means an uncommon punishment, more especially amongst the poor. Men,
says Pike, branded on the forehead, without hands, without feet, without
tongues, lived as an example of the danger which attended the commission
of petty crimes, and as a warning to all men who had the misfortune of
holding no higher position than that of a churl.[29] Wealthy people
might do wrong with impunity. It has been clearly shown that there was
one law for the rich, and another for the poor, in England during the
four centuries which preceded the Norman Conquest.
According to Pike, under the Danes, mutilation was practised with
perhaps greater severity than under the rule of the Saxons. Amongst the
horrors of the Danish conquest were eyes plucked out; the nose, ears,
and the upper lip were cut off; the scalp was torn away, and sometimes
even, there is reason to believe, the whole body was flayed alive.
Under the first two Norman kings mutilation of offenders was largely
employed to preserve game in their forests. They, however, only appear
to have enforced earlier laws. The earliest forest laws of which we have
any knowledge are those which were promulgated about 1016 by Canute, the
Dane, and probably much the same as had existed for a long period
previously. The principal points of their tyrannical laws were, that if
a freedman offered violence to a keeper of the King's deer, he was
liable to lose his freedom and property; if a serf did the same, he lost
his right hand; if the offence was repeated, he paid the penalty with
his life. For killing a deer, either the eyes of the offender were put
out, or he was killed; if anyone ran down a deer so that it panted, he
was to pay at least ten shillings in the money of the day. Such was the
law under the Saxon and the Danish Kings. The laws protected the private
estate owner, and it was not until the Conqueror came that all the
forest land was considered the property of the King.
In the reign of Henry I. coiners of false money were brought to
Winchester and suffered there in one day the loss of their right hands
and of their manhood. Under the Kings of the West Saxon dynasty the
loss of the right hand was a common sentence for makers of base coin.
Several curious instances of mutilation are mentioned in "The Obsolete
Punishments of Shropshire," by S. Meeson Morris. A case occurring in the
reign of King John provides some interesting particulars. "In 1203,"
says Mr. Morris, "at the Salop Assizes, Alice Crithecreche and others
were accused of murdering a woman at Lilleshall. Alice immediately,
after the murder, had fled into Staffordshire with certain chattels of
the murdered woman in her possession, and had been there arrested, and
brought back into Shropshire. Her defence before the _Curia Comitatus_
of Salop was at least ingenious:--She alleged that on hearing a noise at
night in the murdered woman's house she went and peeped through a chink
in the door; that she saw four men within, who presently coming out,
seized, and threatened to murder her if she made any alarm, but on her
keeping silence, gave her the stolen goods found upon her when arrested.
On being brought before the Justices-in-Eyre at the above Assizes, Alice
Crithecreche no longer adhered to this defence, and she was adjudged to
deserve death, but the penalty was commuted for one hardly less
terrible. It was ordered that both her eyes should be plucked out."
At a meeting of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology, held February 26th,
1889, Mr. George E. Crisp, of Playford Hall, near Ipswich, exhibited
instruments used in the time of Henry VIII. for cutting off the ears, as
a penalty for not attending Church.
In our chapter on the Pillory will be found particulars of cases of
mutilation of the ears. The punishment of mutilation, except to the ears
of the offender, was not common for centuries before the reign of Henry
VIII., but by statute 33 Henry VIII., c. 12, the penalty for striking in
the King's court or house was declared to be the loss of the right
hand.[30]
FOOTNOTES:
[29] Pike's "History of Crime in England," 1873.
[30] Morris's "Obsolete Punishments of Shropshire."
Branding.
This mode of punishment was discontinued in the reign of George III.,
and finally abolished in 1829. Old laws contain many allusions to the
subject. In the reign of Edward VI. was passed the famous Statute of
Vagabonds, authorising the branding with hot iron the letter V on the
breast of a runaway slave. If, on being sold, he afterwards ran away, he
might be branded on the cheek or forehead with the letter S, and thus
the fact made known to those who saw him that he was a slave. Church
brawlers in this reign were liable to be branded on the cheek with the
letter F, meaning a fraymaker.
Gipsies were punished with branding. At Haddington, in 1636, some
gipsies were severely dealt with, the men being condemned to be hanged,
the women drowned, with the exception of those having children, and they
were to be scourged through the burgh and burnt on their cheeks.
