The University of Mississippi and Sectionalism

By: Jesse Hisaw

The University of Mississippi has been coined the name, The Harvard of the South. In
Daniel Samsings book, the reason for the building of the university is to give the southern
gentry a southern education, so that the sons of the Souths future generations would not have to
go up North to be educated and then have their minds bent with northern abolitionist ideas about
slavery and sectionalism.1 In this paper I will discuss the sectionalism ideas that surrounded the
institution of the University of Mississippi, its students and its staff from the universitys
founding to 1860.
Sectionalism is a term that means someone has a tendency to be more concerned with the
interests of your particular group or region than with the problems and interests of the larger
group or country. Its origins date back to America in 1847, which is rather coincidental since the
University of Mississippi opened its doors in 1848, only a year later.
One important incident that happened in the universitys history is the case of a student
assaulting an African American woman slave in 1860. A student by the name of Mr. S. B.
Humpheys entered the residence of the President of the University of Mississippi while he was
away and allegedly assaulted, physically and sexually, the African American woman slave. A
Professor by the name of F. A. P. Barnard took the testimony of the slave and had her to point out
her assailant, which was Mr. Humpheys. Mr. Humpheys had a hearing with the president and
faculty to plead his case and of course he pleads not guilty. However, the motion was made
during these proceedings that Mr. S. B. Humpheys be found guilty, therefore, be suspended from
the university. The motion, with a 3 to 5 vote, did not pass. Then the following resolution was
1 Sansing, David G. 1999. The University of Mississippi: A Sesquicentennial History. Jackson:

University Press of Mississippi.

given by the board, That although the Faculty are morally convinced of Mr. Humpheys guilt,
yet they do not consider the evidence adduced to substantiate the charge, as sufficient, legally, to
convict him2
Given the victims testimony and the pointing out of her assailant, the Board still only
morally convicted and not legally convicted Mr. Humpheys, because they could not find the
evidence substantial enough. The reasons why the board only morally convicted Mr. Humpheys
is because the evidence and the statement of the African American slave, Jane, were given by Dr.
Barnard. Also, some of the members of the board believed that her testimony was not
historically accurate, rather it was introduced to her by Dr. Barnard. Another reason is that Dr.
Barnard had no other testimony to accredit Janes testimony. They considered Janes testimony
worthless since she was an African American slave and was below the white man. Also during
this case, another Professor by the name of Dr. Boynton stated that he knew of Mr. Humpheys
guilt, but refused to say who had told him about it because his witness was also an African
American slave. After the trial ended, Dr. Barnard wrote a letter to Mr. Humpheys parents to
bring him home for the semester since he could not expel the student, which the parents did.
And when the new semester was about to begin, Mr. Humpheys reapplied into the university, but
Dr. Barnard denied his application, which stirred up more trouble. 3
After the case settled and the student was sent home, Dr. Wm. F. Sterns wrote a complaint
about Geo. W. Carter and his actions during the previous case with Mr. Humpheys, saying that he
abuses his privileges that come with his position. The complaint against Dr. Carter had been due

2 Board of Faculty Minutes. 1860.

3 Ibid

to him believing the testimony of the African American slave over the white students. Dr. Carter
was accused of being a witness and authority to a charge against Dr. Barnard for being in
connection with the action of abolitionism.4
This incident paved the way for another trial having to do with the trial that took place
against the Chancellor of the University of Mississippi that same year. A citizen of Oxford
named H. R. Branham, placed charges on the chancellor for the lack of sectionalism, or having
pro-north ideas. In these charges, H. R. Branham gives evidence that Dr. Barnard is unbalanced
on the question of slavery and that Dr. Barnard was in favor of accepting a testimony from an
African American slave over the testimony of a white student. In the charges brought forth, Mr.
Branham accuses Dr. Barnard of not being of Southern manly hood. Mr. Branham recalls the
voting results to expel the student, Mr. Humpheys saying, the vote was sectional dividedBarnard, Boynton and Moore voting in the affirmative, and the Southern men voting in the
negative,5 and taking Dr. Barnards testimony during the trial of Mr. Humpheys, saying that he
would take his African American slaves testimony over a white man. Furthermore, all of the
information against the white student was solely from the testimony of the African American
slave named Jane. Also, since the vote of the expulsion of Mr. Humpheys failed, Dr. Barnard
wrote to his family telling them to take the student away, and if the Board of Trustees continued
to fail to charge Dr. Barnard for taking a Negro testimony against a student, Mr. Branham would
publish the whole ordeal into the Mississippian so the entirety of the state could read.6 All of
4 Ibid
5 Trustees of the University of Missisippi. 1860. Record of the Testimony and Proceedings in

the Matter of The Invesigation.

6 Ibid

these charges and uproar were not because of what a white student did to an African American
slave on the campus of the University of Mississippi, but rather the case that the chancellor put
into place against the white student for taking Janes testimony into account even though she was
of African American decent. In the South, that is something that is not done, but only in the
North where the abolitionist ideas and teachings are trying to destroy the Southern way of living.
Sectionalism has been in the Institution of the University of Mississippi since the very
beginning. It was the main reason the university was built. So that the future generations of the
South could get a true southern education with southern morals and values about slavery and
satanic view of abolitionist and their ideals, that if had been put in the minds of the Souths
youth, would be the end of Southern prosperity in every single way. In 1852, eight years before
this incident between the takings of testimonies of African American over a white student,
Jefferson Davis made a speech to PHI SIGMA and Hermean Societies that contained a lot of
ideas and views that implemented sectionalism.7 One great example of sectionalism in the
speech Jefferson Davis spoke in Oxford was this: We who are passing from the stage of life in
the anxiety which springs from the desire that the institutions of our Fathers may be preserved in
their purity when we and all of ours are dust, turn to the rising generation, their future guardians
to sustain the hope of which we would die possessed.8 Here Jefferson Davis is referring to the
Southern way of life, and how the younger generation that is coming up to be educated by the
university will protect it. Also, he says to further emphasis the need for the Southern educated
youth by saying he looks to the young men of Mississippi for the protection of her rights and to
treat and protect the state and the university as though they were their mothers. Furthermore,
7 Davis, Jefferson. to PHI SIGMA and Hermean Societies. 1852. Address. Oxford, July 15.
8 Ibid

