WHY PEOPLE FIGHT

The Romance of Manly Virtue

By: Skip Gochenour

I.                   Fighting is distinguished from predatory killing by motive and behavior.

A.     Fighting is the product of three motives,

1.      Honor

2.      Fear

3.      Economic self-interest

B.      Honor motivated fighting is in response to a threat or attack, usually verbal or situational, on ones image of manhood, that if left unanswered will bring about unbearable shame, as viewed by the offended party.

Honor fighting has at its foundation a willingness to shed blood, yours or the offenders, rather than face shame and disgrace attendant to the unanswered insult.

1.      Honor fighting is probably as ancient as social man.  It is written about in the most ancient texts.

2.      All manner of social behavior patterns have been developed to avoid creating “offense” to another person as a means to reduce the fighting response.

3.      These behaviors have some amount of cultural significance that are obscure outside the particular culture.

4.      When subjects are approached that may be taken as offensive by the party addressed, it is common to offer apology, followed by an assertion that no offense is meant, before addressing the subject.

5.      Even the law recognizes this concept in identifying the concept of “fighting words”.

C.     Fear motivated fighting is a response to a gambit by another who threatens or offers violence.

1.      This is the form of motive on which self-defense fighting is predicated.

2.      The fighting response to this motive can, assuming the right conditions are met, complete the requirements of legal justification.

3.      Failure to follow accepted rules of etiquette, especially in doing offensive actions including the use of “fighting words” will likely have a negative impact on claims of legal justification, even if self-defense is necessary at the moment.

D.     Economic self-interest motivated fighting is to preserve, proliferate or further acquire assets of economic well-being.

1.      Machiavelli said a man will forgive you for killing his father, but, he will never forgive you for destroying his property.

2.      Proper apology may salve an offense to honor and reduce the likelihood of a fight, but threatening economic well-being of another man will not be answered with an apology.

3.      The concept of “mine” is the precursor to brutal fighting throughout the history of man.

II.                 Fighting is distinguished from predatory killing in that each party to the encounter is willing to risk his physical well-being in the exchange.

A.      Predatory killing does not always imply such willingness.

1.      Predatory killing is more usually engaged in when the actor believes he has an advantage that obviates the targets willingness or ability to perform in a way that would endanger the actor.

2.      The predatory killer tends to attack those he determines to be of a will that is too timid to fight or too squeamish to fight effectively and/or without sufficient assets to overcome the attack.

3.      The predatory killer uses artifice, subterfuge and/or cunning to mask his intention before the initiation of the attack.

B.      Fighters, to the contrary, usually make plain their intention to fight sufficiently in advance that the other party has some response time, however abbreviated.

1.      Unlike predatory events, casual observers are able to identify the respective antagonists and that there is about to be an engagement.

C.     Fights generally initiate when one of the parties to the fight concludes, based on interactive interpretation, that the other lacks sufficient deterrence quotient.

1.      Deterrence quotient equates to sufficient skill, determination and ruthlessness to carry the fight to the end.

2.      Fights that are not concluded with a clear and decisive victory to one of the respective sides, whether on a school yard or a war zone, set the stage for a numbered sequence of further engagements until a decisive outcome is acquired.  (WWI & WWII)

3.      Intervention by negotiators, whether teachers on a school yard or diplomats in a war zone, merely assure that there will be another engagement.

III.              The romance of manly virtue is as old as cultured man.

A.     The willingness to fight, as derivative to these motives, is reinforced as a manly virtue through a process of romanticization.  Examples of virtuously motivated fighting response to attack or threat are the subject of stories, fables, mythology and history.

1.      Examples include Knights and “gunfighters”.

2.      The search for historical accuracy associated with individual events is important, but marginal to the purpose of the romanticized version.

B.      These motives of action are closely associated with issues of “right and wrong”, “good and evil”.  One party is seen as answering only to his own conscience, the other is seen as answering to society’s conscience.

1.      As with most lesson that use mythology, historical fact is mixed with lessons of virtue in an effort to inculcate proper motive and response in the group that selects these stories as morality lessons.

2.      The virtue of these motives and actions are then made part of the reference frames, the imagination, of those in the group.  Hence, it is “civilized” to engage in such actions – when properly motivated. 

3.      We find fighting for these motives acceptable and, under the right conditions, legally justifiable.

4.      While these motives and responses long existed and were celebrated in lore, (see Beowulf) the American West in the late 1800’s provided a milieu that allowed these qualities to be explored in a way that has captured the world’s attention.

IV.               Fighting, Manly Virtue and the American West.

A.     The American West in the late 1800’s provided a venue where the motives for fights were constantly available.

1.      Primary among those motives was economic self-interest.

2.      At the end of the Civil War, the US experienced an explosion in population and economic expansion.

3.      Food production began a shift from each person raising his own food, particularly beef, to a need for huge amounts of stock raised cattle.

