Part 3

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.

Tuesday last a Gang of Villains were apprehended at a House in Roxbury, and brought to Town & committed to Goal, they have been concerned in the late Robberies here, and 'tis suspected in some of those towards Pennsylvania, for which Reason it will be proper to advertise their Names, with some Description of them, which are as follows, viz.

_William Robinson_, a tall slim fellow, about 5 Feet 7 inches high, wears a blue Surtout Coat with metal Buttons, and his Hat commonly flopt before, and an old laced Waistcoat, has short curled black Hair; when he speaks he seems jaw-fallen and very effeminate, is about 35 Years of Age, walks much like a Foot-pad, and has a comely Woman with him whom he calls his Wife.----_John Cassady_, a middling siz'd Fellow much pock-broken, square-shoulder'd, wears a Wig upon the yellow cast, and has a very guilty Countenance, is about 40 Years of Age, and calls himself a Shoe-maker.--_John Willson_, a short young Fellow, about 21 Years of Age, wears a blue Surtout Coat, and short black Hair, of a pale Countenance, and calls himself a Sail-maker.--_George Sears_, a well-set Fellow, with a comely Face, black Hair twisted with a black Ribbon, and says he serv'd 3 Years to an Attorney in England.

In the "Essex Gazette," Nov. 12, 1771, is the following news from England:--

A Correspondent expresses great Surprise and indignation at the Disproportion of Punishments in this Country. He says he read in a News paper that two Men were hanged together last Month in Kent, one of whom had committed a barbarous Murder on his Wife, and the other had stolen three Shillings and Sixpence. In the same Paper there followed immediately another Paragraph, that a Woman had been only whipped for stealing little Children and burning their Eyes out.

At this day we believe it is the custom of the English authorities to treat all prisoners alike, whatever the charges against them may be. It seems as if they were desirous of degrading men as much as possible. Mr. John Boyle O'Reilly, a poet and gentleman of culture, who was unfortunately a political prisoner, was chained to a wife-murderer. And this the English call "justice,"--as if there could be no difference in offences!

Severe punishment used to be inflicted for the crime of passing counterfeit coin. The "Essex Gazette," April 23, 1771, under news from Newport, April 15, says,--

William Carlisle was convicted of passing counterfeit Dollars, and sentenced to stand One Hour in the Pillory, on Little-Rest Hill, next Friday, to have _both Ears_ cropped, to be branded on _both Cheeks_ with the Letter R, to pay a Fine of One hundred Dollars and Cost of Prosecution, and to stand committed till Sentence performed.

The letter R probably meant "rogue." The same account states that--

"Last Wednesday Evening one Mr. ----, of this Town (Newport), was catched by a Number of Persons in Disguise, placed on an old Horse, and paraded through the principal Streets for about an Hour as a _Warning_ to all bad Husbands."

In the "Massachusetts Gazette," Sept. 8, 1786, we find an account of the Dutch mode of executions.

NEW-JERSEY.

ELIZABETH-TOWN, _Aug. 16_. The little influence which our present mode of executing criminals has in deterring others from the commission of the same crimes, arises from a want of solemnity and terrifick circumstances on such occasions. It is not the mere loss of life which has so much a tendency to affect the spectator, as the dreadful apparatus, the awful preliminaries, which ought to attend publick executions; whose justifiable purposes is the prevention of crimes, and not the inflicting torment on the criminal. A variety of particulars might be adopted respecting the dress of the condemned, the solemnity of the procession to the place of execution, and the apparatus there, to throw horrour on the scene without in reality giving the unhappy victim a more painful exit. The Dutch have a mode of execution which is well calculated to inspire terror, without putting the sufferer to extraordinary pain. The criminal is placed on a scaffold, opposite to the gigantick figure of a woman, with arms extended, filled with spikes, or long sharpened nails, and a dagger pointed from her breast, she is gradually moved towards him by machinery for the purpose, till he gets within her embrace, when her arms encircle him, and the dagger is pressed through his heart. This is vulgarly called among them, kissing the Yssrow, or woman, and excites more terror in the breasts of the populace than any other mode of punishment.

Inhabitants of Boston severely punished (on paper) in April, 1774, for _destruction of the tea_.

