Punishments fitting the crime?

Everyone knows about the punishments meted out to lawbreakers in Tudor times. So much so, that the general impression is that all felons were hanged, even if they stole a loaf of bread. It isn’t that simple, though. There were statutes which covered the whole of England, but punishment varied throughout the kingdom. Whereas some Justices would indeed hang a man for stealing a loaf or rabbit to feed his family, others would not.

It is also a myth that many people were racked. There was only one rack in the whole of England and that was in the Tower of London and saved for traitors and heretics. Capital crimes attracted the most horrific punishments, although England never descended to the horrors of the inquisition. Torture was technically illegal unless sanctioned by the monarch. Poisoners were subject to being boiled alive, a law that Henry VIII rescinded. High-born traitors were beheaded. Others were either hanged or hanged, drawn and quartered.

In the reign of Edward I (1272-1307), Richard Puddlicott robbed the royal treasury. He begged Edward to show clemancy and not hang, draw and quarter him. Edward, not known for his mercy, agreed. Puddlicott was hanged until he was dead. Then Edward had him skinned and his hide nailed to the door of Westminster Abbey to warn any others who might try to rob him.

Minor crimes were punished with less ferocity and sometimes with a fitting ‘punishment fits the crime’ sentence. For example a fishmonger who sold tainted fish would be put in the pillory and rotten fish hung round his neck. The Justices might sentence him to stay there from an hour to 24 hours, regardless of the weather. Drunkenness was also punished by a stay in the pillories or stocks, usually situated in the market place. 

Whilst so imprisoned, the malefactors were the constant target of abuse, both verbal and physical. Not just rotten food was aimed at them, but horse dung, bloody animal entrails from the fleshers stalls, anything that could be thrown. It was not unknown for the prisoners to be doused immediately before being released - and not with water. Imagine a drunken roisterer on a frosty February morning, now sober, having endured hours of such abuse, extremely cold and then released but only after being soaked by freezing horse urine. I wonder if that would make our present-day rampagers think twice before re-offending?

The ducking stool was used for alleged witches or nagging wives. If a suspected witch sank, she was innocent, so whatever happened, she was doomed. Any woman found guilty of malicious gossip or false accusation was liable to be punished by the brank or gossip’s bridle. The offender's head was imprisoned in an iron cage with a tongue lever covered in spikes. It was excruciatingly painful, especially as the populace were permitted to beat the woman whilst she wore it. Often, sufferers died. Some media bosses and editors might find that interesting.

Branding was common. The Earl of Somerset in the first days of Edward VI’s reign passed a law that any man out of work for three days was to be branded with a V for Vagrant and sold into slavery for two years. Most Justices thought this too severe and it was not enforced by all courts. Obviously, Somerset would have fallen down in shock at the theory of state benefits. Other brands included a T for thieves, who could also have their ears clipped or a hand amputated, a visible symbol of their crime. Not all murderers were executed. An M brand denoted a murderer – perhaps it depended on the intent of the criminal for there was a crime of ‘Man’s Slaughter’ for unintentional killings.

Those women who committed adultery as well as prostitutes were liable to have their heads shaved and be paraded around the town in a cart. Beatings were common and most towns had a ‘whipping post’, but that was better than being hanged! Beggars were beaten as far as the parish boundaries and cast out.

Clerics were very much involved in the formation of some laws. So much so that self-interest led to the ‘benefit of clergy’ plea, whereby anyone who could recite the first lines of Psalm 150 was given a much lesser punishment, usually a fine. It is interesting to muse on current clerical scandals and think that nothing has changed.