Produced by Juliet Sutherland and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
_THE OLDEN-TIME SERIES._
16mo. Per vol., 50 cents.
There appears to be, from year to year, a growing popular taste for
quaint and curious reminiscences of "Ye Olden Time," and to meet this,
Mr. Henry M. Brooks has prepared a series of interesting handbooks.
The materials have been gleaned chiefly from old newspapers of Boston
and Salem, sources not easily accessible, and while not professing to
be history, the volumes contain much material for history, so combined
and presented as to be both amusing and instructive. The titles of
some of the volumes indicate their scope and their promise of
entertainment:--
CURIOSITIES OF THE OLD LOTTERY.
DAYS OF THE SPINNING-WHEEL.
SOME STRANGE AND CURIOUS PUNISHMENTS.
QUAINT AND CURIOUS ADVERTISEMENTS.
LITERARY CURIOSITIES.
NEW-ENGLAND SUNDAY, ETC.
"It has been the good fortune of the writer to be allowed a peep at
the manuscript for this series, and he can assure the lovers of the
historical and the quaint in literature that something both valuable
and pleasant is in store for them. In the specialties treated of in
these books Mr. Brooks has been for many years a careful collector and
student, and it is gratifying to learn that the material is to be
committed to book form."--_Salem Gazette._
_For sale by all Booksellers. Sent, post-paid, upon receipt of price.
Catalogues of our books mailed free._
TICKNOR & CO., BOSTON.
THE OLDEN TIME SERIES
SOME STRANGE AND CURIOUS PUNISHMENTS
_Yet, taught by time, my heart has learned to glow
For others' good, and melt at others' woe._
POPE: Odyssey.
_But hushed be every thought that springs
From out the bitterness of things._
WORDSWORTH.
THE OLDEN TIME SERIES.
GLEANINGS CHIEFLY FROM OLD NEWSPAPERS OF BOSTON AND SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
SELECTED AND ARRANGED, WITH BRIEF COMMENTS
BY
HENRY M. BROOKS
Some Strange and Curious Punishments
"Old and new make the warp and woof of every moment. There is
no thread that is not a twist of these two strands. By necessity, by
proclivity, and by delight, we all quote."--EMERSON
BOSTON
TICKNOR AND COMPANY
1886
_Copyright, 1886_,
BY TICKNOR AND COMPANY.
_All rights reserved._
University Press:
JOHN WILSON AND SON, CAMBRIDGE.
PUNISHMENTS MENTIONED.
PAGE
ARREST of the dead 86
BACK "dress'd" 63
Banished 10
Books burned 15, 16
Bound and chained 8
Branded with a hot iron 2, 3, 43
Burned 83
CLEFT stick put on tongue 8
Confined at Castle Island 5, 48
EARS cropped 3, 10, 24
Eating one's own words 67
Executed (of frequent mention).
FINE and imprisonment (of frequent mention).
GAGGED and dipped or ducked (of frequent mention).
HUNG in chains 14, 15
IMPRISONMENT for debt 70, 71
In the bilboes 35
In the pillory (of frequent mention).
In the stocks 35
In the stocks on lecture-day 8
"KISSING the Yssrow" 44
LIMITS of the jail 70, 71
PAPER on the breast with the word _Cheat_ 33
Prisoners sold 21, 22, 47, 48, 49
Prosecution against animals 78
SENT back to England 51
Sent to Castle Island to make nails 65
Sewed up in bed-clothes and thrashed 68
TIED neck and heels and thrown into a pond 28
Tied to a gun and whipped 20
Tied to a tree and chastised 81
Tongue bored with a hot iron 20
Tread-mill 71 to 76
UPON the gallows with rope about the neck (of frequent mention).
WHIPPED at the cart's tail 1, 9
Whipping-post (of frequent mention).
SOME STRANGE AND CURIOUS PUNISHMENTS.
-------------------------
In the month of January, 1761, "Joseph Bennett, John Jenkins, Owen
McCarty, and John Wright were publickly whipt at the Cart's Tail thro'
the City of New York for petty Larceny,"--so the newspaper account
states,--"pursuant to Sentence inflicted on them by the Court of
Quarter Sessions held last Week for the Trial of Robbers," etc. In
March the same year "One Andrew Cayto received 49 Stripes at the
public Whipping Post" in Boston "for House-robbing; viz., 39 for
robbing one House, and 10 for robbing another." In 1762 "Jeremiah
Dexter, of Walpole, pursuant to Sentence, stood in the Pillory in that
Town the space of one Hour for uttering two Counterfeit Mill'd
Dollars, knowing them to be such." At Ipswich, Mass., June 16, 1763,
"one Francis Brown, for stealing a large quantity of Goods, was found
Guilty, and it being the second Conviction, he was sentenced by the
Court to sit on the Gallows an Hour with a Rope about his Neck, to be
whipt 30 Stripes, and pay treble Damages. He says he was born in
Lisbon, and has been a great Thief."
We extract the following from the "Boston Chronicle," Nov. 20, 1769:--
We hear from Worcester that on the eighth instant one Lindsay
stood in the Pillory there one hour, after which he received 30
stripes at the public whipping post, and was then branded in the
hand; his crime was forgery.
Lindsay was probably branded with the letter F, by means of a hot
iron, on the palm of his right hand; this was the custom in such
cases.
