Thursday, September 15, 2011

Police Court Judge Lazarus Believed in Whipping Post for Wife Beaters – New York 1908

FULL TEXT: The way of the wife-beater is hard three days particularly out in Bayonne, where Recorder Hyman Lazarus presides over the Police Court. An eye for an eye, and a beating for a beating, decrees this Solomon of domestic disputes. In consequence the impetuous ones of Bayonne now pause to consider before “breaking the face” of a wife or “knocking her block” loose.

In the hand that rock the cradle Recorder Lazarus has placed the slipper or retribution if the lady in the case seems to be at a loss when and where to apply it he gave her the benefit of his personal suggestions backed with the majesty of the law. A spank in time will save nine, he encourages as he spurs on faltering zeal.

“I really believe in whipping and spanking under certain circumstances,” he said yesterday. “But I do not think they should be indulged in indiscriminately.

~ When Whipping Is Needed. ~

There are some cases however where on thorough whipping would accomplish more than months of argument or imprisonment. These are the cases where the only superior force that the offender recognizes or understands is actual brute strength. Many of the men who habitually beat their wives are of this type. Whipping would be an excellent punishment for them for two reasons. First, because it is in a language they understand and second because in many instances the wile cannot exist without the support of her husband and therefore his imprisonment would be punishing her too.”

“Should the wife do the whipping, of an officer of the court?”

Well I suppose some of the women would get a lot of fun out of doing it themselves.     

How have your theories worked out or have you any means of knowing whether a permanent reform has been inaugurated.

“Oh yes, I see to that. After a man has been before me once for wife-beating I make him bring me a report of his conduct written by his wife each week. That does away with the chances of backsliding.”

~ “Not Good” for Women. ~

“Can’t you imagine any time when a woman would be really better for a sort of friendly beating administered in a gentlemanly way,” I asked.

“No, I certainly can not,” answered the Recorder. “It is never permissible under any circumstances in my opinion to strike a woman.”

“But children should be spanked?”

“Some children should be spanked,” he corrected.

Do you spank your own?”

“Never did. My wife spanks them sometimes, but I hate to have her do it.”

“What type of child should be spanked I rather than reinforced with?”

“The hardened child that is, the diminutive of the hardened man who should be beaten, I will just tell you a little story that will illustrate what I mean.

~ Where Spanking Cured. ~

“Several weeks ago on the street I overheard a group of boys discussing another boy who was passing.

“There goes Bobbie Jones,” one said; he’s not afraid of the cops. He’s been rested six times double overheard the remark and before he turned to strut away paused long enough to call back: ‘Been arrested seven times not six.’ Well I took a good look at that boy and I waited for him to be brought up before me. Sure enough in about a week he was. Now the thing to do in that case was to make him understand that he was not really a hero. That to be arrested was neither manly nor big. I think I attained the desired limit by simply sending for Bobbie’s mother and having her administer a good, sound spanking. In consequence, Bobbie has ceased to be either a dramatic or romantic figure to the boys of his neighborhood,” the Recorder finished with a laugh. “That was a case,” he said, “where a spanking was the very thing.”

“And with you, yourself, ever spanked when you were a child,” I asked.

“Yes he replied I was and I don’t mind saying I resented it terribly.

[Ethel Lloyd Patterson, “Magistrate Lazarus Believes In Whipping for Wife-Beaters – More Efficacious Than Imprisonment Where Brute Strength Is the Only Superior Force Recognized. – Spanking Is Good For Some Children. – Magistrate Doesn’t Paddle Hus Own, but His Wife Does It for Him When Necessary.” The Evening World (N.Y.), Oct. 7, 1908, p. 3]


• You have been told that before the rise of feminism in the 1960s that domestic violence against women was tolerated by society as acceptable behavior and was not taken seriously by police and the courts.

You have been lied to. The people who told you these lies were paid to tell them you. In most cases you paid your own money (taxes and tuition fees) to be led to.

Here is one of countless pieces of evidence that demonstrate the truth.

• To see more eloquent, vivid evidence proving the lie and giving you the truth, see:

19th Century Intolerance Towards Domestic Violence

Treatment of Domestic Violence Against Women Before 1960this post collects cases classified by the form of punishment or sentencing (whether judicial or through community action)

No, the claim that laws created by males were for the benefit of males is false. Yes, the "Rule of Thumb" myth has been proven to be a marxist-feminist hoax, taking an ancient English common historical notation published in the 18th century and extrapolating it into unsupported claims that 18th and 20th century United States communities, courts and legislatures (laws on the books) were in agreement with the18th century historical notation (Blackstone).


“[O]nly since the 1970s has the criminal justice system begun to treat domestic violence as a serious crime, not as a private family matter.”

From the entry: “Domestic Violence” on

This claim has been proven to be false.


No comments:

Post a Comment