Tombstone epitaph., 1891-01-04
q CHAPTER ON EARS.
People Who Were Punished Long Age b,
 Having Their Hearers Removed.


 Having Their Hearers Removed.
 Any mutilation of the ear which in. volved the loss of portion or all of it has always been mark of disgrace. In one of the statutes of Edward VI the penalty affixed for it's violation is the -'loss of an ear and perpetual infamy." In those days the celluloid ear had not been invented and the loss of one of these members was a public badge of shame for life.
 Following the retributive law of Moses, probably the punishment originated in the ecclesiastical courts. lt is first uicn. toned in the trials of offenses against tie church and some of the earless cierIcals were noted men. The sentence to tic plllory frequently had the additional pun ishment of the loss of one or both ears added. Daniel Fooe, or Foe, later in life known as Daniel Defoe, wrote a pamph- let called 1.-The Shortest Way with the Dissenters," and lost his ears. Pope, in ais "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 raised platform explains the line. In Defoe's case, however, as in many others, his punishment was rather a martyrdom, and lifted him in the esteem of those who believed as he did.
 Dr. Bastwick, who published more pamphlets than pills. concludes one of his essays with: "From plague, pestilence and famine, from bishops, priests and deacons. good Lord deliver us." This was SO serious an affront that the doctor was sentenced to the pillory and to lose both his ears. The execution of his sen- tence was a sort of public fete. His friends gathered before the pillory and shouted words of encouragement. His wife climbed upon the pillory and kissed him. When his ears were cut off ''she put them in 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 nlak. ing the loss of an ear a penalty in law. Fighting in church or churchyard hy 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 implies that there were habitual criminals $50 years ago he 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 artiicers to raise the price of provisions or the rate of labor for the third offense was punished by the pillory and the loss of an ear. The statute not only extended to the combinations to raise wages, but to reg alate 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 ing disgrace. The ear is not easily lost. Any accident that destroys the ear usually destroys the person wearing it. One of the favorite ways of nlutilatine an enemy in a 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 1esperado. in fit of rage. is said to have cut off the ears of a man he had mur- dered. He kept them in his pocket and boastfully exhibited them when in a drunken and dangerous mood. When he saw on the poker table stake he wanted particularly Jack played the ears. them on the table they beat four lces or straight flush. for Jack had a pistol in each hand the next instant. He always took the pot on the play.-Chi- ago News.