Freedmen's Bureau Records: George T. Cook to R. S.
Lacey, July 31, 1866
Summary:
Cook's report details two legal cases that he states are representative of the
injustices suffered by freedmen in the local courts.
Bureau Refugees, Freedmen, and A.L.
Office Asst.
Supt.
Sub-Dist
No. 10
Captain R. S. Lacy
Supt. Seventh Dist
Va
Lynchburg Va
July 31st 1866
Staunton Va
Sir,
I have the honor to report in compliance with Par.
6 Circular No. 10 C S. from Hd qrs
Asst
Comr State Va. - that as far as notified I have attended
criminal trials in which freedmen were concerned in this sub-Dist during the past month. The trials have
chiefly been preliminary hearings before Magistrates and almost without
exception where white persons have been parties the decisions have been in their
favor - there have been several cases assualts upon freedmen - in not one
instance has any satisfaction been given the freedmen it is only by the most
strenuous exertions that I can get Magistrates to hear the cases and
[page 2]
the results of trials are so unfavorable as to make it better in most
instances not to try the case, for instance if the freedman makes complaint and
it is clearly proven the Magistrate will probably bind both parties to keep the
Peace, then the freedmen must get bail or go to jail for making the complaint.
I give the following synopsis of two trials to show the impartiality of the trials the cases are not exceptions, but fair specimens of the rule.
Chas K. Saupe (white) vs.
Wm Gearing (F) -- Evidence went to prove that Gearing and his
wife live in house adjoining and belong to Saupe. Gearings wife had been abused
by the wife of Saupe, Gearing, a quiet mulatto, went in a respectful manner to
Mrs. Saupe and asked what the difficulty was - She was angry at being questioned
by him, "a nigger" - her husband came in and without remark struck Gearing
heavily with a chain, three blows - disfiguring his face. Saupe then got
[page 3]
the boy Gearing arrested, and swore the peace, the Magistrate binding
Gearing to keep the peace, it not having been
proven that he committed, or threatened to commit any over act.
2
d
Alexander Props vs. Taylor Dunlap and Robert Dunlap - Trial proved that
the parties with the addition of Props brother Charles were working in hay when
Chas remarked to one of
the white men in a laughing way that he would let the white man take a certain
part of the work - at which the white man struck Charles - Robert then remarked
come work, don't fight, when the remaining white man struck Robert with Pitch
fork after some blows Robert resisted, and came out best in the fight, whereupon
the whites together gave him a thrashing, after tea they told their father when
the old man unable to find his slave whip, had a number of rods cut, and
together the party whipped the boy for having resisted. The case after hearing
before County Magistrate, in town was dismissed. It was difficult to get a
warrant issued in the case - the white men admitted the
[page 3]
statement of
the boy, Robert, and also admitted his general good character, still altho' they had threatened him with further
punishement no action was taken.
Very Respectfully
Your Obt Servant
Geo. T. Cook
1st
Lt
V.R.C. and Asst.
Supt.
