then I helped at the Veterans Administration, and later with the local American Legion. I still volunteer with the Pacific Islanders Cultural Association, the John Coffee Hays Club, a Marine Corps League Detachment, and the Calaveras County Sheriff's Office. 

Next year, it will be my 30th year that I've been involved with the Pacific Islanders Cultural Association. And yes my friends, believe it or not, I still coordinate the security for our yearly Aloha Festivals. For me, since I'm originally from Hawaii, it is my way of giving back and enjoying the culture of where I'm from. It's been a wonderful group. 

I used to volunteer at the American Legion at a local post for about 13 years. I was the 2nd Vice Commander and Adjutant for Post 376 in Glencoe, California. That was a horrible situation. I'll talk more about that in a little while.

As for the John Coffee Hays Club? After a speaking engagement with the John Coffee Hays Club, I accepted a volunteer position as that group's Old West Historian. They are all good people. The club raises money for charities. It's a social group of mostly politically incorrect Conservative friends who practice free speech while also respecting others. We like to think we're the way Americans should be -- unmuzzled and unafraid. 

I'm the present Commandant of the Marine Corps League Detachment 1080 in Ione, California. I love being a member of that group. It's a great group to volunteer for. I'm very honored to be their Commandant. Overall, that group is very much a social group, a lot of fun, with very friendly people. 

Maybe it's because most of us are older and we seem to have pretty thick skin, but not too much offends us in the way of how someone in our group says something -- unless of course, someone acts like a jerk. And really, who likes putting up with a jerk? Not us.

Of course, I'm also still a Calaveras County Sheriff's Volunteer. I've been with them for about 3 and a half years. Unlike the Pacific Islanders Cultural Association, the John Coffee Hays Club, and the Marine Corps League Detachment which are definitely social groups full of like-minded people, the Calaveras County Sheriff's Volunteer is very different because it's not a volunteer group that someone joins if they're looking for a social group. 

The Calaveras County Sheriff's Volunteer Unit is very business-like. Volunteers represent the Sheriff's Office and are treated like employees with all of the Human Resources rules and regulations that go with being an employee. And while I have a real sense of camaraderie and friendship with my long-time friends in the Pacific Islanders Cultural Association, the John Coffee Hays Club, and my Marine Corps League Detachment, the Calaveras County Sheriff's Volunteer doesn't have that. 

I think the reason for that has to do with our role as volunteers and the way we support the Sheriff's Office. The Calaveras County Sheriff's Volunteers is a community service-oriented volunteer group of members who work on their own for the most part. 

Most of us don't see each other but once a month at our monthly meetings. And yes, there can be a lot of frustration when dealing with some personalities -- especially when there are some folks who simply don't like other people. You know them, they are the people who are so negative that they will never see anything good in others. 

Of course, just because a group isn't very social or doesn't have the closeness of other volunteer groups, that shouldn't stop someone from volunteering with it. It all depends on what you want to do, what you want out of the group, and what you're willing to put up with in the way of petty politics and meanspirited people. 

As I keep saying, not all volunteer groups are social groups. And from my experience, I can tell you there's a huge difference between volunteering for various organizations. One of the biggest differences is expectations in the way how the group "requires" volunteers to behave. Some groups are, let's say more understanding of someone's quirky sense of humor, the way someone was raised, their manners, their outlook on life, and of course their dislike of today's political correctness requirements. 

For example, in government organizations, such as the VA, some administrators expect people to speak and act in a prescribed way. It's their job to make sure that policies are followed -- including policies regarding the speech and behavior of paid employees and unpaid volunteers. Those administrators regulate the behavior of everyone from their paid employees to their unpaid volunteers, and maybe even visitors and patients. 

Everyone is monitored. What they say and their actions, if deemed inappropriate to the organization, is noted. Even a joke can get one in deep trouble if the joke is deemed insensitive by the powers to be. 

Of course, political correctness is what it is in our society today. In government organizations and big corporations, administrators today are very concerned with what their paid employees and their unpaid volunteers say and do. Those organizations are very concerned with how your language and behavior affect others. In today's world, both in government and business, no one wants to hurt the feelings of others even unintentionally or accidentally. And yes, administrators guard against that. 

While some volunteers and staff will tell you that some of the monitors act like Big Brother on steroids, and how some administrators act like they were trained in the old Soviet Union Communist Party where speech and actions are controlled, it's all part of the world we live in today. Your choice is whether you want to volunteer for an organization like that. Some find it okay, mostly because they are used to it since they retired from working in government, while others end up quitting. I was told that it's one of the reasons for the high volunteer turnover in some groups.   

And believe it or not, there's more to this. Out of their concern for the feelings of others, some organizations will try to "modify" or even "suppress" the free speech and actions of people in their organization. With today's sensitivities, for today's way of thinking, it seems that they believe it needs to be done to make everyone more sensitive and tolerant of others. In that way, everyone can live in a one-size-fits-all society where an individual's actions are regulated. 

Frankly, I found that such things made people more apt to hold back and watch what they said to such an extent that people acted as if they were too afraid to speak their minds out of fear of repercussions. I found it very interesting to watch some of the Counselors at the VA ask a Veteran how he's doing, but then admonish him for not stating his status in a more politically correct manner. Imagine that! 

And yes, I've found that some government organizations condition their people to walk on eggshells so they wouldn't "offend" others. The other thing that I've learned when dealing with the VA was how they wanted volunteers to adhere to their politically correct rules and regulations, even if some of us who grew up in a different generation have never had to put up with those sorts of limits on our freedoms. Most of us were brought up with common sense and common courtesy for others dictating what we could or couldn't say or do. 

It wasn't easy to be around and associate with people who were always monitoring your behavior and correcting you on your speech, or even how you pronounced something. I hated feeling like everything I did or said was noted and would be somehow used against me later -- all because I may have inadvertently offended someone's sensitivities. That's partly why I quit volunteering there. Frankly, volunteering there started out as feeling pretty rewarding. But after a while, I just didn't want to be there. 

So really most of the volunteer groups that I've belonged to have been either a lot of fun, just filled with great friends and camaraderie, or as with the Sheriff's Volunteers more business-like and not so social based. The several years I've spent volunteering at the American Legion were filled with worry, frustration, jealousy, hate, back-stabbing, bickering, and petty politics with everyone wanting to be the boss but no one wanting to step up to help. While it had its moments of few laughs over the years, it's an organization that I truly regret volunteering for. 

From 2009 until 2022, I was the 2nd Vice Commander at a local American Legion Post here in Glencoe, California. All officers, whether it's the Commander or the Sergeant-At-Arms, are volunteers. As the post's "Second Vice," following the Post ByLaws at the time, my position put me in charge of the day-to-day operations of the post, the running of the canteen (bar) and kitchen, the special events such as Bar-B-Ques and Holiday celebrations, the rental of the facility, the maintenance of the post, the licenses, and I was in charge of the post's Honor Guard. 

It sometimes felt like a full-time job. And while over the years I got a lot of help from the Finance Officers and volunteers who were not Veterans, I never got any help from the Post Commander who would only show up once a month to run the Monthly Meetings. He'd show up, I'd had him his "script" on what to say, then he'd return to the bar. 

Looking back on it now, with all of the cliques, the animosity and hate swirling around the place, especially the jealousy and backbiting. and the constant negativity that was thrown toward me and a few other volunteers by the local drunks who sat on their backsides while the Finance Officers and I worried about how to keep the place afloat, I see those 13 thankless years of busting my tail as being wasted. 