In Boston, in June, 1762, "the noted Dr. Seth Hudson and Joshua How
stood a second Time in the Pillory for the space of one Hour, and the
former received 20 and the latter 39 Stripes." In the same town in
February, 1764, "one David Powers for Stealing was sentenced to be
whip't 20 Stripes, to pay tripel Damages, being £30, and Costs. And
one John Gray, Cordwainer, for endeavouring to spread the Infection of
the Small Pox, was sentenced to pay a Fine of £6, to suffer three
months' Imprisonment, and to pay Costs." In New York in January, 1767,
"A Negro Wench was executed for stealing sundry Articles out of the
House of Mr. Forbes; and one John Douglass was burnt in the Hand for
Stealing a Copper Kettle." In the last half of the eighteenth century
it appears to have been a capital crime for negroes to steal. At
Springfield, Mass., in October, 1767, "one Elnathan Muggin was found
Guilty of passing Counterfeit Dollars, and sentenced to have his Ears
cropped," etc. On reading these quaint accounts we are led to inquire
whether the punishment for crime in "olden times" was more severe than
at the present time. Many people think it was, and justly so, and
argue that crime has consequently greatly increased of late years, on
account of the lightness of modern sentences or the uncertainty about
punishment. This may be true. Crime is said to increase with
population always. According to Mr. Buckle, it can be calculated with
a considerable degree of accuracy. We can estimate, for instance, the
probable number of murders which will take place in a year in a given
number of inhabitants. Whether this theory is true or not would
require a vast amount of study and observation to determine. We know
that population in our time crowds in cities; especially is this true
of the classes most likely to furnish criminals. Still, in spite of
this, do not most of us feel that it has of late years been rather
safer to reside in a city than in the country? Consider the numbers of
lawless and too often cruel tramps which have overrun the country
towns and villages for a few years past, making it so unsafe for women
to walk unattended in woods and highways, even in the quietest parts
of New England, where once they could go with perfect safety alone and
at all hours. No laws can be too severe against _cruel_ tramps. It has
been affirmed that people who live in cities are in reality more moral
than country people of the same class.
Is this state of things brought about by the infliction of light
sentences, or is it caused by the increase among us of a bad foreign
element? We have heard many serious and humane persons express
themselves as in favor of a restoration of the whipping-post and
stocks, really supposing that these things would lessen crime. But is
it likely that the old methods of punishment would be considered by
criminals themselves as severer than the present? Let us see what some
of the last century rogues thought about the matter. At a session of
the Supreme Judicial Court held at Salem, Mass., in December, 1788,
one James Ray was sentenced, for stealing goods from the shop of
Captain John Hathorne (a relative of Nathaniel Hawthorne), to sit upon
the gallows with a rope about his neck for an hour, to be whipped with
thirty-nine stripes, and to be confined to hard labor on Castle Island
(Boston Harbor) for three years. "It is observable of this man," the
account continues, "that he has been lately released from a two years'
service at the Castle, that during the trial he was very merry and
impudent, and continued in the same humor while his sentence was
reading, holding up his head and looking boldly at the Court, till the
three years' confinement was mentioned; when his countenance changed,
his head dropped on his breast, and he fetched a deep groan,--an
instance of how much more dreadful the idea of labor is to such
villains than that of Corporal punishment."
At a session of the Court of Oyer and Terminer held at Norristown,
Pa., for the county of Montgomery, Oct. 11, 1786, we are furnished
with a case in point. "A bill was presented against Philip Hoosnagle
for burglary, who was convicted by the traverse Jury on the clearest
testimony. He was, after a very pathetick and instructing admonition
from the bench, sentenced to five years' hard labour, under the _new_
act of Assembly. It was with some difficulty that this reprobate
was prevailed upon to make the election of labour instead of the
halter, ... a convincing proof," the report says, "that the punishments
directed by the new law are more terrifying to idle vagabonds than all
the horrors of an ignominious death."
Probably there are many more cases on record where criminals preferred
death to imprisonment. Burglary and forgery were once punished by
death. We have all noticed on the old Continental currency these
words: "Death to counterfeit this."
On the 17th June, 1791, Samuel Cook, in the eighty-fourth year of his
age, was executed at Johnstown, N.Y., for forgery. On the 6th
December, 1787, William Clarke was executed at Northampton for
burglary; the same day Charles Rose and Jonathan Bly were executed at
Lenox for robbery. On the 4th May, 1786, at Worcester, Johnson Green,
indicted for three burglaries committed in one night within the space
of about half a mile, was tried on one indictment, convicted, and
received sentence of death. The papers contain numerous similar cases.
It would be useless to enumerate them all; we give only a few in order
to show what the punishment formerly awarded to these crimes really
was. We do not, of course, know the circumstances attending all these
cases; but robbery and burglary are usually premeditated, and the
criminals are prepared to commit murder if it should be necessary for
their purpose, so that we can have no sympathy with the perpetrators.
Our sympathy ought, we think, to go to the victims.
-------------------------
OLD NEW ENGLAND.
Early in the settlement of New England, as is pretty generally known,
some of the laws and punishments were singular enough. A few extracts
from Felt's "Annals of Salem" may not be out of place here, as
illustrating our subject:--
"In 1637, Dorothy Talby, for beating her husband, is _ordered to
be bound and chained to a post_."
"In 1638, the Assistants order two Salem men to _sit in the
Stocks, on Lecture day_, for travelling on the Sabbath."
"In 1644, Mary, wife of Thomas Oliver, was sentenced _to be
publickly whipped_ for reproaching the Magistrates."
"In August, 1646, for slandering the Elders, she had a _cleft
stick put on her tongue for half an hour_." Felt says: "It is
evident that her standing out for what she considered 'woman's
rights' brought her into frequent and severe trouble. Mr.
Winthrop says that she excelled Mrs. Hutchinson in zeal and
eloquence."
