Critical Discussion Of How And Why Punishment Methods For Serious

Introduction

During the time of the old Bailey, judges chose from a variety of punishment sentences as per the provisions during that period; although they had limited opinions, by statutes and by the choices, they made during the early judicial process stages. During the early period (1787), it is evident that convicts received punishments, which differed from the original punishments that they were given. This is owing to the fact that the old bailey proceedings provided the actual punishments, although convicts deemed it necessary, consulting their “life Archive.” Serious offences in England were punishable by law. However, since the mid of the 18thc, it is evident that statute law significantly curtailed the death penalty use. Moreover, misdemeanors were also punishable by various non-capital punishments (Shoemaker, 2017). During that period, offences that statutes defined were punished in accordance to relevant legislation. In this regard, the punishments were available for all types of cases and were circumscribed by the offence’s legal status, when an accused was charged (in which some cases were influenced by choices the victim or the even the grand jury made). Notably, juries, during those early times manipulated various punishments through using partial verdicts. Most defendants were sentenced to many punishments and not just one, and of significant to note, this was specifically common for those who were sentenced to imprisonment, whipping, fines, or even pillory and thus, providing sureties for positive behavior. Of importance to note, a gradually growing reluctance in using the death since the 18TH C to the 19th C (only for an exception of certain serious offence) encouraged the introduction of alternative punishment methods (Beattie, 1986).

Death

Most of the 18thc statutes denoted death as a punishment, just for various minor property offences (bloody code), thereby, implying that most of the people were sentenced to death (even for stealing a handkerchief) at the old bailey. Nevertheless, it is evident that the judicial procedures purposed to prevent a blood bath through ensuring that various sentences could easily be mitigated, or rather, the charge be redefined to be a less serious offence. Through the use of partial verdicts, it is clear that juries purposed to reduce the charges that were laid against most convicted defendants to non-capital offence. Moreover, through the pardon mechanisms, many other defendants that were found guilty of a specific capital offence were not given the death penalty and thus, were then subjected to certain types of punishments like branding (up to the year 1789), imprisonment or even transportation, whilst others did not receive any punishment at all (Shoemaker, 2017).

Notably, hanging was regarded a standard technique of capital punishment. In this regard, execution posed as a public spectacle, which was acting as a crime deterrent. Until the year 1783, it is evident that most defendants were punished by hanging at Tyburn (presently, the Marble Arch stands there). Convicts were moved across the streets from Newgate and upon being granted an opportunity of speaking to the crowd, with the expectation that they confessed their sins, they were hanged. Notably, in 1783, Tyburn procession was eliminated and throughout the following 85years, hangings were done outside the Newgate prison. It is worth noting that although such expectations were expedited using a sharp drop, they were regarded to be public occasions (EMSLEY, 1999). In the year 1868, there were various concerns regarding public disorder, which then resulted into the abolition of public executions and as such, subsequent hanging were done privately in prisons.

Pregnant women who were sentenced to death sentence had the opportunity of ‘pleading their bellies’ and a jury of matrons could examine them. If they were found ‘quick with a child,’ their punishment could be postponed until after the child birth, in a practice that sympathized for the born child. Notably, successful pregnancy pleas were infrequent in most of the old bailey proceedings, especially after 1760 (Emsley, 2013). Evidently, after 1800, there existed only few recorded cases, whereby, women could make such pleas and in such cases, only medical authorities were summoned to give advice to the matrons. The last plea of such a case appeared last in 1880, in Emma Pleasance’s trial. During the 19th century, the use of death penalty was restricted increasingly, and was only allowed in serious offences. It was then removed in 1808 and from many more offences that happened in the 1820s and beyond. By 1840, only special cases such as those found in crimes such are violent theft, sodomy, murder and even wounding received death punishment. By 1861, a legislation known as Offences against the Persons Act purposed to abolish death penalty for all offences, with an exception to murder, and even high treason and this followed up to 1948 (Clive, 2018).

Execution with Additional Cruelty

Women that were found to be guilty of treason or even petty treason were sentenced to be burned alive at stake, although the executioners could strangle women using a cord prior to lighting the fire. Notably, burning alive at stake was eliminated in 1790 and thus, replaced by handing, as well as drawing. On the other hand, men that were found to be guilty of treason were sentenced by being drawn to the execution place on a hurdle (Emsley, 2013). This punishment was rare; however occasionally, those that were convicted of petty treason were to be sentenced by being drawn on a hurdle, and not to be quartered. Notably, Cato Street conspirators were the last convicts, who were sentenced to be quartered and also drawn at old bailey in the year 1820. However in that event, only decapitation was considered to be part of the grisly ceremony, which was conducted. The introduction of the Murder Act 1752, which stressed on the prevention of horrid murder crime made it clear that the bodies of murder criminals that were hanged needed to be taken to surgeons, in order for them to be dissected and anatomized or even hanged in chains. Owing to the increase in terror, as well as shame associated with death penalty, it was thus abolished in the year 1832 (dissection) and also in the year 1834 (hanging in chains) (Shoemaker, 2017).

