Issues on Criminal Justice in the 18th Century - Essay Example

Innovations in punishment in the centaury following 1720 Introduction The 18th- centaury was a time of much change, particularly in the UK. The system of law and authority was changing, with power shifting away from the monarch towards parliament. As a consequence of the changing position of power, as well as increased crime, there was a drastic change in the way criminals were being punished for their crimes. Up to this point the death penalty had been prevalent for severe crimes; however it was no longer effective at keeping crime rates down. Crime was rampant throughout the cities, and officials were looking for effective methods of getting the crime levels back under control. The populace was fast developing distaste for violence, and with the ineffectiveness of the death penalty at keeping crime rates low, a new method was determined. Beginning in 1720 there was a radical shift in the use of the death penalty, with the use of the death penalty for severe crimes decreasing, and an increase in the use of imprisonment. It was thought that hard labour would be able to reform criminals, making their reintegration into society possible. This essay looks at the change in the systems of punishment that occurred in 1720 and throughout the following centaury, what drove those changes, the innovations that were in effect and how the impact of these changes effect the systems of punishment even in the present day. Innovations and methods of punishment Crime is a part of culture and society that has existed for as long as we have existed as a civilization. It is not simple to define crime, as different stances can be taken depending on whether the moral or physical law is deemed as most important. Generally, crime is defined as breaching the laws of an area created by the governing authority. There is also some precedent for looking at the moral code, where a man may have done something extremely immoral, but is not illegal according to the law. This may also be defined as crime. For the most part, definitions in the literature look at criminals as having broken the law of the country or city they are part of and this essay looks at crime in this respect. With the development of law and laws there must also be a development of methods of punishing those who break the law. One reason for using punishments for crime is to affect the willingness of people to commit crimes in the first place (Mustard, 2003). Crime can be viewed from an economic perspective rather than an emotional one, where crimes are committed by people who weigh up the benefits of the crime with both the expected costs (such as costs of the crime itself) and potential costs (such as punishment or imprisonment) (Reynolds, 1990). This can be seen as a method of controlling crime, as crime rate is lower when the cost of crime is high. Thus, the development of appropriate methods of punishing crime is important. It gives the sense of the importance of obeying the law, it creates examples from those who disobey the law and aims to decrease the prevalence of crime by making the costs high. In 18th-centuary social order in England consisted of a strong combination of the monarchy and the church. These two institutions worked together and used law as a method of exerting control over the populace. They operated by creating the idea that all were treated equally before the law, and using threats of punishment, pardons and partial verdicts to ensure that the law became crucial and well established (Shoemaker, 1991). At this point in time there was an increasing development of the parliament system, which was making laws quickly, in order to secure both the safely of the general populace, and the presence of the parliament system. The sheer amount of laws that were present had implications for the law that is still in place, that ignorance of the law does not excuse anyone from obligation or from criminal charges (Lieberman, 2002). As well as preventing crime, law also played a key role in maintaining the social order of the time as it was wielded by those high in social standing. Evidence suggests that the law was used even by the lower class, with jury verdicts appearing to consider relevant factors concerning guilt or innocence, rather than political or social factors (Shoemaker, 1991). Not only were there many laws in this period, but the laws were often poorly formulated, contradictory to other laws or inaccurate (Lieberman, 2002). During this time parliament was beginning to have a role in the succession of the monarchy, and the power of the monarchy was beginning to fail. While the theoretical power of the monarch was virtually limitless, in practice there was little the monarch could do without the parliament (Olsen, 1999) . Within the period of 1690 through to 1720 there were very high crime rates within London, with frequent fears that the city was in the grip of a crime wave (Shoemaker, 1991, Hagan and Peterson, 1995). Crime rates were