She finally, in 1650, left the colony, after having caused much
trouble to the Church and the authorities.
"In 1649, women were prosecuted in Salem for scolding," and
probably in many cases whipped or ducked.
"May 15, 1672, the General Court of Massachusetts orders that
Scolds and Railers shall be gagged or set in a ducking-stool and
dipped over head and ears three times."
This treatment we should suppose would be likely to make the victims
_very pleasant_, especially in cold weather.
"May 3, 1669, Thomas Maule is ordered to be whipped for saying
that Mr. Higginson preached lies, and that his instruction was
'the doctrine of devils.'"
Josiah Southwick, Mrs. Wilson, Mrs. Buffum, and others, Quakers, for
making disturbances in the meeting-house, etc., were whipped at the
cart's tail through the town. Southwick, for returning after having
been banished, was whipped through the towns of Boston, Roxbury, and
Dedham. These are only a few of the cases of the punishments inflicted
upon the Quakers. Mr. Felt says in reference to the persecution of the
Quakers:
"Before any new denomination becomes consolidated, some of its
members are apt to show more zeal than discretion. No sect who are
regular and useful should have an ill name for the improprieties
committed by a few of them."
Our "pious forefathers," we must confess, were too apt to be a little
hard towards those who annoyed them with their tongue and pen upon
Church doctrine and discipline or the administration of the
government. As early as 1631, one Philip Ratclif is sentenced by the
Assistants to pay £40, to be whipped, to have his ears cropped, and
to be banished. What had he done to merit such a punishment as this?
He had made "hard speeches against Salem Church, as well as the
Government." "The execution of this decision," Mr. Felt says, "was
represented in England to the great disadvantage of Massachusetts."
Jeffries was not yet on the bench in England.
In 1652 a man was fined for excess of apparel "in bootes, rebonds,
gould and silver lace."
Mr. Charles W. Palfrey contributed in 1866 to the "Salem Register" the
following interesting item on the Salem witchcraft trials:
Among the many attempts to remedy the mischiefs caused by the
witchcraft delusion, the subjoined is not without interest. About
eighteen years after the memorable year, 1692, four members, a
committee of the Legislature, were sent to Salem to hear certain
parties and receive certain petitions, and the following is the
record, in the Journal, of their Report:--
October 26, 1711. Present in Council, His Excellency Joseph
Dudley, Esqr., Governor, John Hathorne, Samuel Sewall, Jonathan
Corwin, Joseph Lynde, Penn Townsend, John Higginson, Daniel Epes,
Andrew Belcher, etc., etc.
Report of the Committee appointed, Relating to the Affair of
Witchcraft in the year 1692; viz.--
We whose Names are subscribed in Obedience to your Honours' Act at
a Court held the last of May, 1710, for our inserting the Names of
the several Persons who were condemned for Witchcraft in the year
1692, & of the Damages they sustained by their prosecution; Being
met at Salem, for the Ends aforesaid, the 13th Septem., 1710, Upon
Examination of the Records of the several Persons condemned,
Humbly offer to your Honours the Names as follows, to be inserted
for the Reversing their Attainders: Elizabeth How, George Jacob,
Mary Easty, Mary Parker, Mr. George Burroughs, Gyles Cory & Wife,
Rebecca Nurse, John Willard, Sarah Good, Martha Carrier, Samuel
Wardel, John Procter, Sarah Wild, Mary Bradbury, Abigail Falkner,
Abigail Hobbs, Ann Foster, Rebecca Eams, Dorcas Hoar, Mary Post,
Mary Lacy:
And having heard the several Demands of the Damages of the
aforesaid Persons & those in their behalf; & upon Conference have
so moderated their respective Demands that We doubt not but they
will be readily complied with by your Honours.
Which respective Demands are as follows:--
Elizabeth How, Twelve Pounds; George Jacob, Seventy nine Pounds;
Mary Easty, Twenty Pounds; Mary Parker, Eight Pounds; Mr. George
Burroughs, Fifty Pounds; Gyles Core & Martha Core his Wife, Twenty
one Pounds; Rebecca Nurse, Twenty five Pounds; John Willard,
Twenty Pounds; Sarah Good, Thirty Pounds; Martha Carrier, Seven
Pounds six shillings; Samuel Wardell & Sarah his Wife, Thirty six
Pounds fifteen shillings; John Proctor & ---- Proctor his Wife,
One Hundred and fifty Pounds; Sarah Wilde, Fourteen Pounds; Mrs.
Mary Bradbury, Twenty Pounds; Abigail Faulkner, Twenty Pounds;
Abigail Hobbs, Ten Pounds; Ann Foster, Six Pounds ten shillings;
Rebecca Eams, Ten Pounds; Dorcas Hoar, Twenty one Pounds seventeen
shillings; Mary Post Eight Pounds fourteen shillings; Mary Lacey
Eight Pounds ten shillings. The Whole amounting unto Five Hundred
& seventy eight Pounds, & twelve shillings.
(Sign'd) Jno. Appleton, Thomas Noyes, John Burrill,
Nehem'a Jewett.
Salem, Septemr. 14, 1711.
Read & Accepted in the House of Represent'ves
Signed JOHN BURRILL Speak'r
Read & Concur'd in Council
Consented to J. DUDLEY.
The following quaint memorandum of the expenses of the commission
is minuted in the report, viz.:--
_Ye Acct of gr servts_
Charges 3 days a peis ourselves & horses 4.0.0.
Entertainment at Salem Mr. Pratts 1.3.0.
Major Sewals attendans & sendg notifications
to all Concerned 1.0.0.
