Crime and Punishment Through

Time

Revision Guide

Produced by

Homewood History Department

Unit 1B: Crime and Punishment

Your first exam is the Crime & Punishment paper. The results of this paper make up 25% of your final

grade.

The exam lasts for 1hr 15mins. You need to answer 5 questions from this paper and there are a total of 50

marks for the answers and 3 further marks available on the last question for Spelling; punctuation and

grammar. Very roughly, you should allow 1.5 minutes per mark.

Types of questions you will be asked:

Question 1 (8 marks) This is compulsory and it is a change question: use evidence from the sources to

draw inferences about change and explain the changes using your own knowledge – you must use both

sources in your answer. The source shows ‘…’ which tells me that… This was a big / substantial / large /

small change because…

Question 2 (6 marks) This is a compulsory questions that focuses on describing or explaining a key feature

of a particular period: you will have to choose one of the time periods and e.g. describe policing in that

period – Policing was / was not very successful in this time period. They used methods like / they had access

to technology such as… These were successful / not very successful because…

Question 3 (8 marks) This is a compulsory questions that focuses on ‘How useful’ question: explain in what

ways the source is useful to a historian who is investigating a particular topic that you are told about. You

must explain your answer using the source and your own knowledge. The source is useful because it is an

accurate / complete / comprehensive representation of… which helps us to understand… about… This helps

a historian studying XXX because… It is also useful because it shows us… helping us to infer… about… This

helps a historian studying XXX because… However, it is not very accurate / complete / comprehensive in

showing… which doesn’t help us to see… about… Overall this source is very / not very / partially useful for…

Question 4 OR 5 (12 marks) You should choose to answer EITHER question 4 OR 5. This is a question about

explaining ‘change and continuity’ over a number of time periods. You will need to use factors to weigh up

why things changed and why things stayed the same. The ‘Hue and Cry’ was used in both periods. In the

Norman period punishments such as… were used for example… Also,… These were used for punishing… The

punishments were mostly harsh / lenient in this period because… In the Tudor period Hue and Cry was still

used but not as much as it had been because… There has also been the development of… because.

Punishments were more harsh / more lenient in this period than in the Norman period because…

Question 6 OR 7 (16 marks) You should choose to answer EITHER question 4 OR 5. These questions will

ask you to judge ‘how much’ OR ‘how far’ something has ‘change or continued’ over some time periods.

You will need to explain your answer by using the key points the examiner gives to you and adding at least

one more of your own. There was a lot of new crimes because new laws were made about car crime. This

was a crime against the person / property or authority… Examples of these new laws are… This was a new

crime / old crime / looked like a new crime because… This showed a complete / partial change OR

continuity because…

In addition to this there was also computer crime…

Another crime in this period was…

Overall…

Suggested Activities

1/ Read through the Revision Audit. Check what you know and what you need to know.

2/ Divide your notes into categories and create a memory map for each one. If you don’t have notes – or

you have missed a lot of lessons – then copy someone else’s work and use the notes in this guide.

3/ Use the tables in this booklet;

Themes

This shows how various themes (such as Crime, Punishments and Preventions) have changed, stayed the

same and developed through the various time periods. Try to use the table to answer the following

questions.

A) Which things stayed the same?

B) Which things changed and when?

C) Which period saw most changes?

D) Which period saw least changes?

E) Where can you see new versions of old crimes?

Factors

Factors are things which affect change, continuity and development. These factors can cause or prevent

changes. They can explain why there are changes in some areas but not in others. There are 9 factors but

they won’t all apply to all periods or particular issues. Sometimes two or more factors work together.

When you revise factors:

A) If you think a factor has changed something in a particular time period shade the

box in red. E.g. Media in the present day.

B) If you think a factor has helped in a particular time period shade the box in green.

E.g. Government in the 20th Century.

C) If you think a factor has helped and hindered then shade the box in red and green.

E.g. Individuals in the 1900s.

D) Choose the factor you think is the most important in each time period and explain

why.

E) Choose the factor you think has changed the most and explain why.

F) Choose the factor you think has caused continuity the most and explain why.

Individuals

You will be asked in your exam about the importance of key individuals. You will need to be able to explain

how the particular individual made changes. Make sure you can:

A) Put the individuals in order of importance. Who do you think made the most

important contribution?

B) Put the individuals in order of influence. Whose ideas stayed influential for longest?

C) For each individual draw a spider diagram to show which factors helped them and

how. E.g. Science & technology, improved communication and policing became more

effective.

4/ At the end of this booklet are sections of notes on the most popular topics with plans for

common questions. Read these and practice writing out your answers to the questions. Time

yourself if you need to.

Revision Audit

Topic

After

completion

of the

course

After first

time of

revising

topic

After second

time of

revising

topic

How much did Crime and Punishment change from Roman Britain to c.1450?

Explain Roman laws and trials.

How did the Romans try to prevent crime?

Explain Roman punishments.

Explain attitudes behind the laws?

How effective were the laws in ‘Dark Age’ England?

How did Crime and Punishment change after 1066?

Factors – What factors were at work in this period and how?

Has Crime really changed so much over time?

Why was religious opposition seen as a crime?

Why was being homeless a crime in the 1500s?

Why could eating meat lead to a crime?

Why could drinking tea lead to a crime?

What caused the rise and fall of highway robbery?

Did crime change in the 19th century?

How did crime change in the 20th century?

Factors – What factors were at work and how?

Was there a revolution in punishment?

What was the Bloody Code?

Was the Bloody Code really so bloody?

Why did the Bloody Code end?

Why was transportation used as a punishment?

Why did transportation end in the 1860s?

How might changes to Britain have affected punishments?

How did punishment change in the 19th Century?

Why was there a revolution in prisons during the Industrial Revolution?

How did the punishment of women change?

Did prisons change more in the 19th or 20th centuries?

Why did the death penalty end in 1965?

Could one event change punishments completely?

Factors – What factors were at work and how?

When did policing change the most?

How effective was policing in 1450?

Which was greater in the 1700s: change or continuity?

Which was greater in the 1800s: change or continuity?

Which was greater in the 1900s: change or continuity?

Factors – What factors were at work and how?

Why have attitudes to crime changed?

How do changing attitudes explain the rise and fall of witchcraft?

‘Conchies’: ‘slackers’ or an important freedom?

Did changing attitudes to women mean changes in the law?

