FOOTNOTES FOR ALL CHAPTERS
[1]. “In the early cuneiform writing ... the symbol for a prison is a combination of the symbols for ‘house’ and ‘darkness.’”—Isaac Taylor, History of the Alphabet, p. 21. London, 1899.
[2]. It has been said that imprisonment is not mentioned in Anglo-Saxon laws as a punishment; it is, however, referred to in the laws of Æthelstan thus: “For murder let a man forfeit his life, if he will deny it and appear guilty at the threefold ordeal let him be 120 nights in prison; afterwards let his relations take him out and pay the king 120 shillings and to his relatives the price of his blood....” See J. Johnson, Ecclesiastical Laws. London, 1720. The same king ordained that “If a thief be brought into prison that he be 40 days in prison and then let him be released thereout with cxx. shillings and let his kindred enter into borh for him that he will ever more desist.”—B. Thorpe, Ancient Laws and Institutions of England, fol. ed. p. 85. London, 1840.
[3]. “In the reign of Henry III. imprisonment for a definite period was an unknown punishment.”—G. J. Turner, Select Pleas of the Forest, p. lxv. London, 1901.
[4]. “Imprisonment occurs in the Anglo-Saxon Laws only as a means of temporary security.”—Pollock and Maitland, Hist. Eng. Law, vol. i. p. 26. Cambridge, 1895.
[5]. “In the nature of the Saxons in the most ancient times there existed neither a knowledge of the most high and heavenly King ... nor any dignity of honour of any earthly king....”—W. Stubbs, Const. Hist. p. 49. Oxford, 1880.
[6]. Ibid. p. 75.
[7]. “Nihil neque publicae neque privatae rei nisi armati agunt.”—Tac. Germ. xiii.
[8]. Among the Jutes, etc., see J. M. Lappenberg, Hist. of Eng. under the Anglo-Saxon Kings, i. p. 97. London, 1845. The Anglo-Saxon lad came of age at twelve; see work just quoted, p. 173, and J. Thrupp, The Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 108. London, 1862.
[9]. The exceptions to this wise though primitive rule are to be found where occasionally “God” and even “Nature” would be cited as injured third parties, upon theological grounds. See, for instance, N. Marshall, Penitential Discipline of the Primitive Church, pp. 49, 190, Oxford, 1844; and the thirteenth-century Mirror of Justice, chap. xiv.
[10]. “To keep the peace is the legislator’s first object, and it is not easy. To force the injured man or the slain man’s kinsfolk to accept a money compensation instead of resorting to reprisals is the main aim of the law-giver.”—F. W. Maitland, Constitutional History of England, p. 4. Cambridge, 1908.
[11]. Thus in the Laws of the XII. Tables the manifest thief would be killed if a slave, or if free become the bondman of the person robbed; if, however, he were captured later, he had to refund double the value of what he had taken. By the Germanic codes a thief might be instantly chased and then hanged or decapitated, but fines for homicide would be imposed if he were slain after an interval. Henry Maine, Ancient Law, ed. of 1906, pp. 387, 388.
[12]. For instance, Exodus xxi. 23, 24, 25.
[13]. See E. Westermarck, Moral Ideas, vol. i. p. 178. London, 1906.
[14]. At first it was not always necessary to accept the blood-fine. See E. W. Robertson, Scotland under her Early Kings, p. 287, Edinburgh, 1862, on this point; and as to the treatment of female relatives, see J. Thrupp, Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 151.
[15]. In the seventh century a law of Ine ordained that “If any one takes revenge before he demands justice, let him give up what he has taken to himself and pay the damage done and make bōt with xxx. shillings.”—Thorpe, Ancient Laws and Institutions, fol. ed. p. 48.
[16]. “The penal law of ancient communities is not a law of crimes; it is a law of wrongs, or, to use the English technical word, of torts. The person injured proceeds against the wrongdoer by an ordinary civil action, and recovers compensation in the shape of money damages if he succeeds.”—Maine, Ancient Law, p. 379.
[17]. “It is curious to observe how little the men of primitive times were troubled with these scruples (as to the degree of moral guilt to be ascribed to the wrongdoer), how completely they were persuaded that the impulses of the wronged person were the proper measure of the vengeance he was entitled to exact, and how literally they imitated the rise and fall of his passions in fixing their scale of punishment.”—Maine, Ancient Law, p. 389.