After I finally resigned from my position in 2022, I found out that many people there really hated how I ran the post. I found out later, as silly as it sounds, the number one reason that they hated me was because I tried to turn that American Legion Post into a more family-friendly place. Imagine that. 

When I got there, the local American Legion was a snobbish group of local drinkers who didn't even want to spend the money fixing its damaged walls and foundation, or painting the place. For what was supposed to be a "Veterans Club," it was not inviting to veterans.  And worse, it was going broke. 

In a town with a population of 189, they didn't like that some of us wanted to make it our community's gathering place. It's amazing how many people were against that. But a few of us saw the need to get the community to support the place. And after a while, we built what became our community's center. 

Of course, at the time, I brushed off the shitty attitudes as not worth worrying about because the people who did the most complaining about the kids being present, or the lights being turned up, or the noise from everyone having a great time, were coming from the same people who didn't volunteer to help out around the place. All they did was complain and point their fingers at how others weren't doing things right. And no, they weren't happy.    

Friends, it's not like I didn't see the writing on the wall when I first got there. Please understand, that when I got there, I was amazed to find out how many veterans were against helping our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. I was amazed to find out that the American Legion didn't do anything for local veterans. I was also amazed to find out that members of that post weren't interested in doing anything for veterans. 

Besides not wanting to spend a dime to even paint the old building, they said "No" to helping vets. In fact, at one of our monthly meetings, I remember bringing up sending Care Packages to our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. I was told, "No." I was told, "They must have an Exchange over there." Image that. And that happened at a meeting of veterans in charge of the American Legion post. 

I also remember wanting to raise funds to help veterans in our area who needed assistance. I was told, "No." I also remember wanting to get our American Legion post to help out at the VA Hospital in Sacramento. No one cared for that either.   

It was later that volunteers like myself and others started a Veterans Relief Fund at that post. We made meals inexpensive so Seniors and veterans without much would be able to get a meal for almost nothing. We made it a place where families enjoyed bringing their kids. It took volunteers to stay the course and not quit even though the petty politics of those wanting to return to the bad old days made it a place not worth helping at times. 

Volunteers made it work. While only a few veterans actually volunteered, thankfully a lot of locals who had generational ties to the building came forward. We cooked. We cleaned. We put on events during almost every calendar holiday. We did fundraisers. And we made it into a good place worth coming to -- despite the cliques and jerks who wanted it to just be a place for local drunks. 

I'm told that it's now reverted back to the way it used to be many years ago. I'm told that it's because people have stopped volunteering and have left. And yes, that's why I see those 13 years of busting my tail for that place as being wasted. I find it sad. No matter how much time and effort, all of my own money that I and other volunteers poured into that place, the end result is that it has gone downhill and has become nothing even close to it once was. 

What's ironic is that my friends tell me that the place isn't even for Veterans anymore. A few Veterans hold officer positions, but I'm told the place is run by non-veterans. I heard they keep their Veteran status and the place's 501(3) non-profit status while they rack in a lot of money. And the people who have taken it over, are running it as a "for-profit" business while still claiming a "non-profit" status to get out of paying for-profit taxes.

So frankly, I'm glad I haven't had anything to do with the place for almost 2 years now. It's a shame to see it go from what it was for so many years -- just to return to how it is today. But that's the other part of volunteering, you can only hope something will hold together once you stop volunteering and leave. Of course, as for the American Legion up here, some say it seems just a matter of time before it shuts its doors -- especially since they can't find volunteers to work there.  

A few days ago, I was talking with an old friend who served in the Navy. We both volunteered at the American Legion up here for many years. We were talking about the problems at the American Legion and how they now can't find volunteers to keep the place afloat. He was saying that some of the people still hanging around there are waiting for people like us to return and make things right again. 

Of course, that's not going to happen. As my close friend reminded me recently, we don't have to volunteer for a that is no fun or simply not worth our time. We've been there. We did that. We don't need to do it again. The American Legion may have some good posts, but the one here locally isn't for Vets. And really, that's sad.

As we talked about our time volunteering at the American Legion, we both laughed when remembering the number one rule for all of us who served in the military "Never Volunteer." To make life easier while serving in the military, most of us were given the advice, "Never Volunteer." It seems we forgot that rule when it came to a place like the American Legion where appreciation and gratitude for volunteers were non-existent.

My friend reminded me of what the acronym "NAVY" stands for among Navy Vets. It's an old joke among Sailors. If used as an acronym, the word "NAVY" can be translated to mean, "Never Again Volunteer Yourself."

While I was always told it was a joke, that the acronym "NAVY" meant "Never Again Volunteer Yourself," I had no idea until recently that the phrase "Never Again Volunteer Yourself" is an old adage that originated when Americans volunteered for service in the Navy around World War I. At least that's what I was told. And yes, I was also told the phrase "Never Again Volunteer Yourself" was also used by unhappy Soldiers who volunteered to join the Army during World War II. 

My friend reminded me that we once volunteered and learned the hard way to "Never Again Volunteer Yourself." And yes, from what I remember about my time as a Marine aboard a ship as part of the ship's company, "Never Again Volunteer Yourself" seemed to be the U.S. Navy's unofficial motto. It was a term that perfectly fit those Sailors with disgruntled attitudes. It fits those who don't want to put forth more of themselves than they should. 

My friends, this blog is about volunteering which is defined as offering to do something without being forced or paid to do it. Volunteering is all about stepping forward and doing so through one's own free will. It means not expecting something in return. It means not needing acclaim, reward, or promotion. It means giving time and one's skills freely and without coercion. Most of the time, we volunteer to do things we feel passionate about. 

In the case of the American Legion, it was the only place we had here in our little town where we could have a good meal and enjoy friendships. The petty politics and drama, the bickering and the jealousy, all helped to kill it. Those of us who volunteered to try to keep it alive didn't do it for awards or some sort of acclaim. We did it because we wanted to keep something good here in our little town.  

And I'll tell you this. While appreciation and gratitude go a long way in keeping volunteers happy, volunteers shouldn't expect it. No, whatever you do, don't expect it. No matter how hard you work, no matter how much of a good job you do, you better understand that that's just for you. Frankly, I believe that's the way it should be in the long run. 

I used to remind my volunteers about how much they meant to me personally and the place all the time. But really, I found that it's fundamentally up to you to feel good about what you've given back. If you expect appreciation and gratitude, even if you have worked harder than anyone else there, you're setting yourself up for disappointment. That's why you have to feel good about what you're doing and not expect much more.

If someone is volunteering to gain recognition, or for awards, promotions, or for want to be noted, or if they want cheering crowds, or expect others to throw flowers at their feet as if they're some sort of mythical hero; if someone is expecting accolades and proclamations celebrating their good deeds; then they shouldn't be volunteering. Volunteering is selflessness. 

To me, volunteering should be like making donations. It should be done anonymously without wanting credit or acclaim for it. It should be done without expecting anything in return. But yes, we can all hope that our volunteering can be fun and rewarding with a good feeling about what you're doing. So yes, it should make you feel good. If it doesn't make you feel good, then I recommend you quit and maybe find something else more fulfilling for you. And as you can tell from what I mentioned earlier in this story, there are a lot of very different groups that you can volunteer for -- and feel great about being there.  