during Jefferson Davis speech he delves into Northern abolitionist actions to stop slavery in the
south. Jefferson Davis describes their efforts as an unholy crusade and they are fighting against
the Souths domestic institution, calling slavery a holy horror since it is no longer profitable for
the North to use slave labor as the South and brought down the Norths ideas of slavery and
called them self-canonized saints.9 Jefferson Davis very openly condemns the Northern
actions against the South and her way of living and says that since now the North wants to end
slavery, since they can no longer profit from it, the South should do away with it too. Jefferson
Davis then speaks to the young generation in front of him that the South and her ways need to be
protected and it is up to them to do so with everything they have because the North does not see
the institution of slavery the same as the South does because they are different.
In a letter from Dr. Stearns to a Mr. Nelson, sectionalism is very prevalent. Dr. Stearns is
talking to his friends son who has talked about going to Yale to get his degree instead of the
University of Mississippi. First, Dr. Stearns tells Mr. Nelson that the alumni of Yale is among the
thousands and are scattered across the United States but the alumni of the University of
Mississippi is still small but would grow into that amount and it would be an honor for him to be
a part of that alumni. Dr. Stearns then proceeds to discuss why he shouldnt go to Yale if Mr.
Nelson simply wants to go to be able to say he went to that Ivy League college because of the
increasing hostility between the North and the South. He also asks Mr. Nelson if it would be
worth the constant insults he would receive from being on a northern abolitionist institution
about the land of his birth (the South) and that he is a native Mississippian. Dr. Stearns also told
Mr. Nelson that if he did resort to a northern college for his education it would be of no use

9 Ibid

because of the sectional ill that is increasing between the North and the South, as well as
creating valuable friendships that only can be created at this time in his life.10
In this letter from the chairman of Governmental Science and Law, Dr. Stearns openly
discusses the issue of sectionalism to a young man who is trying to decide where he wants to get
his diploma. Dr. Stearns describes to Mr. Nelson the increasing conflict the North and the South
are having, while at the same time, describes the situations Mr. Nelson will be in if he goes to
either college. He describes how much of a struggle it would be for Mr. Nelson to go to Yale
under the current political circumstances because he would be constantly insulted from his peers
and teachers having no one to lean upon and the opposite would be if he went to the University
of Mississippi.
When Dr. Barnard was the chancellor, he kept teaching and gathered the love and loyalty
of many students. These students defended him very fervently against those who blamed Dr.
Barnard for trying to die out the Southern ways at the university with ways of the North. 11 It is
ironic, though to see such support from these students who were the youth of the Southern slave
holding gentry. Especially, with what Dr. Barnard was being charged, things that went against
everything they had been taught up from babes to adults, and began getting an education to keep
protecting those things which they believed.

10 Stearns, Wm. F. Wm. F. Stearns to Mr. William C. Nelson, August 7, 1857. Letter. From

Oxford Univeristy, William Cowper Nelson Collection.

http://clio.lib.olemiss.edu/cdm/search/collection/civil_war/searchterm/nelson
%20letter/field/all/mode/all/conn/and/order/origia/ad/asc (accessed April 20, 2015)
11 Barksdale, Norma. 2015. Barnard Observatory - Center for the Study of Southern Culture.

Center for the Study of Southern Culture. Center for the Study of Southern Culture.
http://southernstudies.olemiss.edu/about/barnard-observatory/. (accessed April 28, 2015)

The case against Dr. Barnard started several weeks after the case of the student assaulting
a negro servant on the property of Dr. Barnard while him and his wife had been gone. Here is
the recollection of the case that ensued and the outcome therewith.
Charges were brought against Dr. Barnard by a citizen of Oxford, Mississippi, named Dr.
Branham. The charges are as follows: that Dr. Barnard is unsound on the slavery question, that
he allowed and used the testimony of a negro against a white student, the student then went on
trial solely on the negros testimony. When the question was raised to expel the student, the vote
was divided with Barnard, Boynton, and Moore voting yea while the southern men12 voted nay.
Also, before the case of the student started Dr. Barnard asked Dr. Richardson if he would believe
his negros testimony, in which Dr. Richardson replied he would not if it conflicted with that of a
white student whereas Dr. Barnard replied and said that he would. Furthermore every single
piece of information against the student was given solely by a negro woman, that Dr. Barnard
declared that the negro woman later pointed out her assailant as the student that went on trial.
Finally after the vote to expel the student failed on the board of trustees, Dr. Barnard wrote a
letter to the students family to take him home, which the family did.13
Upon hearing the charges he faced, Dr. Barnard responded by inviting the fullest and
most searching investigation on the part of your honorable body14 and the study of his past life,
not only of the twenty-two years he had spent in unwearied devotion to the cause of Southern

12Trustees of the University of Missisippi. 1860. Record of the Testimony and Proceedings in

the Matter of The Invesigation.

