Early Law Enforcement in Jax (warning, racist language)

[stephendare]

The following is from the History of Jacksonville
http://fulltext10.fcla.edu/DLData/NF/NF00000013/file24.pdf
History of Jacksonville, Florida, and vicinity, 1513 to 1924
Davis, Thomas Frederick, 1877-1946.
Florida Historical Society

as Joe has already pointed out, the writing is a little racist.  But the account is word for word from what is presently the official history of the city.

The Marshal constituted the active police force of Jacksonville in the days before the War Between the States.  His duties were manifold and varied, for it was for him to see that all of the town ordinances were carried out and obeyed.  He had the authority, nevertheless, to call upon any citizen of the town to help him when force was necessary, and a citizen refusing such assistance was liable to fine or imprisonment.  The Marshal's was a day time job.  At night, after 9 o'clock the Patrol went on duty in compliance with the Curfew Law.  The Patrol consisted of two of the towns citizens selected in their turn.  The fire bell was rung every night at 9 o'clock as a signal for the negroes to be in their quarters.  If found on the streets after that hour, or out of bounds, without a written pass signed by their owners, or if free negroes, without a legitimate reason, they were arrested by the Patrol and locked up for the night to be taken before the Intendant (mayor) the next morning for trial.  Usually the owner paid the small fine; it was only for the most serious offenses that the slave was whipped, and usually by his owner. 

The town had no regular whipping post, where the slave was beaten into unconsciousness and left with his head hanging upon his chest to be viewed by the passing residents.  All that sort of thing is fiction.  The negro was property in those days and to maim or injure him bodily was not the purpose of the punishment.  That there were cruel masters, there is no doubt.  But they were no more representative of the slaveholding Southerner than the cruel parent is of the American people today.  The town however, did possess a pillory and stocks outfit for white thieves, but its use was seldom needed as there was little thieving in those days.  On the rare occasions when it was used, the culprit was never known to remain in the community afterwards.

Every citizen of age, excepting clergymen and doctors, was subject to Patrol duty.  An exemption for one time could be obtained by the payment of $3 and providing a substitute, but not twice in succession.  Midnight usually found the Patrol slumbering serenely in their homes.  The negroes corrupted Patrol into 'patteroller' and a familiar medley among them was:

Run, nigger, run, the patteroller'll ketch yer,
Run, nigger, run, it's almost day;
I run, an I run, till I los' my way;
I run an I run, an I run my bes',
Till I run my head in a hornet's nes'.

In the beginning, the Marshal received only fees for his services, but later, in the 1850's he was allowed a specific salary besides, to wit:  Annual salary, $150; of taxes collected, 5%; of money collected for swimming or flatting cattle across the St. John's River, 5%;  of fines collected, 50%;  and allowed the same costs as a constable.

The names of only a few Marshals before the war have been found.

[Joe]

It really is a fascinating book. Published in 1925 for those who didn't glean that from the title, which explains the inappropriate language.

[CrysG]

Not touching this with a 20 foot pole.

[Doctor_K]

As with all things historical, I love it.  Un-PC language and all.  Helps us to understand our culture at a radically different point.

[Doctor_K]

LoL.

And just think, when they refuse, we can refer back to this and say, "but there's precedent!"

It's amazing to think of all of the things, all the minutiae, that contributed to get us where we are today.

[heights unknown]

There is a movement in historical research that diverges from the traditional Dates/ Themes/ Geography approach to History, and that is the history of daily life.

It runs on the idea that you can tell a whole lot more about a culture or a civilization by how people lived on a daily basis, and what motivated them to do what they did.

There are a number of awesome books out there that take this approach, the Daily Lives of the Greeks and Romans are among my favorite in the field.

I think that the truth, as well as the devil, is usually in the details somewhere.

STEPHENDARE:  Putting your fascination aside, how do you really feel about the way things were done, racially I mean, back in those days?  And this question is also fielded to other members of this forum and within this thread regardless of color.

I find the way things were done back then repulsive, inhuman, unfair, unGodly (despite most people who practiced such things claiming to be Christians), and the people that did those things to people should have been lynched and murdered themselves.  I always say "let sleeping dogs lie," but be cautious and careful around them, that is, treat everyone the way you would want to be treated, move on, and don't dwell on the past but be aware of what happened in order to see it for what it was and in some cases still is.