A CURIOUS HISTORICAL ITEM. In a recent English Chronological work, under the article of "Tea," we found the following brief notice of the American Revolution: "Tea destroyed at Boston by the inhabitants, 1773, in abhorrence of English Taxes; for which they were severely punished by the English Parliament, in April, 1774."

_Salem Observer_, April 28, 1827.

Sentences of death for robbery, May 6, 1788.

The Mulatto who, some time since, robbed Mr. Bacon, on the Cambridge road, was, at the late term of the Supreme Court at Concord, convicted of the crime, and had sentence of death pronounced against him.

Thursday next is the day appointed for the execution of the two Taylors, for the robbery of Mr. Cunningham, on Boston-Neck.

Captain Phillips, of the British army, whipped in New York in 1784.

PHILADELPHIA, February 4, 1784.

On Saturday last, was whipped at the cart's tail, for robbery, one of George the Third's pretty subjects. This fellow, who now goes by the name of Captain Phillips, under his good friend Sir Harry Clinton, learned such a knack of thieving while he commanded a whale-boat along this coast, under his good master, that now, having lost his protection, he and a number more of those lads called Loyalists are swarming amongst us, and have set up business in a small way; and though many of them may not choose to steal themselves, yet, by harbouring and encouraging others, may do much mischief to the good inhabitants of these states.

_Salem Gazette._

Sentences at the Supreme Court.

BOSTON, March 22, 1784.

At the Supreme Judicial Court, lately held here, the following persons were arraigned, viz.

_Thomas Hastings_, indicted for selling corrupt swine's flesh, was found guilty.--He was sentenced to pay a fine of twelve pounds for the use of the Commonwealth, recognize himself as principal in the sum of thirty pounds, with sufficient surety or sureties in the like sum, for his keeping the peace and being of good behaviour for the term of one year, pay costs of prosecution, and stand committed till sentence be performed.

_John Boyd_, for stealing, pled guilty:--sentenced to pay to the person injured, treble the value of the goods stolen, receive 20 stripes at the public whipping post, sit on the gallows one hour with a rope about his neck, pay costs of prosecution, and stand committed till sentence be performed.--He was, upon another indictment for theft, sentenced to pay treble damages, whipped 15 stripes, and pay costs of prosecution.--Upon declaring himself unable to pay damages, he was for the first offence sentenced to be sold for 9 months, and for the second, 2 months.

_Lewis Humphries_, for stealing, pled guilty:--sentenced to pay treble damages, receive 20 stripes, sit on the gallows one hour with a rope about his neck, pay costs of prosecution, and stand committed till sentence be performed.--Upon declaring himself unable to pay damages, was sentenced to be sold for the term of 5 years.

_William Padley_, for an assault upon his wife, with an intent to kill her, was tried, found guilty, and sentenced to sit on the gallows one hour, there to receive 30 stripes, pay costs of prosecution, and stand committed till sentence be performed.

Sentences by the Supreme Judicial Court at Salem, Nov. 18, 1786.

At the Supreme Judicial Court, holden in this town, for the county of Essex, which adjourned on Thursday last, several persons, criminally indicted, were convicted and severally sentenced. Isaac Coombs, an Indian, was found guilty, at last June term, at Ipswich, of murdering his wife; at which time a motion was made to the Court, in arrest of judgment, on which the Court suspended giving judgment thereon until this term; but the said motion being overruled, the Court gave judgment of death against him.

Besides the sentence of the Indian, as above, _Thomas Kendry_, for breaking into the store of Israel Bartlet, and stealing sundry goods, was sentenced, on his confession, to pay said Bartlet £33-9-6, to sit on the gallows one hour with a rope about his neck, to be whipped 30 stripes, and confined to hard labour on Castle-island two years.

_Thomas Atwood_ & _John Ransum_, for breaking open the store of Knott Pedrick, and stealing dry fish, were each sentenced to pay said Pedrick £40-5-0, to sit one hour on the gallows, be whipped 36 stripes, and confined to labour on Castle-island 3 years.

_John Smith_, for stealing goods from Abner Perkins, was sentenced to pay said Perkins £18-4-0, and be whipped 25 stripes.

