Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=duke.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Duke University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American
Literature.
http://www.jstor.org
H. Bruce BuddandCapital
Billy ATaleof
Punishment:
Franklin ThreeCenturies
moreantithetical
H as anyworkofAmerican
and mutually
literature
generated
hostileinterpretationthanHerman
Melville'sBillyBudd,Sailor?Andall thebattlesaboutthemoraland
politicalvisionat theheartofthetaleswirlaroundonequestion:Are
we supposedto admireor condemnCaptainVereforhis decisionto
sentenceBillyBuddtodeathbypublichanging? 1 Somehow, astonish-
inglyenough,nobodyseemstohavenoticedthatcentraltothestory
is thesubjectofcapitalpunishment anditshistory.
This is trueevenin thetenessays constituting thefirstnumber
of Cardozo Studiesin Law and which
Literature, was devotedtoBilly
Buddbecause-in thewordsoflawprofessor RichardH. Weisberg-it
is "thetextthathas cometo'mean'Law andLiterature. "2 The closest
encounter withtheissueofcapitalpunishment intheseessaysorelse-
wherecomesfromWeisberg'santagonist, JudgeRichardA. Posner
oftheUnitedStatesCourtofAppealsfortheSeventhCircuit(anda
self-styled"newcritic"),whocondemns thosewho"condemn Vere's
conduct"as mere"liberals"whoare "uncomfortable withauthority,
including military authority,andhatecapitalpunishment" ("mostlit-
erarycriticsare liberals,"addsPosner).According to the judge,"we
mustnotreadmoderncompunctions aboutcapitalpunishment intoa
storywritten a century ago."3
YetduringtheveryyearsthatMelvillewas composing thestory-
1886to 1891-nationalandinternational was focusedonthe
attention
climaxofa century-long battleovercapitalpunishment unfoldingin
theveryplacewhereMelvillewas living-NewYorkState.Whyhave
we overlookedsomething so obvious?Is it because we ignorethe
Wewitnesstwokillings aboardH.M.S.Bellipotent.Onecomesfrom
theimpulsive, fatalblowBillyBuddstrikesto thefore-
involuntary
head ofClaggart.The blowis partlyin responseto CaptainVere's
exhortation to thestammering Billy,"'Defendyourself!"' Vererec-
ognizesthatClaggarthas been "'Struckdead byan angelofGod!"'
andhe andhisdrumhead courtall acknowledge thatBillyactedwith-
outmalice,forethought,oranymurderous The otherkillingis
intent.
carriedoutundercoveroflaw,afterreasonedargumentation, andby
thestateactingthrough theagencyofCaptainVereandhisofficers.
Whichofthesetwoactsconstitutes murder? Buddis notevenac-
cused ofmurder. the
One questionthatunderlies twentieth-century
discussionofVere'sactmightbe framed thisway:Does itconform to
the1794Pennsylvania definition
ofmurder inthe"firstdegree,"that
is,"wilful,
deliberateandpremeditated killing"?
Thisis preciselythewaytheargument againstcapitalpunishment
wasframed duringtheyearsMelvillewaswriting. The factthathang-
ings were conductedby the stateundercoverof law did not,to
opponents ofthedeathpenalty,absolvethemfrom beingmurders. In-
deed,thetermswidelyusedforthesekillingswere"legalmurders,"
"legalkilling,"and"murder bylaw."49 The followingcommentaries,
publishedin 1890,could applydirectlyto the twokillingson the
Bellipotent:
[W]hena criminalis judged,all the extenuating circumstances
Werethisruleobserved,
shallbe takenintoconsideration. thevic-
timofthelaw wouldseldomappearin so bad a lightas thegov-
ernment thethought:
thatpassedthesentence.Let me illustrate a
mancommits thegovernment
a murder: inturnsentencestheman
to death.Herewe havetwopartieswhohavepresumedto takea
human life.... [T]he question now arises, upon the shouldersof
whichpartyreststhegreatest guilt?A mostsolemnthought.There
aremanyextenuating circumstances inthefirst butwhat
instance,
canbe saidinjustification
ofthegovernment?50
[C]apitalpunishment inanyform
administered a relic
is essentially
ofa barbarousage.... [T]he Statealwaysactswithcoolnessand
whileninety
deliberation, percent.ofherchildren slaytheirfellow-
meninthefrenzy ofpassion.51
AlthoughCaptainVerehasalreadydecidedthatBilly"'musthang"'
beforehe conveneshis drumheadcourt,thethreeofficershe hand-
Literature
348 American
picksarequitereluctant toconvictandsentencetheHandsomeSailor.