Thanks.

Heights Unknown

[Doctor_K]

There is a movement in historical research that diverges from the traditional Dates/ Themes/ Geography approach to History, and that is the history of daily life.

There are few things more entertaining and enlightening, Steven, than to hear a bonafide, seventh-generation Appalachian hillbilly recount an oral history of his 'holler' and surrounding region.  Asheville//Burnsville/Mars Hill, NC offers a plethora of such oral historians.  It's still in their blood.  Phenomenal to experience.

I'd love to find someone from any part of Florida who was a true 'Florida Cracker' descendant offer up their own oral history.  I know it'd be fascinating.

**EDIT** Thanks to this site and Ocklawaha, my appetite for such things is at least pacified from time to time.

[BridgeTroll]

Was about to respond to Heights when I read Stephens post and agree whole heartedly.
This quote is especially true...

I think its hard to retroactively judge individuals for behavior which characterized the times they lived in, frankly.

Many of the passages and racist descriptions hold true for many immigration groups throughout our history.  I have been looking through Polish immigration descriptions and histories in Wisconsin in the mid to late 1800's and you can see many of the characterizations attributed to Blacks of the time to Poles recently emigrated...

[Doctor_K]

Yes!
..and the Irish, and the Italians, and the Slavs...

[heights unknown]

I forgot that there were in fact certain and sporadic bigotry against other ethnic groups though they were white, but let's face it, as Stephen said the primary and local form of bigotry was racism against blacks and a hard down anti-black sentiment.  Also, though other countries in the world also fielded blacks from Africa as slaves, they soon realized how wrong it was.  While the rest of the world was apologetic to the Africans who were slaves America continued to opress and hold them down which eminated from the bitterness and anger of having to let the slaves go in the 1860's; mainly more of a southern thing than the whole nation.  The southerners (who were white) felt that the slaves were inferior and were not even human beings.  Hard to imagine, in these modern times, people even attempting to think in that vain.

Heights Unknown

[Ocklawaha]

There is a movement in historical research that diverges from the traditional Dates/ Themes/ Geography approach to History, and that is the history of daily life.

It runs on the idea that you can tell a whole lot more about a culture or a civilization by how people lived on a daily basis, and what motivated them to do what they did.

There are a number of awesome books out there that take this approach, the Daily Lives of the Greeks and Romans are among my favorite in the field.

I think that the truth, as well as the devil, is usually in the details somewhere.

STEPHENDARE:  Putting your fascination aside, how do you really feel about the way things were done, racially I mean, back in those days?  And this question is also fielded to other members of this forum and within this thread regardless of color.

I find the way things were done back then repulsive, inhuman, unfair, unGodly (despite most people who practiced such things claiming to be Christians), and the people that did those things to people should have been lynched and murdered themselves.  I always say "let sleeping dogs lie," but be cautious and careful around them, that is, treat everyone the way you would want to be treated, move on, and don't dwell on the past but be aware of what happened in order to see it for what it was and in some cases still is.

Thanks.

Heights Unknown

Want to send your kid's history teacher into the stratosphere? Give them this photo: This is the 1St Louisiana Native Guards, CSA, in 1861!

or try:


Forrest's Scouts, at a reunion in Alabama around 1900.


HEIGHTS - NOT YOUR AVERAGE YANKEE HISTORIAN...

Heights, as an unrepentant and "un reconstructed" Southron, I have a completely different view of these things then most of histories, TV shows, or movies, portray. I subscribe to the same brotherhood theory's that Stephen laid out, and based on your religious comments we are brothers in more ways then one. I am frankly convinced that my own, Stephens, and most other Southern "White boys," DNA will probably show traces of a Negro race. I'm also a historian studied at OSU (OK) and debated the revisionist historians to a standstill on at least 3 occasions in a public forum. So much for my qualifications.

I hope no one takes offense at what many will see as a radical departure from the standard history of the USA.

I think the crux of our racial problems in the South are laid out in your question, "People that did these things..."
Heights I'd like to ask our historical community "What things and, what people?" In other words your very question to the members of the forum assumes that there was a gulf between white and black Southrons that nobody dared cross. This simply isn't borne out by the facts, I'm going to give you a few and lets just settle back and see how many "educated via television" folks jump on me here... I'm ready are you?