-------
£6.3.0.
It is a grave error into which many modern writers have been drawn,
when alluding to Salem witchcraft, to lay the responsibility of that
dire delusion entirely upon Salem people, as if they alone were to
be held accountable for the dreadful occurrences of 1692. The laws
of England in those days, all the authorities of New England, and,
with but rare exceptions, all the people everywhere throughout the
civilized world, recognized witchcraft as a fact and believed it to
be a crime. The most learned men in England and in other countries
believed fully in witchcraft. Sir Matthew Hale had given a legal
opinion on the subject; Lord Bacon believed in witchcraft; and there
are strong reasons for thinking that Shakspeare and other great men
of the time of Queen Elizabeth and still later believed in it fully.
Cotton Mather, Judge Sewall, Peter Sargent, Lieutenant-Governor
Stoughton, all belonging to Boston, were the leaders in the
proceedings against the witches of 1692.
-------------------------
HUNG IN CHAINS.
In the papers that we have examined we have not found any instances
recorded of the old English law of hanging the remains of executed
criminals in chains as having been carried into effect in our country.
But from some investigations of Mr. James E. Mauran, of Newport, R.I.,
we learn that on March 12, 1715, one Mecum of that town was executed
for murder and his body was hung in chains on Miantonomy Hill, where
the remains of an Indian were then hanging, who had been executed
Sept. 12, 1712. Mecum was a Scotchman, and lived at the head of Broad
Street. A negro was hanged in Newport in 1679, and his remains were
exposed on the same hill.
-------------------------
A BOOK ORDERED TO BE BURNED BY THE COUNCIL IN 1695.
The "Salem Observer" of Feb. 14, 1829, quotes from the Rev. Dr.
Bentley's "Diary" as follows:--
Tho's Maule, shopkeeper of Salem, is brought before the Council
to answer for his printing and publishing a pamphlet of 260
pages, entitled "Truth held forth and maintained," owns the book
but will not own all, till he sees his copy which is at New-York
with Bradford, who printed it. Saith he writt to ye Gov'r of N.
York before he could get it printed. Book is ordered to be
burnt--being stuff'd with notorious lyes and scandals, and he
recognizes to answer it next Court of Assize and gen'l gaol
delivery to be held for the County of Essex. He acknowledges that
what was written concerning the circumstance of Major Gen.
Atherton's death was a mistake (p. 112 and 113), was chiefly
insisted on against him, which I believe was a surprize to him,
he expecting to be examined in some point of religion, as should
seem by his bringing his bible under his arm.
Thomas Maule was a Quaker who lived in Essex Street, Salem, on the
spot now occupied by James B. Curwen, Esq., as a residence.
Imported books were ordered to be burned in Boston as early as 1653,
by command of the General Court; but we believe this is the first
instance of burning an American book.
-------------------------
Punishment for wearing long hair in New England. From an old Salem
paper.
PURITANICAL ZEAL. It is known that there was one of the statutes
in our ancestors' code which imposed a penalty for the wearing of
long hair. At the time Endicott was the magistrate of this town
he caused the following order to be passed:--
"John Gatshell is fyened ten shillings for building upon the
town's ground without leave; and in case he shall cutt of his
loung hair of his head in to sevill frame (fewell flame?) in the
meane time, shall have abated five shillings his fine, to be
paid in to the Towne meeting within two months from this time,
and have leave to go in his building in the meantime."
Purchas says of long hair that--
"It is an ornament to the female sex, a token of subjection, an
ensign of modesty; but modesty grows short in men as their hair
grows long, and a neat perfumed, frizled, pouldered bush hangs
but as a token,--_vini non vendibilis_, of much wine, little wit,
of men weary of manhood, of civility, of christianity, which
would faine turn (as the least doe imitate) American salvages,
infidels, barbarians, or women at the least and best."
Prynne, who wrote in 1632, considers men who nourish their hair like
women, as an abomination to the Lord, and says--
"No wonder that the wearing of long haire should make men
abominable unto God himselfe, since it was an abomination even
among heathen men. Witnesse the examples of Heliogabalus,
Sardanapalus, Nero, Sporus, Caius Caligula, and others."
He refers to the opinions of the fathers and the decrees of the Old
Councils to prove that--
"Long hair and love locks are bushes of vanity whereby the Devil
leads and holds men captive."
-------------------------
In a Boston paper, Aug. 11, 1789, we find the following ludicrous
account of the unfaithfulness of an officer in the duty of whipping
a culprit:--
On Thursday, 11 culprits received the discipline of the
post in this town. The person obtained by the High Sheriff to
inflict the punishment, from sympathetick feeling for his
brother culprits, was very tender in dealing out his strokes,
and not adding weight to them, although repeatedly ordered; the
Sheriff, to his honour, took the whip from his hand, by an
application of it to his shoulders drove him from the stage,
and with the assistance of his Deputies inflicted the
punishment of the law on all the culprits. The citizens who
were assembled, complimented the Sheriff with three cheers for
the manly, determined manner in which he executed his duty.
-------------------------
In the "Boston Courier," September, 1825, is an account of the
conviction of a common drunkard at the age of 103! It seems hardly
possible that such a case could have occurred, and in New England,
too. This item is copied from the "Salem Observer." If it is true, it
can hardly be said that the man shortened his days by the use of
liquor. They had, however, good, pure rum in those days.
POLICE COURT. Donald McDonald, a Scotchman reported to be _one
hundred and three years of age_, was brought before the court
yesterday charged with being a common drunkard, of which he had
been convicted once before. Donald stated that he had been in
various battles of the Revolution, had sailed with Paul Jones,
and was at the taking of Quebec. He was found guilty and
sentenced to the House of Correction for three months.
