Jack Fell pleaded not guilty and put himself on the mercy of his country. After all the evidence was heard he was found not guilty of stealing, but was deemed guilty of receiving stolen goods, knowing that they were stolen and valued at nineteen shillings.
It was ordered “That Jack Fell prisoner shall pay a fine of forty shillings and be confined in gaol for six days.”20
Samuel Van Nostong confessed to the crime of stealing one keg of rum (containing about ten gallons, or thirty seven litres) on December 25 from the premises of Samuel Marshall Esquire, and also of receiving another keg of rum from James Landers. He put himself on the mercy of the court and was found guilty of stealing and receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen and valued at nineteen shillings. It was ordered “That Samuel Van Nostong Snr shall receive publikly twelve lashes on the bare back and make restitution to Samuel Marshall Esqr the sum of thirty shillings.”21 Samuel Van Nostong Jr. also pleaded guilty to the charges against him and put himself on the mercy of the court. He was charged with having been a party to stealing about ten gallons of rum and was found guilty of receiving goods valued at ten shillings knowing that they were stolen and also secreting the same. It was ordered “That Van Noston Jnr Shall receive publikly Twelve lashes on the Bare back and make restitution to Samuel Marshall Esqr the sum of Twenty shillings.”22
James Landers’s charges were for crimes perpetrated over a period of time:
The said James Landers having confessed himself guilty of the following charge viz. The said prisoner stands charged with having about a year ago stolen form the store of Sam’l Marshall about 12 gallons Rum-2 Brown Hatts-1 pr. Stockings, 2 Silk Handkerchiefs-12 lbs flour-2 lbs sugar — within fifteen months with having stolen 5 several sheep in company with others — about 9 Months ago with having stolen 6 pieces of pork — within 3 Months past in company with Samuel Van Nostong and others with having stolen about 30 gallon of Rum — ;within 7 months past with having stolen 2 other Hatts, a gimblet & 3 Bottles in Co with Isaac Jordan and Manuel Jervis….23
He was found guilty of stealing to the amount of nineteen shillings. Although the value of the goods stolen was basically the same as the other men’s, given that he seems to have stolen more, his punishment was more severe — a public lashing of thirty nine lashes on the bare back and restitution payment of five pounds to Samuel Marshall.
Manuel Jervis was “charged with having, at various times within Eighteen months past in company with James Landers and others, stolen from Samuel Marshall Esqr about 30 gallons [112. Litres] of Rum,—Also that in company with James Landers, Isaac Jordan, Dinah Ackerman alias Jordan and others unknown, did steal, kill and eat 5 sheep within the time aforementioned, being the property of persons unknown….”24 He was found guilty and ordered to pay the amount of ten pounds. It was ordered that Manuel be taken to gaol where he was to await the next general session of the court at which time his fellow conspirators would be called to give evidence against him. The general sessions for the April term of 1809 opened at which time Manuel Jervis pleaded guilty to his crimes. It was ordered “that the said prisoner Manuel Jervis shall receive twenty-seven lashes on the Bare Back and make restitution to Samuel Marshall Esqr the sum of nineteen shillings & eleven pence. Which said sentence was accordingly Executed….”25
Manuel Jervis and Jack Fell ran afoul of the law again, and on the same day, February 14, 1812. They were brought before the courts on suspicion of Petit Larceny “for stealing and embezzling” boards, wood, and other items. This time for Manuel Jervis, the penalty was severe:
“It is the opinion of this Jury of Our Sovereign Lord the King that the prisoner Manuel Jervis is Guilty in Manner and form as he stands charged.” Yarmouth14th February 1812. Benjamin Barnard Foreman…Ordered by the Court that the said Prisoner Manuel Jervis Shall receive twenty-four stripes and lashes on the Bare Back and that the same shall be immediately performed which was Accordingly done. Publickly….26
Jack Fells (spelled Fells this time) was more fortunate than Manuel. Although accused of the same crime, the jury returned with a “not guilty” verdict, whereupon the court ordered that Jack be released and acquitted.
How much did thirteen-year-old Harriet scream while the flesh was being torn from her back? Did the men scream as well or did they endure the punishments in silence because they were accustomed to being abused? Did they take the wood because they were cold; the food because they were hungry? The Van Nostongs, father and son, James Landers, and Jack Fells were not slaves, but it is not known if Harriet and Manuel Jervis were. It would, however, have not mattered. They were Black and during that time period, that was all one had to be in order to be punished more severely than others for the same crime.
Going back a few years to October 28, 1806, reveals even earlier cases. This one involved a Native man who abused a Black woman:
Bartlett, an Indian who was Bondman for one Malta another Indian who was apprehended and entered into a Bond of Recognizance for said Maltas appearance to the Court. He the said Malta being apprehended for striking, abusing and misusing Charlotte, a Negro woman. Both said parties in the Bond came into Court … The Court after Severely reprimanding Malta dismissed him, he appearing penitent and sorry for his fault and promising to govern himself better in the future….27
Even the Native people of that time, some who had been slaves in the past and had often been treated no better than animals themselves by the Europeans, abused the Black people and got away with it. There were so many injustices against the Negroes it would take too long to document each case. In too many cases, whippings broke not only the skin, but the spirit as well. But, one had to go on from there day by day. Amazingly, many did!
How many Blacks have been tied to the two lofty sign posts in front of Vengence House? Located in the south end of Yarmouth, it was known for half a century as a public house, sometimes as Richan’s Tavern and at different times as the Olive Branch or the Phoenix.28 When known as Vengence House, it was used as a courthouse and jail. It was there that prisoners convicted of crimes received their lashes from a cat-o’-nine-tails. Is this where young Harriet received her twelve lashes for stealing a piece of ribbon? Or Manuel Jervis his thirty-nine lashes for stealing a few sticks of wood? The original building is gone, but what stories it could tell about those times of so long ago!
The plaque commemorates Vengence House, which at one time was used as the courthouse. Knowing some of the history behind the sign that was erected by the Yarmouth County Historical Society in 1998, and seeing it for the first time, brought forth a range of emotions. How could anyone inflict such cruel punishment as flogging on another human being, no matter the colour of their skin? I tried, in my mind, to place myself in front of Richan’s Tavern/Vengence House during that period. All I could imagine was me rushing to the aid of those being punished and then being punished myself for doing so.
Fortunately, not all masters were cruel. James Lent was a United Empire Loyalist from Westchester County, New York. Having chosen land grants in Nova Scotia, he and his family sailed to Shelburne in June 1783. The family brought with them their personal possessions, appointments, cattle, and slaves. When the Lents arrived and discovered that Shelburne was becoming too crowded for their liking, they boarded their ship again and set sail up the Tusket River and settled at what became the village of Tusket. Here, the Lents constructed their house, dug their well, and, with the slave quarters built, settled in to live out the rest of their lives. James Lent, “Cobus” as he was called by those close to him, trusted his slaves and treated them with respect.29
Stories are told of James Lent’s relationship with his slaves. One concerns how one of his personal slaves was sent back to New York by packet to retrieve a small trunk containing gold sovereigns that had been hidden in a stone wall during fighting that took place at the time of the American Revolution. This slave faithfully returned to Tusket with the trunk and handed it to his master. Another tells of one particular slave named William Berry, who had become discontented and asked his master to buy him