Viewing page 245 of 285
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
[[preprinted]] 476 [[/preprinted]] [[Footnote 1]] Very Respectfully, (Sd) E. Whittlesey Asst. Commissioner. Raleigh April 4th 1866. Col. E. Whittlesey, Asst. Commissioner: Sir, Your communication of this date has just been received. The Court of which I am the presiding officer is the Superior Court of Law, and not the County Court. There has been "no unjust discrimination made against the negro case" in its adjudications. During the past week, in Johnston County, one white man (and no negro) was whipped, after being convicted by a jury of larceny. During this week, two negroes have been whipped for the same offence. I have already consulted with the Commanding General of this Department, and have been informed by him, that whilst he does not approve of the punishment by whipping, which is inflicted by our laws, in larceny cases, yet there will be no interference upon the part of the authorities of the United States Government, so long as the law is impartially administered by our Courts to whites and blacks alike. If white men, arrested by the Freedmen's Bureau, are held for trial before the Courts of Military Commission for larceny, are not as severely punished as negroes before the Courts of Justice in North Carolina, the injustice can be removed, by yielding to our Courts the exclusive jurisdiction in all such cases. The Attorney General informs me that there are no more cases against freedmen for larceny upon our docket, to be tried this week, but if there were, I could not, at your request, stay the execution of the laws of North Carolina until I had been officially informed that the Commanding General of the Department of North Carolina had seceded from the position which he has heretofore maintained. Very Respectfully (Sd) Daniel G. Fowle. Judge. Sup. Ct. of Law Raleigh April 4th 1866 Major General Ruger, Comd'g. Dep't. N.C. General, I enclose for your inspection a copy of a communication, this day received from Col. E. Whittlesey, Assistant Commissioner, together with my reply. You are aware of the disposition which has been shown by our Courts to avoid any conflict with the Military Authorities, and I have already explained to you the necessity which exists for the punishment of parties guilty of Larceny, and the great soil which [[Footnote 1]] Howard [[end page]] [[start page]] [[preprinted]] 477 [[/preprinted]] [[Footnote 1]] would result to the country at large, from our Courts of Justice being rendered inefficient and powerless by the interference of the military authorities. I am, General Very Respectfully Yours, &.c. (Sd) Daniel G. Fowle, Judge, Sup. Ct. of Law. General Ruger receipted for this letter, but made no reply in writing. Bureau Refugees, Freedmen &c Raleigh N.C. April 5th 1866. D.G. Fowle, Esq. Judge Superior Court of Law. Sir, Your communication of the 4th inst. is received. By again reverting to my letter you will perceive that I made no complaint that any civil Court had made "unjust discrimination against the negro race in its adjudications". My statement was that under existing orders requiring certain white criminals to be tried by Military Commissioners and permitting certain colored criminals to be tried by civil Courts, the "result would be unjust discrimination &c", since no U.S. Court can punish by whipping. I said nothing about the comparative severity of different modes of punishment. You say further that "if white men arrested by the Freedmen's Bureau and held for trial before courts of Military Commission for larceny are not as severely punished as negroes before the Courts of Justice in North Carolina, the injustice can be removed by yielding to our Courts the exclusive jurisdiction in all such cases. I am happy to avail myself of the occasion which this remark furnishes to ask if, in your opinion, the civil Courts can receive the testimony of colored witnesses against white men accused of larceny or other crimes. If by the recent legislation negroes are restored to common law rights, and no distinction will hereafter be made on account of race or color, the chief difficulty in the way of "yielding the exclusive jurisdiction" is in any judgement removed. Very Respectfully, (Sd) E. Whittlesey, Assistant Commissioner Raleigh, April 5th 1866 Col. E. Whittlesey, Asst. Com'r. Sir, Yours of this date was not received until half an hour ago, because of my attendance upon Court until that hour. If your note of the 4th was not intended to institute a comparison as to the "severity of different modes of punishment", and to charge that "unjust discrimination against the negro race will be the result", because by the laws of North Carolina, "freedmen had been sentenced to be publicly whipped" [[Footnote 1]] Howard