Transportation

Efforts aimed towards finding the death penalty alternatives are noted to date from the 17thc and this is owing to the fact that it was believed that the penalty still failed in deterring others from engaging in serious crimes. In this regard, there was significant need, focused towards finding the most suitable secondary punishment that could be used in punishing offenders found guilty of serious but not egregious offences. In this regard, the first invention was the use of transportation. However much it was believed that transportation could result into offender reformation, its primary motive was that it could result into deterrent impact, as well as the desire to remove hardened criminal offenders from the society (Godfrey & Lawrence, 2013). After the implementation of the 1718 Transportation Act, it is evident that a total of 57,000 convicts were thus, sent to various American colonies. In the year 1776, transportation halted, owing to the American war outbreak and in the attempt to search was new destinations, it transportation was resumed in the year 1787, with Australia being the new destination. Notably, transportation was regarded as a more serious form of punishment as compared to imprisonment, as it involved an individual being exiled to a far land. Evidently, in the 19thC, whilst revising the criminal law, transportation was substituted for maximum imprisonment for various offences, which were initially punishable by death. Clearly, in 1830, there were oppositions to transportation, as many people complained that it did not deter crime, did not reform convicts, and that the conditions of Australia was inhuman (Emsley, 1986). In this regard, those who were convicted to transportation reduced in the course of 1840s. Ultimately, the Penal Servitude Act 1857 abolished transportation, which then substituted it for penal servitude. However, other convicts were still sent to Australia. It is notable that the last convicts who were sent to Australia, were sent in the year 1867.

Imprisonment

There was a greater desire to reform most convicts, instead of punishing them, and this led to the introduction of imprisonment for serious offences, since the late 18thC, manifested in 1779, upon the passage of the Penitentiary Act. Whilst the very first penitentiary, Millbank failed to open until in the year 1816, (when the transportation to America ended in 1776), there was an increase in the number of convicts who were punished by imprisonment. Notably, the traditional nature of the pre-modern prisons were then replaced by better cells for prisoners, as well as numerous combinations of silent and solitary prison regimes (Barker, 2014). As such, prisoners were subjected to hard labour. During the late 1840s, there was the introduction of the progressive stage system, wherefore, prisoners began their imprisonment through solitary confinement, with hard labour and then they were moved to public work prisons, where they were subjected to work in quarries and on roads, prior to release, based on a prison licence, in an instance where it was found that their conducts had changed.

Notably, the growing transportation opposition, which led up to the Penal Servitude Act 1857 that ultimately eliminated it led to the growing rate of imprisonment and also changed to the adoption of a legal framework that purposed to limited the increasing rate in the number of prisoners in prisons (McGowen, 2000). In the year 1853, the Penal Servitude Act brought forth leaving tickets for convicts during their last sentence stage and it is evident that the Criminal Justice Act 1855 downgraded the simple larceny offence to an offence, which was subject to jurisdiction summary and if an individual had pleaded guilty, he could be incarcerated up to 6months in correction houses rather than in prisons. It is evident that convicts were incarcerated in different prisons, whereby, some were imprisoned in Newgate prison, which was for convicts who awaited trial or even execution (Gatrell, 1996). Notably, those who were punished at Newgate were young individuals who were noted to be serving short-term imprisonment followed by a longer term of imprisonment in a place meant for reformatory. Notably, Newgate was closed in the year 1902, and consequently demolished in the year 1904.

Corporal Punishments

Early-modern punishments that included whipping, and even pillory involved physical harm, which was often denoted to be a public spectacle, to act as a way of deterring crime. Whilst many criminals were continually convicted to such kind of punishment until into the 19thC, all except private whipping of men had stopped when the century came to an end. Defendants who were convicted to various notorious crimes like deception, and even perjury were at times punished in the pillory publicly, to act as a significant way of signalling public distaste of the crimes they committed, as also destroying their reputations (Gretton & Krasfch, 1980). Notably, these were organized in open places, as well as busy streets where crowds could gather easily and then, the culprit would be put on a platform, and expected to stay put for about an hour, with his arms, and even heard secured by, holes in a wooden structure. Notably, the pillory was turned, in order for the crowds to get a better view, and thus expected to express their disapproval of the given offence by throwing the offender using stones and even bricks. Evidently, others died, owing to the abuse, despite the efforts of constables to protect the offender by putting a ring on the pillory (Shoemaker, 2017).