-------------------------
Donald M'Donald, the Scotchman, who has numbered upwards of 110
years, was sent to the House of Industry on Saturday of last
week, in a state of intoxication. He had been suffered to go at
large but four days previous, and during two of them was seen
about our streets a drunken brawler.--_Boston Patriot_, 1829.
-------------------------
NEW ENGLAND IN 1686.
John Dunton, writing from Boston in 1686 to his friends in England,
quotes some of the Province laws then in force. He says:--
For being drunk they either Whip or impose a Fine of Five
shillings; And yet, notwithstanding this Law, there are several
of them so addicted to it that they begin to doubt whether it be
a Sin or no, and seldom go to Bed without Muddy Brains.
For Cursing and Swearing they bore through the Tongue with a hot
Iron.
For kissing a woman in the Street, though but in way of Civil
Salute, Whipping or a Fine (Their way of Whipping Criminals is by
Tying them to a Gun at the Town House, and when so Ty'd whipping
them at the pleasure of the Magistrate and according to the
Nature of the Offence).
For Adultery they are put to Death, and so for Witchcraft, For
that, there are a great many Witches in this Country &c.
Scolds they gag and set them at their own Doors, for certain
hours together for all comers and goers to gaze at. Were this a
Law in England and well Executed it wou'd in a little Time prove
an Effectual Remedy to cure the Noise that is in many Women's
heads.
Stealing is punished with Restoring four-fold if able; if not,
they are sold for some years, and so are poor Debtors. I have not
heard of many Criminals of this sort. But for Lying and Cheating
they out-vye Judas and all the false other cheats in Hell. Nay,
they make a Sport of it: Looking upon Cheating as a commendable
Piece of Ingenuity, commending him that has the most skill to
commit a piece of Roguery; which in their Dialect (like those of
our Yea-and-Nay-Friends in England) they call by the genteel Name
of Out-Witting a Man and won't own it to be cheating.
After mentioning the case of a man in Boston who bought a horse of a
countryman who could not read and gave him a note payable at the "Day
of the Resurrection," etc. Dunton goes on to say: "In short, These
Bostonians enrich themselves by the ruine of Strangers, etc.... But
all these things pass under the Notion of Self-Preservation and
Christian Policy."
It would hardly be fair to quote all this from Dunton's letters unless
we added what he says of Boston in another place; namely, "And though
the Generality are what I have described them, yet is there as sincere
a Pious and truly Religious People among them as is any where in the
Whole World to be found."
-------------------------
It seems to have been quite common at one time to sell prisoners. At
the Supreme Judicial Court in Salem, in November, 1787, "Elizabeth
Leathe of Lynn, for harbouring thieves and receiving stolen goods, was
convicted and sentenced to be whipped twenty stripes and to be sold
for six months." Also at a session of the same Court, held in Boston
in September, 1791, six persons were convicted of theft and sentenced
to be whipped and pay costs, or to be sold for periods of from six
months to four years. At this same Court one Seth Johnson appears to
have received what seems to us a rather severe sentence, although of
course we do not know all the circumstances of the case. He was
convicted of theft on three indictments and was sentenced to be "whipt
65 stripes and confined to hard labor for nine years." The Court at
Salem, before referred to, passed on one Catharine Derby a very heavy
sentence for stealing from Captain Hathorne's shop. It was, "To sit
upon the gallows one hour with a rope about her neck, to be whipped 20
stripes, pay £14 to Capt. Hathorne, and costs of prosecution." This is
almost as bad as the old saying, "being hung and paying forty
shillings."
This practice of selling convicts was nothing more or less than making
slaves of them,--for a limited period, of course; but perhaps it was
in many instances a punishment more to be desired by the victims than
being confined in prison, especially if they were well treated. The
prisons in those days had not "modern conveniences," and probably in
some cases were hardly decent. The condition of the jail in Portsmouth,
N.H., in February, 1789, is thus described by a prisoner who made his
escape from there by digging through the chimney. His account is
interesting in this connection. The paper from which we take it says:
"But for fear his quitting his lodgings in so abrupt a manner might
lay him open to censure, he wrote the following on the wall:--
"The reason of my going is because I have _no fire_ to comfort
myself with, and very _little_ provision. So I am sure, if I was
to _stay_ any longer I should perish to death. Look at that bed
there! Do you think it fit for any person to lie on?
"If you are well, I am well;
Mend the chimney, and all's well!
"To the gentlemen and officers of Portsmouth from your humble
servant,
"WILLIAM FALL.
"N.B. I am very sorry that I did not think of this before, for if
I had, your people should not have had the pleasure of seeing me
take the lashes."
The whipping-post and stocks were discontinued in Massachusetts early
in the present century. On the 15th of January, 1801, one Hawkins
stood an hour in the pillory in Court Street (now Washington Street),
Salem, and had his ear cropped for the crime of forgery, pursuant to
the sentence of the Supreme Court.