Crime and punishment from Roman Britain - 1450 Overview

Even though societies changed in this time, attitudes and ways to deal with crime remained fairly consistent for most of this period. The beliefs and attitudes about crime and punishment mainly reflected those of the more powerful groups and classes. Individuals were usually held to be totally responsible for their criminal actions, no matter what their circumstances were (e.g. poor etc). The key aims of punishment remained fairly consistent. They were:

Deterrence: deliberately harsh punishments used to stop others committing them, and

Revenge: wanting criminals to suffer for their actions.

Roman Britain

Roman society meant different people had power over others. At one end were wealthy families who owned property and slaves and at the bottom were the slaves themselves.

There was no proper police force in Roman Britain. Major crimes were dealt with by the governor and minor cases in small local courts. Yet if someone felt they had been robbed, they had to take the suspect to the local centurion who then decided on the evidence provided, whether the case should be tried.

The most serious crimes included Rebellion (if a province like Britain rebelled or plotted against the emperor they would have severe and gruesome punishments inflicted on them). Also Religious non-conformity (while people who were conquered by the Romans were allowed to continue worshipping their own gods, they also had to worship the emperor as part of the civic religion. When Christians refused to do this, they were severely punished).

Punishments were different if you were a man or woman or citizen and slave. Crimes and Punishments Minor crimes (e.g. petty theft) -Flogging (whipped) -Beating -Financial penalties Major crimes (e.g. mugging) -Amputation of limbs More serious crimes (murder, arson and slander) -Execution by various methods -Exile (Only wealthy people could be sent away from a region) Most serious crimes (such as refusing to accept the authority of the emperor) -Execution by crucifixion or being thrown to the lions -Being forced to become a gladiator

Anglo Saxons

Anglo-Saxon law was more localised than Roman Law as Britain was split up into different kingdoms for much of the period. The role of the local community grew and the importance of family was key. Loyalty to family was highly prized which had a huge impact on crime and punishment as family groups stuck together in support of their kin. Blood feuds meant the victim or the victims family had the right to take revenge on the person who had done the harm – even by killing them or a person in the family. Sometimes this led to long running family feuds and violence. The role of the king in law-making also grew. He was in overall charge of the law. Offences against the kings’ peace such as robbing a traveller would be punished harshly. Crimes Punishments Minor crimes (e.g. petty theft) -Fines Major crimes (e.g. mugging) -Fines -Beatings, floggings Stealing -Cutting off hands and feet Slander - Cutting off tongue Most serious crimes (Treason against the king) -Execution by beheading, burning or hanging Church influence on Anglo-Saxon punishments was considerable. The death penalty was rarely used. Instead, mutilations became more common, as this, they believed, gave the guilty a chance to repent and so save their soul. This introduced a new idea about the purpose of punishment – the idea that offenders could be reformed. However this remained a minority view for many centuries: Changes and continuity

Similar to Romans in that lesser punishments were dealt with similarly and crimes against the ruler was also dealt with harshly.

Different as the death penalty was not used as much.

Normans

The Norman invasion brought some new laws into action based on Norman beliefs of the importance of the Church and morality. The role of the king became more important and the importance of religion also increased.

The Norman invasion also brought some new laws into action based on protecting the power of the new king and ruling families, e.g. the creation of a new crime of ‘killing a Norman’. Also William the Conqueror introduced ‘forest laws’ that taxed and policed huge forested areas to protect them for the king and the landowners.

William set up Church Courts to deal with religious and moral crimes, e.g. adultery, sex before marriage as well as not following all the rites and practices of the church. He also used the courts to control the behaviour of priests.

Changes and continuity

The importance of the king was similar to that established by the Anglo-Saxons.

Like the Anglo-Saxons, the Normans had no police force and they continued local systems of law enforcement used previously.

The Normans did though introduce ‘Trial by Ordeal’ or trial by combat. The believed God would show guilt through combat between the accused and accuser.

Church courts established. Priests could only be tried by these courts which had no power to use the death penalty (Benefit of the Clergy). Some criminals could also get the sanctuary of the church which meant they couldn’t be arrested. If he confessed his crime, he would be allowed to leave the county.

Crimes Punishments

Minor crimes (e.g. petty theft) -Fines -Stocks/Pillory Major crimes -Beatings, floggings -Amputation of hands Serious crimes (murder, arson) -Execution (mostly hanging but occasionally beheading, stoning or drowning) Most serious crimes (rebellion, heresy) -Execution by beheading, burning or hanging Changes and continuity • Death penalty and mutilations used much more. • For minor crimes the main punishments didn’t really change from the Anglo-Saxons – whipping, public humiliation in stocks.

The Later Middle Ages

For a long time after 1066, Anglo-Saxon and Norman law continued to operate side by side, although it was Norman law that dominated. However, during a civil war that lasted from 1135 to 1154, law and order broke down. This illustrates the importance of strong government in the maintenance of law and order. A new system after 1154

At the end of the war, Henry II’s priority was to restore the priority of the king. He had to deal with powerful individuals such as great nobles who felt strong enough to ignore the law and decisions of the courts.

One of the ways he did this was by updating and drawing together Anglo-Saxon, Norman and royal laws and created the basis of the English Common Law.

Law enforcement after 1154 England was divided into 6 circuits that royal judges travelled around to hear the legal cases using the English Common Law All counties now had their own prisons (gaols) to hold prisoners before trial To make sure powerful sheriffs enforced the kings law, writs (kings instructions) were written and sent the most serious criminal cases were dealt with by the king’s court (a new court in London) and not in the local courts.

Changes and continuity

Despite reforms made by Henry II, the system of justice depended on the ruler with some families (especially in the 14th and 15th centuries) feeling strong enough to ignore the law and king himself.

The power of the church also increased as crimes of heresy (speaking out against the church) became more common. Churches now could set up special courts to torture and execute such crimes.

The most common crime at this time (similar from Romans through to medieval) was small scale theft

Executions and other physical punishments continued to be most common, yet as the Middle Ages continued hanging became less common. The church was the main influence and more and more people were pardoned or fined.

