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
{'title': 'The Olden Time Series, Vol. 5: Some Strange and Curious Punishments by Brooks', 'source': 'Project Gutenberg', 'lang': 'en'}