Tombstone epitaph., 1891-02-08
< CHAPTER ON EARS.
reorIe Who Were Punished Long Age kJ
 Having Their Hearers Removed.

reOrIe Who Were Punished Long AGo bJ
 Having Their Hearers Removed.
 Any lnuti!ation of the ear which in. volved the loss of a portion or all of fl has always been mark of disgrace. In o,ie of the statutes of Edward VI the pens lty affixed for its violation is the "losD of aa ear and perpetual infamy.. In those days the celluloid ear had not been invented and the loss of one of these members was public badge of shame for life.
 Following the retributive law of Moses. probably the punishment originated iii the ecclesiastical courts. It is first uicn- toned in the trial: of offences against tie church and some of the earless clericais were noted men. The sentence to the p,iiory frequently had the additional pun ishment of the loss nf one or both ears added. Daniel Foce, or Foe, later in life known as Daniel Decoe. wrote pamph- Jet called '.The Shortest, Way with the Ossenters, and lost his ears. Pope, in ils "Dunciad, speaks of the author of
 Robinson Crusoe:'' "Earless on high stood unabashed Defoe.
 He was placed in the pillory three times That instrument being on a raised plaG orm explains the line.. In Defoe's case, however, as in many. others. bis punishme nt was rather martyrdom, and liftel him in the esteem of those who believed as he did.
 Dr. Bastwick, who published more pamphlets than pills, concludes enc of his essays with: "From plague, pestilence and famine, from bishops, priests and deacons, good Lord deliver us" This was so serious an offront that the doctor was sentenced to the pillory and to lose both his ears. The execution of his sen- tence was sort of public fete. His friends gathered before the pillory aud shouted words of encouragement. His wife climbed upon the pillory and kissed him. When his ears were cut of. ''she
 put them in a clean handkerchief" and carried them home. The celebrated Prynne suffered similar punishment. The names of lesser criminals have escaped the permanent records, but Blackstone mentions number of early English parliamentary enactments mak ing the loss of an ear penalty in law. Fighting in church or churchyard hJ acts passed during the fifth and sixth years of the reign of Edward VI meant the loss of both ears. If the prisoner
 had no ears-which imr.ies that there were habitual criminals $50 years ago 1he was to be branded with the letter F in the cheek. In the second and third year of the same monarch combinations among victualers and artificers to raise the price of provisions or the rate of labor for the third oifcnse was punished by the pillory and the loss of an ear. 1 The statute not only extended to the ! combinations to raise wages, but to reg nlate the quantity of work or to lessen the hours of labor. In this degenerate age the trusts and other combines, with the different labor unions, if these laws were enforced. would give the public
 executioner active employment.
 In later years the loss of an ea. or part of one has also been regarded as imply. 1 ing disgrace. The ear is not easily lost. Any accident that destroys the Gal | usually destroys the person wearing it. | One of the favorite ways of mutilatine
 an enemy in rough and tumble fight is
 to bite off his ear. In disreputable brawls | and in low resorts brute instinct makes ear mutilation a fit revenge for almost
 any wrong. Jack Slade, the notorious iesperado. in fit of rage. is said to have cut off the ears of man he lad mur iered. He kept them in his pocket and boastfully eA A.ibii.l them when in 8
 drunken and dangerous mood. When
 he saw on the poker table stake he wanted particularly Jack played the cars
 'linging them on the table they beat fouI
 aces or straight flush, for Jack had | | pistol in each hand the next instant. llt
 always took the pot on the play. Chi
 cago News.