1450-1750: Medieval

Church courts Manor courts Royal courts dealt with priests, monks and nuns and those who refused to pay a tenth of their income to the church dealt with ordinary villagers in the countryside and made them keep to the rules set by the ordinary landowners. The most likely to be fined and punished were not free farmers called villeins. Though the court did protect them from being made to do too much work or being fined too much. The Royal courts dealt with all serious crimes and all types of people. Divided according to their seriousness: Murder, Arson, Rape, Treason, Robbery: Punished by hanging Assault, Selling goods at wrong prices etc: Usually punished by fines of money Prisons – It was not until 1576 that local judges were required to build houses of correction in which beggars could be kept. Medieval prisons were mostly for holding people awaiting trial. Limits to justice: Only free men could appear in the Royal Courts. Women could only go to court to accuse someone who had: (a) Murdered her husband (but only if he had died in her arms), (b) Attacked her and this led to the loss of an unborn child or (c) Raped her There were ways to avoid being hung in the latter Middle Ages: Claim benefit of clergy

This was the most common way of avoiding execution as churchmen or priest could not be punished in the king’s courts.

They were handed over to the local bishop for punishment and the church did not execute people for crimes.

To prove you were a churchman you had to read aloud this passage from the Bible:

‘Oh loving and kind God, have mercy.

Have pity upon my transgressions’ (Psalm 51, Verse 1).

This verse became known as the ‘neck-verse’ because reading it saved the necks of many criminals.

The theory behind this was that generally the only people who could read were churchmen.

However, clever criminals learned the verse by heart even if they could not read.

This option was only open to men as women could not become priests.

Benefit of clergy did not get you off punishment altogether. – The church preferred mutilation to execution as it wanted to give the convict a chance to repent.

Join the Army Sometimes during times of war – criminals were spared execution on condition they joined the army. Buy a Pardon Richer people could buy pardons because kings were usually desperate for money. Get Pregnant Women who were pregnant could not be hanged.

If they claimed they were pregnant they were examined and if pregnancy was confirmed their punishment was postponed and often COMMUTED. Become a King’s Approver To become a king’s approver meant that you would give evidence that would convict other criminals. Prevention of crimes:

Making a group of 10 people (a tithing) responsible for each other’s actions. If a crime was committed they had to hunt for the criminal (Hue and Cry).

Deterring people by threat of punishment.

Church teachings about right and wrong. Reasons for medieval crime waves: Rising unemployment, rising prices, weak government and corrupt judges. In court, two methods were used to decide guilt of accused:

1) Witness of neighbours: Could people swear they had a past of good behaviour? 2) Trial by jury: A group of local people looked at the evidence, listened to witnesses and discussed

the character of the person. There was no police force. By 1400, landowners were appointed as Justices of the Peace to hold local courts at least four times a year to deal with less serious offences BEFORE: Changes in the economy in the late 14th and 15th century had increased the numbers of people wandering and looking for work. SO: Changes in society led to a moral panic with beggars (often healthy) being thought of as criminals – and punished. Reasons why the numbers of beggars increased during the 16th century:

Closure of monasteries took away support for the poor.

Population increase put pressure on jobs and food.

Landowners kept sheep instead of growing crops. This needed fewer workers. Reasons why begging was treated harshly and as a crime:

The cost of supporting beggars was resented by communities they ended it up in.

Poor people were more likely to turn to other crimes such as theft.

Large numbers of travelling beggars seemed to be a threat to people who felt they should know their place within a community.

LAWS/CHANGES

1531: A law passed by parliament separated the ‘Deserving Poor’ (sick or injured beggars worthy of help) from ‘Sturdy Beggars’ (those considered lazy). All beggars were to be classed as either deserving a licence or punished. Justices of the Peace put the new law into effect. 1547 VAGRANCY ACT: Forced beggars to work. It also ordered they should be whipped and branded. This law, though, was impossible to enforce and was repealed (abolished), but showed how worried people were. Despite the laws against begging, it was impossible to stop because it was brought on by wider social causes.

1450-1750: What beliefs affected attitudes towards crime and punishment?

Increased unemployment led to beggars wandering from town to town.

Changes in religious beliefs led some to refuse to follow official religious beliefs.

The improved quality of roads led to more highwaymen. Attitudes and beliefs

Divine right: It was believed that God gave power to kings and queens. Hierarchy: There was a strong belief that society had strict ordering with some groups above or below others in terms of power, wealth and rights. Property: The richest people owned most property and only wealthy people were represented in parliament, were laws were made. What challenged this system?

Increased population: In 1450 the population of England was 2 million. By 1750 it was 7 million.

Increased urban growth and unemployment: Growing towns were harder to control. Crimes against property: Most crimes committed by the poor were crimes against property, not crimes against the person. Landowners were rich law makers. Also many landowners restricted access o their land for hunting etc. Law enforcement case study: JONATHON WILD He was a Thief-taker - someone who makes a living from tracking down criminals and collecting rewards. Wild was a former criminal who set up innocent victims, tricked them into crime for the rewards. He was eventually found out and hanged. Afterwards there was a surge in robberies and other crimes in London. This was because Wild controlled many of the criminal gangs when he was alive. Yet people still thought it was too expensive for a police force, if one was set up it would affect their freedoms and that the answer lay in more bloodier punishments to control crime.

1450-1750: How did rulers meet the challenges they faced?

The Bloody Code Historians use this phrase to describe how the number of crimes carrying the death penalty rose significantly in this period (including stealing sheep, smuggling and damaging trees). Transportation also began in this period. Authorities reacted by:

Criminalising beggars.

Punishments varied according to person’s social group. Commoners were hanged, drawn and quartered.

Nobles were beheaded. Until the 18th century, any first-time offender who claimed benefit of clergy. (were able to read a passage of the bible) was often acquitted.

The use of fear: authorities aim was a mixture of retribution (punishment) and deterrence (preventing crime). With no real prison system, the punishment was either removing them (execution), fining them or hurting or humiliating them stocks or pillory).

Poaching – People did this often out of necessity because of unemployment/money. Some also did this as a result of landowners closing off land (enclosure). Law makers made it punishable by death.

Smuggling – The response of high taxes meant goods were often smuggled in. Most ordinary people didn’t see it as a serious crime because they could benefit. Law makers made it punishable by death. Why rulers felt under threat and how they reacted: Political changes between 1485 and 1750 caused rulers to feel under threat. This led to an increase in accusations of treason (Guy Fawkes) Earlier harsh punishments – designed to crush opposition to royal power (hung, drawn and quartering) – were increasingly used in this period. Lessening of political tension after 1750 reduced the use of such punishments.

