Abolitionist John Brown's Treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia: A Lesson for State Governments about the Culpability of Non-Residents for Treason against the State

James A. Beckman
{"title":"Abolitionist John Brown's Treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia: A Lesson for State Governments about the Culpability of Non-Residents for Treason against the State","authors":"James A. Beckman","doi":"10.2478/bjals-2021-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article analyzes the specific issue of whether an individual could be tried for treason by a State government if that individual is not a resident or citizen of that State. This issue is analyzed through the prism of the landmark case of John Brown v. Commonwealth of Virginia, a criminal prosecution which occurred in October 1859. Brown, a resident of New York, was convicted of treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia, insurrection, and murder after he attempted to overthrow the institution of slavery by force on October 16–18, 1859. After a prosecution and trial which occurred within a matter of weeks following Brown's crimes, Brown was executed on December 2, 1859. To this day, John Brown's trial and execution remains one of the leading examples of a State government exercising its power to enforce treason law on the State level and to execute an individual for that offense. Of course, the John Brown case had a major impact on American history, including being a significant factor in the presidential election of 1860 and an often-cited spark to the powder keg of tensions between the Northern and Southern States, which would erupt into a raging conflagration between the North and South in the American Civil War a short eighteen months later. However, in the legal realm, the Brown case is one of the leading and best-known examples of a state government exercising its authority to enforce its laws prohibiting treason against the State. The purpose of this article is not to discuss treason laws generally or even all the issues applicable to John Brown's trial in 1859. Rather, this article focuses only on the very specific issue of the culpability of a non-resident/non-citizen for treason against a State government. With the increased array of hostile actions against State governments in recent years, and criminal actors crossing state lines to commit these hostile acts, this article discusses an issue of importance to contemporary society, namely whether an individual can be prosecuted and convicted for treason by a State of which the defendant is not a citizen or resident.","PeriodicalId":40555,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of American Legal Studies","volume":"11 1","pages":"61 - 79"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of American Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/bjals-2021-0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article analyzes the specific issue of whether an individual could be tried for treason by a State government if that individual is not a resident or citizen of that State. This issue is analyzed through the prism of the landmark case of John Brown v. Commonwealth of Virginia, a criminal prosecution which occurred in October 1859. Brown, a resident of New York, was convicted of treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia, insurrection, and murder after he attempted to overthrow the institution of slavery by force on October 16–18, 1859. After a prosecution and trial which occurred within a matter of weeks following Brown's crimes, Brown was executed on December 2, 1859. To this day, John Brown's trial and execution remains one of the leading examples of a State government exercising its power to enforce treason law on the State level and to execute an individual for that offense. Of course, the John Brown case had a major impact on American history, including being a significant factor in the presidential election of 1860 and an often-cited spark to the powder keg of tensions between the Northern and Southern States, which would erupt into a raging conflagration between the North and South in the American Civil War a short eighteen months later. However, in the legal realm, the Brown case is one of the leading and best-known examples of a state government exercising its authority to enforce its laws prohibiting treason against the State. The purpose of this article is not to discuss treason laws generally or even all the issues applicable to John Brown's trial in 1859. Rather, this article focuses only on the very specific issue of the culpability of a non-resident/non-citizen for treason against a State government. With the increased array of hostile actions against State governments in recent years, and criminal actors crossing state lines to commit these hostile acts, this article discusses an issue of importance to contemporary society, namely whether an individual can be prosecuted and convicted for treason by a State of which the defendant is not a citizen or resident.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
废奴主义者约翰·布朗对弗吉尼亚联邦的叛国罪:一个关于非居民叛国罪的州政府的教训
摘要本文分析了一个具体问题,即如果一个人不是该国居民或公民,该个人是否可以被该国政府以叛国罪审判。这个问题是通过1859年10月发生的具有里程碑意义的约翰·布朗诉弗吉尼亚联邦案来分析的。1859年10月16日至18日,纽约居民布朗试图用武力推翻奴隶制制度,随后被判叛国、暴动和谋杀罪。在布朗犯罪后的几周内,经过起诉和审判,布朗于1859年12月2日被处决。时至今日,约翰·布朗的审判和处决仍然是州政府行使权力在州一级执行叛国法并因该罪行处决个人的主要例子之一。当然,约翰·布朗案对美国历史产生了重大影响,包括成为1860年总统选举的一个重要因素,也是南北各州之间紧张局势火药桶的一个经常被提及的导火索,在短短18个月后的美国内战中,这场紧张局势将爆发为南北之间的熊熊大火。然而,在法律领域,布朗案是州政府行使权力执行禁止叛国罪法律的主要和最著名的例子之一。本文的目的不是全面讨论叛国法,甚至不是讨论适用于1859年约翰·布朗审判的所有问题。相反,这篇文章只关注非常具体的问题,即非居民/非公民对国家政府叛国罪的罪责。近年来,针对州政府的敌对行动越来越多,犯罪分子越过州界实施这些敌对行为,本文讨论了一个对当代社会至关重要的问题,即被告不是公民或居民的国家是否可以起诉和定罪个人叛国罪。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of American Legal Studies is a scholarly journal which publishes articles of interest to the Anglo-American legal community. Submissions are invited from academics and practitioners on both sides of the Atlantic on all aspects of constitutional law having relevance to the United States, including human rights, legal and political theory, socio-legal studies and legal history. International, comparative and interdisciplinary perspectives are particularly welcome. All submissions will be peer-refereed through anonymous referee processes.
期刊最新文献
The Constitution, Invasion, Immigration, and the War Powers of States Rise of Complete Substitutes and Fall of the Origination Clause in the Post-Ratification Era Insurrection, Disqualification, and the Presidency Transatlantic Justice: Slavery in the Judicial Imagination Magical Thinking and Appearance-based Recusal
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1