James Nayler, the Mad Quaker, who claimed to be the Messiah, as part of
his punishment for blasphemy, was condemned to have his tongue bored
through and his forehead branded with a hot iron with the letter B,
signifying that he was a blasphemer.[31]
Persons found guilty of petty offences and claiming benefit of clergy
were burnt on the hand. Dr. Cox gives particulars of a case occurring at
the Derbyshire Sessions in 1696. A butcher named Palmer, from
Wirksworth, had been found guilty of stealing a sheep. He claimed
benefit of clergy, which the court granted, and he read. The court gave
judgment that he be burnt in his left hand, which was executed. His
troubles did not end with the branding, for we find he had to "remaine
in Gaole till hee finde Sufficient Suretyes for his Good behaviour to
bee approved of and taken by Recoign by Mr. Justice Pole and Mr. Justice
Borrowes, and for his appearance att next Sessions, and then to abide
further Order of this Court."[32]
We reproduce from a carefully written work entitled, "In and Around
Morecambe and Its Bay," issued by Mr. T. A. J. Waddington, York, an
old-time picture of a branding scene. In the Lancaster Criminal Court is
still preserved a branding iron. "This iron," we are told, "is attached
to the back part of the dock; it consists of a long bolt with a wooden
handle at one end, and the letter M at the other. In close proximity are
two iron loops designed for securing firmly the hand of the prisoner
whilst the long piece of iron was heated red hot, so that the letter
denoting 'Malefactor' could be impressed. The brander, after doing his
fiery task, examined the hand, and on a good impression being made on
the brawny part running from the thumb, would turn to the judge and
exclaim--'A fair mark, my Lord!'"
[Illustration: "A FAIR MARK, MY LORD."]
At the Assizes held at Northampton, in 1720, before Mr. Justice Powis,
the following prisoners were adjudged to be branded:--"Silvester Green,
found guilty of sheep-stealing, burnt in the Hand. And James Corby, the
Pig Merchant, had the Honour of the Brand confer'd on him likewise: Jane
Clarke, William and John Green, convicted of several Petty Thefts and
Larcenies, are to travel for 7 years after the proper Officer has kiss'd
their Hand with a Red Hot Iron."
The foregoing list is drawn from the reports in the _Northampton
Mercury_, and in the same paper for August 1st, 1721, it is stated "The
following Persons were try'd at The Assizes held for The Town and County
of Northampton, on Tuesday, the 26th of this Instant. Isabella Chapman
and John Field were convicted of several Thefts and Larcenies. To be
burnt in The Hand and whipt; and afterwards to be transported for 7
years. Fielding's crime was stealing 12 sheep.... Isaac Emmerton, who
was committed on the 21st May last ... was burnt in The Hand."[33]
Branding in some instances appears to have been a mere farce. "When
Charles Moritz, a young German, visited England in 1782, he was much
surprised at this custom, and in his Diary he mentions that a clergyman
had fought a duel with another in Hyde Park, and killed the man; he was
found guilty of manslaughter, and was burnt in the hand, if that could
be called burning which was done with a cold iron."[33] Such cases as
this prepared the way for abolishing the custom, as cold irons for one
class, and hot irons for another, could not be tolerated.
It was customary to command criminals in the courts in the past century
to hold up their hands to prove if previous convictions had been passed
upon them.
FOOTNOTES:
[31] Andrews's "Literary Byways," 1898.
[32] Cox's "Three Centuries of Derbyshire Annals," 1888.
[33] Markham's "Ancient Punishments of Northamptonshire," 1886.
The Pillory.
In the history of our own and other European countries, the pillory may
be traced back to remote times, and its origin is almost lost in the
mists of antiquity. Its story is one of tragedy and comedy, and full of
historic interest and importance. In England, in bygone ages, the
pillory was a familiar object, and perhaps no engine of punishment was
more generally employed. Where there was a market, the pillory might be
seen, for if the local authorities neglected to have it ready for
immediate use, should occasion require it, they ran the risk of
forfeiting the right of holding a market, which was a most serious
matter in the olden time. Lords of Manors, in addition to having the
right of a pillory, usually had a ducking-stool and gallows. Thomas de
Chaworth, in the reign of Edward III., made a claim of a park, and the
right of free warren, at Alfreton, with the privilege of having a
gallows, tumbrel, and pillory.
