The times., 1901-03-31
CURIOUS old STATUTES
Laws That Once Prevailed in the
District of Columbia.
Penalties Attached to Trivial Of
fences Hundred Years Ago
Heavy Fines for Selling Too Much


The discussions which have followed
the adoption of the new code OF laws for
the government of the District have
called to mind some OF the laws which
were in force at the time the territory
was ceded to the Government by the
States of Virginia and Maryland. a few
examples OF the statutes which We're in
force at that time and perhaps half a
century after, and from which the pres
ent laws have been evolved, viii no
doubt prove interesting. Four years be-
fore Walter s. Cox, a member of the
bench of the Supreme Court of the Dis
trict, commenced a compilation of laws
for the government of the District. a
similar task had been undertaken and
most acceptably performed by William
Stone Albert, a prominent member Of
the local bar. Mr.. Justice Cox, however,
had a very different field cs legal litera-
ture from which TO gather the material
for his code from that in which Mr.
Albert was compelled to labor. The latter
was asked TO evolve a system Of laws for
the government of the District out of the
raw material found in the statutes OF
nearly a hundred years ago, many OF
which were unreasonable, and which to-
day would be considered barbarous and
inhuman.
In the early days of the settlement OF
the Colonies offences against morals or
wrongs to private persons were punished
most severely. drunkenness being punish
able at the whipping post and the steal
ing of a horse by death upon the gallows.
Blaspherny was also very abhorrent to the
ears of the CoIonists, and was punishable
by heavy fines. So great were the fines
in, rnHa
the Government could be supported by
this source of revenue alone Accord
ing 10 the statutes it was compulsory for
the clergy to read the laws relating TO
them in the churches at least four times
a year In case they failed to do so they
were compelled to pay the penalty in the
shape of go pounds of tobacco, which
was of great value in those DAYS. and
passed in all business transactions as cur
rency For instance. in the case of sell
ing liquor TO Indians. violations or the
law were punished by very heavy fine. the
first offence being punishable by tne or
3, 600 pounds of tobacco.
The law, however, was not so restrictive
as the Tillman diSpenSary law OF South
Carolina OF the present day. In fact, the
trainers of the law seemed to be governed
more by the capacity Of indians TO tote
liquor than by anything else in restricting
the sale of il to them. According TO the
sell as much as one gallon in single day
to an Indian. One of the quickest drunk
makers sold in those days TO the red men
was a beverage known as perry.
This was cOncocted from the juice OF
pears, and is said TO have been very In
toxicating An instance is cited in the
old law reports where it is stated that
on one occasion an Indian charged with
admitted to the court that
he had drunk as much as five gallons Of
perry and did consider that he was
tod ha W info rod ht2
prisoner that five ga ons was too much
for any one man 10 ak in a day, but
the Indian thought differently, and said
that too much was lust enough for
him Horse stealing was an unpardOu-
able crime in the eyes OF the COlOniSts,
and was punishable by death upon the
gaiOws. The burning OF snip over
seventeen feet in length was also con-
sidered a capital offence and the OF
fender was made To pay the penalty or
his crime on the Scahcld- In most cases
the law provided that where the offender
was not able or refused to pay the penal
ties imposed in the way OF INES, he was
placed in stocks, and after the public
had time TO view him he was whipped IN
\ terrible punishment awaited those
" no were SO fOolhardy as 10 swear III
the presence Of "A minister OF the gospel.
the sheriff. coroner, or magistrate For
the first offence fne or ShliilngS WAS
imposed and for q second or other ike
violation of the law the penalty was
made. shilIings for each and every oath.
Disrespectfu speech in relation to the
Deity or an open denial of Christ was
punishable by a fine OF Sl00. and in default
1f payment the offender was imprisoned
for period of six months. For second
offence of this kind the letter b was
branded upon his forehead with red
hot iron. and for the third offence ne was
put to death. Forgery was also severely
punished by the early laws. The alter
ing or changing Of a will was a crime or
the highest degree. for which death was
considered too light penalty. Embezzle-
lnent was also severely punished, and
persons convicted of this crime were de-
prived OF all their lands and chattelS,
nne-half of which reverted to the Gov
eminent and the remainder TO the person
injured.