Did you know some of the largest slave owners in at least two Southern States were themselves Black? Some of the first groups to pledge themselves and their fortunes to the Southern Cause, were the Black citizens of our cities. Entire units of black troops rallied to join the State services, since until 1865, black men could not serve in regular Confederate national ranks. It is estimated that 90,000 black troops fought for the North, and fully 100,000 black SOLDIERS fought for the South. Another 200,000 devoted themselves to civil projects or to running the absentee plantations which kept the Confederacy humming along. I have read several accounts of a federal officer caught behind the lines in Northern Virginia. He wrote that as Lee's Army crossed the Potomac River, the black troops were completely mixed in, carrying weapons, singing and uniformed.

That horse whips were NOT used (except in crimes) on humans, black or otherwise? Going back to Bible times a flogging whip was developed, this made it's way into English law, and aboard His Majesty's ships. By the time it reached the new world, it had gone from an instrument of hideous torture to a common and much less lethal tool of corrections for all races. Outside of Hollywood, "There were no horsewhips in corporal punishment."

That the language in any pre war document refers to "aunt", "uncle" etc, when referring to owned slaves. That there were two systems of slavery descended from at least Roman days, a gang system, where hundreds toiled under a hard driving overseer.  The other management method was called the task system, where every man and woman had an assigned job, and when complete, was free to persue a trade, buy, sell, preach, teach or enjoy some recreation. Needless to say, the task system worked far better and was the dominate system with gang work all but gone by the outset of the war.

People should read that there was a "good ole boy" double set of standards within the society itself, for example, though as a free man one might own a black family (no matter what your race), they might well be sleeping with the family's lovely 22 year old daughter. With that type of affection going on, it's no wonder that so much energy was spent on making the way easier for the slaves themselves.

Locally, many of the plantations had black members in management, or some degree of ownership. "Gravely Hill," (roughly I-295 and Normandy) wrote documents giving each member of the former slave family a portion of the property when the owner passed away. Kingsley married an African Princess, and built homes for this black in-laws. When a New York newspaper inquired as to why a "otherwise normal" white man would marry a black "slave," Kingsley told them it was nobodies damn business how he conducted his life on the island.

Georgia alone, appeared and submitted bills over 60 times to adopt the UK system of abolition - BEFORE the war. Each time this vote came up, the Southern States supported it, and the Northern States led by Adams, Webster, and other famous names, voted it down.  The bottom line was no self respecting Yankee was going to allow the government to spend a dime to free black men and women in the South. At least not without an "investment" in blood to seize freedom, slaves and, real property. 

The Official Records of The War of The Rebellion, (US Congress), a chock full of the most incredible facts which modern revisionist historians have buried in a feel good, smoke screen, to cover Uncle Sam's ass. This "new" history, based on supposed facts, that nearly every Southerner fought "against," the Black race, is fantasy. Then or now, nobody but a psychotic weirdo would put himself in harms way, so someone else could "horse whip" another human. There is no logic in the modern argument, in fact it has spread more disunity among the races by teaching young white children that their ancestors are shamed because.... and it has taught a generation of young black children that the white man is against you. So the white child acts out according to the role written for him, and the black child strikes back based on what he is told. It's just not true, not 100%, not 50%, maybe a fraction of a percent which probably reflects the evil people living among us today.

Did you know for example that Nathan Bedford Forrest, who has been blamed for starting the KKK, was one of those who not only freed a number of slaves, his ARMY was led by slaves, a fully black volunteer unit known as The Scouts?  At the so called Fort Pillow Massacre (which a Federal inquisition aquited him of all blame when it was learned the Federal Gunboat opened fire on Forrest's men AFTER the fort surrendered) The Scouts all came back, each with a Federal prisoner which they proceeded to tease and torment.  Did you know that right after the war Forrest was one of the first public personality's that embraced the black community, even addressing a large gathering in Memphis that would, with his encouragement and support, become the NAACP?

If you want references, I can give you 1,000's, if you'd like to meet and talk or have a show and tell session, I'm your Huckleberry.

OCKLAWAHA