But, if you're someone who expects more than just feeling good about volunteering, then you're volunteering for all of the wrong reasons. And yes, in that case, you should "Never Again Volunteer Yourself."

That's how I see it.

Tom Correa

Vigilantes of Bannack and Virginia City, Montana

Present Day Bannack, Montana

Story by Terry McGahey

Gold was discovered on July 28, 1862, alongside Grasshopper Creek in the far west portion of the Idaho territory. Not long after the Montana Territory came into being and gold was discovered in a place called Alder Gulch with Bannack becoming the first capital of Montana. Bannack was only the capital for two years before Virginia City cropped up at Alder Gulch and took over as the capital. Alder Gulch became one of the largest gold finds in the western United States in 1863 bringing thousands of gold seekers to the area and others looking for their fortune as saloon keepers, hardware stores, and others, as was said, those businesses mined the miners.

In 1863-64 the only means of transportation was by wagon, stagecoach, or horseback over horrible rough roads which caused slow travel. This situation became very tempting for road agents who began preying on gold shipments as well as travelers within the area. As the frequency of holdups and murder grew, the locals began to suspect Henry Plummer, the Sheriff of Bannack to be the ring leader because he knew when the shipments would be sent. It was claimed that over one hundred men had been killed by road agents. Who really knows except god, numbers such as these were overstated many times back then.

On December 23, 1863, The Vigilance Committee Of Alder Gulch was organized by the Virginia City residents. The founders of this group were Wilber F. Sanders, Major Alvin W. Brockie, John Nye, Captain Nick D. Wall, and Paris Pfouts. Some of these men had been involved with the San Francisco Vigilance Committee in California and used that as their guidelines. Paris Phouts was elected president of the committee and along with some of the other voted-in officers they wrote their by-laws. 

Below are those by-laws:

It shall be the duty of members to attach themselves to some company and whenever any criminal act shall come to their knowledge to inform his Captain or Lieutenant of the same, when the officers so informed shall call together the members of his company, (unless the company has chosen a committee for such purpose) when they shall proceed to investigate the case, and elicit the facts and should the said company conclude that the person charged with any offence should be punished by the committee, the Captain or Lieutenant will first take steps to arrest the criminal and then report same with proof to the Chief who will thereupon call a meeting of the Executive Committee and the judgement of such Executive Committee shall be final. The only punishment that shall be inflicted by this Committee shall be death.

Now, those by-laws meant business, I would hate to have had a finger pointed at me for something I didn’t do back then, That would not have been good. All in all and as far as we know the Vigilance Committee of Alder Gulch had executed twenty-one men of the Henry Plummer gang in 1884. The names of these men are, Henry Plummer, the sheriff of Bannack, Erastus “Red” Yeager, George Brown, “Dutch John” Wagner, Ned Ray, Buck Stinson, “Greaser Joe” Pizanthia, Frank Parish, Boone Helm, Jack Gallagher, George “Clubfoot” Lane, Hayes Lyon, Steve Marshland, Bill Bunton, Cyrus Skinner, Aleck Carter, Johnny Cooper, Bob Zachary, George Shears, “Whiskey Bill” Graves and Bill Hunter.

Other executions committed by the Vigilance Committee include an unknown nineteen-year-old who was hanged for shooting and killing an unarmed man in one of the saloons.

Doc Howard, Chris Lowery, and Jem Romaine. All three were hung for robbery and murder.

Jack Slade for breach of the peace while firing his revolver errantly and could have possibly killed someone.

James Brady for shooting a man. The man didn’t die.

Personally, I have been to Virginia City and Bannack Montana, and should you ever get the chance to be within that area of Montana, I would highly suggest visiting these old west towns. You won’t regret it, they are still original for the most part.

About the Author

Terry McGahey
Associate Writer/ Old West Historian

Terry has been a working cowboy, a writer, and an Old West historian. He is best known for his fight against the City of Tombstone and its historic City Ordinance Number 9.

He was instrumental in getting the famous Tombstone City Ordinance Number 9 repealed while at the same time forcing the City of Tombstone to fall in line and comply with the laws of the State of Arizona.

If you care to read how he fought Tombstone's City Hall and won, check out:

The Last Gun Fight -- The Death of Ordinance Number 9 (Chapter One)

Tombstone Daily Nugget - The Earps' Examination - November 8, 1881

Tombstone, Arizona, 1881

Four days after what's become known as the "Gunfight at the OK Coral," the Earps and Holliday were charged with murder. During the preliminary hearing in regards to the murder charges filed against the Earp brothers and Doc Holliday, Justice of the Peace Wells Spicer heard testimony from several witnesses during the next 30 days.

Well, again I want to remind my readers that the 30-second shooting which became glamourized as the "Gunfight at the O.K. Corral," took place on October 26, 1881, in Tombstone, Arizona Territory. The shooting took place when Deputy U.S. Marshal Virgil Earp, who was also holding the position of Tombstone Town Marshal at the time, Assistant Town Marshal Morgan Earp, and temporary deputy marshals Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday attempted to disarm Ike and Billy Clanton, Frank and Tom McLaury, and Billy Claiborne.

Ike Clanton and Tom McLaury were both unarmed. Ike Clanton threw up his hands and ran off. Billy Claiborne, who was armed, ran out the back of the lot. So when the shooting started, only Billy Clanton and Frank McLaury were armed while facing the Earps and Holliday.

With all three Earp brothers and Doc Holliday were armed, and only two "Cowboys" Billy Clanton and Frank McLaury were armed. When the shooting started, the two armed cowboys were overwhelmed and in about 30 seconds Billy Clanton and Frank McLaury were shot dead. Also as I've stated before, I believe it's important to note that an unarmed Tom McLaury was also shot and killed by a shotgun blast from Doc Holliday. 

The Tombstone Daily Nugget published the following on November 8, 1881:

THE EARPS EXAMINATION

Continuation of Testimony for the Prosecution - Wyatt Earp and J. H. (Doc) Holliday Remanded in the custody of the Sheriff.

At the convening of court yesterday morning, the prosecution re-opened the case by introducing West Fuller, who being sworn testified as follows:

Reside at Tombstone; occupation gambler, was at Tombstone, Cochise County, on October 26, 1881; I saw a difficulty between the Earp brothers and Holliday on one side and the Clantons and McLowrys on the other side, on that day; the difficulty occurred on Fremont street, near the corner of Third street; the parties were Doc Holliday, Wyatt Earp, Virgil Earp, and Morgan Earp on one side, and Tom and Frank McLowry and Billy Clanton and Ike Clanton on the other side; I was right back of Fly's photograph gallery, in the alley-way; the alley-way runs length wise with Fly's gallery and west of the gallery; it was the first vacant alley-way next the gallery; [Witness marks on the diagram his position in the vacant lot, about seventy-five feet from Fremont street and about ten feet from Fly's building]. I was going down the Allen street to where to Clanton boys were standing for the purpose of telling Billy Clanton to leave town. I mean the parties I saw was Billy Clanton, John Behan, and Frank McLowry; could not see any other person from where I was; well, I expected he was going to get into trouble, as I saw the Earp boys and Holliday armed.