[Illustration: PILLORY, WHIPPING-POST, AND STOCKS, WALLINGFORD.]
In the middle ages frequently a pillory, whipping-post, and stocks were
combined, and we give a picture of a good example from Wallingford,
Berkshire. It will be observed that they are planned to hold four
delinquents, namely, one in the pillory, one at the whipping-post, and
two in the stocks. They stood near the town hall, in the market-place,
down to about the year 1830, when the pillory and whipping-post were
taken down. The stocks remained for a few years longer to remind the
tippler of his fate, if he overstepped the bounds of temperance and was
caught drunk. In course of time they fell into disuse, and were finally
presented by the Corporation to Mr. J. Kirby Hedges, of Wallingford
Castle, the historian of the ancient town. He informs us that there was
a pillory at Wallingford in 1231, and probably earlier.
[Illustration: OCKAM IN THE PILLORY.]
A good representation of the pillory formerly much used is furnished in
a cut of Robert Ockam, undergoing part of his sentence for perjury, in
the reign of Henry VIII. In the year 1543, Ockam, with two other
criminals mounted on horseback, with papers on their heads, and their
faces towards the tails of the horses, had to ride about Windsor,
Newbury, and Reading, and stand in the pillory of each of the three
towns.
We give a view of an ancient pillory which formerly stood in the
market-place of the village of Paulmy, in Touraine. It is copied from a
picture of the Castle of Paulmy in _Cosmographie Universelle_, 1575. It
will be observed that it is planned for holding a number of offenders at
the same time. This form of pillory was not generally used. It was
usually much simpler in construction, and frequently was not a permanent
structure.
[Illustration: PILLORY FOR A NUMBER OF PERSONS.]
Stow, in his "Survey of London," supplies a description of the Cornhill
pillory, and gives particulars of the crimes for which it was brought
into requisition. After adverting to the making of a strong prison of
timber, called a cage, and fixing upon it a pair of stocks for
night-walkers, he next tells us: "On the top of the cage was placed a
pillory, for the punishment of bakers offending in the assize of bread;
for millers stealing of corn at the mill; for bawds, scolds, and other
offenders." In the year 1468, the seventh of Edward IV., divers persons,
being common jurors, such as at assizes, were forsworn for rewards or
favour of parties, and judged to ride from Newgate to the pillory of
Cornhill, with mitres of paper on their heads, there to stand, and from
thence again to Newgate; and this judgment was given by the Mayor of
London. In the year 1509, the first of Henry VIII., Darby, Smith, and
Simson, ringleaders of false inquests in London, rode about the city
with their faces to horses' tails, and papers on their heads, and were
set on the pillory in Cornhill, and afterwards brought again to Newgate,
where they died for very shame, saith Robert Fabian.
A curious note, relating to this topic, appears in the "Journal of Henry
Machyn, Citizen of London," published by the Camden Society. It is
stated that, on the 1st July, 1552, there were a man and woman on the
pillory in Cheapside; the man sold pots of strawberries, the which were
not half full, but filled with fern. On the 30th May, 1554, two persons
were set on the pillory, a man and woman; but the woman had her ears
nailed to the pillory for speaking lies and uttering false rumours. The
man was punished for seditious and slanderous words.
An instance of great severity is recorded in 1621, when Edward Floyde
was convicted of having used slighting expressions concerning the king's
son-in-law, the Elector Palatine, and his wife. The sentence was given
as follows: (1) Not to bear arms as a gentleman, nor be a competent
witness in any Court of Justice. (2) To ride with his face to a horse's
tail, to stand in the pillory, and have his ears nailed, etc. (3) To be
whipped at the cart's tail. (4) To be fined L5,000. (5) To be
perpetually imprisoned in Newgate. It was questioned whether Floyde,
being a gentleman, should be whipped, and have his ears nailed. It was
agreed by a majority that he should be subject to the former, but not to
the latter. He stood two hours in the pillory, and had his forehead
branded.
Pepys, writing in his diary under date of March 26th, 1664, relates that
he had been informed by Sir W. Batten that "some 'prentices, being put
in the pillory to-day for beating of their masters, or such-like things,
in Cheapside, a company of 'prentices came and rescued them, and pulled
down the pillory; and they being set up again, did the like again." We
may infer, from the foregoing and other facts that have come down to us
respecting the London apprentices, that they were a power in bygone
times, doing very much as they pleased.
