Shooting between Wild Bill Hickok and Davis Tutt – Wikipedia

Posted on by
before-content-x4

Wild Bill Hickok threatens Davis Tutt’s friend after defeating tutt in a duel, illustration from the Harper’s New Monthly Magazine , February 1867.

The shooting between Wild Bill Hickok and Davis Tutt is a firearm fight that took place the on the city of the city of Springfield (Missouri) between Wild Bill Hickok and a Cowboy of the Cru named Davis Tutt (in) . It is one of the rare duels alone to revolver the conquest of the West that took place as described in the dime novels et les westerns tels The train will whistle three times ( High Noon ) with Gary Cooper or the Dollar trilogy With Clint Eastwood [ first ] . The first detailed account of this shooting was published in an article by Harper’s Magazine In 1867 [ 2 ] , immediately making Hickok famous.

after-content-x4

Tutt and Hickok were both players and attended the same saloon. They were friends, although Tutt was a confederate veteran and Hickok scout for the Union.

We do not know about it about Davis Tutt: he was from Marion County, Arkansas where his family was involved in the Tut-Everett war (in) , he left west after the Civil War.

The discord between Hickok and Tutt apparently began about women; According to rumors, Hickok flirted with the sister of Tutt and/or Tutt was too closely interested in Susanna Moore, the mistress of Hickok. Everyone agrees that the , the two men were sworn enemies: Hickok refused to play cards with Tutt, while Tutt paid the other players to make him lose and ruin him.

The latent conflict ends up bursting during a game of poker in Lyon House Hotel (Currently Old Southern Hotel ). Wild Bill Hickok played against several people to whom Davis Tutt (in) lent money and gave advice [ 3 ] .

The stakes were high, and Hickok won about 200 $ [ 4 ] Tutt money. Used by his loss, Tutt reminded Hickok the debt of 40 $ that he had contracted during the sale of a horse, that Hickok paid by shrugging his shoulders. Tutt then asked him for 35 $ game debt dating back to the time they still played together. Hickok replied: “I think you are wrong, Dave. It’s only 25 $ . I have a memorandum in my pocket. »» [ 5 ] Encouraged by his armed friends, Tutt took the table Waltham Repeatert in Hickok gold and announced that he would keep it as a warranty until the 35 $ [ 5 ] .

after-content-x4

The friends of Tutt continued to taunt Hickok with the story of the watch for several days, until the day they announced that Tutt was planning to carry it the next day on the city square. Hickok replied: ‘ He shouldn’t come across that square unless dead men can walk [ 6 ] , [ 5 ] . » , then he got into his room to clean his revolvers.

Although Tutt had humiliated his rival, Hickok’s ultimatum forced his hand to him: he could not go back without making him think that he was afraid of Hickok, and to stay in Springfield he could not afford to Show cowardice. The next morning, he arrived at the square towards ten h , with the Hickok watch in its pocket. The word Tutt continued to humiliate Hickok quickly spread and reached Hickok’s ears per hour.

According to the depositions of Eli Armstrong, John Orr and Oliver Scott, Hickok joined Tutt on the square to discuss, in the presence of Eli Armstrong and John Orr, terms of the return of the watch. Tutt claimed 45 $ , Armstrong advised him to stick to the 35 $ And Hickok did not give up his 25 $ , but they declared that they did not intend to fight for that and they went to drink together. Then Tutt went to the stable and returned to the square.

A little before 18 h , Hickok arrived at the square, his Colt 1851 Navy in hand. The crowd dissipated quickly, and Tutt remained alone at the northwest corner of the square. Hickok stopped at around 70 m and say : “Dave, I’m here. »» He armed his revolver, put him in his holster and said: “Don’t approach this watch. »» Tutt did not answer but put his hand on his revolver [ 5 ] .

Davis Tutt was the best shooter, but both had demonstrated their courage. They put themselves in profile, in the position of DUELISTES, held on a short time. Then Tutt grabbed his revolver, Hickok took out hers, and assumed her on his other forearm. The two men pulled at the same time. Tutt missed, Hickok reached him between the fifth and the seventh coast. Tutt says ‘ Boys, I’m killed. » and ran under the porch of the court, then in the street where he fell and died [ 5 ] .

The next day, an arrest warrant was issued against Hickok, which was arrested the next day under the name of William Haycocke (name he used in Springfield). Liberation under bail was refused, which was normal for the assassinations. The judge reduced the charges to manslaughter ( manslaughter ) According to the circumstances, and Hickok paid a deposit of 2,000 $ [ 7 ] . During the trial, the names used go from William Haycocke to J. B. Hickok and Davis Tutt/Little Dave ( little is the equivalent of the current junior , which indicates the same name as his father).