Q. Where were the Earps and Holliday when you saw them armed?

A. On Fourth and Allen Streets.

Virg. had a shotgun; the other had sixshooters; I did not get close enough to say anything to Billy Clanton or any of that party before the shotting commenced; I saw the Earps coming down; saw them just as they got there; heard someone say "throw up your hands" some of the Earps said it; Billy Clanton throwed up his hands and said,

"DON'T SHOOT ME, I DON'T WANT ANY FIGHT."

at the same time shooting commenced; I did not see Tom McLowry at the time; I did not see Ike Clanton at the time of the first shooting; I did not see Frank McLowry. The Earp party fired the first shots; two shot; almost together; I would not be positive if they were gun or pistol shots; after these shots the firing commenced very rapidly; both parties were firing then; after the first two shots, Billy Clanton, staggered and fell against the side of the house; there were five or six shots fired by the Earp party before Billy Clanton or Frank McLowry fired and they, Billy and Frank, were the only ones of the Clanton party I saw fire a shot at all; at the time of the first two shot by the Earp party, the hands of Billy Clanton were up. (By demonstration, witness shows hands up even with the head). Frank McLowry, just as the shooting commenced, was standing by holding his horse; I don't think he was doing anything; I saw his hands and nothing was in them; if he had had a weapon in his hand, I would have seen it; I think the first two shots were aimed at Billy Clanton; I saw he was hit; he threw his hands down on his belly; and partly turned around;(witness here shows manner of Clanton). I did not see, at that time, the effect of any shots on any one else; Frank McLowry drew a weapon and fired some shots during the fight; Frank McLowry was in Fremont street when he drew his weapon; I think he was a little past the middle of the street when he drew his pistol; (Witness on the diagram "A," shows the position of Frank McLowry at the time the first two shots were fired by figure 11).

Q. About how far from that position was Frank McLowry when you saw him draw his weapon, and in what direction?

A. He must have be thrity or forty feet from there. At the point 1 marked 12 on the diagram; (northeast direction);

Q. How many shots, if any, had been fired by the Earps and Mr. Holliday, prior to the time you first saw Frank McLowry draw his weapon?

A. There were several shots fired; I don't know how many; can't say exactly; I would say seven or eight.

Q. Did you see Tom McLowry or Ike Clanton during the fight at all?

A. Yes.

Q. When and Where?

A. After the fight had been going on I saw Tom Mclowry pass through an open space in Fly's building. I do not know where he went; did not see him afterwards until until he was brought into the house; saw Ike Clanton pass right out a head of Tom, and that was the last I saw of him.

Q. In what condition was Tom when you saw him in the open space of Fly's building?

A. He was walking along slow; appeared to be hurt; he was staggering.

Q. How long after this was Tom McLowry brought into the house?

A. I don't know; it was probably ten minutes.

Q. What condition was he in then?

A. He was dying; shot in the right side.

Q. Who carried Tom in the house?

A. I don't know.

Q. Who was in the room?

A. Billy Clanton was in there and a man named Keith, and others I do not remember.

Q. Did you examine Tom McLowry after he was brought in the house?

A. I did.

Q. Did he have any arms on at that time?

A. He did not.

Q. Did he have a cartridge or other belt on?

A. I did not see any.

Q. State whether or not, at the time of the shooting, you at any time saw Ike Clanton with any arms?

A. I did not.

Q. Did you see Billy Clanton after the shooting, and if yes, where was he and what condition was he in?

A. I saw him at the house next below Fly's building. He was lying there rolling around in agony from the shot. He said: "Look and see where I am shot." I looked and saw he was shot twice, once in the belly, about here I should judge, (showing), and another shot under the left nipple; the first shot was, I think, a little above the navel and a little to the right. I told him he could not live. He said: "Get a doctor and give me something to put me to sleep." That was about all I recollect him saying, I did not leave until he died.

Q. State whether or not you saw Billy Clanton fire any shots?

A. I did.

Q. Did you see Billy Clanton when he first drew his weapon?

A. I did, it was a pistol.

Q. In what position was his body at the time he first drew his pistol?

A. he was in a crouched, stooping position, leaning against the house, and while so drew his pistol with his left hand; his body was out from the corner so I could see him.

Q. At the time you saw him draw his pistol about how many shots had been fired by the Earps and Holliday?

A. I would judge there had been some six or seven shots.

Q. Do you know whether Billy was wounded in either of his hands or arms?

A. Yes, he was shot through his right wrist.

Q. At the time you saw Frank McLowry about the middle of Fremont street drawing his pistol what condition was he in, or his appearence or actions indicate he was in?

A. He seemed to be wounded, he was staggering and dizzy.

Q. Did you during the shooting, see any horses there, and if so where were they and who had them?

A. I did, Billy Clanton had one and Frank McLowry had one.

Q. Did you or not see any arms on those horses or about those horses, and if so, what description were they?

A. I saw arms on them; I supposed they were rifles from where I was; I am positive there were arms on one, about the others I am not positive; Frank McLowrys horse is the one about which I am certain had arms on him; I saw a rifle on Frank's horse, that is all the arms I saw on him.

Q. State whether or not the rifle which you say you are certain you saw on Frank McLowry's horse was used during the shooting?

A. I did not see anybody use it.

Q. Was it on the horse when the shooting was over?

A. I don't think I saw the horse after the shooting was over.

Q. Did you see Frank McLowry when he left the horse?

A. I did.

Q. About where did Frank McLowry leave the horse?

A. In the street, probably twenty feet from where he stood when the first shot was fired-near the middle of the street.

Q. When Frank McLowry keft his horse where was his rifle?

A. It was still on the horse.

Q. State whether there was any attempt by any one to get possession of the gun or to use the gun that was on Frank McLowry's horse at any time during the shooting, and if so, by whom?

A. Frank McLowry himself tried to get the gun; he was fooling with the horse and it looked to me that he was trying to get the gun out of the scabbard, but there was so much shooting, and the horse keep jumping around and the horse finally got away from him.

Q. About how many shots had been fired by the Earps and Holliday before Frank McLowry commenced to try to get the gun.

A. Seven or eight, probably more.

Court adjouned until 1 p.m. Met pursuant to Adjurnement. Motion was made by the attorney for the prosecution that the defendants' be remanded to the custody of the Sheriff without bail. The point taken was that the proof was conclusive of murder, and overcomes the affidavits filed by on motion for bail. That the proof so far was conclusive of murder, and under the proof the defendants' ought not be admitted to bail in any sum.

Council for defense took the ground that the court having once admitted defendants'to bail, had no jurisdiction to again raise the question of bail until all the evidence was completed. The answer made to this was that the court once having jursidiction could not lose it, until it finally passed on the case. That the defendants' before him were at all times under his direction and it was the right of the court at any time to make any order permitting or refusing bail according as the evidence showed quilt or evidence of the offense charged. That if the court had at first refused bail, whenever subsequently the evidence showed the proof not positive or the presumption not great, then the court had the power and ought to admit to bail. On the other hand, the court was bound were the proof was positive and presumption was great to remand the prisoners to the Sheriff, and so keep them until the presumption was overcome by evidence for the defense.

The court after reviewing the Compliled Laws and wieghing the arguments and authorities cited, said: "The statutes give in one section a right of discretion in the court on the application of bail when a party is charged with murder, but the statutes take such discretion away in a subseqent action." When, in the course of investigaton, "the proof became evident and the presumption great" that the parties accused of murder are guilty of as charged, then the court was bound to remand the prisoner to the custody

of the proper officer. The prisoners were remanded to the custody of the Sheriff until further order of the court. Counsel for defendants before proceeding with the cross-examination of the witness, Fuller, demanded that they be permitted forthwith to produce evidence in behalf of defendants, to show that this case is one where defendant should be admitted to bail, and they herewith make application for such admission to bail.

