There were several periods of dearth in the late eighteenth century some of them lasting for several years e.g. 1756-1757, 1766-1768, 1772-1774, 1782-1784, 1795-1796 and 1800 to 1801.
The effects of a disastrous harvest were exacerbated by the cost of war against France at the end of the century. Inflation rates were astronomical and there was great hardship. Sudden shortage and savage inflation rates left many people destitute. Prices were high but unemployment opportunities were low and family incomes suffered as a result. There was also at this time a rise in mortality rates.
The number of convictions that were recorded would as today figures only show a proportion of the crime rates as many go undetected.
There were also many reasons for authority not to actually prosecute, such as the fact that there was nowhere to put any convicted criminals due to the small size of jails and the numbers of magistrates, police constables and other officials were not sufficient to cope with rising crime levels.
Many lay people lived in a sense of panic that the country was going to be, overwhelmed by crime which was usually unlikely to happen.
Crime levels at the end of the eighteenth century seem to go in hand with wartime and peacetime. Levels of crime rise after the war and decreased during war. The reasons behind the rising crime rates may be the problems I have previously spoken about. Other reasons behind the rising crime rate are often due to the population increases at peacetime. Those who had taken part in wartime duties were now unemployed.
The recording of crime levels changed in the second half of the eighteenth century and there appears to be little evidence of any record keeping for the first half.
Parliamentary reaction to the rising levels of crime meant that the additional offer of awards above the statutory amounts and by taking responsibility away from clergy for certain offences. They set up a committee in 1750 to investigate criminal law and find ways of suppressing offences “which were increased to a degree of robbery and murder beyond example”. This led to the recommendation of changes in the law as paralleled by Henry Fielding a Bow Street magistrate.
Magistrates around the country were encouraged to do their duty and suppress crime in their own neighbourhoods by judges (who were very unusually called before the King) and were delivered a speech by Lord Chancellor Hardwicke.
There was a reorganisation of the work of the courts to cope with the demands and pressures put upon them. Prisoners were often offered the option of enlisting in the Army or navy rather than go to trial, providing their offences were not too violent. The majority of crimes where property crimes such as burglary and robbery or larceny.
One of the reasons behind the changes was the end of transportation. This meant that when the jails became too full they could no longer send convicted felons to America. Transport ended in 1776.
The jails became more crowded and some convicts were sent to prison ships.
Capital punishment increased and it was hope that the fear of punishment by death would deter robbers and thieves. The increasing capital punishment was a direct reflection of the increase in violence being used by criminals.
Police constables were encouraged to be more vigilant and have more control over vagrants, alehouses, gambling and drunkenness.
They also enhance the rewards that were being offered.
It was believed that criminals who committed serious and violent offences would often re-offend and it was also stated that many of the offenders were disbanded soldiers and sailors at peace time who received no support on re-entry into society and often use the skills and equipment they had gained in wartime to commit offences such as highway robbery, often in large gangs. They were also seen as too idle to work in many places. Authorities were often viewed as being weak.
Men committed more than 75% of the recorded crimes. Women were much less likely to be convicted of violent crime. Married women were also unable to be held responsible for offences that were committed in the presence of their husbands and women’s activity beyond their home was restricted by various constraints. The lure of the capital for single women to seek employment was hindered by the inequality of wages between men and women. Demand on markets increased opportunity but decreasing demand meant employment opportunity was scarce. Women were more vunerable to economic decline and many of them turned to prostitution while some of them turned to theft.
Whether a prisoner committed for trial was held in jail or allowed to receive bail depended largely on the offence they were charged with. Although statutes concerned with particular offences might establish punishment that was peculiar to them, the broad regulation laid down on the statute of Westminster 1(1725) and confirmed in the first Marian statute was that bail was not to be allowed in grounds of any seriousness, are certainly not a felony, that is except in open Court and by two justices acting together
Prisoners were segregated on arrival at jail and many were put into solitary confinement for long periods of time as a means of forcing repentance for their actions, although this was later abolished as too many prisoners were driven insane.
Usually bail was only available for misdemeanours, such as assault, threatening behaviour, forcible entry, extortion, and small-scale riot. Bail may be denied in the case that involved violence or if the offence had been particularly vicious. If there was a threat that the victim may die from wounds received in an assault the accused will probably be denied bail because the charge would then be replaced by one of murder.
Between the years of 1748 and 1753 the number of cases to come before a court on property crime rose from one or two to approximately 138.
This was because there was a redistribution of work between crown and county courts.