VAGABONDS

Who were the vagabonds? Vagabonds were beggars, tramps and vagrants who wandered the country without a settled home or job. Some vagabonds were soldiers who had been demobbed, or criminals, but most were unemployed people moving to a new town or village looking for work. The records of the town of Warwick, for example, list among the vagabonds:

A girl from Cheltenham going to find work as a servant.

A man from Henley-on-Thames who said that ‘he had no trade to live on but is only a labourer and is come into the area to seek work but can find none’.

A silk-weaver who had been to various places to seek work but was now heading for London.

John Weaver of Stratford who had sold ‘small-wares and was robbed of them and so was now forced to go abroad (elsewhere)’.

In the Middle Ages people had not been very free to move around from place to place.

By the 1500s these restrictions had been removed and there was a lot of travel from town to town. How were the poor helped? Each village and town did try to help the genuine poor of their own parish. The aged, the sick and children of poor families received help to buy food, which was paid for out of the poor-rate, a local tax paid by the better-off residents. Why did people think that vagabonds were a problem? In the 1500s people became worried about vagabonds for three main reasons:

1. People felt that idleness was wrong. Puritan religion taught that everyone should work hard so they did not have time to be tempted to commit sins. Not working was actually seen as a crime in its own right. Most people did not object to helping the genuine poor, who could not work because they were old or sick, but were suspicious of outsiders asking for help, especially if they appeared to be healthy and fit enough to work.

2. Vagrants were blamed for many crimes such as thefts, assaults and murders. It made sense to

many people that vagrants were more likely to commit crime because that was the only way they could get money to buy food.

3. Many people were worried about the cost. Each village and town raised poor-rates to help the

genuine poor of their own parish. Local people did not want to spend their hard-earned money supporting the poor or idle from another parish. They wanted them to return to their own towns or villages. These worries were particularly acute at times of poverty when the number of unemployed

and poor people, looking for work, naturally increased. Pamphlets that were produced about vagrants also added to people’s fears.

How did they treat vagabonds? Through the century governments took different measures against vagabonds. 1531 – Unemployed men and women found begging, or vagrants were whipped until their bodies ‘be bloody’ and returned to their birthplace or previous residence. 1547 – First offence – two years slavery. Second offence – slavery for life or execution. 1550 – The 1547 Act was repealed as being too severe. The 1531 Act was revived. 1572 – First offence – whipping and burning off an ear. Second offence – execution. 1576 – House of Correction to be built in every county to punish and employ persistent beggars. 1593 – The 1572 Act was repealed as too severe. The 1531 Act was revived. 1598 – Vagrants were to be whipped and sent home. If they did not mend their ways, the JPs could send them to a House of Correction, banish them from the country or execute them. Were the vagabonds really such a problem?

Many ordinary citizens did live ‘in terror of the tramp’.

The harshness of the laws against vagabonds tells us that landowners and the government believed that vagabonds were behind many crimes and were a serious danger to peace.

Some vagabonds were undoubtedly criminals – CUT-PURSES, petty thieves and fraudulent beggars.

There were also some gangs. BUT most vagabonds were not a threat to law and order.

Most vagabonds were not criminals or the devious beggars they were made out to be.

They were genuinely poor and unemployed people looking for work.

As the population was increasing there simply was not enough work for everyone.

In some areas, changed work patterns increased the problem.

In years of good harvests many people could only just ‘get by’ so when the harvest failed, bread prices went up rapidly and the poor became desperate – then they would travel in search of any kind of work.

In the same way, workers in trades might suddenly hit a bad time when their trade went through a recession – they would then have to get on the road and look for work.

In normal years vagrancy was not a big problem.

The city with the greatest number of vagrants was London.

It was the only large town in England in this period.

Many people went there thinking that they would be bound to find work or that it offered good opportunities for crime.

Even so, in 1560 the London Bridewell dealt with only 69 vagabonds.

However, following the bad harvests of the 1570s the number of vagrants had grown to 209 per year.

The late 1590s were years of even greater poverty – wages were at their lowest point since the year 1200.

In 1600 the number of vagrants in London was up to 555.

In normal years Oxford JPs dealt with 12 vagrants a year.

In 1598 they dealt with 67.

It was the same story in Salisbury where there were 96 vagrants in 1598 instead of the usual 20 or fewer.

Treason and Plot – why rulers felt under threat and the impact of this on the

treatment of crime – Guy Fawkes. Treason is not a common crime – but the Tudors were particularly concerned about it. This was because they had seized power by force and there were people who questioned their right to rule. Tensions increased when Henry VIII broke away from the Catholic Church. These religious tensions continued. On 5th November 1605, Catholic opponents attempted to murder King James I in the Guy Fawkes ‘Gunpowder Plot’. The conspirators planned to blow up the king, his family and leading Protestant aristocrats at the state opening of Parliament. After this the plan was to start a rebellion and put a Catholic on the throne. There were a dozen leading conspirators – mostly from important Catholic families. Guy Fawkes was the explosive expert, responsible for igniting the large store of gunpowder concealed in a cellar beneath the House of Lords. The conspirators were betrayed, the leaders were sentenced to be hanged, drawn and quartered.

1750-1900 – Industrial Period

The 6 major changes in this period were: 1) By 1850 the Bloody Code had been swept away due to changing attitudes to punishment. 2) Prison sentences became the most common punishment. 3) Professional police forces were set up. Rising crime and the fear of it was a common factor in this

time. 4) The government became increasingly involved in matters through intervention and greater wealth. 5) Huge growth in towns led to increased street crime and burglary, growth in alcoholism, disorder

and riots. 6) Many immigrants moved into areas of terrible poverty with many turning to crime. The increased

movement of the population meant it was harder to know and keep track of people. Summary

Massive economic and social changes took place after 1750. This led to an increase in crime and disorder.

Many of these crimes were crimes against property and were committed by poor people struggling to survive.

The violent state of the worst slums meant that crimes against people increased too.

How did governments respond to threats to authority?

There were many challenges to authority including:

French revolution encouraged some people to hope for similar change here.

Many people wanted more moderate demands such as right to vote, right to strike etc.

With no police until 1829, soldiers were used to put down uprisings. Government often dealt with it by using soldiers – this led to many deaths and unpopularity against them. They also used laws to control people who protested at how Britain was being run. This led to many people who demanded reform were treated as criminals. Reforms after 1850 meant that demands for change were no longer treated as crimes.