It would be easy to multiply cases showing the old methods of dealing
with criminals; but we think we have cited enough for our readers to
be able to form some judgment as to the desirability of reviving the
old and degrading systems, even if it could be done. It does seem
sometimes that there are brutes in the shape of men whose cruelty,
especially in the case of crimes against women, makes them deserving
of the worst punishment that could be inflicted for the protection of
society; but for the general run of such comparatively light offences
as petty larceny, etc., beating and branding with hot irons must be
considered barbarous in the extreme, and more after the manner of
savages than Christians. We always thought that the beating of
scholars--a practice once very common in schools--for such trifling
offences as whispering and looking off the book, was a gross outrage,
and the parent knowing and allowing it was in our opinion as guilty
as the schoolmaster. Of course we will not deny that teachers
did, then as now, have a great deal to put up with from saucy,
"good-for-nothing" boys, to whom the rod could not well be spared;
but we do not allude to such cases. We knew a master whose delight,
apparently, was pounding and beating _little_ boys,--he did not touch
the large ones. And yet he was generally considered a first-rate
teacher. Parents upheld him in anything he chose to do with the boys,
and if they complained at home, they were told that it must have been
their fault to be punished at all. This man every morning took the
Bible in one hand and his rattan in the other and walked backward and
forward on the floor in front of the desks while the boys read aloud,
each boy reading two or three verses; and woe be to any boy who made a
mistake, such as mispronouncing a word! Although he might never have
been instructed as to its pronunciation, he was at once pounded on the
head or rapped over the knuckles. Of course he never forgot that
particular word. And this teacher was called only "strict"! If ever a
man deserved the pillory, it was that teacher.
Possibly some of our readers may think that there is another side to
this story; for the benefit of such we give some lines from the "Salem
Gazette," Feb. 6, 1824.
_From the Connecticut Centinel._
THE SCHOOLMASTER'S SOLILOQUY.
To whip, or not to whip?--that is the question.
Whether 'tis easier in the mind to suffer
The deaf'ning clamor of some fifty urchins,
Or take birch and ferule 'gainst the rebels,
And by opposing end it? To whip--to flog--
Each day, and by a whip to say we end
The whispering, shuffling, and ceaseless buzzing
Which a school is heir to--'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wished. To whip, to flog,
To whip, and not reform--aye, there's the rub.
For by severity what ills may come,
When we've dismissed and to our lodging gone,
Must give us pain. There's the respect
That makes the patience of a teacher's life.
For who would bear the thousand plagues of a school,--
The girlish giggle, the tyro's awkwardness,
The pigmy pedant's vanity, the mischief,
The sneer, the laugh, the pouting insolence,
With all the hum-drum clatter of a school,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare hickory? Who would willing bear
To groan and sweat under a noisy life,
But that the dread of something after school
(That hour of rumor, from whose slanderous tongue
Few Tutors e'er are free) puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear _these_ lesser ills,
Than fly to _those_ of greater magnitude.
Thus error does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied over with undue clemency,
And pedagogues of great pith and spirit,
With this regard their _firmness_ turn away,
And lose the name of _government_.
-------------------------
We here record a curious affair which took place in the State of
Georgia in the year 1811. At the Superior Court at Milledgeville a
Mrs. Palmer, who, the account states, "seems to have been rather glib
of the tongue, was indicted, tried, convicted, and, in pursuance of
the sentence of the Court, was punished by being publicly ducked in
the Oconee River for--_scolding_." This, we are told, was the first
instance of the kind that had ever occurred in that State, and
"numerous spectators attended the execution of the sentence." A paper
copying this account says that the "crime is old, but the punishment
is new," and that "in the good old days of our Ancestors, when an
unfortunate woman was accused of Witchcraft she was tied neck and
heels and thrown into a pond of Water: if she drowned, it was agreed
that she was no witch; if she swam, she was immediately tied to a
stake and burnt alive. But who ever heard that our _pious_ ancestors
_ducked_ women for scolding?" This writer is much mistaken; for it is
well known that in England (and perhaps in this country in early
times) the "ducking-stool" was resorted to for punishing "scolds."
This was before the days of "women's rights," for there is no record
of any man having been punished in this way.
It is said that the ducking-stool was used in Virginia at one time.
Thomas Hartley writes from there to Governor Endicott of Massachusetts
in 1634, giving an account of the punishing a woman "who by the
violence of her tongue had made her house and neighborhood
uncomfortable." She was ducked five times before she repented; "then
cried piteously, 'Let me go! let me go! by God's help I'll sin so no
more.' They then drew back y^e Machine, untied y^e Ropes, and let her
walk home in her wetted Clothes a hopefully penitent woman." In the
"American Historical Record," vol. i., will be found a very
interesting account of this singular affair, with an engraving of the
"ducking-stool." Bishop Meade, in his "Old Churches," etc., says there
was a law in Virginia against scolds and slanderers, and gives an
instance of a woman ordered to be ducked three times from a vessel
lying in James River. There must have been very severe practices in
Virginia in the early days, according to Bishop Meade. We refer
persons especially interested in this subject to Hone's "Day Book and
Table Book," or Chambers's "Book of Days," both English publications,
for a full account of the ducking-stool and scold's bridle, formerly
used in England for the punishment of scolding women. It is not
pleasant to think that such a shameful practice was ever resorted to,
but it appears to be well authenticated. We cannot, however, read
English history, or any other history, without finding a vast number
of disagreeable facts which we are obliged to believe. Some things,
too, have occurred in our own country that we should like to forget.