A statue introduced in 1826 purposed to restrict the pillory to only perjury and the punishment was later on eliminated in 1837 (Briggs et al., 2005). Offenders who were convicted of theft were sentenced to stripping to the waist and thus, whipped along the public street that was near to the crime scene until their back became bloody. Notably, publicity was traditionally a vital feature of such kinds of punishments as they served to shame the criminal and prevent others from committing such crimes. However, during the 18th and the 19th centuries, the rates of whippings that were conducted in public diminished. In this regard, public whipping of females was eliminated in 1817 and that of men ceased in early 1830s, although by then it was not formally abolished, until 1862. As such, private whippings of men in prisons continued in the 1850s (Cockburn, 1996). Upon the passing of the Security from Violence Act, which was also referred to as the Garrotter Act, in the year 1863 that authorized the taking of up to 50 strokes of canes, it is worth noting that the punishment was used often, for individuals who were guilty of theft with violence. However, it was eliminated in the year 1948.

Other Punishments

Other punishments described were also regarded to be part of sentences, which were given with more than just a single punishment. In the year 1779, a Penitentiary Act clause allowed a fined to be levied in the ‘lieu’ of branding. Following this, fines were then used frequently in conjunction with other terms of imprisonment, especially for manslaughter, and even simple grand larceny. As such, judges purposed to vary the fine amount, in accordance with the offence severity, as well as the status of the victim and that of the victim. The fine amounts that were involved varied from less that just a shilling to even hundreds of pounds. It is worth noting that non-payments of fine amounts resulted into jail until the time that the fine could be paid. Young offenders were as well fined and thus, sentences to a given period of imprisonment, in a juvenile reformatory (Lane, 1996).

This posed as a covert procedure and as such, it was often not documented in the proceedings of the old bailey. Short life narratives that were recorded in the books of Refuge for destitution of people tried and sentenced can be found in the records of the Old Bailey records of between the years 1740 to 1834. By sending convicts to the services of their majesties’ it is evident that the court exiled undesirable characters. Notably, this sentence was often used in the course of the American Independence war, between the years 1775 to 1783 and during the Napoleonic wars, between the year 1793 to 1815 (Sharpe, 1990). In some instances, the prisoners could be sentences to a term of service in a navy, or an army, whilst others the actual sentence could be withdrawn once the prisoner consented to serving. Alternatively, other defenders were pardoned on a service condition, whilst others, they were sentenced to death.

Conclusion

Overall, it is significant to note that the criminal law reforms that were adopted in the nineteenth century significantly abolished the penalty of death, especially for many criminal cases. In this regard, it is worth noting that various punishment types, for felons, such as transportation, and even imprisonment were introduced and thus, eventually came to overtake the ever-growing role, in criminal sentencing. Significantly, such new punishments that were introduced purposed to reflect on two trends, in the strategies evolution for punishments. Firstly, there were shifts from various physical punishments like whipping, hanging and even branding to reformation of the defendants through imprisonment and transportation. Moreover, punishments were made to be less public such as hangings, pillory, and even public whipping on the streets and as such, private whipping, imprisonment, and even transportation to far lands replaced them.

References

• Barker, H. (2014). Newspapers and English Society 1695-1855. Routledge.
• Beattie, J. M. (1986). Crime and the Courts in England, 1660-1800 (Vol. 404). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Clive, E. (2018). Crime and Justice – Punishments. Old Bailey Proceedings. Retrieved [online from https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/static/Punishment.jsp [accessed on 28th Nov, 2019].
• Briggs, J., Briggs, M. J., Harrison, C., McInnes, A., & Vincent, D. (2005). Crime and punishment in England: an introductory history. Routledge.
• Cockburn, J. S. (1996). The Hanging Tree: Execution and the English People, 1770-1868. Victorian Studies, 39(2), 286.
• Emsley, C. (1986). Detection and prevention: the old English police and the new 1750-1900. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung, 69-88.
• EMSLEY, C. (1999). English Criminal Justice in the Nineteenth Century. The English Historical Review, 114(458), 1007-1007.
• Emsley, C. (2013). Crime and society in England: 1750-1900. Routledge.