How one Slander Allegation Relates to the Entire Antebellum Frontier
Small v Breese:
How one Slander allegation Relates to the Entire Antebellum Frontier
By: Calvin Lynch
HIST 4972: Liberty and Licentiousness in the Trans-Mississippi Southwest, 1803-1860
April 5, 2016
Dr. Mark M. Carroll
In antebellum United States, St. Louis was the economic gateway to the frontier and the west as a whole. Located in a prime location of a near to the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers, St. Louis was able to grow exponentially from the trading vessels that navigated the rivers. The city became the primer trading post along these rivers, the city surpassed other trading posts like Cahokia and Alton as the leader in the local market economy. After the evolution of the steamboat, St. Louis entire economy was centered on trade. The post also had become a jumping off point for individuals who came to the frontier to begin a new life, thus giving name to the “Gateway to the West”.[1] These reasons among others contributed from the population of St. Louis in 1840 being 16,469. Just ten short years later the population grew by 370% to a population of 77,860.[2] All of this growth allowed the citizens of St. Louis to partake in many capitalistic endeavors that allowed for further expansion of the city. One of these endeavors was to print and sell counterfeit bank notes. Counterfeiters were present and alive in antebellum St. Louis. Even though the city itself was growing rapidly, the rural area around the city had not developed at the same rate. This lack of development allowed for counterfeiters to perfect their craft and create legitimate notes that would pass as legal notes. Counterfeiters would take advantage of the isolation from law enforcement in the rural areas surrounding the city. Then once they manufactured their fake bank notes in the rural surrounding area, they brought the bills into the city for distribution.
St. Louis as a whole was an example of what was occurring on the antebellum frontier. These rapidly growing cities had become the target of an illegal enterprise by counterfeiters who sought to take advantage of the need for counterfeit notes, and took advantage of the political tension revolving around tangible currency. In the civil slander litigation of Small v Breese, these themes arose along with many others that were present on the antebellum frontier. Small v Breese encompassed what had occurred on the frontier as a whole. Political preferences, Jacksonian politics, and male honor were all common themes in Small v Breese. More than the case itself, these characteristics were entrenched on the frontier society as a whole.
The details of the case are as follows. David Small filled a civil slander law suit against Thomas Breese in 1834. Small accused Breese for defaming his name, by going around telling other individuals about David Small’s involvement in producing counterfeit notes. Small then proceeded to seek legal action in the form of a law suit against Breese for making these public accusations. At trail the case was heard by the infamous Judge Carr in his court in St. Louis. Thomas Breese pleaded the general issue towards his slander allegations, meaning that Breese articulated that he did in fact tell other individuals about Small’s involvement in counterfeiting, but was not guilty of slander because his accusations were true. Small wanted five thousand dollars in damages, but was only awarded five-hundred dollars by the jury. At the conclusion of the case, Breese and his lawyers attempted to file the Bill of Exceptions, but Judge Carr refused to sign them, an irregularity. Thomas Breese then sought to appeal his case to a higher court, but was denied due to a filling error.[3]
The case proposes some interesting questions that may give some insight into more broad contextual factors that were present on the frontier as a whole. First, why did David Small feel the need to sue Thomas Breese in a civil court? At no time was Small arrested or indicted for counterfeiting, so going after Breese in a civil court may seem a bit fatuous. A later explanation may shine some light into if Small was actually in danger of being tied to counterfeiting. Also, why was Judge Carr openly biased towards Small and the allegations against him? A judge should at least acknowledge the Bill of Exceptions at the conclusion of a case. Was there implicit bias on Judge Carr’s part that could have dictated the outcome of the case? These questions that are highlighted in the case Small v Breese are not just themes for this one particular case. As it will be further explained, the issues at the heart of this case were issues that were present at the lives of individuals on antebellum frontier.