13 Ibid, page 4
14 Ibid

education.15 Dr. Barnard also asks the board to even look into his youth at a time when he had
not expected to live in the South. In his closing remarks Dr. Barnard states: If I entertain
sentiments now, or if your investigations shall discover that I have ever entertained sentiments,
which shall justify any man however captious, in pronouncing me unsound upon the slavery
question, then, gentlemen, do your duty and remove me from a position for which I am morally
disqualified.16 If however, when the intense investigation is done and there is found that the
alleged charges are false, bring the justice down on Dr. Branham.17
The charges that were brought against Dr. Barnard had been very strong, especially in the
Southern gentlemens moral and emotional sense. During the time period of 1860, the testimony
of a negro, free or slave, could not be used in a court case no matter how docile the charges may
have been. Not only did Dr. Barnard take and believe the testimony of the negro, but he also had
her point out her defiler and believed her. When the vote came to expel the student, it failed
because of that reason. The board members that voted not to expel the student did so for the
reason of not having any white testimonies saying the student had done the awful crime and that
if there were, they would have voted accordingly instead of just morally convicting him.18 Then
to make the situation worse, Dr. Barnard was not a Southerner. Also, whatever Dr. Barnards
thoughts about slavery he did not speak publically, he may have not seen slavery as wholly
wrong, but believed that the negro slave girl had the right to see the person who done her harm
15 Ibid
16 Ibid, page 5
17 Ibid
18 Ibid

receive justice. In Dr. Barnards statement to the charges, he fearlessly tells the board to search
as tediously as they wished and if they found fault, then let him go of his duties at the
university.19 Dr. Barnard states those words because he knew he had done what he believed was
right in his heart during the sexual assault case and that the charges by the Dr. Branham of
Oxford had been trying to get him removed of his office for quite some time due to him being
from the North.20
After the court and Dr. Branham had heard Dr. Barnards statement on the matter of his
charges, changed his charges only to: Dr. Barnard took the testimony of a negro, wrote to his
parents to take the student home after the board refused to expel him and that Dr. Barnard
rejected the students readmission into the college.21 In return, Dr. Barnard responded to these
submitted charges by explaining why he did what he did during the trial of the white student and
the charge of the sexual assault on the negro slave woman. Dr. Barnard says that the case he
made against him was with entirely sufficient and satisfactory evidence22before he had ever
spoken to his negro servant who had been cruelly outraged and beaten.23 Dr. Barnard
continues to say that he never spoke to the servant on the subject ever.24 But, during the week in
which the assault happened, his wife was told of what happened by the student to her and then
19 Ibid
20 Ibid
21 Ibid
22 Ibid
23 Ibid
24 Ibid

reiterated it to him without any supplication of his own. Then during the trial of the white
student, Dr. Barnard presented the evidence which he believed to be of par, especially since his
wife confirmed the incident and the story told by the negro woman.25 Furthermore, the Faculty,
by a vote, did morally convict the students guilt and the outcome of the trial was made public
and the student body did not show any conflict with the outcome of the hearing.26 Dr. Barnard
also went on to say that without the uprising of the other students, also confirmed the guilt of the
student. The student also had a history of bad character and it was his duty as the Chancellor of
the University to send the student home and not allow his readmission in the university. Having
said this, Dr. Barnard stated that the last two charges were nugatory.27 And as for the charge of
taking the testimony of his negro servant, Dr. Barnard states: if it were in any sense true, I was
but doing my duty as a Christian master, to protect my servant from outrage and that college
government is a parental not a municipal government.28
During the beginning of the trial when Dr. Barnard is telling of the charges and why they
should have not been made in the first place, he brings out the essence of Southern teachings in
his defense. Especially, when Dr. Barnard is explaining why he took the negro servants
testimony. He states that the only reason he took it had been because his wife confirmed it,
which by the law in the south was by all means legal and had no abolitionist, Northern ideal to it.
Furthermore, Dr. Barnard also added that the college government was not like that of a town or
25 Ibid
26 Ibid
27 Ibid
28 Ibid, page 6

city but as one in a family household. Dr. Barnard really brings in the Southern education into
his defense when he states that he was just trying to be a Christian master to his slaves and to
protect them from harm. This is what was taught in households of future slave owners, to be
Christian masters unto their slaves. However, if Dr. Barnard had been raised in the South he
would not have even took the testimony even from his wife, because he would had been a
Southern gentleman and just morally convicted the student for doing such an act and go on.
As the trial went under way, Dr. Branham introduces only one item of evidence.29 That
evidence was an interview he conducted with Dr. Branham a month back showing that Dr.
Barnard had in fact admitted that he had used the testimony of a negro woman against a student
as circumstantial evidence. The interview also stated that Dr. Barnard justified the testimony as
evidence since that could be used in courts of law.30 Dr. Branham then explains how the
interview came to be. Dr. Barnard had heard that Dr. Branham, accused of being an abolitionist,
in which Dr. Branham wanted to clarify that he had not called him an abolitionist but in fact a
free-soiler. Dr. Branham accuses Dr. Barnard of such a thing because of his use of the negro
testimony in the case against the white student, but he did say where he had got that information,
since only the outcome of the case was made public.31 Dr. Branham went on to say that, if the
university was to be conducted upon such principles as would allow negro testimony to be used
against students, I would not pull out a chunk of fire from under the University buildings.32
29 Ibid, page 7
30 Ibid
31 Ibid
32 Ibid

Dr. Branham shows an outstanding example of the sectionalism ideal. A free- soiler is
described as a person who is opposed to the extension of slavery into the United States territories
and the admission of slave states into the Union before the civil war.33 Also, Dr. Branhams next
statement is also a strong sign of sectionalism. He states that if the use of negro testimonies in
trials is being practiced and taught at the university and the university caught on fire he would
not help put it out and that it deserves to burn to the ground. This is a rather strong statement but
makes the point across of the ideal that they didnt want anything that did not accept or further
the institution of slavery.
Then a Mr. Dowd took the stand and accused Dr. Barnard of being a free- soiler. Upon asking
why he believed such a thing, he stated that Dr. Barnard had allowed the testimony of a negro to
be used in the court against a white student, and because he wanted the catalogue of the
university to be printed in the North instead of the South.34 Mr. Dowd then said he had never
heard Dr. Barnard say anything that suggested pro slavery or not pro slavery but lost his
confidence after the incident about the catalogue.35 Many of the Southern gentlemen took Dr.
Barnards wanting to print the university catalogue in the North instead of the South as an
attempt to bring Northern ideals into the Southern university to alter the minds of the future
youth of the South.36

33 Merriam-Webster. 2015. Free-Soil | Characterized by Free Soil.Merriam-Webster.com.

Accessed May 1. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/free-soiler.