4.      Men of determination moved into the undeveloped parts of the west and claimed huge tracts of land or engaged in free-grazing.

5.      Herds were moved to locations where they could be shipped by rail to major population center where they could be butchered and sold as meat.

6.      Men were hired to tend the cattle on the open range and the drives to the rail heads.  Cowboys!

7.      In these sections of the country there was little formal policing because there was no real political entity.  In instances where they were political entities, they were small and without financial resources for policing staff.

8.      VCA were dealt with by those who had an economic interest in curtailing their activities.  That meant the cattle owners and other business men in the community.

9.      Movies and lore not withstanding, thieves and “man-killers” were most often chased out of the area.

10.   A similar circumstance arose with mining camps.

B.      Towns grew up to provide for the needs of the cowboys and the miners.  Economic self-interest.

1.      These towns, whether serving cattle communities or mining communities had certain commonalities. 

2.      There were a lot of young men who lived hard solitary lives with money.  They would pay for entertainment.

3.      Drinking, gambling and prostitution were commodities they would pay for.

4.      People who traffic in these commodities are not known for their virtue.  Miss Kitty and Calamity Jane Canary notwithstanding, there is no such thing as a whore with a heart of gold.  Gamblers are no better.

5.      Men who engaged these services sometimes felt as though the service was not what it cost.  Alcohol enhanced that feeling.  That meant they felt “cheated” which was a violation of their honor if they did not stand up for themselves.

6.      This was a setting for a fight.

7.      The towns had no real tax base form of acquiring funds.  Their money came from license fees and fines.  Prostitutes were sometimes charged fees to operate.  Common was $10.00 per month.  For some towns this fee was their single greatest source of income.  Gamblers were similarly charged fees.

8.      This set the stage for some entanglements between the customers of these services and the police in the community. 

9.      It was in the interest of the town fathers, who also were the moneyed interests of the community, to have a relatively peaceful town.  They hired or elected men to keep order. 

10.   At the same time, the town’s largest source of income was the fees charged to those who were often the object of a “cheating” accusation.  If the accuser. (cowboy or miner) was too rowdy in pressing his claim, he was arrested for mis-conduct and fined, providing the town with more revenue and the town marshal with income, which was based at least in part, in a percentage of the fine.

11.   The stage was set to be shamed again.

12.   Add to this political factionalization of the business interests, all of whom have large stakes in economic self-interest, and the need for competing policing services was apparent and addressed.

13.   For the most part, the office of city marshal and county sheriff were filled by business men in the community as part of their perceived public duty.  These men tried to use persuasion and accommodation to solve disputes.

14.   There were times in the history of many of these communities where the forces were so abraded that it was determined by the business men on council or county politicos that police of a more direct personality were needed.

15.   These men were hired for their reputations and for usually short periods of time.  The period of employment was generally short because their methods were problematic and they were not amenable to taking direction.

16.   These men were less manageable because they realized that their employers were not willing to personally do what they were hiring these “curly wolf’s” to do.

17.   Often when these men of reputation were killed doing dealing with the element they were hired to confront, the killer was not prosecuted, but was often told to leave town.

18.   Funeral expenses for the downed marshal were sometimes not provided by the town council.

19.   They marshal was, after all, just killed in a fight where he played some role as an antagonist. 

V.                 Specific incidents of fight motives in the American West.

A.     Dallas Stoudenmire, El Paso Tx.

1.      In the late 1800’s El Paso was a small town directly across the Rio Grande River from the much larger Mexican town of Juarez. 

2.      The American side had a rail head for the movement of cattle. 

3.      Cattle on each side of the river were regularly stolen by Americans and Mexicans, each trying to increase the size of their herd.

4.      The vice traffic was creating more problems than were acceptable, but the city council was unwilling to take direct and strong action because of the income derived from the vice community for the town.

5.      George Campbell was hired as the city marshal.  He was not satisfied with his salary so he entered into some objectionable arrangements with the saloon keepers to supplement his income.  He was fired.  A warrant was issued for him charging corruption.  Campbell hid-out at Hale’s ranch until charges were dropped if he accepted his termination. 

6.      His replacement was a town business man, but the replacement was unable to complete his obligations a marshal so Bill Johnson, the town drunk was hired.

7.       Among the political factions in the town were the Manning brothers, George, Frank, James and Felix.  They had a foreman at their ranch named John Hale.  In addition to a ranch, the brothers owned bars and restaurants in town.  They were also commonly believed to be part of a rustling ring that often stole cattle out of Mexico.

8.       George Cummings moved to town and bought a restaurant and bar.  He was determined to become an economic and political force to be reckoned with in the town.

9.      Upon learning of the problems town council was having with the vice trade and their marshals, Cummings suggested the town hire his brother-in-law, Dallas Stoudenmire.