John Howard published reports in 1777 about the state of English penal institutions, which showed the reasons for reform. There was generally a low level of security and harshness of treatment, and there was also the possibility that conditions in prison actually posed a threat to the health of the inmates. Unlike present-day jails in the eighteenth century prisoners had only the latest influence over the lives of the inmates, and prisoners often organise their own groups to take control over discipline, charitable contributions, and also collect new prisoners entrance money that was used to buy candles soap or coal.
Prison officers only took control of matters that they could directly profit from. They were paid an allowance but not an actual wage until the end of the eighteenth century. He may provide better accommodation for those prisoners who can pay for it, either in a special wing or perhaps even in his own house or apartment. Other money could be earned from visitors and the granting of sexual favours between inmates and visitors. The majority of the extra money was earned through selling liquor MBO and tobacco this was only abolished in 1784 by an act of Parliament.
Prisoners were allowed to mix freely in day rooms, the courtyard, and in the taproom. At night they were usually locked into wards not individual cells depending on the number of inmates at the present time. Visitors were allowed to visit whenever they felt necessary for a fee. Jails were unhealthy places. There were times when they were relatively clean and free from lice but very often visitors found it impossible to stay for long because of the horrible stench. There was no running water, inadequate toilet facilities and cleanliness was not evident. Prisoners slept on planks on the floor without bedding or straw and only those who could pay two shillings and sixpence could have a bed. The introduction of prison clothing came about in 1774 after the bill was passed to try and eradicate jail fever. This was known as the Pophams Act.
The penitentiary act of 1779 proposed the building of institutions to be run on entirely new lines where prisoners would be transformed in their religious and social outlook and emerge as men capable and anxious to support themselves and their families by honest work. There was also to be the provision of running water and fuel and fresh air for prisoners. New goals that were built at the end of the century had individuals sleeping cells with beds and bedding with ventilated glazed windows, they also had doctors available and were controlled with more discipline and humiliation.
Punishment by hanging changed from being a public spectacle to being carried out inside the prison gates at the end of the eighteenth century and the time span between conviction and execution was shortened to increase the terror of prosecution, and deter other criminals. Executed prisoners bodies were often used for medical research; they were sold to surgeons for dissection to advance medicine.
Philips argues that in practice there were not actually as many hangings carried out as previously thought, and the aim was to make an example of only a few, approximately 1 in 10 to raise awareness.
Justices of the peace in the eighteenth century came purely from the landed gentry and it was only in the nineteenth century with the rising amounts of cases being brought to prosecution that they were then asked to appoint magistrates for their own local area. It was unheard of for any magistrate to come from anything less than a middle class background. They were also unpaid for their services and the first salaried magistrates, or stipendiary magistrates as they became known, only came about in 1792.
In 1829 Robert Peel the then home secretary introduced new powers of arrest in his Metropolitan Police Act, police constables no longer needed to obtain a warrant before making an arrest. Then in 1856 the County and Borough Act introduced the first obligatory Police Force for every district.
Other new laws introduced in these times were: The Vagrancy Act of 1824 and the Master and Servant Act of 1823.
The abolition of the death penalty was argued for by many reformers, but was only abolished for pick pockets in 1808, but kept for other ‘Capital Offences’ as they were known.
Conclusion:
The rising crime figures could be attributed to many factors. The increase of Industrialisation and urbanisation meant that there were more people and more opportunity for crime to take place in the industrialised cities. Rural crime was less as many of the offences that were committed were out of sheer desperation and destitution, it would probably be the theft of a pig or a sheep to feed ones family that they would see as inevitable. Many of the crimes went unpunished in the eighteenth century, as people could not afford the legal costs of prosecution.
Urban crime tended to be more prolific and often more violent, but a lot of it was carried out through sheer greed rather than necessity. An exception to this would be the single women who turned to prostitution in times of economic decline.
The revision of the laws and the abolition of the Bloody Code meant that more and more laws were being introduced and more activities were being classed as illegal, as a form of social control and to allay fears of a moral panic.
The improvements made in the housing of prisoners acknowledged the fact that even prisoners had rights. The introduction of Police forces for every borough heightened awareness both of crime and the methods of punishment that would be carried out if one were to be prosecuted.
Bibliography:
Beattie J.M. “Crime and the Courts in England 1660-1800.”(1986) Oxford University Press. Chapters 5,6 and conclusion.
Hay D “War Dearth and Theft in the 18th century.”(1982) Pgs 117-160.
Philips.D “Crime Law and Punishment in the industrial revolution.” in O’Brien and Qunalt eds, The Industrial Revolution and British Society.
Course notes as issued.