In thetrial,duringwhichVereactsas sole witness,prosecutor, and,
ultimately, commander ofthejury,he findsitnecessarytooverwhelm
his threesubordinates witha delugeofarguments. One is precisely
thattheymust"'let notwarmheartsbetrayheads thatshouldbe
cool"' (270).52
Vere makeshis firstargument whilestillin his role of witness
(thoughlaterhe tellstheofficers, "'HithertoI havebeenbutthewit-
ness,littlemore"'[265]):"'Quiteasidefromanyconceivable motive
actuating themaster-at-arms, and irrespective oftheprovocation to
theblow,a martialcourtmustneedsin thepresentcase confineits
attention to theblow'sconsequence,whichconsequencejustlyis to
be deemednototherwise thanas thestriker's deed"' (256).Byargu-
ing,especially in such legalisticphraseology, that his courtis notto
considerextenuating circumstances or motive,Vereis underlining
forreadersin 1891thefundamental injusticeoftheproceedings. The
threeofficers, in fact,are disturbed bythismanifestation of"a pre-
judgment onthespeaker'spart"(258).LaterVerereiterates, " 'Budd's
intent ornon-intent is nothing tothepurpose"'(274).
As discussedearlier,Vere'sextendedargument thatthe officers
owe theirallegiancenot to "'Nature,"' their"'hearts,"' or their
"'privateconscience,"'but entirelyto King George III and his
"'code underwhichalonewe officially proceed"'wouldto anylate-
nineteenth-century audiencebe an emphatic reminder ofthebarbaric
BloodyCode forwhichVereis actingas agent.Vereinsists,in fact,
thathe andhisofficers mustactmerely as agentsandinstruments of
" the
thatlaw: 'Forthelawand rigor it, of we are notresponsible. Our
vowedresponsibility is in this:Thathoweverpitilessly thatlawmay
operateinanyinstances, we nevertheless adheretoitandadminister
it"' (270).To latenineteenth-century readers,thiswouldserveas a
conspicuous reminder ofthehorrors ofGeorgianjusticefromwhich
nine decades of reform had liberatedboththe UnitedStatesand
Britain.Each ofVere'sarguments, infact,defendsoneormoreofthe
mostegregiousfeatures oftheGeorgiancode,features thathadbeen
repudiated bylawinthosenineensuingdecades.
Immediately afterinsistingthathis officers may not consider
"'Budd's intentor non-intent,"' Vere claimsthattheyare taking
too muchtime(a blatantly speciousargument, especiallyin lightof
thetimelaterspentin theexecutionandburialrituals):"'strangely
BuddandCapital
Billy 349
Punishment
extrapolating fromthispassage,ormanysimilaronesoftheperiod,in
hiscommentary onthechaplain's inability toavertthe
tolift"a finger
doomofsucha martyr to martialdiscipline" and on his overallrole,
whichlinkstheexecution totheessentialpurposeoftheBellipotent:
Bluntly put,a chaplainis theministerofthePrinceofPeace serving
in thehostofthe God ofWar- Mars.As such,he is as incongru-
ous as a musketwouldbe on thealtarat Christmas. Why,then,is
he there?Becausehe indirectly subservesthepurposeattestedby
thecannon;becausetoohe lendsthesanctionofthereligion ofthe
meekto thatwhichpractically of
is theabrogation everything but
bruteForce.(312)
The responseofthecrewto Billy'sexecutionis a directrefutation
ofVere'sdeterrenceargument, in whichhe suggestedto his offi-
cersthatthethreatofimminent mutiny was smoldering on theship.
Although thestoryis labeledan "InsideNarrative," itrevealsnotthe
hintofanysuchpossibility
faintest priorto Billy'sdeath.Discipline
is breachedonlyafterBilly'shangingand in responseto it,in the
midstofthe ritualsofthe publicexecutionand subsequentburial
(326,330,331).