CROSS-EXAMINATION



Q. State as near as you can, when you was on Allen street, when you first saw Billy Clanton, Frank McLowry, and John H. Behan, on Fremont street?

A. I was standing between Third and Fourth; I was on the north side of Allen; I don't know exactly how far from the corner of Third; I was just below the O. K. Corral.

Q. You stated in your direct examination that you saw the Earps and Holliday on Fourth and Allen streets, and that they were armed; Virgil Earp with a shotgun and the others with sixshooters. State how you knew the other had sixshooters. State when and in what manner the other carried or exhibited sixshooters.

A. I saw Holliday put one in his coat pocket; I saw one in Morgan Earp's pocket, on the right hand side of his coat; Wyatt had his right back here, (indicating) stuck in his pants; i think a little on the right side; I saw this on the corner of Fourth and Allen; I was not very far; I was about ten or twelve feet from Holliday, Morg and Virg; I don;t recall what kind of coat Wyatt had on.

Q. Did Wyatt Earp's coat cover the pistol? Was the pistol under the coat?

A. It was at times.

Q. Did not Wyatt have a overcoat on?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Do you know whether his coat was buttoned or not?

A. When I saw the pistol it was not.

Q. Well how was it about Virgil Earp?

A. Virg had a shotgun.

Q. After seeing the Earps and Holliday on the corner of Fourth and Allen streets, in which direction did you go? How rapidly did you proceed, and at what point did you stop?

A. I went right down Allen street; I walked along, not very fast, and I first stopped, probably four or five seconds, and spoke a few words as

I WAS GOING THROUGH



The alley between Fremont and Allen; I spoke to Mattie Webb; I met and spoke to her first at the rear of her house.

Q. Were you not talking to Mattie Webb at or near her building when the first shots were fired?

A. I was not.

Q. By what route did you go from the corner of Fourth and Allen street to the point you have designated on the diagram as 10?

A. I don't remember which house it was I went by on Allen street to get to that point, it was below the O.K. Corral.

Q. Did you during the shooting at any time move from the point you have designated on the diagram as 10, and if so when did you move and in what direction?

A. I did move after the shooting commenced; after several shot I moved, not before; I moved back towards Allens street a few steps and then came back again, and was dodging about some, as bullets were flying about; I might have moved back some twenty feet or so towards Allen street, and then back again.

Q. Did you move stepping backwards and keeping your face towards Fremont street, or did you turn around and face towards Allen street as you moved?

A. I was watching the fight all the time; I was stepping back and turning around there.

Q. When you finally stopped had the firing ceased?

A. I don't think it had; I am not positive how many shots were fired after I ceased to move; I am positive that two shots were fired.

Q. Locate as near as you can on the diagram No. 13, the point where Billy Clanton stood when you heard him say, "Don't shoot me, I don't want to fight?"

A. I locate it about here (locating it at a point near the house below Fly's building.)

Q. Locate as near as you can by figure 14 the point at which Frank McLowry was

WHEN THE FIRST SHOT

was fired?

A. Eleven is the point where he was, as i have already said.

Q. Locate as near as you can on this diagram the position of the Earp party when the first shots were fired?

A. I think I only saw Doc Holliday and Morgan Earp; I mark 14 for Holliday and 15 for Morg.

Q. Which of the Earp party fired the first shot?

A. I think Morg Earp and doc Holliday fired the first two shots; could not tell which of the two fired first.

Q. Against who or in whose direction was the first two shots fired?

A. I thought they were fired at Billy Clanton.

Q. State by what means you know that the first shot preceded from the Earp party?

A. I saw them shoot them.

Q. What kind of weapon was in the hands of Doc Holliday?

A. I would not be positive; I was looking more at Morg Earp.

Q. If you did see, and therefore can't be posative as to the charachter of the weapon, what was it, if anything about the shooting that you saw, which enables you to state that one of the first two shots was fired by Doc Holliday?

A. I saw a weapon in his hand, heard it go off, and saw the smoke; don't know if it was a pistol or shotgun.

Q. Were you not so excited at the time as to be incapable of accurate observation?

A. No sir.

Q. Had you been drinking any intoxicating liquor that day, if so about how many drinks had you taken and what king of liquor?

A. I had not been drinking that day.

Q. Where were you the night before the day of the shooting, when did you go to bed,if at all, and when did you arise in the morning?

A. If I recollect right it was about three o'clock in the morning that I went to bed and I got up between eleven and twelve.

Q. Had you been drinking any the day or evening before the day of the fight?

A. I had.

Q. To what extent?

A. Considerably.

Q. Over what period of time continusly had that extent over drinking extend?

A. I don't recollect.

Q. Had you had any time during the day, or two, or more, before the time you went to bed at 3 o'clock on the morning of the 26th?

A. I had not.

Q. Describe the charachter of wound on Billy Clanton's wrist?

A. I don't think I could do it; Don't know whether it went through; I only saw the shot on the arm, (designates the place about three inches from the palm of his hand on the arm); don't recollect whether it was on the inside or outside.

Q. Was it on both sides?

A. I don't know.

Q. Was the wound deep or shallow?

A. I cannot say.

Q. Did you see any bullet in the wound?

A. No.

Q. Was it anything more than a mere scrathc or scrape?

A. I did not examine it; I saw it was a shot.

Q. What made you think it was a shot?

A. Blood was about the only thing.

Q. Did you notice whether the skin was knoocked of or not?

A. It was.

Q. Did Frank McLowry first draw his pistol before or after he left his horse or it got away from him?

A. Well, about that time.

Q. Are you unable to say whether it was before or after?

A. I would not be positive.

Q. Did Frank McLowry fire any shots, before he became seperated from his horse?

A. I think not.

Q. You said on your direct examination that you saw Ike Clanton pass through the vacant lot between Fly's building. Are you sure of that?

A. I am.

Q. Are you as sure of that as you are of everything else you testified to?

A. I am positive I saw him pass through there.

Q. You said in your direct examination that you saw Tom McLowry walk as if he were hurt, and staggering, and slowly into the same vacant space between Fly's building. Are you sure of that?

A. I am.

ARE YOU AS SURE OF

That as anything else you have testified to?

A. I am. I am positive I saw him go through there.

Q. Do you know Wm. Allen?

A. I do.

Q. Do you know if Wm. Allen was one of the parties that brought Tom McLowry into the house?

A. I don't recollect who brought him in.

Q. In what house was Tom Mclowry brought?

A. In the house on the corner of Third and Fremont; it was the second house below Fly's gallery, on the same side of the street.

Q. Did Billy Clanton ever leave the position, in which you have ascribed him, at the corner of the house, as crouched? If so, when and where did he go?

A. He was rolling around on the ground; he did not leave that place.

Q. What became of the horse Billy Clanton had?

A. I don't know.

Q. Do you know at what stage of the fight Billy Clanton and his horse became seperated?

A. Almost immediately after the fight began; I did not see anything more of the horse.

Q. Locate the horses on the diagram, showing which was Frank McLowry's horse and which was Billy Clanton's horse,at the time the first shot was fired?

A. Can't say what position Frank stood in relation to his horse; Billy Clanton the side of his; Billy's horse was to the left of him.

