This sort of thing never happened …

Or so most writers of history say.

In the spring 1843 session of Sixth District Court in Red River County Texas came the case “The Republic of Texas vs. John, a slave for life – Assault with Intent to Murder.”

There is not much else in the large, thick ledger-size books. The initial entry does not list who owned John, nor is there an account of the crime for which he was accused. We do not know who it was John was accused of assaulting. The case has a document number, but that number is not in the boxes from 1843.

A few weeks after the first listing is another, with the same title, plus a trial date and the entry that a jury found John, a slave for life, not guilty of the charge of assault with intent to murder.

If you search “rights of slaves in America,” you will discover a quick answer. “None.”

Here are facts: John, a slave for life, was arrested by a white law officer. John was charged by a white justice of the peace or judge. John was indicted by a grand jury of white men. John was tried by a white prosecutor before a white judge and defended by a white attorney. And a jury of 12 white men found John not guilty of assault with intent to murder. John was then released from jail, probably returned to the man or woman who owned him, probably to remain a slave for life.

And another thing: Most likely, John was accused of assaulting a white man. Had he assaulted another slave, John’s owner and the owner of the other slave would have settled the matter.

Historians say slaves had no rights. In the main, that is true, if we consider today’s rights. But somewhere in the emotions of the Republic of Texas, lay the idea that the man John deserved a legal trial for his supposed transgressions.

I talked with Jim Clark about the case. Jim’s long ago ancestor James Clark was the founder of Clarksville. Jim said, “There shouldn’t have been a trial in the first place.”

“Why not?” I asked.

“Because,” Jim said, “property cannot commit a crime.”