The truesignificanceofthekillingofBillyBuddcomesoutinthese
scenes.Likemanyofthearguments raisedagainstthedeathpenalty
Literature
352 American
betweenthe1790sandthe1890s,BillyBuddstripsawaytheillusions
ofjusticeanddeterrence torevealtheessenceofcapitalpunishment:
humansacrifice, a ritualofpowerin whichthestateand theruling
class demonstrate, sanctify,and celebratetheirultimate power-the
poweroflifeanddeath-overtheclassestheyrule.
By thelastthirdofthenineteenth century, publicexecutionhad
been thoroughly discredited and legallyabandoned,in Englandas
wellas inmostoftheUnitedStates.Nevertheless, crowdscontinued
tofindwaystoviewhangings thatwereofficiallyclosedtothepublic.
When,forexample,a "private" execution tookplaceat theTombsin
NewYorkCity,"theneighboring buildings[were]blackwithpeople,
seekingto look downoverthe prisonwallsand witnessthe death
agoniesofthepoorwretch. "57Suchsceneswerea maintargetofthe
stipulation in the NewYorkStateelectrocution law thatexecutions
musttakeplace insidethe walls of a prison.A principalargument
againstpublicexecutionshad been theireffects on the"mobs"that
came to watch.This reasoningis ironically echoedin the strange
"murmur" thatrunsthrough thesailorsforcedto witnesstheirship-
mate'sexecution: "itseemedtoindicatesomecapricious revulsionof
thought or feelingsuchas mobsashoreare liableto,in thepresent
instancepossiblyimplying a sullenrevocation on themen'spartof
theirinvoluntary echoingofBilly'sbenediction" (326).
Anotherargument againstpublicexecutionwas that,contrary to
its allegeddeterrent it tendedto transform
effect, thecriminal into
botha victimand a "hero."58 The sailors,pointedly refutingVere's
prediction aboutthem,"instinctively feltthatBillywas a sortofman
as incapableofmutiny as ofwilfulmurder."To themhe becomes
morethana hero.The verysparfromwhichhe was hangedis meta-
morphosed intotheobjectoftheirveneration: "To thema chipofit
was as a pieceoftheCross"(345-46).59
BillyBuddis not,however, a meretreatiseagainstcapitalpunish-
ment.Melvilleis usingcontemporaneous awarenessabouttheissue
to explorethe largerethical,philosophic, and politicalquestionsit
so dramatically focuses.Undoubtedly New YorkAssemblyman Hitt
was overstating thecase whenhe claimedin early1890,"atpresent
thereare onlytwoclasses ofthe community whoyetfavorcapital
punishment and theseare clergymen and prosecuting attorneys."60
Nevertheless, Melvillecouldsafelyassumethatalmostall potential
readersin 1891wouldregardpublicexecutionandhangingas relics
Punishment
BillyBuddandCapital 353
Notes
1 Myownviewofthegreatdebatecan be foundin "FromEmpireto Em-
pire:BillyBudd,Sailor," inHermanMelville:Reassessments,ed.A. Robert
Lee (NewYork:BarnesandNoble,1984):199-216.Foran astuteanalysis
ofthecontesting interpretations
as expressionsofpoliticalchangesdur-
ingseveraldecadesofrecentU.S. history, see Geraldin2 Murphy, "The
PoliticsofReadingBillyBudd,"American Literary History1 (summer
1989):361-82.
2 RichardH. Weisberg, "Editor'sPreface,"CardozoStudiesin Law and
Literature1 (spring1989).Weisberg himselfhas donethemostthorough
analysisofthespecificlegalissuesin thestoryin "HowJudgesSpeak:
SomeLessonsonAdjudication inBillyBudd,Sailorwithan Application
toJusticeRehnquist," NewYorkUniversity Law Review57 (April1982):
1-69,andinTheFailureoftheWord: TheProtagonistas LawyerinModern
Fiction(NewHaven:Yale Univ.Press,1984),131-59.See also theper-
ceptiveexploration inSusanWeiner, Law inArt:Melville's
MajorFiction
and Nineteenth-Century American Law (New York:PeterLang,1992),
139-66.