34 Ibid
35 Ibid
36 Davis, Jefferson. to PHI SIGMA and Hermean Societies. 1852. Address. Oxford, July 15

Professor J. M. Phipps was then put on the stand to testify as a witness to the interview that
corresponded with Dr. Barnard and Dr. Branham. He testified that during the interview, Dr.
Barnard was convinced it was a very strong case against the student and spoke of his past with
the chancellor. Professor Phipps stated that since he had known Dr. Barnard, which was for six
years had never heard him say anything about slavery or anything that was hostile to the
Southern institution. 37 The professor then proceeds to say that the student who was accused of
the assault crime against the slave, was not a good, orderly student,38 and that the students
academic performance was never pleasing. The professor, however, goes on to criticize Dr.
Barnard by saying it is very unusual for the chancellor to dismiss a student after an investigation
of this sort and to not allow him to return without the approval of the Faculty.39
When Professor H. Whitehorne took the stand, he defended Dr. Barnard from the charges of the
assault case by stating he did not force the testimony of the negro upon the court, he just
reiterated what his wife had told him. Professor Whitehorne also said that he believed the guilt
of the student by his actions during the court and his failed alibi and not because of the evidence
that Dr. Barnard had given.40 Then another professor by the name of G. W. Carter was ordered to
the stand to tell what all happened during the trial of the student. Professor Carter then explained
that on Dr. Barnards return home from Jackson, he and his wife found out about the assault on

37 Ibid
38 Ibid
39 Ibid
40 Ibid

one of their negro servants and believed the certain student to be the assailant.41 Dr. Barnard then
wrote to the student stating him of his guilt and that he could prove it with an unimpeachable
testimony.42 When the student read this from the chancellor, he attempted to withdraw from the
university but subsequently did not from the advice of his classmates.43 The student then
demanded an investigation. During this time period Dr. Barnard presented the charges against
the student before the Faculty and the student plead not guilty.44 The student then attempted to
prove an alibi but failed to do so.45 Then Dr. Barnard introduced the testimony of his servant
woman and telling of whom was the person responsible. At the same time, Dr. Barnard
explained the servants method of identifying her assailant by noticing a missing tooth.46 In
return, Professor Richardson attempted to disrepute the servants testimony. That, of course, is
when Dr. Barnard asked Professor Richardson if his servant had told him of a student who had
taken his horse from the stable would he not believe him. In which Professor Richardson
famously replied, I would not, if his statement conflicted with the statement of a student, and
especially if his method of identifying the party should prove false or defective.47 Dr. Barnard
defended the credibility of the servant womans testimony and gave no other testimony during
41 Ibid
42 Ibid
43 Ibid
44 Ibid
45 Ibid
46 Ibid
47 Ibid

the trial. Professor Carter then states that he had kept waiting on Dr. Barnard to bring in the
unimpeachable witness to which he described but it did not happen. Also the negros statement
was false on her method of identifying her assailant since the student on trial had no missing
tooth.48 Professor Boynton backed Dr. Barnard by saying he was a witness of the crime, but
when he was questioned by two of the other professors he stated he did not know facts firsthand.
And when questioned of who told him what happened, he would not say whom, so the court
assumed that another negro had witnessed it and told him to which he believed.49 Then the
students bad habits and irregularity of school related work became brought in as evidence of his
guilt. Later that month in a faculty meeting, however, Dr. Barnard made known his
unimpeachable witness which was Professor Boynton.50
When Dr. Barnard asked Professor Richardson if he would have believed his male servant if he
told of a student stealing his horse, Professor Richardson fiercely replied and said no, if it
conflicted with that of what the student said. This statement shows the amount of sectionalism
that was in this case and how important it was to the Southern gentlemen. To Professor
Richardson, no matter what the negro servant would say he would not believe it if it conflicted
with that of another white student or person. That kind of mindset is a prime example of
sectionalism and the sectional divide between the North and the South at this time, especially
since the ideal behind the Southern domestic institution depends on that the African Americans
were less than human and were not capable of telling the truth. Dr. Barnards unimpeachable

48 Ibid
49 Ibid
50 Ibid

witness had been a white man which was accepted by all of the Southern gentlemen, but when it
came to light that Dr. Boynton did not actually witness the events and refused to say where he
received the information. The Faculty dismissed his testimony since it most likely also came
from a negro servant that witnessed the crime. Just as before, the information given had been
supplied by a negro instead solely from a white source. This made the evidence, to the Southern
men on the Faculty, have little weight to adequately convict the student any more than just
morally because of lack of solid evidence that was supplied by trusted sources.
Following these testimonials, the court starts taking more testimonials to find out of Dr.
Barnard was an abolitionist. Professor Carter states that he never put forth the implication that
Dr. Barnard was unsound upon the slavery question.51 At an earlier faculty meeting, Professor
Carter was asked by Dr. Barnard if Carter thought he was an abolitionist to which he declined to
answer saying the question was given at an improper time and had no information on the matter.
Dr. Barnard, in Professor Carters point of view, did not do anything during the trial of the
assault by the student to see him as unsound on the question of slavery.52 Professor Carter goes
on to say that the only thing Dr. Barnard did that even came close to this idea was when Dr.
Barnard admitted the introduction of the statement and testimony of the negro slave. But even
then, I did not see this action as evidence of his inadequacy on the matter, just seen the act as an
objectionable one and in violation of our social and political economies.53