Protest case study: Tolpuddle Martyrs

In 1833, a peaceful group of Dorset farm workers from the village of Tolpuddle formed a trade union to try and stop their wages going down. They did not act violently but the local rich farmers and the government feared they might lose control of their workers. The authorities reacted by using a navy law from years before about breaking silence at meetings to arrest and transport them to Australia for seven years. After huge protests the Tolpuddle Martyrs were eventually released in 1836. Transportation ended because of cost and that Australia was becoming independent and didn’t want our criminals. It completely removed the criminal from society. This was seen as a less humane solution to execution when dealing with criminals who damaged or stolen property. By the 1780s, many prisons were overcrowded. Petty crimes were also increasing in many towns and cities. Transportation: The deporting of convicted criminals. The sentence of transportation could be a set number of years or for life.

HIGHWAYMEN

Highway robbery was one of the most infamous and feared crimes of 18th Century. It was not a new crime, but it became much more frequent during this period because there were increased opportunities for travel and many people were wealthier. Image The popular view of highwaymen is a glamorous one: daring, masked, well-dressed, ‘gentlemen of the road’.

They were polite to their victims, especially women and did not use violence.

Very few people resisted them – passengers were all too ready to hand over their purse and even carried two purses in case of robbery.

Highwaymen could escape quickly on horseback. Reality In reality – many of them were treacherous, cruel and violent.

One highwayman’s mask slipped during a robbery and he was recognised by a woman. He cut out her tongue to stop her reporting him.

Highwaymen were greatly feared by ordinary travellers.

They were seen as a major danger by traders – largely because they disrupted trade.

The worst areas for highway robbery were around London on the main routes to the capital.

Highwaymen even ventured into the edge of the city. Dick Turpin

Born in 1705 in Essex and became involved in smuggling before joining a gang of housebreakers famous for their violence. Then he became a highwayman.

He joined forces with another highwayman – Tom King – apparently after trying to hold him up.

The two men worked so successfully together that a reward of £100 was offered for their capture.

Turpin was ruthless - he robbed women alone and killed at least one man who tried to capture him.

In May 1737 Turpin and King were cornered – Turpin escaped but King was killed by a shot from Turpin’s gun. This could have been an accident or a way of stopping King from talking.

Turpin fled to Yorkshire and became a horse thief.

He was arrested after an argument over shooting a cockerel.

The authorities did not know who he was and allowed him to write to his brother for references to secure his freedom.

Turpin did not send enough postage so his brother rejected his letter.

This was to be his downfall – because the letter was returned to the postmaster who happened to be Turpin’s old schoolmaster.

He recognised the handwriting and informed the authorities they were holding the notorious highwayman.

Turpin was executed for horse-stealing in York in 1739.

After his death his life became glamorised in stories and poetry. Why did highway robbery grow and then decline? Highway robbery grew because of increased travel and increased wealth. The interesting thing for the history of crime and punishment is why highway robbery declined. - How far was the Bloody Code responsible? - How far were other factors responsible such as better law enforcement? Factors Explaining the Development of Highway Robbery

There were many open, lonely areas outside towns where travellers could be held up.

Handguns were easier to obtain and use.

Highwaymen could hide and sell their loot in taverns.

Horses became cheaper to buy.

More people were travelling in their own coaches.

There was no police force and local constables did not try to track highwaymen across counties.

After wars ended, some demobilised soldiers became highway robbers because they could not find any other way of making a living.

Factors Explaining the Disappearance of Highwaymen

Open land around London was built on as the population expanded. This cut down the chances to ambush a coach.

Mounted patrols were set up around London and high rewards encouraged informers. Highwaymen had more of a chance of being caught.

Travellers no longer carried large amounts of money as the number of banks grew and the banking system became more sophisticated.

JPs refused to licence taverns that were known to harbour highwaymen.

Stagecoaches were introduced to carry passengers around the country.

Coaches became more frequent as road improved, reducing highwayman’s chances of stopping a coach for long.

SMUGGLING

During the 17th Century, governments increased taxes on imported goods to raise extra money. These import duties were unpopular. They were also very hard to enforce. With several thousand miles of unguarded coastline around Britain, it was fairly easy to smuggle in goods and there was a ready market among people who did not see why they should pay higher prices. Like poaching there were many who did not see smuggling as a crime at all. Many thousands of people were involved in smuggling. Under the Bloody Code the government made smuggling a capital offence. How smuggling was organised in Sussex

They worked in gangs of 40-50 during the day loading teas, brandy and dry goods. At night their numbers increased.

The smugglers would arrive in London about 2 or 3 in the morning and could sell between 1000 to 2000 pounds weight of tea and be out of London by 6 in the morning.

Smugglers also sold their tea to ‘duffers’ who could carry up to a quarter of a hundred weight of tea in their specially adapted coats.

They would take the tea to London and sell it to ‘hawkers’ who would carry it around town and sell it to the customers.

Three million pounds worth of tea was smuggled into Britain each year – three times as much as was legally imported.

There were not enough officers of the Customs to deal with the problem and the smugglers were not afraid of the army.

If revenue officers or the army seized a cargo, smugglers very oftengot it back by force.

Magistrates were very wary of committing offender to gaol as they feared the reprisals that would happen as a result.

Who were the smugglers?

Over 70% of smugglers were labourers.

Fewer than 10% were small farmers.

The rest were tradesmen such as butchers and carpenters.

Wealthy people also took part. Eg Robert Walpole (who later became Prime Minister) smuggled wine into the country while he was a government minister using a government ship.

Why did people become smugglers?

For farm labourers it was a quicker (and more exciting) way to make money than farm labouring.

A smuggler could earn six or seven times a farm labourer’s daily wage in a night.

Anyone who helped to carry goods from ship to shore could expect to earn nearly twice a labourer’s daily wage. - This resulted in a shortage of labour in some places on the south coast.

In Suffolk in 1749 and in the 1780s – the army put a temporary end to smuggling – as a result, smugglers turned to highway robbery and housebreaking rather than earn a living by farming.

Not all smugglers were farm labourers – In Sussex some came from the declining cloth industry and from the fishing and mining industries that were also in decline.

Attitudes to smuggling.

“…. the generality of the people on the coast are better friends to the smugglers that they are to the Custom House Officers.”

“It is extremely dangerous for the Custom House Officers to attempt to seize smuggled goods in the coast counties because smugglers are very numerous there and can assemble a great number whenever they need.”