particularly high against property throughout this period, and women appeared to be involved as frequently as men (Hagan and Peterson, 1995). Fears also abounded about the prevalence of serious crime with worries that it was connected to lack of religion, idleness and lack of morality within the populace, particularly for the poor (Shoemaker, 1991). This crime wave was partially responsible for the reforms in capital offenses that occurred around 1720, as authorities sought to find new ways of reducing crime, due to the current system being clearly ineffective (London Lives, 2010). At the end of the 17th-centurary and the beginning of the 18th there was increasing criticism of corporal punishment and the procedure associated with law. This resulted in the aversion of many people to the courts, and declines in levels of prosecution (Emsley and Knafla, 1996). With the rising levels of crime it was clear that a new more effective method of punishment was required, not only to decrease crime but to also restore faith in the legal system. This led to a shift away from the death sentence, which had been the popular method of punishment for many crimes, with a focus instead on imprisonment, which was quickly growing in use and popularity. This was due in part to people were becoming less tolerant of the violence associated with the death sentence, and beginning to believe in the potential of hard labour to reform criminals (London Lives, 2010). The changes in punishment that occurred in 1720 and were developed through the following centaury were innovative for the time period, and the consequences were far reaching. The changes constituted a new way of looking at both crime and criminals, which radically changed behaviour. Incarcerating criminals was thought to be a way of reforming them causing a change in behaviour through hard labour. While this had been in use to some level as early as the 16th-centuary, this had been mainly focused at petty offenses and the idea of incarcerating criminals that would have otherwise been killed was new (London Lives, 2010). While by today’s standards serious crime constitutes murder and manslaughter, in the 18th-centurary crimes such as violence was also included in this category, and would have come with a death sentence. Today prisons are used commonly as methods of reforming criminals, while the death sentence still persists; it is not commonly enacted with most cases of serious crime resulting in extended or lifetime imprisonment (Reynolds, 1990). There are a large number of prisons across the UK and other countries, it is hard to imagine how the landscape of our society would look if serious criminals were killed rather than imprisoned. Conclusion It is certainly true that “the centaury after 1720 was a period of far-reaching innovation in systems of punishment”. Around 1720 parliament began having significantly more power over the production of laws, producing many laws, and bypassing much of the power of the monarch. Crime was high and a new, effective method of dealing with criminals was required. In addition the general populace was fast growing tired of the violence associated with the death penalty. Shifting in focus from the death penalty to imprisonment was a radical change that began in 1720 and spanned the centaury that followed it. It involved a drastic change of thinking, from the consideration that criminals needed to be removed from society permanently, to the thought that the part of their nature that made them commit crimes could be removed through hard labour. In addition the treat of imprisonment could be sufficient to reduce the criminal activity. The innovation has reached far beyond the 18th-centruary to modern times, where incarceration is still being used as the predominant method of dealing with serious crime. The death penalty is now largely extinct, while still enacted in rare occasions; for the most part imprisonment has replaced its role. Bibliography EMSLEY, C. & KNAFLA, L. A. 1996. Crime history and histories of crime: studies in the historiography of crime and criminal justice in modern history, Greenwood Pub Group. HAGAN, J. & PETERSON, R. D. 1995. Crime and inequality, Stanford Univ Pr. LIEBERMAN, D. 2002. The Province of Legislation Determined: Legal Theory in Eighteenth-Century Britain, Cambridge Univ Pr. LONDON LIVES. 2010. London Lives 1690 to 1800 - Crime, Povery and Social Policy in the Metropolis [Online]. Available: http://www.londonlives.org/static/Punishment.jsp [Accessed August 15 2011]. MUSTARD, D. B. 2003. Reexamining Criminal Behavior: The Importance of Omitted Variable Bias. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 85, 205-211. OLSEN, K. 1999. Daily life in 18th-century England, Greenwood Publishing Group. REYNOLDS, M. O. 1990. Crime pays, but so does imprisonment. The Journal of Social, Political & Economic Studies, 15, 259-300. SHOEMAKER, R. B. 1991. Prosecution and Punishment: Petty crime and the law in London and rural Middlesex, c. 1660-1725, Cambridge Univ Pr. Read More