Death for stealing candles

[mootothemax]

This dates from the so-called "Bloody Code" era of 1688 to 1815, where some 220 offences could lead to the death sentence:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Code

Apparently "theft of goods worth more than 12 pence, which was only about one-twentieth of the weekly wage for a skilled worker at the time" could lead to the death sentence.

Other crimes that could be punished with death included:

- Being in the company of Gypsies for one month

- Strong evidence of malice in a child aged 7–14 years of age

- Blacking the face or using a disguise whilst committing a crime

The latter comes from the Black Act, which introduced 50 such offences:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Act

"Pleading the belly" was an option for women who were detectably pregnant, and if they were found pregnant, the woman's death sentence could be postponed until they had delivered their child, changed to penal transportation, or even pardoned altogether:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleading_the_belly

A jury of matrons would be responsible - sometimes corruptly - although a woman would only receive one reprieve; any further pregnancy would be ignored and the death penalty carried out regardless:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_of_matrons

[noir_lord]

It's easy to forget living in 21st century Britain how far we've come generally.

Thanks for the reminder.

[tptacek]

The same site suggests that most of these prisoners weren't actually executed:

http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/static/Punishment.jsp#death

[monroepe]

I was actually going to point that out too. I did a research paper on theft in this time period when I was in college and was shocked when I saw that people were sentenced to for theft. I mean I know it was a different time, but it really wasn't all that long ago. I was relieved when I looked into it more and found that most weren't really executed.

[ballpoint]

This was apparently pretty typical for English law hundreds of years ago. As I understand it, wealthy people had a lot of influence over the government and were able to lobby for extreme punishments to protect their fortunes. Many of the death sentences were not even carried out by the executioners, because they were so common.

[ionised]

> As I understand it, wealthy people had a lot of influence over the government and were able to lobby for extreme punishments to protect their fortunes.

Western society has come a long way indeed.

Oh, wait...

[V-2]

    wealthy people had a lot of influence over the government 
    and were able to lobby for extreme punishments to protect their fortunes

Such as candles

[mauricemir]

though over time Juries became unwilling to convict and quite often the amount in question was reduced so they got transported

[ghayes]

Going to the source[0], there is no reference to the punishment listed. In fact, other punishments listed on the same page seem mundane in comparison, e.g.

> ... the Jury found him Guilty to the Value of 38s.

Is it possible this is just a transcription error?

Edit: maybe not, see [1]

[0] http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/images.jsp?doc=171601130002

[1] http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/images.jsp?doc=171601130006

[SixSigma]

According to my tour of The Galleries of Justice, in Nottingham UK, the cut-off point between transportation and execution was the price of a loaf of bread.

[hvm]

Also, like I said in a previous comment, it's interesting to note the 'interview' given to the condemned: http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?div=OA17160127

I also wonder what's up with those two names in the 'burnt in hand' section that are anonymized (V--- E--- and G--- C---). Public people not wanting others to know about it? Escapees? People with no public records?

[saosebastiao]

I found this interesting and upvoted accordingly but I'm hoping to hear why it was submitted. Is there some context we should know about?

[hvm]

I love this kind of historical information. It's difficult (to me) to empathise with past historical events when we (I) have no knowledge of those people and how they lived.

Reading about their daily struggles gives events from that time a whole new image.

BTW, I found extremely interesting that they gave the condemned an interview which they then wrote down ( http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?div=OA17160127 ).

How many average people from that time have the luxury of their lives being recorded for future people to see? How many of us have that today?

[malkia]

Context: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9443048

[lifeisstillgood]

I grew up around Hoddesdon - the same town in England that Mary Knight grew up in, before she was executed for stealing 9shillings, On the same gallows as the candle thief

http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?div=OA17160127

That's the weirdest thing ever - it's like finding the middle of butt-nowhere was still the middle of butt-nowhere 200 years ago.

RIP Mary.

http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?div=OA17160127

[DannoHung]

How much is 48s in a monetary value I am familiar with?

[deanmen]

There are 20 shillings in an old pound, so it is £2.40

This is equivalent to about £300 today. If we instead consider it as a percentage of the GDP per capita it would be eqiuivalent to £6000 today.

[bobbles]

It'd buy you about 8 dozen candles.

[zby]

The detection was very law so for the penalties to be effective they would have to be severe.

[cstross]

The point is, the penalties weren't effective -- if effectiveness of a criminal justice system is evaluated in terms of crime prevention.

We're talking about an age where there were no police organizations as we currently understand the term: a lot of arrests were made by freelance "thief takers" such as the infamous Jonathan Wilde, who himself eventually went to the gallows (because he wasn't merely a thief-taker, he was also the biggest fence for stolen goods in London!):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Wild

(Shorter version: think of him as a kind of 18th century anti-Batman.)

Because arrest rates were virtually non-existent except when an angry shopkeeper grabbed a burglar in the act, or a mob went for a known miscreant, punishments were draconian. But because punishments were draconian, they were often commuted -- by the end of the 18th century about half of death sentences ended up being turned into transportation and involuntary servitude (basically, exile and slavery). Crime rates remained terrifyingly high by modern standards until the 1830s, when Sir Robert Peel as Home Secretary abolished and rationalized a lot of laws (he axed the death penalty for most offenses but replaced it with imprisonment) and instituted the first modern police forces:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Peel

Anyway, the takeaway from all this is, the British state in the 18th century performed a large-scale experiment that proved pretty much definitively that draconian punishments do not deter crime. What reduces criminal activity is certainty of apprehension, even if the punishment is relatively mild or rehabilitative. (Nobody thinks "I'd better not steal that pizza, I can probably get away with it but if they catch me I might end up facing life in jail". But knowing "if I steal that pizza, I will be caught" is an effective deterrent.)

[qzervaas]

Can anybody shed any light on the etymology of "prov'd"?

It was fully prov'd, that the Prisoner unbolted the Hatch...

[seatonist]

"Prov'd" is just a contraction of "proved". It was common at that time. This might have a familiar ring...

  If this be error, and upon me prov'd,
  I never writ, nor no man ever lov'd.

(It's from Shakespeare's famous sonnet that begins "Let me not to the marriage of true minds / admit impediments".)

Beyond that, "prove", "proof", "proven", etc are all from the latin provare - to try, or test.

[onion2k]

That's not a light sentence.