“The common people of England in general fancy there is nothing in the crime of smuggling….the poor feel they have the right to shun paying any duty (tax) on their goods.”

“I have often heard you say and with great truth, that the common people of this country have no notion that smuggling is a crime.”

POACHING

In the 1700s some of the most unpopular laws were those concerning poaching.

Only landowners whose land was worth £100 a year could hunt and they could hunt anywhere.

Other landowners, with land worth less than £100, could not even hunt on their own land.

In 1723 the Black Act made hunting deer, hare or rabbits a capital crime punishable by death. Anyone found armed, disguised or with blackened faces in any hunting area was assumed to be poaching and could also be executed.

Possessing dogs or snares that could be used for hunting was punished by a £5 fine or three months in prison. Critics of these laws believed they were simply there to protect the interests of rich landowners.

For many poaching was a ‘custom of the manors’ that they and their fathers had followed for many years, long before the landowners had acquired the land in the 16th Century.

These new laws meant that gamekeepers were armed with the law and were attracted by rewards to capture the poachers.

As a result…

The poachers sometimes resorted to violence.

Communities stuck together to allow suspects to escape.

Some people however, seeking to claim a reward, revealed the names of poachers.

Most poachers were very poor and for some hunting had a great economic importance. Instead of being just a supplement to an ill-paid or irregular job, poaching became a trade itself. Any country inn-keeper could supply almost any quantity of game and the stage-waggoners acted as agents for city buyers.

The majority of men in rural England thought that the game laws were a great injustice. One writer commented that “Every magistrate knows that it is very hard that he should be punished for taking what he had as good a right to as any man.”

From prevention to detection: The Police

Before the Police: Parish constables dealt with minor disorders, beggars and petty criminals. Troops could be used to put down riots or rebellions. Why change? Constables did not have much chance of success in cities, especially London, where he crowded streets and houses provided ideal shelter for criminals. The system of law and order had been the same for centuries and couldn't’ cope with growing towns. Timeline of change 1749 London magistrates (lawyers) John and Henry Fielding:

Set up a civilian horse patrol to stop highwaymen.

Introduce Bow Street runners, a team of thief-takers who patrolled the streets of London in the evening.

Published ‘Hue and Cry’ newspaper that contained details of crimes, criminals and stolen property. This helped pass on information about criminal activities.

1829 Sir Robert Peel (Home secretary): Set up the Metropolitan police force in London. It had 3200 men. He was able to set up a force because:

Government had more money from taxes to spend.

People feared protests - Increased crime and fear of it. Attitudes to the police: At first the police (peelers) got a lot of bad press including: there were not enough of them, and they did not have the right equipment (truncheons) to deal with criminals many of who were armed. But by 1900 attitudes had changed. Improved pay and training meant that the police had developed a reputation for honesty. Targeting uniformed patrols in high crime areas helped to reduce street crimes and disorder. The use of photographs and fingerprints assisted crime detection.

How successful were 19th-century prison reformers?

3 major changes occurred in the way prisons were run:

Imprisonment became the normal method of punishing criminals.

Reforming prisoners became the aim of punishment (Bloody Code had not worked).

The huge increase in prisoners led to the government taking over and reforming the whole prison system (Rising crime at start of 1900s).

Why prisons?

Removal (To keep them away from others)

Rehabilitation / reform (To change a person for the better)

Deterrence (To discourage others from doing it)

Retribution (To punish people for doing wrong)

Restitution (To work and payback society)

Reformers

John Howard: He toured prisons in Britain and wrote a book highlighting bad conditions and other problems. It highlighted problems in the system reforms did not begin until after his death. Sir Robert Peel (Home Secretary): He introduced acts that changed prisons including inspections of prisons, visits by doctors and basic education. Oversaw huge new prison building scheme. He also reduced the number of death penalty offences. Elizabeth Fry: Fry introduced changes in Newgate women's prison and then in others including female warders, schools for women and children and clothing/furniture. Prisons in the late 19th century were a compromise between rehabilitation and retribution. It also showed, just like the police, that the government got more involved in British society.

1900 to present day

Changes in policing and combating crime since 1900:

The impact of technology on fighting crime:

Fingerprinting: The Scotland Yard fingerprint department was set up in 1901. In 1995 a computer system allows all English and Welsh police forces to compare fingerprints

Radios: Modern communications makes it easier to report issues and call for back up.

Computers: Sorting information, finding patterns and matching evidence saves a huge amount of police time.

DNA evidence: Can be used to identify victims and criminals from tiny quantities of hair, blood and skin.

Cars and motorbikes: Greater mobility means police can get to crime scenes quicker.

CCTV: Can be used to monitor people’s behaviour in real time or recorded. CONTINUITY:

Modern Neighbourhood Watch schemes involve local people in crime prevention. This is similar to the 15th century, which made local communities responsible for the behaviour of their neighbours and reporting crime. The difference is that the modem scheme is completely voluntary.

Challenges facing policing in the 21st century are terrorism (IRA an Al-Qaeda) and international fraud.

Changing definitions of crime

Since 1900 a number of new definitions of crime have led to the punishment of different groups of people who would not have been punished before including conscientious objectors (people who refused to fight in wars) and people who drive badly (due to the increase in motorised transport).

Conscientious objection. People who refused to go to war could be court-martialled and receive

sentences up to 2 years imprisonment.

Cowardice in the face of the enemy has always been crime. Yet modern war (WWI etc) meant you

were executed.

Traffic Crime. Speeding, dangerous driving and using your mobile phone while driving are all crimes today were not before the 20th century.

Race crime. Race relations act (1968) made it illegal to refuse housing and employment to a person on the grounds of race. Before this, racist motivation of crimes would not have been considered seriously.

Domestic violence. Violence in the home has often been ignored unless the crime involved murder or serious assault.

Crime trends since 1900

Crime has increased since 1900.

The prison population has increased since 1900.

However, the percentage of women in prison has fallen since 1900

Since 1992 the level of crime has fallen.

Some newspapers, though, give the impression that the level of crime is increasing.

Why was capital punishment abolished?