The Hickok trial for manslaughter began the and lasted 3 days. Twenty-two witnesses of the place deposited. Hickok was defended by Colonel John S. Phelps (in) , Governor of Arkansas during the war, the complainant was the mayor Robert Washington Fyan (in) et le continent Sempronius H. Boyd (in) . The minutes of the trial were lost, but reports in the press indicate that Hickok argued self -defense. Most of the trial consisted in determining who had shot the first, only four witnesses had really seen the shooting: two said that the two men had pulled, the third was behind Hickok and could not see Tutt and the fourth said that Tutt n ‘had not fired, but admitted that he had noticed that a revolver room was empty. The other witnesses, who had not seen the shooting said they had heard only a detonation.

Although Hickok’s self -defense is technically illegitimate under the law of the Duels ( mutual combat ) (Considering that he had come to the armed square and expecting the combat), the jury found that he was justified in his shot, the sensitivity of the time wants that as Tutt was the initiator of the fight and the First to show manifest assault – two witnesses indicated that Tutt had released his revolver first – Hickok was absolute to have shot Tutt. Hickok was considered particularly honorable for having given Tutt several opportunities to avoid the fight when he lacked respect [ 8 ] . The judge gave the jury two apparently contradictory instructions: that conviction was the only legal option [ 9 ] and that they could apply the non-writing law of fair combat ( fair fight ) and pay it [ ten ] – that’s to say jury nullification  (in) , doctrine which allows jurors to pay the defendants which are technically guilty, but which do not deserve it. The trial ended the by the acquittal of Hickok after a deliberation of the jury of an hour or two, rare verdict for the time [ 11 ] . The verdict was both predictable and in accordance with case law, as a historian notes: ‘ Nothing better described the times than the fact that dangling a watch held as security for a poker debt was widely regarded as a justifiable provocation for resorting to firearms. » [ twelfth ] , [ 3 ] .

Several weeks after the shooting on September 13, 1865, Colonel George Ward Nichols, who wrote for Harper’s Magazine , sought to meet Hickok and started the interviews that made the shooter then unknown a legend of the conquest of the West.

  1. ↑ Cecil Adams, ‘ Did Western gunfighters really face off one-on-one? » , on The Straight Dope , (consulted the ) .
  2. ↑ (in) George Ward Nichols , ‘ Wild Bill » , Harper’s New Monthly Magazine , vol. 34, n O 201, , p. 273-286 ( read online ) .
  3. ↑ a et b (in) Richard O’Connor , Wild Bill Hickok , Garden City, N.Y., Doubleday, , first re ed. , 282 p. (OCLC  721962 ) , p. 85 .
  4. ↑ About 3,000 $ 2010.
  5. ↑ A B C D and E (in) William Elsey Connelley , Wild Bill and His Era : The Life and Adventures of James Butler Hickok , , p. 84–85 .
  6. ↑ Literally : “He should not cross this place unless the dead can walk. »»
  7. ↑ 30 800 $ 2010.
  8. ↑ (in) Joseph G. Rosa , Wild Bill Hickok : The Man and His Myth , Lawrence, KS, University Press of Kansas, , 276 p. (ISBN  0-7006-0773-0 And 978-0-7006-0773-0 , OCLC  470901587 , BNF  41138118 , LCCN 95054015 ) , p. 121 .
  9. ↑ ‘ The defendant cannot set up justification that he acted in self-defense if he was willing to engage in a fight with deceased. To be entitled to acquittal on the ground of self-defense, he must have been anxious to avoid a conflict, and must have used all reasonable means to avoid it. If the deceased and defendant engaged in a fight or conflict willingly on the part of each, and the defendant killed the deceased, he is guilty of the offense charged, although the deceased may have fired the first shot. » .
  10. ↑ ‘ That when danger is threatened and impending a man is not compelled to stand with his arms folded until it is too late to offer successful resistance & if the jury believe from the evidence that Tutt was a fighting character & a dangerous man & that Deft was aware such was his character & that Tutt at the time he was shot by the Deft was advancing on him with a drawn pistol & that Tutt had previously made threats of personal injury to Deft … & that Deft shot Tutt to prevent the threatened impending injury [then] the jury will acquit. » .
  11. ↑ (in) Steven Lubet , ‘ Legal Culture, Wild Bill Hickok and the Gunslinger Myth » , UCLA Law Review , vol. 48, n O 6, (ISSN  0041-5650 And 1943-1724 ) .
  12. ↑ “Nothing describes the facts better than taking a watch that served as a guarantee for a poker debt is considered a reasonable justification to use firearms. »» .

after-content-x4