The same _John Smith_, for breaking open a sloop, and stealing goods of John Brooks, was sentenced to pay said Brooks £16-8-0, to sit one hour on the gallows, be whipped 30 stripes, and confined 18 months on Castle-island.

_John Scudder_, for stealing from Eli Gale, was sentenced to pay said Gale £5-2-0, or if unable to pay, to be disposed of by him, in service, to any person, for 2 months.

_Joseph Ballard_, for stealing a horse from Thomas Dodge, was sentenced to pay £30, be whipped 20 stripes, pay costs, &c. and, if unable to pay, that said Dodge may dispose of him in service to any person for two years.

_Calvin Newhall_ was indicted for assaulting Deborah Sarker, a negro woman, with intent to commit a rape upon her. He pleaded not guilty; and the jury found him guilty of the assault, but whether with an intent to ravish they could not agree; whereupon the Attorney General would no further prosecute for said intent to ravish; and the Court ordered that said Calvin should be whipped 10 stripes, and recognize in £60, with sufficient surety in a like sum, to be of good behaviour for 3 months, and pay costs.

Punishment in 1644 for criticising the preacher and the music, and for sleeping in "meeting."

The Hon. Wm. D. Northend, in a very interesting and valuable address before the Essex Bar Association, Dec. 8, 1885, mentions the following among other cases taken from the Essex County Court Records:--

"In 1644 William Hewes and John his son, for terming such as sing in the congregation fools, and William Hewes also for charging Reverend Mr. Corbitt with falsehood in his doctrine, were ordered to pay a fine of fifty shillings each, and to make humble confession in a public meeting at Lynn."

William Hewes and his son were probably only criticising the music and the preaching in the "meeting-house." If people nowadays were fined for similar offences, the county would grow so rich that there would be no necessity for the present heavy tax.

"In 1643 Roger Scott, for repeated sleeping in meeting on the Lord's Day, and for striking the person who waked him, was, at Salem, sentenced to be severely whipped."

It must be borne in mind that people in those days were not allowed to stay at home on the Lord's Day and do their sleeping there. Staying at home on Sunday is a modern innovation.

From the Massachusetts Colony Records, quoted by Mr. Northend, we learn that in March, 1761, Sir Christopher Gardner, who had passed much of his time "with roystering Morton of Merry Mount," and who was living with a lady he called his cousin, upon receipt by the Governor of information of two wives in England "whom he has carelessly left behind," after a long pursuit was captured and sent back to England.

It would seem, then, that there must have been, judging from this example, in "high places" some "indiscretions" and "unpleasant" gossip early in our history.

Mr. Northend finds that at "the same date one Nich. Knopp, for pretending to cure scurvy by water of no value, which he sold at a very dear rate, was ordered to pay a fine of five pounds or be whipped, and made liable to an action by any person to whom he had sold the water."

How would such a decree work in our day, if applied to the makers or venders of all the "water of no value" which is advertised on the fences and barns alongside of our railroads and highways?

Mr. Northend, speaking of the severity of the early laws, says:--

"The criminal laws were taken principally from the Mosaic code; and although many of them at the present day seem harsh and cruel, yet as a whole they were very much milder than the criminal laws of England at the time, and the number of capital offences was greatly reduced."

CURIOUS PUNISHMENTS IN SCHOOLS.

In some of the old schools in Salem (no doubt it was the same in other places) the teachers whose business it was to teach youths the "three R's,"--Reading, 'Riting, and 'Rithmetic,--were too apt to be occupied, as we have been told, in scolding, devising or practising some mode of punishment. We remember hearing of a school where the master kept a long cane pole (something like a fishing-rod) which he used for the purpose of reaching boys who needed correction; on account of the length of the pole he was enabled to do business without leaving his seat. It was never suspected at the time how lazy this master was.

Another teacher kept for use as a punishment a common walnut, which when occasion required he first put into the mouth of a colored boy, and after it had remained there for five minutes or so, it was taken out and put into the mouth of the white boy, who was thus to be punished by holding it in _his_ mouth for a certain length of time. This same teacher had a round smooth stone, weighing perhaps ten or fifteen pounds, which very small boys were required to hold in their arms for some time, and stand up straight before the whole school. These with a good rattan and a cowhide furnished this master's equipment for teaching.

