The St. Louis Republic., 1901-03-31
Maryland Law OF 1882.

MarHfnn nj Law OF tSS..
Ii reads as follows:
Any ueison who snail bru.alIv assault and bea
his wife shall BE- deemed guilty of a mis,,culean
ana uIon presentment and conviction thereof
hr any court " competent jurisdiction shall b,
sentenced 10 whipping no: ,vcc.din- fort,
lashes, or be !iNprisorrd FOR term not exceed
ing one Year. ~ both, in the discretion OF III,
court
II anv court shall order OF lirect the punish
ment as afo.esHid bv whipping the same sbai
he administered by tire SrorT Of the ,ount,
o. CITY of baltimore whore the iuignen, shat
he rendered. and said Shc,!T shall adpinIst
the same within the walls Of the city or county
Jail.
In December. 1850. Charles Foote was con-
r.cted before Judge Pinkney in the Crin,i-
nal Court Of Baltimore City of "cru4lly''
beating his wife. and on December of the
same year the following sentence was en-
tered opposite the prisoners name on the
court record:
Judcment-Tn he whIppad tbfr;a,, I,sb. :.
be administered by the She-iY within tho v,,ri.
of the jail. Same day sentence reconsiderel ard
sentenced to be whipped seven lash.s. to he ad-
ministered as aforesaid. and sixty DAYS in jaiI.
An appeal was AT once taken on the
ground of error, but the Court of Appeals
then composed of Judges Miller Stone
Alvey, Robinson, irving and Richie. sus-
tanned the ruling of the lower court.
Decision of the Court.
The decision. which is given in fifty-nine
Maryland, says that the law neither violates
the bill of rights nor the Constitution of the
United states as those taking the appeal
hold. The clause nor cruel and unusual
punishment IN the Constitution of the
United States is not restraint upon the
legislative powers of the States
whipping, TIE court further says, was
nor NOT cruel or unusual punishment within
- Inc proclamation of the .tiIl of rights The
act was declared not to be invalid becaus
" applied to certain class in the COM
munity. 1t was held that the Legislature
mad the right to pass laws inflictng a more
severe punishment on man for beating his
wife than for beating another All other
objections to the act which the court said
sham was. overruled. In reference to pre-
vious laws on the same subject the court
said:
History OF the Punishment.
THE punishment of whipping was rec
ognized by the statute laws of the State
under the Constitution down to 1864. when
It was obliterated. not by direct appeal. but
by the force of the Constitutional amend
ment abolishing slavery. Although the
punishment was usually applied to negroes.
1t was applicable TO whites as well, and
both after and before the adoption of the
bill of rights in 1915 whipping for certain
offenses was imposed upon white and blacks
alike"
AS far back as Ills the whipping post
figured prominently In the administration
of justice in this State. In that year q
law was passed providing that any one
convicted of stealing goods not above the
value of 1000 pounds of tobacco should be
placed in the pillory and whipped with
not more than thirty mine stripes. 1t was
then considered a favor to be whipped.
for the theft must not have been committed
in the course of robbery. burglary or
housebreaking, otherwise more severe pun
ishment presumably imprisonment, was
the sentence. In lno al breaches OF mill
tary discipline were punished by the wielder
of the rawhide.
There was in 1884 an arch over Calvert
street very nearly on the site now occu-
inpf from, Of the s' arch. CHI Here IT was that the
public whpper laid on his lash, In 1903
sons were concerned. but the owners OF
slaves had authority to lash them until
1864. Constables could repair to all sus-
pected places within their districts where
they had reason to believe slaves were
congregating with rebeliious intentions ana I
whip every negro caught with not more
than thirty-nine lashes
After the Court of Appeals had given its
decision on the act of lsS2 the sentence
of the Court was carried out against
Foote Sheriff Hunter deiegsfedh die the hen,i daty
Mr.. George w. Roseman, short stout
man. who provided himself with cowhide
forty inches long for the occasion; 6s srec,ad ihe
Foote was brought into the corridor OF
the inil. where his hands were drawn wide
E sops and o ss SSnna ees to hs Then f fhe
were administered. In carrying out tne
sentence, Mr. Roseman saw to II th1l
neither the letter nor the spirit Of the law
was violated.
How Foote Wns whipped
Foote swaggcred into the corridor ap
parentiv Indifferent to what was awaiting
him He was in his shir sleeves.
Remove your shirt" said Sheriff. Houn'-
er
The regro obeyed. He was then told to
remove his undershirt. This he did some
what reluctantly, beginning to realize
what was awaiting him. IT.
With every stroke a welt raised on ms
back and the ends OF the lash licked me
flesh on his side, causing the blood TO
flow Foote bore his punishment stoicalE'
never uttering word. -, =, 80
marked that he was sorry the hrst trstsd SEN
tence of the Court had not been carrie9
out in order that he might have escaped
the Jail sentence. .,o
AS far as can be learned. that was the
last punishment of the kind ever inficte1i
in, the State; Protests We're maze ahe oeonie oa a
were respected by the courts a..
Mayor Thomas G.. Hayes saw tne seh-
orrfp fpd