> intentionally starved and subjected to freezing cold weather.
> Was that torture?
Yes, that's quite clearly torture.
> Was that torture?
Yes, that's quite clearly torture.
If it was torture, why Congress was so interested in the plight of this one man - enough to send General Washington to investigate the report - and not interested in the plight of everyone else in the prison in the same condition?
Why is it okay to torture common people, but not rich "honorable" people?
It's not. That was his point.
The other 4 Declaration signers who were detained by the British were all rich men of high station - were given good treatment and considerable freedom under parole not given to normal prisoners or POWs. They certainly weren't tortured in any sense of the word.
The description in the biography seems to be that because Richard Stockton was also a rich man of high station, he should have received similar treatment, but he was instead treated like a commoner, and his suffering was all the greater because he was used to the good life.
In the biography were are supposed to sympathize with Stockton because of course rich people deserve to be treated better than plebes. That's the natural order of things. A bizjet traveler should never be forced to fly tourist class.
Congress's interest in the case seems to be much more an apprehension that Stockton was being treated like a common prisoner than a concern that commoners are being horribly mistreated. They wanted Stockton treated like a POW, covered under different laws than a prisoner.
If what was going on can be called torture, Congress don't seem to care. My question is, why not?
"intentionally" implies intention somehow.
Wikipedia's source for "intentionally starved" is https://archive.org/details/biographyofsign03sand/page/102/m... :
> He was not only deprived of the comforts, but the necessaries, of life, having been left more than twenty-four hours without food, and afterward afforded a very coarse and limited supply. The inhuman treatment which he received, so repugnant to the principles of civilized warfare, and so intolerable to an individual who had been accustomed to all the comforts and delicacies of life, depressed his spirits and seriously affected his health.
Can you tell me if that was "intentionally starved" or "intentionally forced to eat the same rations as commoners"? Was it really a starvation diet, or was it food that a rich man wasn't used to eating and found unpalatable?
You may well be right. By all accounts the Provost Prison was a horrible place, cruelly run by Provost Marshal Cunningham. At https://www.gutenberg.org/files/7829/7829-h/7829-h.htm#link2... we can read how a pamphleteer describe him as a torturer:
“His hatred of the Americans found vent in torture by searing irons and secret scourges to those who fell under the ban of his displeasure. The prisoners were crowded together so closely that many fell ill from partial asphyxiation, and starved to death for want of the food which he sold to enrich himself.”
But even if you are right, at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36875273 I point out the other four imprisoned signatories to the Declaration of Independence were not treated like this.
They certainly were not tortured.
The source your quoting also calls it "inhuman" and "repugnant to the principles of civilized warfare."
It's got nothing to do with how rich he was, only the fact that he was mistreated as a prisoner.
> And what is more, by a custom which equally displays the honour and humanity of the Europeans, an officer, taken prisoner in war, is released on his parole, and enjoys the comfort of passing the time of his captivity in his own country, in the midst of his family ; and the party who have thus released him rest as perfectly sure of him as if they had him confined in irons.
Technically speaking, I guess they don't have to be rich to be an officer, but all the ones I mentioned were rich.
As best as I can tell, Stockton is the only one who might fit that description, and the cited support for Wikipedia"s "five weeks of brutal treatment" doesn't help me understand how that specifically was torture, unless all "brutal treatment" is considered a form of torture.
He lost his wealth, including his library and animals. That's surely an emotional shock that could easily lead to depression. I can understand how someone from privilege, with a lot to lose, may be more affected than a poor person with little to lose. I can also understand how that depression may make it harder to survive wretched circumstances. But I also don't want to give special dispensation to wealthy people just because they are used to a good life.
All of the resources I've found about the event trace back to the biography I've been quoting. The book "His Sacred Honor, Judge Richard Stockton" surely has more, but I can't find a copy online.
I am unable to answer your question about the book. I believe that if "civilized warfare" is a meaningful phrase in a 1770s US context then it's surely influenced by Vattel.
Should the people involved be prosecuted for torture?
To be clear, I think it is a clear violation of their 8th amendment right.
Here's a lawsuit where the jail wasn't providing enough food. https://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Lawsuit-says-jail-s... . The class action lawsuit is settled, at https://dailygazette.com/2020/07/23/montgomery-county-agrees... . The county denies any wrongdoing.
Even if you think it was torture, I wonder if the prisoners did. The complaint at https://clearinghouse-umich-production.s3.amazonaws.com/medi... says "A more abusive and inhumane environment is difficult to imagine" but does not use the word torture.
Or, from https://interrogatingjustice.org/prisons/historic-winter-sto... :
> More than 1,000 women in one medical prison endured days without heat. Temperatures inside FMC Carswell the facility dropped to 50 degrees. The prison is the only medical facility for women in the entire country, and it houses prisoners with severe health problems. To make matters worse, staff failed to properly secure water supplies, leading to a water shortage inside the jail. Ahead of the storm, correctional officers did not repair damaged heating systems or secure a generator to make sure essential medical equipment had power. Though the prison never officially lost power, prisoners struggled in the extreme temperatures.
Were they being tortured?
Or, "The Big Chill - I had never been locked up before. No one told me that prison would be so cold." https://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/11/29/the-big-chill .
Are those prisoners being tortured? Or is this part of the "pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions" the United Nations Convention Against Torture specifically excludes?
I found https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/1998/feb/15/cold-cell-v... saying "The court noted that "cold temperatures need not imminently threaten inmates' health to violate the eighth amendment. Thus, Dixon's claim that his cell was so cold he could not write a letter or do legal work, was sufficient, without more, for eighth amendment purposes."
This sounds like a cold cell can be a violation of the 8th amendment, even without involving torture or extreme health problems.
That's why I don't want to say that this short description of the events of 1700s is enough to conclude it was likely also torture.
He was assigned to the commoner prison, not tortured. That's why he was cold and hungry.