We are enabled, by the courtesy of Messrs. W. & R. Chambers, to
reproduce from their "Book of Days" an excellent illustration of Oates
in the pillory (from a contemporary print). "Found guilty," says the
writer in the "Book of Days," "of perjury on two separate indictments,
the inventor of the Popish Plot was condemned, in 1685, to public
exposure on three consecutive days. The first day's punishment, in
Palace Yard, nearly cost the criminal his life; but his partisans
mustered in such force in the city, on the succeeding day, that they
were able to upset the pillory, and nearly succeeded in rescuing their
idol from the hands of the authorities. According to his sentence, Oates
was to stand every year of his life in the pillory, on five different
days: before the gate of Westminster Hall, on the 9th August; at Charing
Cross on the 10th; at the Temple on the 11th; at the Royal Exchange on
the 2nd September; and at Tyburn on the 24th April; but, fortunately for
the infamous creature, the Revolution deprived his determined enemies of
power, and turned the criminal into a pensioner of Government."
It was formerly a common custom to put persons in the pillory during the
time of public market. We may name, as an example, a case occurring at
Canterbury, in 1524. A man was set up in the pillory, which was in the
Market Place, and bearing on his head a paper inscribed, "This is a
false, perjured, and forsworn man." He was confined in the pillory until
the market was over, and then led to Westgate and thrust out of the
town, still wearing the paper. "If he be proud," says an old writer, "he
may go home and shew himself among his neighbours."
The Corporation accounts of Newcastle-on-Tyne contain, among other
curious items, the following:
1561.--Paid to the Gawyng Aydon, for squrgyn a boye about the
town, and for settying a man in the pallerye, two days 16d.
1562.--Paid for a tre to the pillyre 5s.
1574.--Paid to Charles Shawe, for charges in carryinge the man
to Durham that stode in the pillarye, and was
skrougide aboute the town at Mr. Maior's commandment 3s.
1593.--Paide for a Papist which studd in the pillerie for
abusing Our Majestie by slanderous woordes 14d.
1594.--Paid for 4 papers to 4 folke which was sett on the
pillorie 16d.
Paid Ro. Musgrave for takinge paines to sett them upp 8d.
The "papers" above mentioned were for the purpose of proclaiming to the
world at large the nature of the bearer's offence.
At Hull, in the year 1556, the town ordinances were revised and
proclaimed "in the Market Place, in the market-time, according to the
yearly custom." The twenty-third rule runs as follows: "That no person
whomsoever presume to take down and carry away, any brick or stones off
or from the town's walls, upon pain for every default to be set upon the
pillory, and to pay, for a fine, to the town's chamber, forty
shillings." We may infer, from the foregoing, that the town's walls,
both the original stone portion of Edward I., and the later addition of
brick, were in a state of demolition. In 1559, the aldermen of Hull were
directed to take account of "all vagabonds, idle persons, sharpers,
beggars, and such like;" and, doubtless, not a few of the persons
included under these wide definitions would come to the pillory, for the
aldermen were ordered to "punish them severely;" and, as the punishments
of Hull were largely in fines, Mr. Wildridge, author of "Old and New
Hull," suggests that the moneyless classes of persons above-named would
be most economically and severely dealt with by pillorying. About 1813,
a man, for keeping a disreputable house, was placed in the pillory
erected in the Market Place.
At Preston, Lancashire, in 1814, a man about sixty years of age was
pilloried for a similar offence, and it is said that he was the last
person punished in this manner in the town.
The pillory at Driffield was movable, and when in use stood in the
Market Place, near the Cross Keys Hotel. The last occupants, a man and a
woman, were pilloried together about 1810, for fortune-telling. At
Bridlington the pillory stood in the Market Place, opposite the Corn
Exchange. It was taken down about 1835, and lay some time in Well Lane,
but it finally disappeared, and was probably chopped up for firewood.
Before its removal there was affixed to it a bell, which was rung to
regulate the market hours. Mischievous youths, however, often rang it,
so it was taken down in 1810, and kept at a house down a court, known as
Pillory Bell Yard.
[Illustration: MANCHESTER PILLORY.]
Mr. W. E. A. Axon, the well known Lancashire author and antiquary,
kindly furnishes us with particulars of the Manchester pillory. "The
earliest notice of the pillory in Manchester," says Mr. Axon, "is in the
Court Leet Records, April 8th, 1624, when the jury referred the erection
of 'a gibbett' to the discretion of the Steward and the Boroughreeve.