The abolition of capital punishment in the UK was not a sudden decision. Due to arguments like those above, it was gradual. In 1908 people under 16 were no longer hanged, but it took until 1933 for under 18s and 1969 until it was abolished for murder. Jack Straw (Home Secretary) finally abolished the death penalty in the UK in 1998! Controversial executions

Timothy Evans, 1950 – Hanged for killing his wife and baby. Later evidence revealed that another person living in the same flats had really committed the murders. Evans was pardoned in 1966. Derek Bentley, 1953 - 19 year old Bentley was found guilty of armed robbery in which a policeman was shot dead by Bentleys partner Craig. Because Craig was 16 he was not executed (under 18). Bentley also had learning difficulties but was 19 so was hanged. He was pardoned in 1998. Ruth Ellis, 1955 - Suffered violent abuse by her boyfriend who she eventually murdered. The jury had to sentence her death as there was no alternative. Last woman to be hanged.

Different ideas about capital punishment

If you murder someone you deserve to die.

It gives justice to the victims’ families.

Capital punishment does not deter murderers.

What if the wrong person is convicted by mistake?

Changing punishments in the 20th Century

Changes to prisons: They had more functions such as officers trained to re-educate prisoners. ‘Open’ prisons for less dangerous criminals. Some prisoners on probation instead of straight inside. Children and the prison system: From 1908 separate prisons were established for children. Recently there has been rising levels of violence in youth offending prisons and re-offending rates have been high. But government under pressure to be seen ‘doing something’ about crime. Alternatives to prison: Community sentences are now often used like drug or alcohol treatments, community projects (service) and charity work. Electronic tagging and ASBO’s are other changes. Women and prisons: Recent years has seen a dramatic rise in women sent to prison. They have always committed much less crime by men. Some women's prisons now allow them to spend some time with their children.

How new are ‘new crimes’?

Possible new crimes and their links to older forms of crime. OLD NEW

Selling of poor girls into prostitution was a problem in 19th century cities. People trafficking. Many people from less economically developed countries are illegally bought to the UK and work in prostitution or for low wages.

In the 18th century organised criminal gangs smuggled goods. Drug smuggling is a multi-million pound industry.

Impersonating another person to steal money is an old crime, as is tricking money out of a person. Computer crime is often used to commit fraud.

Street robbery and other forms of street crime have been a problem for centuries. Street crime and anti-social behaviour causes great concern in many towns and cities.

There are totally new crimes due to new technology such as ‘speeding’. Changing attitudes can cause new definitions of crime. An example is driving while using a mobile phone, since people have realised over time that it leads to accidents.

Why has there been so many arguments about policing and crime since 1900?

In the second half of the 20th Century reported crime rose steeply. Crime and punishment became hot political issues with- Some calling for harsher punishments and others calling for better policing. Some blamed government policies for rising crime and others blamed decaying moral values. Is there a crime wave?

For 100 years, from 1850 to the 1940s – the recorded crime rate in Britain fell gradually.

In the 1950s that trend reversed and crime began to rise.

This increase has been much faster than the increase in population. Has violent crime increased?

Yes and no!

Throughout the 20th Century about 5% of recorded crimes have involved violence or sexual assault – so as crime in general has risen, violent crime has risen with it.

In recent years the proportion of violent crime has increased slightly to 6% of all crimes.

On the other hand – the ratio of murders to population has actually fallen in the last 100 years.

In the 1880s there were 15 murders per million people.

In 1984, the figure stood at 11 murders per million – 25% lower than in the 1880s. STATISTICS Why is more crime reported?

More people report house burglaries because they have to for insurance purposes.

It is easier to report crimes because most people have a telephone – the easier it is to report a crime, the more will be reported.

More people report violent crimes, such as rape or domestic violence – as they think more people will be sympathetic and take them more seriously than they did in the past.

Why is more crime recorded?

In the past some crimes reported to the police would not have been recorded. The problem would have been dealt with informally and ‘off the record’.

The police now record more crime, more consistently – partly because computer technology has given them new efficient ways to do so – the easier it is to record crime, the more will be recorded.

So, has crime really risen since the Second World War? Yes, but not as quickly as some would suggest. The crime rate rises because of:

Increasing crime

Increased reporting of crime

Increased recording crime Fear of crime

Fear of crime affects punishment and policing.

Until the 20th century it was difficult to measure the fear of crime.

In a survey in 1984 – people were asked if they felt unsafe walking out at night – 12% of all Britons answered yes.

In 1997 the same question was asked again – the figure had risen to 32% - in 13 years the figure had nearly trebled.

Fear of crime was greatest in urban areas.

Some fear of crime is ill-informed – the British Crime Survey of 1997 showed that pensioners believed that they were particularly at risk from violent crime – but the truth is that people under the age of 29 are 13 times more likely to be the victim of violent crime than an old person.

The media and crime

In the 1600s broadsheets were popular as they entertained their readers with stories of murder.

In the 1800s ‘penny dreadfuls’ attracted readers with lurid tales of violent crime.

Today – crime sells newspapers and wins television viewers – the more sensational, the more interest there seems to be.

Violent, dramatic crimes receive wide coverage and so do crimes where the victims are particularly vulnerable, such as the elderly or the very young.

These crimes make the headlines almost every day so it is easy to think that we are living in a crime wave.

Motor Car Crime

One hundred years ago the car had only just been invented. Nowadays car theft is one of the biggest categories of crime, particularly among teenage boys.

Motor crime includes anything from drunk driving to traffic offences.

It absorbs a massive amount of police and court time.

In 1996 there were nearly 1.3 million motor crimes including theft of over half a million cars. Terrorism

From the 1960s Britain has lived with the constant threat of terrorist violence.

Most commonly this has been the threat of bombings by the IRA who were trying to end British rule in Northern Ireland.

Other terrorist groups have also operated in mainland Britain.

The actual number of attacks and the casualties they caused remain small, but the threat to public order and the nuisance caused by added security has made terrorism an ever-present worry and constant drain on police resources.

Computer Crime

Since so much business now depends on technology, computer crimes have become common.

Computers have been used to steal money from bank accounts or to hack into the private records of individuals or governments to steal information.

People have also deliberately introduced computer viruses to destroy vitally important information held on other computers which can lead to the ruin of a business.

Drug Crime

Throughout history there has always been money to be made from smuggling or supplying banned goods.

Drug smuggling and dealing is the most recent version. Poaching In August 1997 a Yorkshire newspaper reported an increase in deer poaching: “Deer in nature reserves have been poached and so have deer on deer farms. Venison has become a fashionable food in restaurants and even supermarkets. Farms and reserves near motorways are particularly vulnerable because the poachers can make a speedy getaway.”