All over the country we are nowadays troubled with "strikes." Such
"irregularities" must have been treated in a different spirit half a
century ago from what they are now. In these days the "strikers"
attempt to dictate terms, and in some cases succeed; although as a
general thing they get the worst of the struggle. The method of
dealing with such matters fifty years ago is briefly set forth in the
"Salem Observer," March 29, 1829. It says: "_Turn-out in New York._
There has been a turn-out for higher wages among the laborers in the
city of New York. _Several of the ring-leaders have been arrested and
ordered to give heavy bonds for their appearance at Court._" In
September, 1827, some sailors struck in Boston for higher wages,
formed a procession, and marched through the city, making considerable
noise with their cheers, etc. They issued the following proclamation,
which was read by the leader now and then, and responded to with loud
cheers: "Attention! We, the blue Jackets now in the city of Boston,
agree that we will not ship for less than $15 a month, and that we
will punish any one who shall ship for less in such way as we think
proper, and strip the vessel [which he ships in]. What say you?" At
the Common they were met by a militia company, who charged upon them;
some men of both sides were knocked down, but no lives were lost or
blood shed. In the afternoon the sailors were out again with drum and
fife. The paper from which we obtain this information says that they
probably would not get any advance, as it is assured by a shipper that
he found no difficulty in procuring crews at the customary wages.
Probably it was not intended that the military should do more than
endeavor to keep order.
-------------------------
It is rather surprising that there should have been no conviction for
felony in the County of Essex from 1692, when the witches were tried,
until 1771,--a period of seventy-nine years. It would so appear,
however, from the following extract from the "Essex Gazette," Nov. 12,
1771:--
Last Wednesday Morning the Trial of Bryan Sheehen for committing
a Rape on the Body of Mrs. Abial Hollowell, Wife of Mr. Benjamin
Hollowell, of Marblehead, in September last, came on before the
Superior Court of Judicature, at the Court-House in this Town.
The Trial lasted from between nine and ten o'Clock A.M. till
three in the Afternoon, when the Jury withdrew, and in about one
Hour brought in their Verdict, GUILTY. Mrs. Hollowell's Testimony
against the Prisoner was fully corroborated by the Physician who
attended her, and by the People who were in the House, at and
after the Perpetration of the Crime; by which the Guilt and
Barbarity of the Prisoner was so fully demonstrated, that the
Verdict of the Jury has given universal Satisfaction.
This Bryan Sheehen (who has not yet received his Sentence) is the
first Person, as far as we can learn, that has been convicted of
Felony, in this large County, since the memorable Year 1692,
commonly called _Witch-Time_.
-------------------------
From the "Boston Post-Boy," February, 1763.
BOSTON, JANUARY 31.
At the Superiour Court held at Charlestown last Week, Samuel
Bacon of Bedford, and Meriam Fitch, Wife of Benjamin Fitch of
said Bedford, were convicted of being notorious Cheats, and of
having by Fraud, Craft and Deceit, possess'd themselves of
Fifteen Hundred Johannes, the property of a third Person; were
Sentenced to be each of them set in the Pillory one Hour, with a
Paper on each of their Breasts with the Words a CHEAT wrote in
Capitals thereon, to suffer three Months Imprisonment, and to be
bound to their good Behaviour for one Year, and to pay Costs.
-------------------------
From the "Massachusetts Gazette," May 1, 1786.
On Saturday evening the 22d ult. eight of the prisoners, confined
at the Castle, broke from their confinement, and made their
escape to the main. The day following five of them were taken in
a barn at Dorchester, and immediately re-conducted to the Castle.
The ensuing night the three others were apprehended at Sharon,
near Stoughton, and were also sent back to their place of
confinement.
Richard Squire and John Matthews, the pirates, and Stephen
Burroughs, a _noted_ clerical character, were among the prisoners
who made their escape from the Castle, as mentioned above. And on
Saturday last, we are informed, the eight culprits shared among
them the benefit of a distribution of 700 lashes.
On Monday evening last, a person, in passing from the Long-Wharf
to Dock-Square, was assaulted and knocked down, by a single
villain, who robbed him of a box, containing a coat, two
waistcoats, a pair of corduroy breeches, a piece of calico, in
which was wrapped up three watches, and a letter containing
money.
On Thursday last, at noon, seven fellows received the discipline
of the post, in this town.
-------------------------
Curious list of punishments in the early days of New England. From
"Salem Gazette," May 4, 1784.
_The following (taken from a Boston paper of last week) is a
collection of a few of the many curious punishments, inflicted
for a variety of offences, among the old records of this
Commonwealth._
Between 1630 and 1650.
Sir _Richard Saltonstale_ fined four bushels of malt for his
absence from court.
_William Almy_ fined for taking away Mr. Glover's canoe without
leave.
_Josias Plastoree_ shall (for stealing four baskets of corn from
the Indians) return them eight baskets again, be fined 5l. and
hereafter to be called by the name of _Josias_, and not _Mr._ as
formerly he used to be.
_Joyce Bradwick_ shall give unto Alexander Beeks, 20s. for
promising him marriage without her friends' consent, and now
refusing to perform the same.
_William James_, for incontinency, was sentenced to be set in the
bilboes at Boston and Salem, and bound in 20l.
_Thomas Petet, for suspicion_ of slander, idleness and
stubbornness, is to be severely whipt and kept in hold.
_John Smith_, of Medford, for swearing, _being penitent_, was set
in bilboes.
_Richard Turner_, for being notoriously drunk, was fined 2l.
_John Hoggs_, for swearing _God's foot_, cursing his servant,
wishing "a pox of God take you," was fined 5l.
_Richard Ibrook_, for tempting two or more maids to uncleanness,
was fined 5l. to the country, and 20s. a piece to the two maids.
_Thomas Makepeace_, because of his novel disposition, was
informed we were weary of him, unless he reformed.
_Edward Palmer_, for his extortion, taking 33s. 7d. for the plank
and woodwork of Boston stocks, is fined 5l. and censured to be
set an hour in the stocks.
_John White_ is bound in 10l. to be of good behaviour, and not to
come into the company of Bull's wife alone.