Some delay must have occurred, for on April 8th, 1625, 'the jurye doth
order that the constables of this yeare, att the charges of the
inhabitants, shall cause to bee erected and sett vp a sufficient gibbett
or pilorye for the vse of this towne, in some convenient place about the
Markett Crosse, and to take to them the advice of Mr. Stewart and the
Bororeve. This to be done before the xxiiijth day of August next,
subpena xx^s.' This threat of a penalty was effective, and the careful
scribe notes _factum est_. The convenient place was in the market-place,
close to the stocks. The pillory remained, more or less in use, until
1816, when it was removed. Barritt, the antiquary, made a drawing of it,
which has been engraved. It was jocularly styled the 'tea table,' and
was used as a whipping place also. In the present century, it was not a
permanent fixture, but a movable structure, set up when required. One
pilloried individual, grimly jesting at his own sorrows, told an
inquiring friend that he was celebrating his nuptials with Miss Wood,
and that his neighbour, whom the beadle was whipping, had come to dance
at the wedding. During the Civil War, there was a pillory for the
special benefit of the soldiers, and it was removed from the Corn Market
in 1651."
The Rye pillory is still kept in the Town Hall, and we give a picture of
it from a photograph. The last time it was used was in 1813, when a
publican was put in it for aiding the escape of General Phillippon, a
French prisoner of war, who had been brought to this old Sussex town.
The pillory was erected on the beach, and the face of the culprit
turned to the coast of France. Mr. Holloway, the local historian,
supplied the late Mr. Llewellyn Jewitt with some particulars respecting
this example. "It measures," says Mr. Holloway, "about six feet in
height, by four in width. It consists of two up-posts affixed to a
platform, and has two transverse rails, the upper one of which is
divided horizontally, and has a hinge to admit of the higher portion
being lifted, so as to allow of the introduction of the culprit's head
and hands. Through the platform and the lower rail there are round
perforations, into which, when the instrument was in requisition, an
upright bar, probably of iron, was introduced, so as to allow the
pillory, with its unfortunate tenant, to be turned bodily round at
pleasure."
[Illustration: PILLORY AT RYE.]
The famous Lord Thurlow was eloquent for the preservation of the
pillory, which he called "the restraint against licentiousness, provided
by the wisdom of past ages." This was in a case against the Rev. Horne
Tooke, who, escaped with a fine of L200. Of others, who have spoken for
and against it, may be mentioned Lord Macclesfield, who, in 1719,
condemned it as a punishment for State criminals. In 1791, Pitt claimed
to have dissuaded the Government from its too frequent use, as had
Burke. Lord Ellenborough, in 1812, sentenced a blasphemer to the pillory
for two hours once a month, for eighteen months. Again, in 1814, he
ordered Lord Cochrane, the famous sea-fighter of Brasque Roads fame, to
be pilloried for conspiring with others to spread false news. But his
colleague, Sir Francis Burdett, declared that he would stand by his side
in the pillory regardless of consequences. In the then state of public
opinion, the Government declined to undertake the responsibility, and
this punishment was waived.
It was no uncommon circumstance for the offenders to be killed on the
pillory, by the pelting to which they were subjected by the fury of the
crowd. In 1731, a professional witness, _i.e._, one who, for the reward
offered for the conviction of criminals, would swear falsely against
them, was sentenced to the pillory of Seven Dials, where so bitter were
the populace against him that they pelted him to death. The coroner's
jury returned a verdict of "wilful murder by persons unknown." In 1756,
the drovers of Smithfield pelted two perjured thief-catchers so
violently that one died; in 1763, a man died from a like cause, at
Southwark; in 1780, a coachman died from injuries before his time had
expired.
An amusing anecdote is related, bearing upon a pillory accident. "A man
being condemned to the pillory in or about Elizabeth's time, the
foot-board on which he was placed proved to be rotten, and down it fell,
leaving him hanging by the neck, in danger of his life. On being
liberated, he brought an action against the town for the insufficiency
of its pillory, and recovered damages."[34]
In the year 1816, the pillory ceased to be employed for punishing
persons, except in cases of perjury, and for this crime a man was put in
the pillory in 1830. The pillory, in the year 1837, was abolished by Act
of Parliament.