[18]. “Every man’s life had its value, and according to that valuation the value of his oath in a court of justice varied, and offences against his person and protection were atoned for.”—Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. p. 188.
[19]. A front tooth usually cost six shillings; in Alfred’s time, eight.
[20]. Laws of Æthelbert. If a freeman rob the king let him pay a forfeiture ninefold. If a freeman rob a freeman let him make threefold satisfaction.—J. Johnson, Ecc. Laws.
[21]. For a collection of the various codes and for examples of their amazing minuteness as to all possible injuries, see F. Lindenbrog, Codex legum antiquarum, pp. 474, 498, etc. Frankfort, 1613.
[22]. The Mercian pound was equal to 60 scillings, the Wessex to 48; see H. A. Grueber, Handbook of the Coins, p. ix. London, 1899.
[23]. Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. p. 109.
[24]. Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 80.
[25]. W. S. Holdsworth, History of English Law, p. 13. London, 1903.
[26]. J. M. Kemble, The Saxons in England, i. p. 149. London, 1876.
[27]. R. Ruding, Annals of the Coinage, p. 110. London, 1840.
[28]. F. W. Maitland, Domesday Book, p. 44. Cambridge, 1897.
[29]. “It was at least theoretically possible down to the middle of the tenth century for a man-slayer to elect to bear the feud of the kindred. His own kindred, however, might avoid any share in the feud by disclaiming him; any of them who maintained him after this, as well as any of the avenging kinsfolk who meddled with any but the actual wrongdoer, was deemed a foe to the king.”—Pollock and Maitland, Hist. ed. of 1898, i. 48.
[30]. When a ceorl had been frequently accused, if afterwards he were apprehended he might lose a hand or a foot.—Laws of Ine. R Schmidt, Gesetze, p. 29. Leipzig, 1858.
[31]. See Laws of Ine, sect. 12. Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 49.
[32]. Pollock and Maitland, Hist. i. 476 and ii. 451, ed. of 1898.
[33]. J. Thrupp, Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 145.
[34]. G. G. Coulton, Chaucer and His England, p. 293. London, 1908.
[35]. Pollock and Maitland, i. 478, ii. 450.
[36]. And see Early Assize Rolls for the County of Northumberland, pp. xviii., xix., etc. Durham, Surtees Society, 1891.
[37]. Stubbs, Const. Hist. p. 89.
[38]. Dooms of Alfred, sect. 24. “If any one steal another’s ox and slay or sell it, let him give two for it, and four sheep for one. If he have not what he may give be he himself sold for the cattle.”—Thorpe, Laws, fol. ed. p. 23. Compare Exodus xxii. 3; Pollock and Maitland, Hist., ed. 1895, vol. ii. 514.
[39]. Pollock and Maitland, ii. p. 11.
[40]. The intertribal wars at one time “filled the foreign markets with English slaves,” says J. R. Green, relating the well-known story of Pope Gregory.—Hist. Eng. People, i. 37. London, 1881.
[41]. Hovenden. H. T. Riley’s ed. i. p. 143. London, 1853.
[42]. A vigorous slave trade was carried on just prior to the Conquest.—Thrupp, Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 130.
[43]. Pollock and Maitland, Hist. i. p. 12. Cambridge, 1895.
[44]. Law of Ine, seventh century. “If any one sell his countryman bound or free, though he be guilty, over sea, let him pay for him according to his wer.”—Stubbs, Charters, p. 61. Oxford, 1884.
Law of Æthelred. “Christian men and condemned persons are not to be sold out of the country, at least not into heathen nations.”—Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 135.
A law of William I. was to the same effect.—R. Schmidt, Gesetze, p. 347.
[45]. F. W. Maitland, Domesday Book, p. 31.
[46]. Æthelbert. “If any one slay a ceorl’s hlf-æta, let him make bōt with vi. shillings.”—Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 3.
[47]. Thorpe, 8vo ed. i. p. 626.
[48]. Thrupp, Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 127.
[49]. See Theodori liber poenitentialis. Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 288. Poenitentiale Ecberti, lib. ii. 3. Thorpe, p. 368.