51 Ibid
52 Ibid
53 Page 11

Dr. Branham and his supporters were trying to find evidence of abolitionism in Dr. Barnards life
because they wanted to see him out of his position because they believed that Dr. Barnard was
trying to pervert the minds of the youth of the South. The testimony of Professor Carter shows
that several of the Faculty did not like the methods and means which Dr. Barnard used in his case
against the white student but did not see that as proof of his inner abolitionist. But Professor
Carter did acknowledge that what Dr. Barnard done, went against the structure of the South. As
stated earlier, in the South, negro testimonies could not be used in the courts against white
people. When Professor Carter says a violation of our social and political economics, he is
referring to the Southern way of life. The Southern part of the country had been different than
the Northern way. Up North their way of life involved more industry while the way of life in the
South required more agriculture. So the Southern people heavily relied upon slave labor to get
the harvest of crops in for their livelihood.54 Professor Carter simply stated that Dr. Barnard
broke the law of Southern economics by allowing and using the testimony of the negro.
Throughout the case that Dr. Branham pursued against the Chancellor of the University, the
students that Dr. Barnard taught quite ironically and fiercely defended him in several of the
student magazines.55
As the case goes on, the subject of testimony is put into question. Especially, since Dr. Boynton
stated that an acquaintance of his, Judge Howry, supposedly said to him that such statements as
from a negro servant such as had been offered by Dr. Barnard during the case of the assault, had

54 Ibid
55 Barksdale, Norma. 2015. Barnard Observatory - Center for the Study of Southern Culture.

Center for the Study of Southern Culture. Center for the Study of Southern Culture.
http://southernstudies.olemiss.edu/about/barnard-observatory/ (accessed April 28, 2015)

a right to be received.56 However, further review by the court to Judge Howry said he made no
such statement. Judge Howry goes on to say that the court had no specific form that a testimony
could be when there is a trial on a student, but what matters is the source of the testimony and
then judge accordingly. And according to the situation, the court sometimes acts on the
information given by the professor without knowing how he received the information but only
after the Faculty is satisfied and believes that the information is reliable.57 As a new session of
the case began, the Faculty reestablished what happened during the sexual assault case with the
student. The student pleads not guilty to the charges of sexually assaulting and injuring the
servant in ways that are still visible days later.58 Then the Faculty made a motion of having
found the student guilty, he should be suspended from the university, but the motion failed.59
Doctors Barnard, Boynton and Moore voted in favor of expelling the student but lost to Doctors
Richardson, Stearns, Whitehorne, Phipps and Carter. So the board then resolved to be morally
convicted of the students guilt, but find that the evidence provided against the student inefficient
to legally convict him.60 Even though there had been testimonies stating of the guiltiness of the
student, the court did not legally convict him as a guilty verdict simply because all of the
information in some way came primarily from a negro servant. After the vote was cast, all those
in favor of suspending the student gave a list of reasons why they did so since it was not the way
56 Trustees of the University of Mississippi, 1860. Page 12.
57 Ibid
58 Ibid, page 13
59 Ibid
60 Ibid

of the social economy in the South to vote such ways on such controversial evidence. Their
reasons included: the students demeanor during the time of the trial, the failure to prove an alibi
in his defense, and the denial of witnesses to say if the student was in fact on the property of the
chancellor that night especially since that the witnesses said beforehand that they had in fact had
been on the property, and the testimony of a faculty member affirmed the guilt of the student by
the testimony of someone whose name he could not divulge.61 On the other hand, those that did
not vote in favor of suspension gave their reason which included that the bad habits of study and
irregularities of the student had nothing to do with the innocence of the student on such a charge,
the statement and testimony of the servant woman, including her method of identifying the
assailant, were felt to be given not historically accurate but seemingly given to her by Dr.
Barnard, when Dr. Richardson tried to disclaim the credibility of the servants testimony, Dr.
Barnard tried to persuade him otherwise. Also, that Professor Boynton had stated that he knew
the guilt of the accused, but when asked if he knew from firsthand experience, he did not.
Professor Boynton also did not wish to divulge the name nor the race of his informant when
prompted. This could only mean that his informant had been a negro man, therefore making his
testimony invalid.62 The final reason and most important to those who voted against the
suspension of the student stated that in the view of the social and political economies , they
considered the testimony of the negro servant inadmissible and worthless especially since the
method the negro servant used to identify her assailant by a missing front tooth proved false.63

61 Ibid
62 Ibid, page 15
63 Ibid, page 14-15

Professor Stearns then began to be examined as a witness to Dr. Barnard. He recalls what
happened during the sexual assault case by starting out by saying when Dr. Barnard returned
from his trip to Jackson, a gentleman told him that a gross outrage64 had happened to one of his
negro servants. Dr. Barnard then wrote a letter to the young man that was suspected to being the
culprit, to which the student denied the charge in such a way that convinced Dr. Barnard of his
guilt. After changing his mind to leave, the student demanded for an investigation and for him to
stand trial.65 When the young man attempted to prove an alibi, it failed, just as Dr. Stearns had
imagined it would. Of the entire Faculty, only one believed that the student had proved an alibi
and that person had been Dr. Carter. Upon hearing this, Dr. Barnard told of the negro servant
that had been assaulted, telling his wife what had happened and who she recognized as the
culprit. Dr. Richardson misunderstood and believed that Dr. Barnard attempted to bring in a
negro statement as an independent testimony.66 When Dr. Barnard realized this, he explained to
Dr. Richardson he only offered her testimony as a corroborating circumstance. Dr. Barnard took
great steps to make Dr. Richardson understand the reasoning behind his action with the negro
statement. Dr. Stearns goes on to say that the fact that a negro testimony was used during the
trial of the white student was false, especially in the way that Dr. Branham charged Dr. Barnard.67
Here, Dr. Stearns is describing to the court that all of the charges that have been put onto Dr.
Barnard have come from a misunderstanding behind the usage of the negro testimony that