_Thomas Lechford_ acknowledging he had _overset_ himself and is
sorry for it, promising to attend his calling, and not to meddle
with controversies, was dismissed.
_Sarah Hales_ was censured _for her miscarriage_ to be carried to
the gallows with a rope about her neck, and to sit upon the
ladder, the rope end flung over the gallows, and after to be
banished.
-------------------------
Wholesale sentences of death in London, in 1820.
At the October session of the Old Bailey, London, sentence of
death was passed on thirty-seven persons, four of whom were
females. Four were condemned for passing counterfeit notes,
eleven for highway robberies, two for burglary, 11 for stealing
in dwelling houses, 1 for horse-stealing, 2 for sacrilege, &c.
-------------------------
From the "Salem Mercury," July 28, 1788.
_The following_ EXTRAORDINARY OCCURRENCE _is extracted from the_
EUROPEAN MAGAZINE _for_ 1787.
SAMUEL BURT, convicted of forgery a few sessions since, was put
to the bar, and informed that his Majesty, in his royal clemency,
had been graciously pleased to extend his mercy to him on
condition that he should be transported during his natural life.
The prisoner bowed respectfully to the Court, and immediately
addressed the Recorder with his "most humble and unfeigned
thanks, for the kindness and humanity of the Recorder, the
Sheriffs, and other gentlemen who had interested themselves in
his favour, and who had so effectually represented his unhappy
case to the throne, that his Majesty, whose humanity could only
be equalled by his love of virtue, had extended his mercy; but
however flattering the prospect of preserving life might be to a
man in a different situation; yet that he, now he was sunk and
degraded in society, was totally insensible of the blessing. Life
was no longer an object with him, as it was utterly impossible
that he could be joined in union with the person who was dearer
to him than life itself. Under such circumstances, although he
was truly sensible of his Majesty's goodness and clemency, yet he
must positively decline the terms offered him; preferring death
to the prolongation of a life which could not be otherwise than
truly miserable." The whole Court was astonished at his address;
and after consultation, Mr. Recorder remanded the prisoner back
to the jail, to be brought up again the first day of next
session.
-------------------------
The pillory appears to have been in use in Boston as lately as 1803;
for we find in the "Chronicle" of that city that in March of that year
Robert Pierpont, owner, and H.R. Story, master, of the brigantine
"Hannah," for the crime of sinking the vessel at sea, and thus
defrauding the underwriters (among whom were Joseph Taylor, Peter C.
Brooks, Thomas Amory, David Greene, and Benjamin Bussey), were
convicted before the Supreme Judicial Court, and the following
sentence imposed: "That they should stand one hour in the Pillory in
State Street on two several days, be confined in Prison for the term
of two years, and pay Costs of Prosecution." Considering the magnitude
of the crime, this was a light sentence. An underwriter in the
"Chronicle" says: "It is a transaction exceeding in infamy all that
has hitherto appeared in the commerce of our country."
-------------------------
Wholesale execution of pirates in Newport, R.I., in July, 1723.
CAPTURE OF PIRATES.
This year (1723) two Pirate sloops, called the Ranger and the
Fortune, committed many piracies on the American Coast, having
captured and sunk several vessels.--On the 6th of June, they
captured a Virginia sloop, which they plundered and let go, who
soon after fell in with his Majesty's Ship Grey Hound, Capt.
Solgard, of 20 guns, who on being informed of the piracy,
immediately went in pursuit of the Pirates, and on the 10th came
up with them about 14 leagues south from the east end of Long
Island. They mistaking her for a Merchant ship, immediately gave
chase and commenced firing under the black flag.--The Grey Hound
succeeded in capturing the Ranger, one of the sloops, after
having 7 men wounded, but the other Pirate escaped. The Grey
Hound and her prize arrived in the harbor of Newport, and the
Pirates, 36 in number, were committed for trial.
_Trial of the Pirates._
A Court of Admiralty, for the trial of Pirates, was held at
Newport on the 10th, 11th and 12th of July. The Hon. William
Dummer, Lt. Governor and Commander in Chief of the Province of
Massachusetts Bay, President of the Court.
The thirty-six Pirates taken by Capt. Solgard, were tried, when
Charles Harris, who acted as captain, and 25 of his men, were
found guilty, and sentenced to suffer death, and 10 men were
acquitted on the ground of having been forced into their service.
_Execution of the Pirates._
On Friday the 19th of July, the 26 Pirates were taken to a place
in Newport, called Bull's Point, (now Gravelly Point,) within the
flux and reflux of the sea, and there hanged. The following are
their names:--Charles Harris, Thomas Linnicar, Daniel Hyde,
Stephen Mundon, Abraham Lacy, Edward Lawson, John Tomkins,
Francis Laughton, John Fisgerald, Wm. Studfield, Owen Rice, Wm.
Read, Wm. Blades, Tho's Hagget, Peter Cues, Wm. Jones, Edward
Eaton, John Brown, James Sprinkly, Joseph Sound, Charles Church,
John Waters, Tho's Powell, Joseph Libbey, Thomas Hazel, John
Bright.
The Pirates were all young men, most of them were natives of
England, Wm. Blades was from Rhode Island and Thomas Powell from
Wethersfield, (Conn.); after the execution, their bodies were
taken to the north end of Goat Island, and buried on the shore,
between high and low water mark.
As this was the most extensive execution of Pirates that ever
took place at one time in the Colonies, it was attended by a vast
multitude from every part of New England.
From the _Salem Observer_, Nov. 11, 1843.
-------------------------
Description of "Villains" in the "Boston Post-Boy," Dec. 12, 1763.