10.   Stoudenmire had a reputation as a tough character that had served in several towns as a police officer and had been a Texas Ranger.

11.   Stoudenmire was hired as marshal.  He was told that Bill Johnson had the keys to the jail.  Johnson, who was not happy about being replaced, said Stoudenmire was not up to the job of taking his position from him. (Johnson)  Stoudenmire went to Johnson and demanded the keys.  When Johnson failed to respond quickly enough to suit Stoudenmire, the new marshal manhandled Johnson and took the keys from him, in front of witnesses.

12.   Tensions in town grew when some Americans went to Mexico and robbed a peddler.  They were arrested and put in jail in Mexico.  They were able to escape.  As they splashed across the river, a Mexican shot them from the river bank with a rifle.

13.   Mannings saw Cummings as a threat to their economic future.  That was made worse by Stoudenmire as marshal and his clear willingness to run over anyone who did not immediately comply with his orders.  Stoudenmire began to clamp down on the bars and vice operations.  Mannings saw economic threat.

14.   A substantial herd of cattle were stolen from a Mexican rancher.  There was some evidence the cattle were at the Manning ranch.  Johnson was aligned with the Mannings and was staying at the residence of their foreman, Hale.

15.   75 armed Mexicans crossed the border and threatened to go the Manning ranch to recover their cattle.  The leader of the group sought out Spanish-speaking Gus Krempkau who was a former Ranger and was, at that time serving as a constable.

16.   In the meantime two Mexicans who did some investigating on their own were murdered on the American side of the river.  Krempkau helped the Mexicans recover the bodies.  An inquest was held and Krempkau served as interpreter.

17.   Campbell, who was still smarting from losing his job to Stoudenmire was drunk and standing in the street shouting that Stoudenmire was incompetent for failing to arrest the Mexicans for appearing on a city street while armed.

18.   Campbell approached Krempkau and berated him for assisting the Mexicans.  Hale, seeing the confrontation with Krempkau, runs up to Krempkau and thrusts a revolver into his armpit and fires.

19.   Stoudenmire, hearing the shot, pulls his two revolvers and runs toward Hale.  Stoudenmire’s first shot kills a passer-by but the second one kills Hale.

20.   Campbell pulls his revolver.  Krempkau, though mortally wounded, empties his gun at Campbell and smashes his right wrist, causing Campbell to shift his gun to his left hand.  Stoudenmire charges Campbell, firing as he does and kills Campbell.

21.   Cummings, armed with a shotgun, joins Stoudenmire.

22.   Two days later, Stoudenmire and Cummings were walking along the street doing night rounds when Johnson, armed with a shotgun and from ambush, tried to kill Stoudenmire.  The marshal charged Johsnon and killed him with revolver fire.  Other men, from cover, began firing at Stoudenmire from across the street.  Stoudenmire turned on them and charged them.  They left.

23.   Cummings and Stoudenmire were sure that Mannings were behind the attempts to kill Stoudenmire.

24.   Stoudenmire took a leave of absence to get married.  While he was gone, Cummings confronted Jim Manning in Mannings bar.  He was killed in a shootout.

25.   Stoudenmire swore vengeance.  Town council intervened and had the Mannings and Stoudenmire sign a truce.

26.   Stoudenmire clamped down on the bars.  He also started to drink heavily.  He was summoned to council meeting.  He was asked for his resignation.  He began examining his revolvers in council chambers.  They took back the request.

27.   Ultimately, he confronted the Mannings.  He accused them of breaking the truce.  They decided to discuss the matter.  Jim went to get his brother Felix.  George and Stoudenmire got into an argument.  As they each pulled their guns, a friend of Stoudenmire stepped between tem to stop the action.  Stoudenmire pushed the fellow out of the way, which slowed his pulling of his weapon.  George shot Stoudenmire in the right chest, but the ball was stopped by his wallet.  Stoudenmire was then shot in the left chest, high near the shoulder.  Stoudenmire shot George in the right arm, above the elbow, destroying the bone.  George dropped his gun, but immediately jumped on Stoudenmire, pinning his arms to his sides.  They wrestled into the street.  Jim returned to see the struggle.  He fired a shot that went wild and hit a barber pole.  His second shot hit Stoudenmire above the left ear.

28.   George seized one of Stoudenmires guns and savagely beat his lifeless body about the head.

29.   This series of incidents happened at about the same time as the Tombstone fight happened.  The Stoudenmire incidents were much more famous than the OK Corral incident at the time.

30.   Years later, a writer visited Jim Manning at his home and tried to convince him to let the author write a book about Jim and this episode.  Jim refused, but offered the writer a suggestion.  He sent him to see Wyatt Earp.  The rest is history.

B.  This example shows all of the motives for fighting in operation in the venue that explored the mythical manly virtue of fighting for what is right.  The facts are much more interesting than the fiction.