They should’ve fucking shot him in the face even without the pretense of a dual.
Burlingame’s aim (ha) here was to goad him into a duel on Canadian soil so he could ice the motherfucker and not get arrested for it (it would be Canada’s problem - international law for individual criminality was a bit… spotty at the time). Unfortunately, had he killed him on US soil, he would be subject to the law of whatever US jurisdiction he was in, and even the most abolitionist jury was unlikely to nullify murder in cold blood, however justified by revenge for Brooks’ crimes. Especially not a DC jury.
Or at least criminally prosecuted him!
Prison as a mass-punishment was not well-established - it was still considered ‘cutting edge’ in the US despite widespread use in Britain for the past 40 years. He was tried, prosecuted, and convicted. Unfortunately, Brooks chose to ambush and assault Sumner with a cane precisely because DC had anti-dueling laws which would’ve made any punishment for harming Sumner much more severe had he made it ‘formal’. So he got off with a (large, but not financially backbreaking) fine under DC’s laws on assault instead.
The law is often fucked, and doubly so by the attempts of people to circumvent it.
As the mood in Congress became more hostile towards him after the attack (with a majority voting for expulsion, but not the needed supermajority), Brooks resigned ahead of the worsening mood to forestall any potential problems. His cretinous constituency, unfortunately, returned him in the next election in a landslide.
On the upside, he died unexpectedly before he could take his renewed seat, lmao
Burlingame’s aim (ha) here was to goad him into a duel on Canadian soil so he could ice the motherfucker and not get arrested for it (it would be Canada’s problem - international law for individual criminality was a bit… spotty at the time). Unfortunately, had he killed him on US soil, he would be subject to the law of whatever US jurisdiction he was in, and even the most abolitionist jury was unlikely to nullify murder in cold blood, however justified by revenge for Brooks’ crimes. Especially not a DC jury.
Prison as a mass-punishment was not well-established - it was still considered ‘cutting edge’ in the US despite widespread use in Britain for the past 40 years. He was tried, prosecuted, and convicted. Unfortunately, Brooks chose to ambush and assault Sumner with a cane precisely because DC had anti-dueling laws which would’ve made any punishment for harming Sumner much more severe had he made it ‘formal’. So he got off with a (large, but not financially backbreaking) fine under DC’s laws on assault instead.
The law is often fucked, and doubly so by the attempts of people to circumvent it.
As the mood in Congress became more hostile towards him after the attack (with a majority voting for expulsion, but not the needed supermajority), Brooks resigned ahead of the worsening mood to forestall any potential problems. His cretinous constituency, unfortunately, returned him in the next election in a landslide.
On the upside, he died unexpectedly before he could take his renewed seat, lmao