64 Ibid, page 16
65 Ibid
66 Ibid
67 Ibid

occurred during the trial against the white student. Later at a meeting of the Faculty, Dr.
Barnard raises the question to them asking if they believed that he was an abolitionist or a freesoiler. In response, Dr. Carter denied to answer the question and Dr. Barnard believed it was
because of what happened during the trial of the student and also the conversations him and the
other faculty had debated whether or not to printing the university catalogue in the North instead
of the South.68 Dr. Stearns tells the reasons why Dr. Barnard wanted to do so, because of the
price difference and the superior quality. Dr. Barnard did not want to print the university
catalogue in the North to be able to bring more Northerners into the Southern institution to
corrupt the Southern teaching as some had thought and suggested. To defend his stand for Dr.
Barnard, Dr. Stearns tells of a printer by the name of D. Van Nostrand who had completed
several printings for him and that he did not believe in abolitionism.69 Dr. Stearns even showed
physical proof of his words by showing the court printings from the North and printings from the
South and their price. Dr. Stearns went on to say that when Dr. Barnard has talked politics with
him in the past, he states that, I never heard any but sound sentiments from him on the slavery
question.70 To prove irrefutably, Dr. Stearns tells of a time when he invited Dr. Barnard to listen
in on a lecture over the subject of slavery on November 1, 1857. During the said lecture Dr.
Stearns took a strong stake in the support of the institution of slavery and as he heard the lecture
he never expressed any doubt of it, but showed his entire support on the matter. And he also
states that there has never been anyone more persecuted that Dr. Barnard has been on the subject
of slavery and its institution than him. Then to prove of Dr. Barnards innocence on this matter,
68 Ibid
69 Ibid, page 17
70 Ibid

he read a letter that was addressed to him from the Honorable J. J. Ormond and a Dr. L. C.
Garland from Tuscaloosa, Alabama strongly endorsing the unconditional loyalty of Dr. Barnard
to the South.71
The letter that Dr. Stearns read to the court to help with Dr. Barnards case reads as follows:
My Dear Sir: Having heard that Professor Barnards principles as a Southern nam have been
called in question, we take the liberty to say that we knew him well while he lived in Alabama
one of us for nearly twenty yearsand never heard his attachment to the institutions of the South
called in question; nor did we ever witness in our intercourse with Prof. Barnard, either in act or
speech, anything calculated to include a suspicion that he was not entirely identified with the
South and attached to her institutions and domestic policy, and therefore we do not doubt he is a
loyal Southern man.72
This letter within itself standing alone without any other material is an outstanding show of
sectionalism. All this letter talks about is how Dr. Barnard is completely loyal to the South, her
institutions, and her domestic policy. This letter in the defense of Dr. Barnard, states that he is a
Southern man through his principles and through his undivided loyalty to slavery, the Southern
way of living, Southern education, and Southern morals concerning everything that deals with
the South.
After Dr. Stearns leaves the stand, Professor E. C. Boynton spoke of how he had known
of the guilt of the student. His testimony states that after Dr. and Mrs. Barnard came back to the
University of Mississippi, that he sent for Dr. Barnard to tell him that while they were away, their
home had been visited by two students by the names of Furniss and Humpheys. And that his

71 Ibid
72 Ibid

negro woman named Jane, had been beaten and those two students had been the ones
responsible, and that Dr. Boynton did not believe that the first time that the students had visited
the vicinity of the property of the chancellor while he has been away and believed to be very
certain on the fact of the matter.73 Dr. Boynton came across this information because he lived
right beside Dr. Barnard and the only thing that separated their property was a brick wall. One
night there had been more than the usual sound of servants working. So he went to investigate
and Dr. Boynton heard the sound of a very heated argument that definitely had not been any
negros. As he heard this argument, Dr. Boynton went and looked over the fence to see two
people standing that were not negros and at the time he did not know that the servant girl had
been beaten and such. Dr. Boynton then states that in a couple of days he found out the names of
the two students he saw on the chancellors property. Their names were Furniss and Humpheys
and it had been Humpheys that had done the crime against the negro servant.74 Now this time,
Dr. Boynton releases that he did not get any information about their names from a negro and has
not even talked with a negro on the subject.
When Dr. Barnard brought the information to the student and to the court for a trial, that
is why he stated he had an unimpeachable testimony due to the testimony of his friend Dr.
Boynton and not the testimony of his negro servant. As Dr. Barnard opens the case and trial
against the student that allegedly committed the crime against the negro servant, he called up
Furniss, the student that was supposedly with the other student on the night of the crime, as a
witness for him. The student admitted to being on the premise of the chancellors property that
night, but when he asks if he was the student, Humpheys, companion on that same night and if so
73 Ibid, page 18
74 Ibid

say if he is innocent or not, but Furniss did not choose to answer the question.75 Dr. Barnard
continued on after this and told that his wife had spoken to the negro servant and she told who
had assaulted her. After Dr. Barnard had said these things, objections began to appear saying that
it was unsound to receive such a statement since it came from a negro servant. Even Dr.
Boynton stated that he did not see this as evidence but rather simply as a fact confirmatory of a
proposition already established.76 There still seemed to be an objection to receiving anymore
testimonies that did not deem legal. So Dr. Boynton stated that I believed the man did the act
and that I was satisfied beyond a doubt, and that I should act according to my convictions.77 In
return Dr. Whitehorne proclaimed that if Dr. Boynton did reveal the source of his information, it
would not be used. To which Dr. Boynton started quoting cases and students who became
expelled by using information that the source was not public knowledge and he denied their right
to find out where his information came from. This case became the first case in which a demand
was given for a Professor to give the name of his informant.78
When Col. A. H. Pegues went up to testify, he stated I have never, recently, heard
anyone sayexcept Dr. Branham and those who got their information from himthat Dr.
Barnard was unsound on the slavery question.79 To back what Col. A. H. Pegues had said, he
refers to a sermon that Dr. Barnard spoke of on Thanksgiving Day of November 20, 1856. Col.
75 Ibid, page 19
76 Ibid
77 Ibid
78 Ibid
79 Ibid, page 20