Q. What are your feeling towards the defendant, Holliday?

A. We have always been friendly.

Q. Are you so now?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Did you not on the 5th day of November, 1881, about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, in front of the Oriental saloon, in Tombstone, say to, or in the presence of Wyatt Earp, that you nothing in your testimony that would hurt the Earps but that you intended to cinch Holliday, or words to that effect?

A. I told Wyatt Earp I thought Holliday was the cause of the fight. I don't think I used the words that I would cinch Holliday; I will not be positive.

RE-EXAMINED,

Q. At the time you had the conversation referred to with Wyatt Earp in the last interrogatory, who was present, if anyone?

A. There were several parties there, but I do not remember any one.

Q. Who were you talking to?

A. Wyatt Earp.

Tombstone Daily Nugget - The Earps' Examination - November 3, 1881

The 30-second shooting which became glamourized as the "Gunfight at the O.K. Corral," took place on October 26, 1881, in Tombstone, Arizona Territory. The shooting took place when Deputy U.S. Marshal and Tombstone Town Marshal Virgil Earp, Assistant Town Marshal Morgan Earp, and temporary deputy marshals Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday attempted to disarm Ike and Billy Clanton, Frank and Tom McLaury, and Billy Claiborne. 

Ike Clanton and Tom McLaury were both unarmed. Ike Clanton threw up his hands and ran off. Billy Claiborne ran out the back of the lot. So while all three Earp brothers and Doc Holliday were armed, only two "Cowboys" Billy Clanton and Frank McLaury were armed. When the shooting started, the two armed cowboys were overwhelmed. Billy Clanton and Frank McLaury were shot dead. An unarmed Tom McLaury was also shot dead by a shotgun blast from Doc Holliday. 

On October 30, a few days after the killing, the Earps and Holliday were charged with murder. During the preliminary hearing in regards to the murder charges filed against the Earp brothers and Doc Holliday, Justice of the Peace Wells Spicer heard testimony from several witnesses during the next 30 days.

The Tombstone Daily Nugget published the following on November 3, 1881:

THE EARPS' EXAMINATION

Testimony of Sheriff John H. Behan, an Eyewitness of the Tragedy.

"The examination of the Earp brothers and J.H. (Doc) Holliday was continued yesterday before Justice Wells Spicer. When the court convened the Hon. Thos. Fitch arose and, addressed his honor, said that it appeared impossible to curtail the enterprise of the press, he hoped the order against the publication of the testimony would be revoked; that the Nugget had so far furnished its readers with a full account of the trial, and had published all the testimony taken on Tuesday. His honor therewith revoked the order. The morning session was consumed in the argument of a point raised by one of the attorneys for the defendants, who contended that the justice of the peace sitting as the examining court was entirely without any judicial function; that he was merely a ministerial officer, and as such has no power to pass on the relevancy or materiality of evidence offered. Or, in other words, he was only a clerk whose only duty was to write down such evidence as it was offered, and when an objection or exception was taken, to note the same on the deposition. The court decided in an examining trial the justice acted as a court, and in consequence, had power to pass on the admissibility of any evidence offered. If any other position had been taken by the magistrate the trial might have consumed just as much time as counsel saw proper to devote to it; and indeed, the evidence under such a ruling need not apply to the case at all in order to be given in full on the depositions,

John H. Behan, being sworn, says:

I am Sheriff and reside in Tombstone, Cochise County, Arizona. I know the defendants, Wyatt Earp and John H. Holliday; I know Virg and Morg Earp; I knew Thomas McLowry, Frank Mclowry, and William Clanton; I was in Tombstone October 26, when a difficulty, or shooting affray took place the parties named. The first I knew that there was likely to be any trouble, I was sitting in a chair getting shaved in a barber shop; it was about a half past one or two, it may have been later, but not much; saw a crowd gathering on the corner of Fourth and Allen streets; someone in the shop said there was liable to be trouble between the Clantons and the Earps; there was considerable said about it in the shop and I asked the barber to hurry up and get through, as I intended to go out and disarm and arrest the parties; after I finished in the barber shop I crossed over to Hafford's corner; saw Marshal Earp standing there and asked him what was the excitement; Marshal Earp is Virgil Earp; he said there was a lot of s-s of b-s in town looking for a fight; he did not mention any names; I said to Earp you had better disarm the crowd; he said he would not, he would give them a chance to make a fight; I said to him it is your duty as a peace officer to disarm them rather than encourage a fight; don't remeber what reply he gave me, but I said I was going down

TO DISARM THE BOYS

I meant any parties connected with the cowboys who had arms; Marshal Earp at that time was standing at Haffor's door; several people were around him; Morgan Earp and Doc Holliday were standing out near the middle of the street at or near the intersection of Allen and Fourth street; I saw none other of the defendants there; Virgil Earp has a shotgun, with the muzzle touching the door-sill, down at his side; I did not see any arms on the others at that time; I then went down Fourth street to the corner of Fremont, and I met there Frank McLowry holding a horse and talking to somebody; I greeted him; I said to him: (Defendants here to any conversation between the witness and Frank McLowry, Court overrules objection at his time.) I told McLowry that I would have to disarm him, as there was likely to be trouble in town, and, I proposed to disarm everybody in town that had arms. He said he would not give up his arms as he did not intend to have any trouble; I told him he would have to give up his pistol all the same; I may have said gun, as gun and pistol are synonymous terms; about the time I saw Ike Clanton and Tom Mclowry down the street below Fly's photograph gallery; I said to Frank, "Come along with me;" we went down to where Ike Clanton and Tom were standing; I said to the boys, "You must give up your arms." Frank McLowry demurred; I don't know his exact language; he did not seem inclined, at first, to give up his arms. Ike told me he 

"DID NOT HAVE ANY ARMS."

I put my arm around his waist to see if he was armed, and found that he was not; Tom Mclowry showed me, by pulling his coat open, that he was not armed; I saw five standing there and asked how many were of them; they said four of us; this young man Claiborne said he was not one of the party; he wanted them to leave town; I said boys you must go up to the shriffs office and take your arms off and stay there until I get back; I told them I was going to disarm the other party; at that time I saw the Earps and Holliday coming down the sidewalk, on the south side of Fremont street; they were a little below the post-office; Virgil, Morgan, Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday were the ones; I said to the Clantons wait here awhile, I see them coming down, I will go up and stop them; I walked up the street twenty-two or twenty-three steps and met them at Bauer's butcher shop; under the awning, in front, and told them not to go any further, that I was down there for the purpose of arresting and disarming the Mclowrys and Clantons; they did not heed me and I threw up my hands and said go back, I am sheriff of this County and I am not going to allow any trouble if I can help it; they brushed past me and I turned and went with them, or followed them two steps or so in the rear as they went down the street, expostulating with them all the time; when they arrived within a very few feet of the Clanton and McLowrys I heard one of them say-

I THINK IT WAS WYATT EARP-

"You s-s of b-s have been looking for a fight and now you can have it;" about that time I heard a voice say "throw up your hands;" during this time I saw a nickle-plated pistol pointed at one of the Clantons- i think it was Billy Clanton- my impression at the time was that Holliday had the nickle-plated pistol; I will not say for certain that Holliday had it; these pistols I speak of were in the hands of the Eapr party; when the order was given "throw up your hands," I heard Billy Clanton say "Don't shoot me, I don't want to fight;" Tom McLowry at the same time threw open his coat and said, "I have nothing," or "I am not armed;" he made the same remark and gesture that he made to me when he first told me he was not armed; I can't tell the position Billy Clantons hands at the time he said "I don't want to fight;" my attention was directed just at that moment at the nickle-plated pistol; the nickle-plated pistol was the first to fire, and another followed instantly; those two shots were not from the same pistol; they were too nearly instantanious to be fired from the same pistol; the nickle-plated pistol was fired by the second man on the right; the seond shot came from the thrid man from the right.