[50]. Compare Exodus xxi. 20, 21; “And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
“Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.”
[51]. Stubbs, Const. Hist. p. 89.
[52]. Omne damnum quod servus fecerit, dominus emendet.—Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 11.
[53]. Maitland, Domesday Book, p. 32.
[54]. Or he might be scourged thrice, temp. Æthelstan. See Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 88.
[55]. Laws of Æthelred. D. Wilkins, Leges Anglo-Saxonicae, p. 103. London, 1721.
[56]. By Alfred’s Dooms rape on a ceorl’s female slave was punished by a five-shilling bōt to the ceorl; if a theow committed the offence, he might be emasculated.—Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 35.
[57]. Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. p. 25.
[58]. Thrupp, Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 131.
[59]. William Andrews, Old-Time Punishments, p. 146. Hull, 1890.
[60]. Thrupp, Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 144.
[61]. E. W. Robertson, Scotland, ii. p. 450.
[62]. Pollock and Maitland, Hist. ed. 1898, ii. p. 450.
[63]. See Thorpe, 8vo ed. vol. i. p. 579: “Si quis dominum suum occidet,” etc.
[64]. F. Lindenbrog, Codex legum antiquarum, p. 498.
[65]. For similar laws in ancient Wales and eighteenth-century America, etc., see Westermarck, Moral Ideas, i. p. 518.
[66]. “Imprisonment,” say Pollock and Maitland, “would have been regarded in those old times as a useless punishment; it does not” (as it was then employed and understood) “satisfy revenge, it keeps the criminal idle, and do what we may it is costly.”—Hist. Eng. Law, ed. of 1895, vol. ii. p. 514.
[67]. Grant Allen, Anglo-Saxon Britain, p. 47.
[68]. E. W. Robertson, Scotland, p. 295.
[69]. Laws of Ine. To fight in the king’s house rendered the offender liable to be put to death.—J. Johnson.
Laws of Alfred. To fight in the presence of an archbishop meant a fine of 150 shillings.—Thorpe, p. 32.
To fight in the house of a common man meant a mulct of thirty shillings, and six shillings to the ceorl.—J. Johnson.
[70]. Thrupp, Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 148.
[71]. See example, temp. Cnut. Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 174.
[72]. J. Johnson, Ecc. Laws.
[73]. Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 174.
[74]. J. Johnson, Ecc. Laws.
[75]. Thorpe, Laws of Cnut, fol. ed. p. 169.
[76]. Ibid. p 213.
[77]. See Saxon Chronicle, J. Ingram’s ed. p. 295. London, 1823.
[78]. Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. p. 204.
[79]. Maitland, Domesday Book, p. 33.
[80]. Often of death for serious offences, but the prisoner’s goods were forfeited for felony; hence it was to the profit of the government to have many felonies. See F. W. Maitland, Const. Hist. Eng. p. 111, and J. Britton, Nichols’ ed. p. 35. Oxford, 1855.
[81]. “To them” (the subject people) “a new tribunal seemed only a new torment.”—L. O. Pike, Hist. Crime, i. 134. London, 1873.
[82]. The hundreds were liable to be fined for undetected murders—as villages now are in India—and also officers for neglect of duty; see T. Madox, History and Antiquities of the Exchequer, chap. xiv. p. 539, etc. London, 1769. J. Britton, F. M. Nichols’ ed. p. 138. This liability was abolished in the reign of Edward III.; see W. S. Holdsworth, Hist. p. 8.
[83]. T. Madox, Hist. Exch. i. p. 425, etc.
[84]. Maitland, Domesday Book, p. 52.
[85]. Infangthef, the right to hang a thief, “hand having and back bearing.” Utfangthef, the right to punish a thief beyond the particular boundary.
[86]. Holdsworth, Hist. p. ii.; and see Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. 452, 453, etc.
[87]. “The lord exercised ... jurisdiction in civil and criminal suits which, with all the profits—for in early times the pecuniary interests of justice formed no small part of the advantages of judicial power—was conferred on him by the original gift.”—Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. p. 102, and Holdsworth, 13, 14.
[88]. See Maitland, Domesday Book, p. 33.
[89]. Ibid. p. 83.
