[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.30 The Assembly kept thefine at that level when it overhauled Virginia s laws in 1662 andadopted a statute for restraint of the filthy sin of fornication. 31 Asa special deterrent to miscegenation, the legislators set the fine forjohn stockley 121 interracial sex at 1,000 pounds of tobacco,32 a sign of the escalat-ing racism that accompanied the growth of slavery.Stockley and his fellow grand jurors brought charges againstJohn Kendall under the 1662 act as part of a general crackdown onmisbehavior.They presented him at the February 23, 1665, courtsession along with 10 other defendants, including three couplescharged with premarital fornication, a man accused of swearing, aman who had neglected to attend church regularly, and a coupleof local officials who were derelict in performing their duties.33The prosecutions came at a time when the pursuit of fornicators onthe Eastern Shore was reaching its zenith.A larger portion of thepopulation (about 1 percent a year) was hauled before the magis-trates for sexual misconduct in the 1660s than in any other decadeof the seventeenth century.34 The rise of prosecutorial activity inthe 1660s had several causes, the most important of which was de-mographic.The Eastern Shore s population increased substantiallyin the early part of the decade with the arrival of several hundredimmigrants, many of whom were young, unmarried servants.Thezealous prosecution of fornicators was designed to deter these in-dentured newcomers from having sex before they had fulfilledtheir service obligations.Local government s ability to carry outthis function improved in 1663 when the Assembly divided theShore into two counties, doubling the number of grand jurorswho were available to ferret out wrongdoers.The surge of prose-cutions also stemmed from insecure magistrates desire to curryfavor with taxpayers and the Crown.In 1661, the Council for For-eign Plantations in London had admonished Virginians thatabove all things they doe prosecute in their severall places and qual-ities the Reformation of the Debaucheries and licentious Conver-sation of Planters and servants whose ill example doth bring scan-dal upon Christianitie. 35 Tightening control over colonists sexualconduct provided a way for local officials to demonstrate both acommitment to holding down welfare costs and their adherence tothe policies of Charles II.122 anne orthwood s bastard Even so, the grand jury s decision to include John in the crack-down seems remarkable, given the county court s opinion exoner-ating him of moral responsibility for Anne s pregnancy.One pos-sible interpretation is that it was a symbolic action designed toregister the jurors disagreement with the justices transparent at-tempt to help the Kendalls save face.John Stockley had an icono-clastic streak and was certainly capable of such a gesture.Less thantwo years earlier, the justices had ordered him arrested for having disturbed and abused the Hungars Parish vestry by accusingthem of injustice and questioning the legality of their selection.36Stockley subsequently apologized and regained enough of thecourt s confidence to be named grand jury foreman, however, sowe cannot assume that the presentment was just another expres-sion of contempt for the justices.A more likely explanation is thatStockley and his fellow jurors decided to prosecute John becausethey did not differentiate between civil and criminal standards ofproof.They appear to have assumed that since a woman s accusa-tion created an irrebuttable presumption of guilt in a civil child-support case, her charge should receive the same weight in a crim-inal prosecution.In other words, if Anne s allegation provided asufficient basis for ordering John to support Jasper, her statementfurnished adequate grounds to fine him for fornication.The magistrates, by contrast, perceived that the community wasunwilling to go that far.No matter how committed they were tocurbing illegitimacy, the justices could not countenance fining orwhipping possibly innocent men on the strength of uncorrobo-rated accusations.Like English JPs and ecclesiastical judges, East-ern Shore magistrates thought men deserved the right to presentrebuttal evidence in criminal cases and adhered to that traditionalpractice even as they developed the irrebuttable presumption forcivil cases.In 1663, for example, an Accomack man, Japhet Cooke,managed to overcome a woman s accusation and avoid a fornica-tion fine by swearing to his innocence under oath and producing aprominent colonist as his compurgator.37 A Northampton defen-john stockley 123 dant, Richard Ridge, was acquitted of fornication in 1667 becausethere was no proof of his guilt besides the woman s affirmation(but, thanks to the irrebuttable presumption, he still had to sup-port her child).38 In fornication prosecutions, Eastern Shore jus-tices applied what amounted to a two-witness rule.Unless a maledefendant confessed, he could not be convicted solely on the wordof his sex partner; another person had to corroborate the truthful-ness of her charge
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
Tematy
IndexJohn Ringo Ghost 01 Ghost
John Norman Gor 04 Nomads of Gor
John Norman Gor 01 Tarnsman of Gor
John Norman Gor 23 Renegades of Gor
John DeChancie Castle 07 Castle Spellbound
John Norman Gor 12 Beasts of Gor
John Dalmas Farside 01 The Lion of Farside
46+%286%29
Gallo Max Napoleon 04 Niesmiertelny z Swietej Heleny
Lackey Mercedes Obietnica magii