THE FIGHT BECAME GENERAL

Two or three fired shots were very rapidly after the first shot; by whom I do not know, the two shots were fired by the Earp party; I could not say by whom; the next three shots I though at the time came from the Earp party; this was my impression at the time of being on the ground and seeing them; after the party said,"Throw up your hands;" the nickle-plated pistol went off immediatly; I think V.W. Earp said "Throw up your hands;" there was a good deal of fighting and shooting going on; I saw Frank Mclowry staggering on the street, with one hand on his belly and his pistol in his right; I saw his shoot at Morgan Earp, and from the direction of his pistol should judge that the shot went into the ground; he shot twice there in towards Fly's building at Morg Earp, and he started across the street; heard a couple of shots from that direction; looked and saw McLowry running, and a shot was fired and he fell on his head; heard Morg Earp say "I got him;" there might have been a couple of shots afterwards, but that was about the end of the fight; can't say I saw the effect of the first two shots; the only parties I saw fall were Morgan Earp and Frank McLowry; my impression was that the nickle-plated pistol was pointed at Billy Clanton; the first man I was certain was hit was Frank McLowry, as I saw him staggering and bewildered and knew he was hit; this shortly after the first five shots; I never saw any arms in the hands of the Mclowry party except Frank McLowry and Billy Clanton; saw Frak McLowry on the sidewalk within a few feet of the inside line of the street; did not see a pistol in the hands of any of the McLowry party until eight or ten shots had been fired; Ike I think went through Fly's building; the last I saw of him was he was running through the back of Fly's building towards Allen street.

At the conclusion of the above testimony, the court adjourned until 9 o`clock this morning.

-- end of Tombstone Daily Nugget, Testimony of Sheriff John H. Behan, Part One

Rachelle Whiting Becomes First Woman Sheriff of Calaveras County

Calaveras County Sheriff Rachelle Whiting
The First Woman Sheriff of Calaveras County's 174-year History

A first in the 174-year history of Calaveras County, California, has taken place. There's a new Sheriff in Calaveras County and the Sheriff's a woman.

Though women working in law enforcement in some capacity is nothing new today, I was surprised to find out recently that there are only a few women County Sheriffs in the entire United States. In fact, according to the National Sheriff's Association, "There are less than 60 women Sheriffs currently serving across the country. Less than 2% of America's Sheriffs are women."

Imagine that! Less than 60 women Sheriffs in the whole country. And here's something else, my research tells me there are 3,143 counties and county-equivalents in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. So yes indeed, Calaveras County Sheriff Rachelle Whiting is part of a small but very prestigious group.

So how did this come about? Well, over her 24 years with the Calaveras County Sheriff’s Office, Rachelle Whiting has risen through the ranks by working hard and demonstrating that she is a fine leader. Over the years, she's received several awards and commendations from the Sheriff’s Office including Deputy Sheriff of the Year, Campaign Ribbons, Unit Citations, and Medals of Merit commendations. But really, there's more to the story than just that.

On October 26, 2022, Calaveras County Sheriff Rick DiBasilio promoted Rachelle Whiting to the position of Undersheriff. On December 7, 2023, Undersheriff Whiting graduated from the FBI National Academy. Located on more than 500 acres within the immense Marine Corps Base in Quantico, Virginia, the FBI Academy's 10-week program is renowned for its academic excellence and provides advanced training in areas such as communication, leadership, and fitness.

The FBI National Academy website states, "Classes are offered in a diverse set of areas, and officers participate in a wide range of leadership and specialized training. Officers share ideas, techniques, and experiences with each other and create lifelong partnerships that transcend state and national borders."

Then there's "The Yellow Brick Road" which is more than just a fitness challenge.

The FBI National Academy website states, "The final test is the fitness challenge. The Yellow Brick Road is a grueling 6.1-mile run through a hilly, wooded trail built by the U.S. Marines. Along the way, the participants must climb over walls, run through creeks, jump through simulated windows, scale rock faces with ropes, crawl under barbed wire in muddy water, maneuver across a cargo net, and more. When (and if) the students complete this difficult test, they receive an actual yellow brick to memorialize their achievement."



As you can see by the picture above of her holding her yellow brick stating "Yellow Brick Road FBINA 288" (FBI National Academy Session 288), she successfully completed five graduate-level courses and an extremely challenging fitness program.

Please understand that this prestigious achievement is huge. This is a big deal. This program is so highly selective that the FBI National Academy only accepts the top 1% of law enforcement leaders worldwide.

Sheriff Rick DiBasilio said, "Undersheriff Rachelle Whiting's graduation from the FBI National Academy is a significant achievement for our department. We are incredibly proud of her and confident that her new insights and skills will significantly contribute to the safety of our community."

Then, with a few years left to serve in his position, in May of this year, 2024, after eight years in office as Calaveras County Sheriff and having over two decades of service with the department, Sheriff Rick DiBasilio announced his retirement date as August 9, 2024. His recommendation to the Calaveras County Board of Supervisors was to appoint Undersheriff Rachelle Whiting to serve out his time in office which ends in 2028.

As a resident of Calaveras County, I cannot tell my readers how happy I am that the Board of Supervisors took Sheriff Rick DiBasilio's recommendation to heart and voted her into the position.

As for Sheriff Rick DiBasilio? I was able to get to know him a little over the last couple of years. He is a great man. He's one of the best people that you'd ever find. And frankly, you'd be fortunate to call him a friend.

As for his time as our Sheriff? I'm extremely grateful for Sheriff Rick DiBasilio's devotion to duty, his good heart, and his caring ways. His steadfast dedication to making Calaveras County a safer place for all of us while keeping a positive attitude about things always impressed me. At age 65, he's certainly earned the right to enjoy life with his family. And yes, I wish "Sheriff Rick" all the best.


Undersheriff Rachelle Whiting selected and sworn in by the Calaveras County Board of Supervisors

On August 13, 2024, Undersheriff Rachelle Whiting was selected and sworn in by the Calaveras County Board of Supervisors as the 24th Sheriff of Calaveras County on a 5 to 0 vote. She was administered the oath of office immediately after the vote. Below is what she said to the Board of Supervisors that historic Tuesday morning:

"After 24 years serving our Sheriff’s Office, I am hoping this Board, our community, our agency partners, and especially my co-workers know me and my commitment to Calaveras County by now.

I think my career track record as a law enforcement leader speaks for itself, but I do want to say: I have a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Management, a Graduate Certificate in Criminal Justice, and am close to completing my Master’s Degree in Public Safety.

The reason I bring this up is because I have been impressed and inspired by how many deputies, all the way through the ranks to Captain, have been seeking higher education in addition to their dedicated work at the Sheriff’s Office. It speaks to our commitment to pursuing opportunities that will continue our personal and professional development. I believe the complexities of twenty-first century policing demand educated professional law enforcement leaders and collectively we are here to fill that role.

I am fifth generation Calaveras County. My parents are here today. My adult kid who also graduated from Calaveras High School is here. As with many of our Sheriff’s Office employees, my husband and I understand the intricacies of raising children in our rural county and worrying about childcare, transportation, the safety of our kids in local schools. School safety is a priority.

