Question

Let us consider the following: In medieval times, landowners such as lords and barons had estates. These people had considerable wealth and may have decided to get and keep as much of it for themselves as possible. As an example, Lord Rufus had an estate that comprised some 12 acres . His land had wild game
(i.e. deer, elk, boar, turkey, etc.). Besides this abundance, he allowed a few people to work portions of land on the property. They grew vegetables, fruit and other crops which they gave half to Rufus as “rent” for using and living on the land. Some of the people even raised pigs, cattle, sheep or chickens.

One day Niles Moon., a young man who had been seeking work/income for nearly three weeks was out searching for employment and any means to provide for his wife and their three small children. Being a male, Niles felt it was his duty/obligation to make sure his family was properly taken care of. This search took Niles through the local village for most of the day. Night began to set in. Niles happened to be near the Rufus estate. He looked at Lord Rufus’s large home and knew of the sharing arrangement his fellow townspeople had with the noble. Niles watched the house and as darkness set in, he waited for everyone to go to sleep.

Niles crept around back of the house where a coup had been built to hold chickens and turkeys for the lord. Niles broke into the coup and took a chicken. As he did, it disturbed many of the birds inside. The noise created a concern in the Lord’s home and a solider came out to make sure a fox or other animal wasn’t attacking the coup. The solider sees Niles attempting to run away with a large turkey. He ran after Niles, caught him and returned the bird to the coup. The soldier brought Niles before Lord Rufus who had him imprisoned until he could stand trail when the area magistrate was able to hear the case. Rufus wanted him put to death for the theft and Niles had plead for mercy given his poverty circumstances.

Given the circumstances, what should be done in this situation? The Lord had more than enough, and Niles was basically starving. Had he succeeded, the turkey could have been sold and likely brought enough money to help his family survive for a month or they could have killed the bird and feasted off it for nearly that long. Ethically, what should be done to Niles in this situation (if anything at all?) Use any ethical standard to make and support your point (s).

Answer 1

The circumstances are that Lord Rufus has considerable wealth and has more than enough, however Niles is not able to get a job, has a wife and three small children to provide for and all of them are starving.

The Ethical Standard that can be adopted here is The Common Good Approach. From the time of Greek philosophers, they have said that equals should be treated equally. Today it means that all human beings must be treated equally, if not at least fairly given the circumstances. The same applies to this case where there is definitely inequality between Lord Rufus and Niles, but Niles could have been treated fairly at least. There is no need for hom to imprisoned and wanting him to be put to death. Niles did it because of his poverty and his need to provide for his family. Stealing a bird is so much of less of a crime compared to so many other crimes in the world. That too by a person of abject poverty to feed his family. All crimes are crimes and are not justified by its means. However ethically for a person of Rufus's stature he could have forgiven Niles. The at most generosity would have been to understand his circumstances and give him the job or give him the bird with a warning. The least Rufus could have done is to leave him free. There is no need for capital punishment for this and could have treated Niles fairly. The common good approach the different kind of relationships in the society like that of Rufus and Niles are the basis for ethical reasoning and it is to have compassion to everybody especially the vulnerable.