The Law and Punishment in 1800s - Essay Example

The law and punishment in 1800 Introduction The Bloody is a term earned by the laws that governed people in England during the 1800s. This law prescribed a stern punishment for any of the perpetrators creating a climate of terror to poor people who planned to commit crime. Death by hanging was prescribed for the majority of the offences by the crown courts that were presided by uneducated judges who were from the upper social classes appointed by the society. The laws frequently pursued the poor threatening them from any form of serious crimes against the rich. Weighing the lives of the human with property and status in the society the law acted against the poor who could not even afford their daily meals. The black code law punishment given by wealthy upper social class judges created terror among the poor citizen in England in 1800. Classifications of crimes and their punishments The crimes in 1800 were divided into two main categories corresponding with their punishments, felonies and minor offences1. Minor offences were small offences committed by the low citizens for example theft of goods worth less than 39 shillings, Lancet and other offences2. The majority of the minor offender punishments were designed to shame the perpetrators of the crime in the public. These included exposure to the buttocks and whipping in public3. The defenders were then left to join the society and do the common good. However, the few others were forgiven and asked to pay fines to cover for their crime. Felonies were the most common crimes and they attracted a severe punishment than the minor offences. Felonies were either clergyable or non-clergyable4. The difference between clergyable and non-clergyable felonies was based on the fact whether the offenders could claim the benefit of clergy or not5. The clergy benefited ministers accused of criminal capital offences. The laws required them to be charged by the church, which many a time did not impose capital punishment. Whereas this rule was primarily intended for the clerics, in the later years it was interpreted to include the people who could read and write. However, the courts that were based on church doctrines could not deal with serious crimes like manslaughter. Once accused of a felony the defendants could plead guilty imprisoned for one year and send home rather than killed by hanging which was the case in the most crimes6. Initially, the Tudor stature provided the offenders who pleaded clergy committed to one-year incarceration and left but this was rarely followed in 18007. In addition, the offenders were only required to plead clergy once after which they were not eligible to plead clergy again. During the first plead, they could be branded on the thumb as a warning not to repeat the crime and sent home. However, the subsequent crimes were punishable. Thus, the offenders with clergyable offence only got two types of punishments in the first case, the thumb sign and or fine to cover the expenses of the case8. It is believed that the thumb branding had a stigmatising effect that could serve as a punishment. In the absence of a clergy, an offender was charged with non-clergy offences. This offence carried a severe punishment including death by hanging. The majority of the offences in this category were serious offences, for instance, manslaughter9. However, the crimes had an extension, for example in the 1800 manslaughter was expanded to include offences that in their general appearance defined murder. For instance, individuals who killed tavern brawl or those who used deadly weapons were classified in this case10. However, with the increase of a number of individuals benefitting from the clergy, the numbers of individuals with this offence greatly declines in the middle of 19th century.11 The Tudor stature made some non-clergyable offences to be clergyable increasing the list of clergyable felonies in the 19th century. As a result, the number of offences punishable by death declined to 100 from 215 in 1873 thus reducing the number of deaths by 50%12. However, this did not deter the judge from hanging people as the punishment for non-clergyable punishment wars death. Execution by hanging: the nature of executions Hanging was one of the commonest forms of punishment for most of the serious felony offences. It formed a severe punishment for the majority of the poor people who never deserved this form of punishment. This is because the cases were being judged by their social standing rather than the magnitude of their crimes13. Before 1765, only 50 crimes were punishable by laws. However, in the subsequent years the crimes that violated property and nature were included in this list. By the year, 1800 there was about 200 lists of punishment that once a prisoner was convicted they were hanged14. Whereas the list includes major offences like murder and treason that are still considered capital in the current world, others were minor offences like irregular cutting of trees15. Stealing food and picking pockets were also punishable by death in England and Whales in the 19th century. The death by hanging was mostly done to the poor than wealthy people. The poor people committed the majority of the crimes in the list of hanging in their time of need16 because their families lived in extreme poverty. Because the poor people were the majority in England, the public hangings and execution in most of the cases resulted in public unrest. Even in the unrest, people were separated and the masterminds hanged. In the mid-1800, Sir Robert removed the unnecessary offences from the list of those punishable by death. This reduced the number of those hanged by 50%17. In the latter years, the number of deaths by execution started to decline because of the collaborative efforts of people and the judges. Both the magistrate and individuals felt that this punishment was harsh. By the year 1900, the magistrates