3 RichardA. Posner,"Comment on RichardWeisberg'sInterpretation of
BillyBudd," Cardozo StudiesinLawandLiterature 1 (spring1989):73-74.
BillyBuddandCapitalPunishment355
attackonthedeathpenalty,
Greeley'sinfluential "DeathbyHumanLaw"
(301-10);see MertonM. SealtsJr.,Melville's Reading:A Check-Listof
BooksOwnedand Borrowed, offprinted fromHarvardLibraryBulletin
(Cambridge: HarvardUniv.Press,1950),130.
16 CharlesSpear,Essayson thePunishment ofDeath,10thed. (London,
1845),224.Originallypublished in 1844,thisvolumeexerteda majorin-
fluenceonthemovement againstcapitalpunishment inEnglandas well
as America.
17 WilliamJ.Bowers,withGlennL. PierceandJohnF. McDevitt,Legal
Homicide: Deathas Punishment inAmerica,1864-1982(Boston:North-
easternUniv.Press,1984),140.
18 Spear,224-31.
19 Bowers,140.
20 Bedau,8.
21 Spear,223.
22 Spear,224.
23 Spear,225-26.
24 LouisP. Masur,RitesofExecution: CapitalPunishment andtheTransfor-
mationofAmerican Culture,1776-1865(NewYork:Oxford Univ.Press,
1989),160;Mackey,Voices, xxvii;Davis,45-46.
25 Neuman, 524.
26 In pre-1850England,eventhosewhowereinfavorofpublicexecutions
admitted thattheywere"depraving," "ugly,""disgusting,""evil,"and
(Cooper,50).
"brutalizing"
27 Mackey,Voices, xx.
28 EdmundClarenceStedman, "The GallowsinAmerica," Putnam's Maga-
zine,February 1889,234.StedmanmetMelvillein 1888.On 20 October
1888Melvillereturned bookslentto himby Stedmanwitha letterin
whichhe wrote,"Andyourownbookin manyofitsviewshas proved
eithercorroborativeor suggestive to me." In 1890Stedmanarranged a
dinnerforMelvilleat theAuthor'sClub,one ofthefewrecognitions of
theauthorinhislateryears.Stedman's sonArthur becamea goodfriend
ofMelvillein thelasttwoyearsofthewriter'slifeandafterMelville's
deathworkedwithElizabethMelvilleinreissuing fourofhisbooks;see
Jay Leyda,The Melville
Log (New York: Harcourt, Brace,1951),1:xxxiii;
2:804-06.
29 Stedman, 230.
30 DictionaryofAmerican Biography (NewYork:Scribner, 1943),s.v.Curtis,
NewtonMartin.
31 LawrenceMeirFriedman, Crimeand Punishment in American History
(NewYork:BasicBooks,1993),171.
32 Fora goodoverallaccountoftheBattleoftheCurrents, see Matthew
Josephson, Edison:A Biography (NewYork:McGrawHill,1959),344-
50; somewhatdifferent perspectives are offered in RobertSilverberg,
BillyBuddandCapitalPunishment357
1962):31-39;ithasbeenexplored byothercritics,
further Stan-
including
tonGarner, "Fraudas FactinHermanMelville'sBillyBudd," SanJoseRe-
view4 (May1978):82-105,and,mostthoroughly, Weisberg, TheFailure
oftheWord, 144-59.Vere'smoderndefenders taketheposition thatMel-
villewas simply unfamiliarwithBritishnavallaw,an argument rendered
dubiousbythedetailedexploration ofthislaw,based on thorough re-
see HowardP.Vincent,
search,in White-Jacket; TheTailoringofMelville's
White-Jacket (Evanston,Ill.:NorthwesternUniv.Press,1970),103-06.
63 The quotations arefromWhite-Jacket orTheWorld in a Man-of-War,ed.
HarrisonHayford, HershelParker,and G. ThomasTanselle(Evanston
andChicago:Northwestern Univ.PressandtheNewberry Library,
1970),
chapters 35,36,71.
64 MerlinBowen,TheLongEncounter (Chicago:Univ.of ChicagoPress,
1960),217.
65 For an analysisofBillyBuddin the contextofthe end-of-the-century
movement towardimperialism, see my"FromEmpireto Empire:Billy
Budd,Sailor."