Crime -- Great Britain; Criminals -- Great Britain; Executions and executioners; Tyburn gallows (London, England)
“It is provided also, That notorious Felons, which openly be of
evil name, and will not put themselves in Enquests of Felonies
that Men shall charge them with before the Justices at the
King’s suit, shall have strong and hard Imprisonment (prison
forte et dure), as they which refuse to stand to the common Law
of the Land: But this is not to be understood of such prisoners
as be taken of light suspicion.”
Britton, supposed to have written about sixteen years later than the
statute, in 1291 or 1292, thus states the punishment:—
“And if they will not put themselves upon their acquittal, let
them be put to their penance until they pray to do it: and let
their penance be this, that they be barefooted, ungirt and
bareheaded, in the worst place in the prison, upon the bare
ground continually, night and day; that they eat only bread
made of barley or bran, and that they drink not the day they
eat, nor eat the day they drink, nor drink anything but water,
and that they be put in irons.”[53]
“Fleta,” written about the same time, contains similar details, expressly
stating that the punishment is to continue till those who refuse the law
“seek what they before contemned.”[54]
An actual case, not mentioned in the law books, is recorded in the
Chronicle of Bartholomew Cotton. In 1293, for the murder of some Dutch
sailors at Sniterleye, thirteen persons were hanged, and the bailiff
of the hundred, because he would not put himself upon the inquest (se
supponere inquisitioni), was sentenced to prison in this form, viz., that
on the day when he ate he should not drink, and the bread which he had
should be the worst bread, and the drink that he should have should be
putrid water, and that he should remain naked except for a linen garment,
and upon the naked ground, and that he should be loaded with iron from
the hands to the elbows, and from the feet to the knees, until he should
make his submission.[55]
That the “penance” was intended not to kill, but to induce the prisoner
to plead, is shown by cases in the Year Book of Edward I. In 1302 one
condemned to “the great penance” brought his charter of pardon into
court, by means of his friends, ten days after the judgment.[56] In 1357
Cecilia, wife of John de Rygeway, indicted for the murder of her husband,
stood mute, and was sentenced to imprisonment accordingly. In this case
it was reported to the king “on trustworthy testimony” that Cecilia
had lived without food or drink for forty days. This was regarded as
miraculous, and Cecilia was in consequence pardoned. Here, in intention
at least, the punishment went to the length of depriving of all food.[57]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account