condemned people to be hanged after appeals rather they were imprisoned. From the period between mid-1800 to early 19th century, only two of five of the victims were hanged in the entire of England18. For example in Bedford out of 13 executions ordered, only four were carried out. However, 3524 people were hanged in the whole of the 19th century in England and whales19. Not every judge could order death by hanging. The system of England in the 19th century provided for a category of judges who could give this verdict that was known as Assize judges an equivalent of crown court judges. These tried serious offences and those that could lead to death by hanging. Initially once a person is vindicated they could be murdered in public. For instance if it were in Bedford, the hanging was carried out outside the goal. To some people executions were festive, thus attracted many viewers but often broke into riots. A mixture of sympathy, jeering and condemnation as fall of death by strangulation attracted many people. However, this did not deter the crimes over time20. The authority realised this spectacle encouraged scalawags and motivated people to criminal activities from the people who were witnessing the deaths at the gallows21. Therefore, in the later years the prison act of 1868 made all the executions to take place in the prison. No executions were carried outside the prison wall after 1870. Besides, authorities sought for different humane ways of handling the condemned. This included better methods of hanging that provided less painful and quicker death to individuals condemned of the crime. During the end of the 18th century, England did not have officials in the public that could be equated with the district attorneys or police. The law enforcers had a little role in reducing crimes in the society. In addition, they were mainly not paid in their role of enforcing the law. The local laws required a person seeking the services of the constables to pay for the services. This made these services only available for those who could afford. Consequently, the rich got the services of these constables to put the poor in bars while the poor who had been wronged by the rich did not have any say22. People tried to create public persecutors but failed for a long time during the 1800s23. For instance, in, 1855 the public outcry wanted to establish a public prosecution but failed this repeatedly even in 1871. It was not until 1879 that few of the districts allowed public prosecutors. Despite this, these prosecutors had limited responsibilities as compared to the current American prosecutors then and now. However, towards 1900 the British formed legal systems by various acts that comprised of the police and prosecutors, who were professional24. They were appointed and paid by the government eliminating most of the barriers that were experienced back in 1800. Whereas during the 19th century non-clergyable death by hanging was the most common imposed by the judges, not all the offenders were punished by hanging for non-chargeable felonies25. The large numbers of the non-clergyable felonies were acquitted to death by hanging, but there were the minorities who often escaped this gallows. The judges had much power under these laws. Non-clergyable felonies were convicted of minor offences and later left or sent home. In other instances, the judges could convict a person with lesser offence cues that were clergyable convict them of the major offence and punished them by hanging26. Although this was rare, it occurred in many instances. For instance, a minor offence was defined as stealing of 39 shillings while a major was 40 shillings, a jury could find a person with 39 shillings to be guilty of large offences that was punishable by death depending on the methods they used to acquire these shillings27. Lesser punishments: Pardons and transportations Pardons were also part of the law for the wrongdoer convicted to death. However, it was hard to get an absolution for death and return to the community. People who were exonerated could be transported to other parts or disowned by the community28. One of the chief reasons for pardon was incongruity between the judge and the jury. In some of the cases, the judges and the jury could disagree in some cases. This could make the judge avoid the execution of an innocent person. Besides, the relatives, employers, friends or any person willing to supplication against could person petition for a person to have theme receive the judge’s mercy and thus not hanged. In some instance, the offender got a lesser punishment like whipping, incarceration, transportation or even compelled to join the army29 Transportations involved selling a person as a slave to a new word. Transportation involved a simple process that involved private merchants. Once convicted, the merchants who wished to transport a convicted felon paid a fee agreeable by the sheriff30. In most of the cases, they were required to pay the clerkship fees, court fees and a fee that could draw up for a pardon among other costs. Then the merchant was at liberty to sell the felony. Since the majority of the felony was skilled and younger men, this was a very profitable trade. However, older and other offenders that did not attract a merchant were left to accumulate in temporary gaol. Factored that limited the chances of the poor winning cases against the wealth in 1800 Many factors made winning of the cases in 1800 to be sometimes hard. The laws of 1800 were very strict to the extent that sometimes the accused had a little to prove when tangible evidence was presented before the judge31. This was also true in cases where it was a battle between the poor and the rich where the rich could easily win due to their social reputation. Secondary, the accused people, never had access to the presented evidence before they were tried. This made it hard for these people to know what they were going to defend themselves against