Pegues believed it was so well, especially since Dr. Barnard was a Northern man by birth,80 that
he had it published. As soon as the sermon starts, there is a statement about sectionalism and the
disturbed relations with a portion of our own fellow-citizens, inhabiting a different section of
our common country.81 Here in the very first sentence of the sermon by Dr. Barnard talks about
the sectionalist idea and the increasing tensions that Dr. Stearns is talking about when he writes
the letter to Mr. Nelson. Dr. Barnard continues to talk about the potential breakup of the union
and the disestablishment of the Souths way of life. He says, If, therefore, this beautiful
political structure which our fathers reared is destined to be undermined, ours will not be the
sacrilegious hands which shall sap its foundations.82 Dr. Barnard is using the arguments of
abolitionist against those who want to stop slavery. He then states if the North and the South
become violent against each other that the great wrong to humanity and sin against God will
never be our work.83 To Dr. Barnard it would be the work of those against the Southern
domestic institution. In this sermon, Dr. Barnard quite strongly stands for the foundation of
slavery and very open and frankly condemns those who oppose the Southern way of life and
what it stands for. After the sermon was read during the trial, Dr. Barnard stated that never had
he taken any information from a negro concerning a white student because it went against his
principles and are detrimental to the practices of good government.84 Dr. Barnard also clarifies
80 Ibid
81 Ibid
82 Ibid, page 21
83 Ibid
84 Ibid, page 23

why he described Dr. Boyntons testimony unimpeachable, he explains that he knew Dr. Boynton
knew what he was talking about and believed that his informant was a white person.85 Dr.
Barnard then explained that he had written a note to the accused student telling him he had heard
of what he did and advised the student to withdraw. Two days later Dr. Barnard wrote him again
saying if he did not withdraw from the university, Dr. Barnard would write to his guardian of
what had happened. In return, the student stated he would not leave without a trial. So, Dr.
Barnard had a private conversation with the other student, Furniss, who admitted to being on his
property the night the assault happened but refused to tell who was with him. In response to this
conversation, Dr. Barnard wrote charges against the student, Humpheys. When Dr. Barnards
wife came to the knowledge of what he had done she told him the negro servant had told her
what had happened that Humpheys was the one who committed the assault.86 Then Dr. Barnard
continues to tell of the events of that trial which were the same as the other testimonials about the
trial until he gets to the time when Dr. Richardson denounces the chancellor for admitting a
negro testimony. To which Dr. Barnard stated that he had no intentions of doing such a thing, but
belief and disbelief in cases often depends on information that is not always legal.87 When Dr.
Barnard did this, it ignited the fire that became the cause for the case against him because people
misunderstood and thought he was allocating for negro testimonies to be admitted against white
students and people outside the college courtroom. In a letter to Dr. Barnard, his friend J.
Thompson is at a loss for understanding. He tells Dr. Barnard:

85 Ibid
86 Ibid, page 24
87 Ibid

 I am wholly at a loss to understand your accusers. Your fault is that you received
information, from your servant girl, which implicated a student, and you acted on that
information to reach the truth; and this is set down as showing your free- soil proclivities. If this
be so, I am the worst free-soiler in the state: I am a downright abolitionist, No man strikes my
negro that I do not hear his story. I will listen to my negros grievances. Before God and man I
believe this is to be my duty. No man has the right to touch him or her without my consent, and
he who would not do the same would be despised by every man in Oxford. The whole matter, as
these young men relate it to me, is so absurd that I can scarcely credit their report. But I must
insist that you be not moved by these things. Have moral courage enough to stand by your post
and do your whole duty. Such trials will only prove your firmness and worth, and the mischief
will fall on the heads of your adversaries.88
As stated earlier, Dr. Barnard believed it was his duty to be the best Christian master to
all of his negro servants, just as J. Thompson states that it is my duty to take care of my negros
and listen to all their distresses. Even Governor Mc Rae displayed like sentiments concerning
what J. Thompson said. The Governor even stated that he would admit the charges if they were
true and defend them on the best Southern authority, but they are not true so they were not
admitted.89 If there is any pattern to this trial, Dr. Barnard constantly has to prove and reprove
that his loyalty lies with the South and not with the nation as a whole especially the North.
At the end of the case against Dr. Barnard, the following was made by a unanimous vote:
the charges against the chancellor are wholly unsubstantial by the evidence90; Dr. Barnard
stands completely and honorably acquitted of all charges that had been bestowed upon him, the
trustees as Southern men found their confidence in the ability and integrity of the Chancellor,
88 Ibid, page 28
89 Ibid
90 Ibid, page 29

and his fitness for his position, increased rather than diminished91, and that the efforts of Dr.
Barnard at the university are doing great things for the education and placing the university upon
an immovable basis.92 After Dr. Barnard was acquitted of all charges, Kinloch Falconer a
student and acquaintance of the student who was accused of the sexual assault on the negro
woman, testified as an act of justice to Dr. Barnard, that the student had confessed to him that he
had done what he was charged of93.
In 1854, Dr. Barnard took the chair of the departments: chemistry, mathematics and
astronomy after leaving the University of Alabama for twenty years. Two years later in 1856, he
became the third chancellor of the University of Mississippi.94 While he was the chancellor here,
he established several reforms that made the university mainly what it is today. While Dr.
Barnard was at the university, he put all he had in excelling the university to be one of the best in
the country.95 Two years after his appointment as the chair of the three departments he put in his
name as a candidate to become the new chancellor. Since Dr. Barnard was a Northerner, his
application to become the new chancellor was highly disputed but won in the end. During his
time at the university, Dr. Barnard was also the priest at Oxfords St. Peters Episcopal Church.96
91 Ibid
92 Ibid
93 Ibid, page 30
94 Barksdale, Norma. 2015. Barnard Observatory - Center for the Study of Southern Culture.