Changing views of the nature of criminal

activity: 1450-present day

Case Study 1: Witchcraft In the Middle Ages, people had been tried witchcraft in church courts, which had tended to give relatively light sentences. This was because ordinary people, who were too poor to afford the services of doctors, relied on local ‘wise women’. These women, using a combination of herbal treatments and magic charms, tried to cure illnesses of both humans and animals. Throughout the 16th and 17th centuries, many superstitions survived and new laws were passed making witchcraft a serious crime. Henry VIII made it a capital crime in 1542. Why were new ?

Social Changes. Many families broke up to try and find work. Some old women were left on their own. Many turned to magic as a way of trying to improve their luck.

Civil War. Tensions in communities were heightened by civil wars.

Religion. After Henry VIII broke away from Rome, witchcraft was seen as an offence against the state rather than the church.

Economic hardship. Increase in beggars due to financial issues in the country led to bad feelings amongst neighbours.

Crop failures and other bad luck was also blamed on witches. Why women?

Christianity had always portrayed women as morally weaker than men (Adam and Eve).

According to some historians many men either feared or even hated women.

The puritans (a Christian sect) tended to see women as a temptress (untrustworthy). How did they convict people of witchcraft?

Unusual marks on a woman's body (e.g. an extra nipple)

Needle test: Used to locate the devils mark on a witches body. It is believed that wherever the devil touched a person that area would be insensitive to pain.

The use of ‘possessed’ children who acted as accusers.

Neighbours could provide evidence, e.g. if heard making a pact with the devil. Facts Although they were far less extensive than in other parts of Europe, there were periods of witch-hunts in England where many people were brought to trial. Up to 1000 people were executed as witches. Mathew Hopkins became known as ‘The Witchfinder General’: For each witch ‘discovered’ and then executed, Hopkins received a fee. He was eventually stopped as he used torture and other illegal methods. Why did witchcraft trials decline?

Economic problems began to slow down. This reduced tensions in villages so people became less jealous and suspicious of their neighbours.

Although many people still believed in witches, a growing number were taking a more rational view. There was a huge increase in scientific discoveries. Things that were blamed on the devil could now be explained by science.

Changing attitudes of authorities: Many uneducated people still clung on to the belief about witchcraft. In 1751 some of the villagers in Tring (Hertfordshire) subjected a suspected witch to the Swimming test (dunked in water – usually the river). She died as a result of the test. Later, though, one of the main ringleaders was tried and hanged for the offence. This showed the attitudes of the authorities had clearly changed, even if local beliefs had not. Case Study 2: Conscientious objection Conscientious objectors disagree with war for religious, moral or political reasons. The arrival of two world wars led the government to introduce conscription, which meant that people refusing to take part in the war could now be imprisoned. WWI: 1914-18

Conscientious objectors (around 16,000 men) were treated with great hostility by the general public during the First World War.

ALTERNATIVES – The majority of conscientious objectors were these. They refused to do anything to kill or injure anyone, but were prepared to take part in the war in alternative ways such as driving ambulances or being stretcher bearers. Some won medals for bravery but many employers refused to give them jobs. The government in the end had to set up work camps to employ them.

ABSOLUTISTS - However about 1,500 conscientious objectors refused to do anything to assist the war as they felt it was fundamentally wrong. These were treated as criminals and sent to prison – often military ones at first. They received very harsh and brutal treatment from prison guards. Some were taken to France and forced into uniforms and ordered to fight or face execution. If this failed, they were either sent back to British prisons or spent time in a brutal French prison.

WWII: 1939-45

As full horrors of WWI emerged, many people became pacifists including those who won medals in WWI.

There were more conscientious objectors in the Second World War than the first – around 59,000.

Almost all were given exemption by the government and treated more sympathetically than in WWI. Fewer were punished as ‘criminals’.

Many still worked in factories, on the land or other non combatant roles.

They were even allowed to continue their campaign during the war, for instance, putting up posters encouraging people to refuse to fight.

The public were still very hostile and attitudes hadn’t changed much since WWI. They were seen and accused of being cowards and traitors both in their faces and in the newspapers.

Since 1960 (when conscription ended), there has been instances of conscientious objection. The Iraq war in 2003 saw two soldiers sent home for calling into question the motive of the war and killing innocent people. Case Study 3: Domestic violence Generally understood to be the physical abuse of a wife or female partner by a husband or male partner. BEFORE:

It was generally accepted both by law and people that husbands (and fathers) had the right to beat their wives and children. Also before the early 19th century women could be punished for a more severe crime of ‘petty treason’ if found guilty of killing their husband.

Some women who suffered ‘severe violence’ from their husbands applied for a peace bond under civil law. These dated back to the 14th century and usually imposed a fine on particularly violent husbands. However, only wealthy women could afford this.

In the 19th century laws were changed so that violence against wives could be classed as criminal assault. Why were the authorities so slow to act?

The male dominated authorities did not want to interfere in private family matters.

Before 1918, women had little political power. All laws were made by men.

The law was enforced by men – all male police force etc.

Domestic violence was seen as part of the problem of ‘drunkenness and disorder’.

Women themselves were often too scared to speak out and make complaints against their husbands.

Why did it becometer 1970? Campaign groups: Women’s Liberation Group became popular in the 1960s and pushed for change. By the 1970s refuge service across the UK had joined together to help improve support for women. It also increased pressure on the government to change the law. New ideas about role of state: It became more accepted that the state could get involved in family life to improve the life of the citizens. For example NHS for health and well being. Media: Both Radio, TV and printed media gave increasing coverage to domestic violence stories. More dramas and soap operas began to deal with the problem. Power of the vote: By 1928 women were given equal voting rights to men. Women’s concerns became increasingly more important to those trying to win elections.

Domestic violence becomes a crime

1976 Domestic violence act: enabled victims to get protection orders from the courts. 1991 Rape within marriage classed as a criminal offence in England and Wales for the first time. 1996 The Family Law Act: Gave extra protection to victims of violent partners and made arrest automatic in cases were violence was used or threatened. 2004 Domestic Violence and Victims Act: Gave all victims (male and female) the same protection. Increased power of police and courts.

The changes have not applied in practice so much to domestic violence against men by women. A study in 2004 found that one in four women and one in six men had become victims of domestic violence at some point in their lives.