those people who accused them. The current laws provide for the prisoners or accused with fair chances to defend themselves against the accusations32. Therefore, as compared with the current laws, The Bloody Codes were very strict and did not favour the victims. In addition, the victims were required to submit written defence before the day of the case. This defense sentence was to be read in court during the day of the case before the judges. This always presented two challenges to the prisoner. First since the cases were not well mentioned it was hard to find a good defense that could get the person off the hook they were accused of33. Besides, majority of the poor did not have adequate levels of education at this time thus writing presented a challenge to them. This made it hard for the poor people to write the defenses that saw them mostly through to jail or predisposed to the harsh capital punishment34. Finally, the education levels of the judges were very limited. In most of cases, the judges were never educated in aspects of laws. People who served the bench were elderly people from the wealthy classes. Besides, the judges were doing a charity work, as there were no payments and these people were already rich. Being from the rich background, made the judges most of the time to condemned those people from a poor background as well as those of the lower social classes. In this system, the judges were corruptible as they could corrode with their pals from the same social standings35. Therefore, in most of cases the verdict was not very fair and binding. The prisoners from the poor were guilty until they proved they were innocent. Without adequate information about the case and the regular biases in the 19th century, the poor mainly were guilty or very guilty36. This gap presented of challenges and hanging for those people in the lower social standing. This system is greatly changed from that of the current world and those of the later year that provide free and fair trials for all people. The current laws champion for the rights of the individuals rich and poor small and big all alike. Comparison of the laws in the 1800 and the current laws There are many instances that The Bloody Code resembles the current laws of criminal prosecution. In The Bloody Codes, it was the victim who initiated and controlled the manner through which the prisoner or the offender was brought to justice. This is also the case with the current laws where the complainant takes the accused to the jury for due justice. Similarly, both systems have judges who determined the cases before them. Besides, there was an organization of the courts of the smaller courts to higher courts, which is the situations in the courts today37. Hay and Landau agree that the process of law seems to be the same in the simplified forms. For instance, a victim reports the matter to authorities and they set the date of hearing of the case. The offender then will be committed to a sentence in accordance with the magnitude of the crimes they committed. In all these aspects, The Bloody Codes and the current laws are almost similar. However, the two laws systems differed in the majority of issues. To start with, in the 19th century and early 18th century the judges were never educated38. They were chosen the wealthy rich men who they considered wise than others. Besides, they were considered to make rational decisions while in the current system the judges are well educated and chosen by the government rather than private sectors. Besides, in the England laws, the victims sued the offender where they were paid if they won the case. In other cases, the offender or the judged criminal was hanged, pardoned or transported depending on the magnitude of the crime, while in the current law the guilty are not transported. Whereas The Bloody Codes provided incentives to the victims in the form of payments, in the current law nothing corresponds to these incentives. Victims are sued then committed to serving their terms rather than pay in cash for their crimes. In the 19th century, the case was among the people who brought the evidence against the person who was suspected to have committed a crime. This is contrary to the practice of the law in the current era. In the current era, the victim may be different from the person suing for the case39. Whereas a person can sue another directly, in most of cases in the current set up lawyers are involved. Besides, whereas in the past the court challenge was a face-to-face accusation between an individual who committed a crime and the defendant, this may not always be the case under the current laws where people can use lawyers or other representatives. Conclusions The transition in law and punishment of the crimes has been great in England. From the primitive laws that mainly focused on the interests of the minority who were rich to taking care of all people in the society. The wave of transformation has witnessed equality in law as a major achievement towards the achievement of human rights. It is evident that the former laws were very oppressive to the poor and generally brutal. The motivation of people by the improper laws in the former period, and the dire need to change has been of a significant factor in the transformation of the newer period. From the abolishment of the hanging to the introduction of fair judicial systems, it has been a major transformation. The gaps between the rich and the poor have narrowed with the distribution of equality in the justice systems currently established. Otherwise, the former laws claimed lives of many people. Bibliography Hay. (2006). Property authority and criminal law. Hostettler, J. (2009). A History of Criminal Justice in England and Wales. Waterside Press. Landau, N. (2002). Law, Crime and English Society, 1660–1930. Cambridge University Press. Roth, M. (2010). Crime and Punishment: A History of the Criminal Justice System. Cengage Learning. Read More