Center for the Study of Southern Culture. Center for the Study of Southern Culture.
http://southernstudies.olemiss.edu/about/barnard-observatory/ (accessed April 28, 2015)
95 Ibid
96 Ibid

Being the priest helped him get the job as chancellor since most of the trustees that belonged to
the university were in fact Episcopalian.97 Dr. Barnard still taught in the classroom while also
serving as the university chancellor. As a professor at the university, Dr. Barnard won over his
students, and they called him a genius of the most versatile talent in some of the student
magazines.98 Because of this loyalty he had with the students, when people like Dr. Branham
came and charged him with trying to infiltrate the university with Northern, abolitionist ideas,
the students quite fiercely defended him despite the fact that what he was being charged with
went against what the students were being taught.99 Even though the case went on against Dr.
Barnard, that following school year, enrollment rose from two hundred and twenty-eight students
to two hundred and forty students.100 The press saw Dr. Barnards vision of educational
advancement as a hotbed of abolitionism.101 Dr. Barnard greatly improved the University of
Mississippi even though while he was there people began to fear for their Southern way of life at
the university.
Today, if this became a court case, the supposed assailant would have been found guilty
both morally and legally based upon the same amount of evidence, and the people would not
97 Ibid
98 Ibid
99 Ibid
100 Walton, Dr. Gerald,The University of Mississippi Fall Enrollment Since 1848-1849, Oxford

Campus
101 Barksdale, Norma. 2015. Barnard Observatory - Center for the Study of Southern Culture.

Center for the Study of Southern Culture. Center for the Study of Southern Culture.
http://southernstudies.olemiss.edu/about/barnard-observatory/ (accessed April 28, 2015)

attack the chancellor for admitting such evidence. Of course in todays time there is no issue
with slavery and everyone is legally equal in the law, but that is where the ideal of sectionalism
comes into play. Even today there are states that have signed petitions to secede from the United
States again, not because of the threat upon slavery but upon other issues that the people believe
is a threat to their state. Sectionalism never dies it just transforms to different issues that have
some type of impact on everything whether we realize it or not.
The case of the sexual assault on a negro slave that belonged to Chancellor Barnard by a
white student at the university turned from sexual assault to accusing the Doctor of abolitionism,
being a free- soiler, and trying to infiltrate Northern ideas into the heart of an institution that was
created to give the Southern gentrys youth a Southern education.102 Since Dr. Barnard was of
Northern decent, they lashed out and ruin him especially if he was attempting to bring down the
institution that had been designed and founded on the principles of Sectionalism and to raise the
Souths youth right without them having to go up North for their education. And in doing so
risking the minds of Southern youth to be warped with abolitionist ideals, ideals that when
brought back with the next generation, that would destroy the Southern way of living and the
Southern domestic institution which is slavery. Thats why the college was built. When
Jefferson Davis made his speech in 1852, just years after it was founded, he said that, We who
are passing from the stage of life in the anxiety which springs from the desire that the institutions
of our Fathers may be preserved in their purity when we and all of ours are dust, turn to the
rising generation, their future guardians to sustain the hope of which we would die possessed.103
102 Sansing, David G. 1999. The University of Mississippi: A Sesquicentennial History.

Jackson: University Press of Mississippi. 126.

103 Ibid

Jefferson Davis also emphasizes the need for the Southern educated youth by saying he looks to
the young men of Mississippi for the protection of her rights and to treat and protect the state and
the university as though they were their mothers.104 Jefferson Davis just like the Southern
gentlemen that had been around Br. Barnard did not want their way of life to end by the ideas of
abolitionism and fee- soilers in the North. An example of this is the letter from Dr. Stearns to a
Southern young man who wanted to receive his education from a Northern University on the eve
of the Civil War, and how Dr. Stearns did not want him to get his education especially from an
institution that was known to harbor abolitionist ideas.105
This ideal was so strong in the South during this time in American history, that it caused
eleven states to secede from the United States of America and become the Confederate States of
America. This ideal caused the Civil War, a war that had the most casualties from any war that
has been fought by the United States today. All of this happened because of one ideal, the ideal
of sectionalism. An ideal that the University of Mississippi had with it from its founding up to
the Civil War and others would even say up until the integration of the university in 1962 by
James Meredith.106

104 Ibid
105 Ibid
106 Eagles, Charles W. 2009. The Price of Defiance: James Meredith and the Integration of Ole

Miss. United States: University of North Carolina Press, The.

Bibliography
Barksdale, Norma. 2015. Barnard Observatory - Center for the Study of Southern
Culture. Center for the Study of Southern Culture. Center for the Study of
Southern Culture. http://southernstudies.olemiss.edu/about/barnardobservatory/. (accessed April 28, 2015)
Board of Faculty Minutes. 1860.
Davis, Jefferson. to PHI SIGMA and Hermean Societies. 1852. Address. Oxford, July
15.
Sansing, David G. 1999. The University of Mississippi: A Sesquicentennial History.
Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.
Trustees of the University of Missisippi. 1860. Record of the Testimony and
Proceedings in the Matter of The Invesigation.