Crime and Punishment in American History - Lawrence M. Friedman [22]
In the eighteenth century, the death penalty was invoked less frequently for these crimes. Even in the seventeenth century, most sexual offenses were petty, and the punishments less than severe. Mild—but amazingly frequent. The smaller vices were punished by the hundreds. Indeed, in the seventeenth century, no crimes appear more often in the ancient pages of court records than fornication and other victimless crimes. Time after time, unmarried men and women who slept together were hauled into court, tried, and then fined, whipped, or put in the stocks. Women could be punished, too, for bearing illegitimate children—Hannah Dickens, of Kent County, Delaware, produced “One Bastard Male Child of Her Body” in 1702, and got twenty-one lashes in consequence 20In Massachusetts, in June of 1670, the Quarterly Court of Salem fined John Roapes and his wife for fornication before marriage, William Batt for drunkenness, and Daniell Salmon for excessive drinking.21
The thousands of cases of fornication and other offenses against morality point in two somewhat conflicting directions. In the first place, they seem to give the lie to a conventional picture of life in colonial times: sour, dour, obsessed with religion, drenched in an ethic of asceticism, treating all pleasures of the flesh with disgust. A frank and robust sexuality leaps from the pages of the record books. Still, our evidence of rampant sexuality comes from the proceedings of courts that were doing their best to punish and suppress that sexuality. And, on the whole, as Roger Thompson wrote of seventeenth-century Middlesex County, Massachusetts, most people probably did not transgress. The “great majority of men, women, and children” simply obeyed the rules of morals and law; the “silent majority behaved themselves and sustained the New England Way.”22
That way was fairly austere. The leaders of the northern colonies were notoriously sour on games and on pleasures. The Laws and Liberties of Massachusetts decreed that “no person shall henceforth use the ... game of Shuffle-board” in any “house of common entertainment,” because “much pretious time is spent unfruitfully and much wast of wine and beer occasioned.” No one was “at any time” to “play or game for any monie or monyworth.” In western Massachusetts, in 1678, Philip Matoone was accused by several persons of “unseasonably Playing at Cards.” Matoone, summoned to court, confessed that he played cards at night in the cellar of a house, secretly, with a group of men; he