I understand the necessity and I am committed to ensuring the level of professionalism and level of trust you have come to expect from the Calaveras County Sheriff's Office.

I believe in upholding the Constitutional Rights of our citizens.

Our Sheriff's Office paramount objective is the protection of our communities and public safety in Calaveras County. With my appointment, that will not change. We have a reputation for managing a clean adult detention facility and will ensure focus on valuing the efficiency of the jail and court security operations. We recognize that the community holds us to the highest standards of conduct; and I take the expectation of accountability and transparency serious. We will continue our existing programs and expand on engagement opportunities for community dialogue on how we are doing and what we can do better.

I have been working alongside Sheriff DiBasilio as his second in command since October 2022. We have had a strong succession plan in place for uninterrupted continuity of operations at the Sheriff’s Office. Through recent budget cycles, I have shown this board how I work cooperatively and collaboratively with County Administration and other Department Heads, making hard but fiscally sound decisions without affecting operations or reducing programs at the Sheriff’s Office. That is thanks to the professional and highly experienced command staff that I work cohesively with and led by Captains Ballard, Sturm, Villegas, and the other Sheriff’s Office Administrators.

Rick DiBasilio leaves some big cowboy boot-sized shoes to fill with the expectation of how a Sheriff should be in our community and I will uphold that standard. My goal is to maintain a culture at the Sheriff’s Office focused on our core values by recruiting and retaining the best for Calaveras County.

The Sheriff is just one person. The Calaveras County Sheriff’s Office is full of dedicated self-sacrificing individuals, with huge servant hearts, focused on our community.

I am so proud to be part of and hopefully to continue to have the opportunity to lead this team."

On August 26th, 2024, a local online news agency MyMotherLode.com reported the following:

Outside the government center on Monday, [August 26, 2024] former Calaveras Sheriff’s Captain Christopher Hewitt officially administered the Oath of Office to Whiting. Immediately after, Whiting bestowed the oath onto newly hired members and those who recently achieved a promotional advancement.

According to the Sheriff’s Office, the following promotions were made (noting their years of service). New Undersheriff Chris Villegas with 26 years, Captain Anthony Eberhardt with 25 years, Lieutenant Chad Poortinga with 20 years, Sergeant Jesse Green with six years, Corporal Jason Longoria with five years, and Senior Dispatcher Jade Kesterson with three years. The new hires were Dispatcher Serena Kimes, Correctional Officer Madison Byrd, and Correctional Officer Christopher Lamke.

Sheriff Whiting concluded the ceremony by stating, "These employees are accepting a challenging role focused on heightening public safety and enriching the quality of life for all our citizens."

Several family members, and law enforcement leaders from neighboring communities, were on hand for the event.

As for who was in attendance at her swearing-in on Monday, the news article above didn't do justice to the number of people there. Like so many others, besides me being there to watch history take place that day, the front of the Calaveras County Sheriff's Office saw neighbors, friends, co-workers, local firefighters, members of the California Highway Patrol, and law enforcement officers from a lot of agencies even from as far away as Sparks, Nevada. It was an impressive showing of support.

My friends, while I know of at least one person reading this article who thinks I'm full of "BS," I truly believe you can tell a lot about someone's innermost character, their good soul, by what touches their heart. During the ceremony, there were a few brief moments when Rachelle Whiting had to collect herself and not let go of the stoic facade that goes with being a Cop. It was then that she spoke about the love that she has for her husband and family and those who she feels have been like mentors to her. She came close to losing it a couple of times, but as she has on different occasions, she used humor to get past the moment to attend to the business at hand.

There is a great deal that we learn about the goodness of others by the way they give credit to others for their achievements. I have a tremendous respect for people who do that. In her case, it was wonderful to see her give so much credit to her husband. She made it known that his support was a huge part of why she was standing there at that moment. And yes, my respect for her grew even more at that point. Witnessing such love and devotion between a couple brought tears to the eyes of many there.

As for the job at hand? I know Sheriff Whiting is up to the task. She is extremely caring. She has a great deal of empathy for others, their plight, their situation, and their circumstance. She understands the problems within our community. And yes, she's an extremely intelligent person, who also has a tremendous amount of common sense. What more can we ask for in a Sheriff?

Well, there's this. I love that Sheriff Rachelle Whiting is from here. I love that she grew up here, went to school here, got married here, attends church here, and goes fishing and four-wheeling here. Also, among other things, she's been that parent with a kid showing livestock at the County Fair. She's a fifth-generation in this county, and the fact that she has 24 years of service with the Calaveras County Sheriff's Office, tells me that she knows what we need in our county.

She has my respect and admiration. She knows Calaveras County and the rural culture of the people who live here. And yes, I love that she's made history by becoming the first woman Sheriff in the 174 years of Calaveras County being in existence. While some see this as no big deal, let's remember that women have been treated like second-class citizens, kept down, limited, paid less, and in many cases were often treated as being owned like cattle in this country. So yes, it's a very big deal that Rachelle Whiting is the first woman Sheriff in this county.

Rachelle Whiting is the right woman to be our new Sheriff for all the right reasons. No, this was not some sort of political appointment. She didn't become Sheriff because she's a woman. She was our Undersheriff and she earned it and deserved to be promoted.

She rose through the ranks. She's worked hard. And yes, she's shown that she has what it takes, the right stuff, the smarts, the common sense, the drive to do well, and the ability to lead. She's not afraid to take on tasks. She has the strength to step up, take responsibility, and move forward to accomplish the objective. She does this while maintaining true faith in the Lord. Whether you're a man or a woman, those are extremely admirable attributes.

And no, if you're wondering, her life has not been all roses. Like many of us, life has thrown her huge challenges. Of course, the challenges have only shown her as someone strong, someone who weathers life's struggles, faces life with courage and gets past the losses. All that while not becoming bitter. All that while being a great Cop.

As for Rachelle Whiting becoming the "First Woman Sheriff of Calaveras County," the 24th Sheriff in this county's 174-year history? This is wonderful because she's always been an outstanding role model for young women, and now she is even more so. As an inspiration to others, besides having a career in law enforcement that many an officer would love to emulate, she's an excellent example of what women can achieve in life.

She will encourage aspiring young women to enter things that they are passionate about. Whether it's the law enforcement field, working in forestry, or whatever else fits their passion, Rachelle Whiting encourages young women to strive to fulfill their dreams. As for women in law enforcement, women are natural multitaskers who find balance and can shift smoothly between their roles in leadership and other roles such as Motherhood -- which in itself is tough enough.

As our new Sheriff, Rachelle Whiting is the perfect role model to encourage women to enter law enforcement in some capacity. Of course, when talking about her being an excellent role model, here's something else, Sheriff Rachelle Whiting is an excellent example to all young people living in Calaveras County. Sadly, some have the idea that they're somehow limited in life because they're from a rural county.

Because she's from here, Rachelle Whiting has shattered the unrealistic notion of young people being somehow limited in their goals because of being from a rural area. She's done so by showing young people that the sky's the limit no matter where they're from -- especially if you are a woman. Yes, she proved to everyone that a woman can reach the stars -- even if you're from a rural community like Calaveras County. She's proven that hard work and toughness wins the day.

I believe she will do an outstanding job. And I wish her all the best.

Tom Correa