There was another master who had what he called "the mansion of misery," which was simply a line drawn with chalk on the floor in front of his desk, where for trifling offences such as whispering, etc., scholars were required to "toe the mark," standing perfectly still and upright for a long time. This was often to a little boy painful enough. This master had a stock of cowhides and rattans besides.

Another teacher, a woman, had the floor of the school-room kept very clean; consequently no boys were allowed to come in at all with heavy boots, and the other children in wet weather were compelled to remove their boots and shoes and put on slippers before entrance. If any of the scholars were too small to take off and put on their own boots they were punished by being "blindfolded" and stood upon a cricket in the middle of the floor. Apparently the worst offence scholars could be guilty of was to bring in mud or wet upon the polished floor of the school-room. At this school one very small boy who wore high boots, but who was unable to take them off without assistance, having been punished for his "stubbornness," was taken away from the school by his parents, who resented such an act of injustice and oppression. The "school-marm," however, said she would rather lose all her scholars than have any mud or wet upon her floor.

These cases are simply curious. It may be doubted whether we can in this country show anything so bad as the record furnished by Dickens in describing some of the schools of England.

THE BRANK.

An instrument of punishment formerly much used in England, but never, we think, introduced into this country, called the "brank," or "scold's bridle," or "gossip's bridle," is thus described by Mr. L. Jewitt, F.S.A., in Mr. William Andrews's "Book of Oddities,"--a very interesting and instructive book recently published in London:--

"It consisted of a kind of crown or framework of iron, which was locked upon the head, and was armed in front with a gag, a plate, or a sharp cutting knife or point, which was placed in the poor woman's mouth so as to prevent her moving her tongue, or it was so placed that if she moved it or attempted to speak, the tongue was cut in a most frightful manner. With this cage upon her head, and with the gag firmly pressed and locked against her tongue, the miserable creature, whose sole offence, perhaps, was that she had raised her voice in defence of her social rights against a brutal and besotted husband, or had spoken honest truth of some one high in office in the town, was paraded through the streets, led by a chain held in the hand of the bellman, the beadle, or the constable, or, chained to the pillory, the whipping-post, or market-cross, was subjected to every conceivable insult and degradation, without even the power left her of asking for mercy or of promising amendment for the future; and when the punishment was over, she was turned out from the town hall (or other place where the brutal punishment had been inflicted), maimed, disfigured, faint, and degraded, to be the subject of comment and jeering amongst her neighbors, and to be reviled by her persecutors."

Mr. Andrews adds that the use of the brank was not sanctioned by law, but was altogether illegal; and he concludes his remarks on the subject by saying that "to everybody it must be a matter of deep regret that the instrument should ever have been used at all."

Dr. Henry Heginbotham, of Stockport, England, says in speaking of the brank preserved in that town: "There is no evidence of its having been actually used for many years; but there is testimony to the fact that within the last forty years the brank was brought to a termagant market-woman, who was effectually silenced by its threatened application."

It is hard for those of us who live in New England to-day to believe that such cruelties were ever practised in a Christian land; but the evidence is too conclusive to admit of doubt. Mr. Andrews, in the book referred to, gives engravings of a dozen or more different kinds of branks and bridles which can now be seen in England and Scotland. At Congleton, Cheshire, a woman for scolding and abusing the town officers had the "town bridle" put upon her, and was led through every street in the town, as lately as the year 1824.

It is said that Chaucer wrote these lines:

"But for my daughter Julian, I would she were well bolted with a Bridle, That leaves her work to play the clack, And lets her wheel stand idle; For it serves not for she-ministers, Farriers nor Furriers, Cobblers nor Button-makers, To descant on the Bible."

Mr. Andrews has confined his account of curious punishments mainly to England and Scotland. Our Puritan ancestors must, we think, have seen some of the instruments of torture here described, and perhaps some of our great-great, etc., grandmothers may have been "ducked" or "silenced by a brank" many years before the sailing of the "Mayflower" or the "Lyon" or the "Angel Gabriel."

It was once the custom in New England for a sermon to be preached before the prisoner upon the day of his execution. In the "Massachusetts Gazette," Dec. 26, 1786, is the following notice:--