[90]. “So intimate is the connection of judicature with finance under the Norman kings, that we scarcely need the comment of the historian to guide us to the conclusion that it was mainly for the sake of the profits that justice was administered at all.”—Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. p. 438.
[91]. After Henry II. “a crime is no longer regarded as a matter merely between the criminal and those who have directly suffered by his crime; it is a wrong against the nation.”—Maitland, Const. Hist. p. 109, ed. of 1898.
[92]. L. O. Pike, History of Crime in England, i. p. 130.
[93]. In the period of the Civil War, however, the barons had made their castles robbers’ caves, from which they raided the unhappy English. Vide The Saxon Chronicle for the year 1137.
[94]. See Stubbs, Charters, p. 143.
[95]. The expenses for gaols at Canterbury, Rochester, Huntingdon, Cambridge, Salisbury, Malmesbury, Aylesbury, and Oxford are detailed in the Roll of 1166.
[96]. See John Lingard, Hist. Eng. ii. p. 619. London, 1849.
[97]. Pike, Hist. i. p. 130.
[98]. “Carcer ad continendos et non ad puniendos habere debeat.”—De Legibus, lib. iii. cap. vi. f. 105.
[99]. F. M. Nichols’ ed. p. 44.
[100]. And see 5 Hen. IV. c. 10.
[101]. In 1295 a law was passed by which a man should no longer suffer death or mutilation for prison-breaking alone, unless his crime would have been so punished upon conviction. See statute, De Fragentibus Prisonam, 23 Edward I., Record Commission. Statutes of the Realm, vol. i. London, 1810.
[102]. W. J. Whittaker’s ed. p. 52.
[103]. In the reign of Henry III. the judges set forth every seven years.—Pike, Hist. Crime, p. 135; and see G. J. Turner, Pleas of the Forest, p. xv. By 13 Ed. I. assizes were to be held three times a year at most. In the early part of the nineteenth century the gaols in the provinces were delivered only twice a year. See Blackstone, Commentaries, bk. iv. chap. xix.; J. Stewart’s ed. p. 352. London, 1854. W. Crawford’s remarks in his Penitentiaries of the United States, p. 37. London, printed for the House of Commons, 1834.
[104]. The gaol was his pledge or security that could find (or was allowed) none.—Glanville, J. Beames’ ed. pp. 346, 348. London, 1812. For details as to who were or who were not replevisable in the thirteenth century, see 3 Ed. I. c. 15 and 27 Ed. I. c. 3.
[105]. F. M. Nichols’ ed. p. 46.
[106]. Fourpence is mentioned as the gaoler’s fee in the Liber Albus (early fifteenth century), H. T. Riley’s ed. p. 448. London, 1861.
[107]. On this point see F. A. Gasquet, Henry VIII. and the English Monasteries, p. 4. London, 1906.
[108]. Lib. iii. f. 137.
[109]. Nichols’ ed. p. 35.
[110]. See illustration given in Besant, Mediæval London, p. 349. 1906.
[111]. “If, however, they refused to plead, they would be pinioned down on the bare ground and fed upon bread and dirty water; but they were not to eat on the day they drank, or drink on the day they ate, etc.”—Nichols’ ed. p. 26.
[112]. “Vix permittitur heredibus quod vivant.”—De Legibus, lib. iii. f. 118.
[113]. Temp. Henry I., see W. Dugdale, Origines Juridiciales. London, 1680.
Richard, see J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, i. p. 458. London, 1883.
Henry III., see W. Page, Early Assize Rolls, p. xviii. etc.
[114]. By the Assize of Northampton. See Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. p. 545.
[115]. 2 Hen. III., Carta de Foresta; and also 9 Hen. III. c. 10: “No man henceforth shall lose either life or member for killing our deer.”
[116]. Sax. Chron., Ingram’s ed. p. 266.
Ibid. p. 295.
Mirror of Justice, Whittaker’s ed. p. 141.
[117]. J. C. Robertson, Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, vol. i. p. 156. London, 1875. Referred to by Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, i. p. 79.
[118]. Hist. Eng. Law, ii. p. 515.
[119]. Ibid. ii. p. 516.
[120]. For example, a fine of one mark (13s. 4d.) for rape.
[121]. See Mirror of Justice, Whittaker’s ed., Introduction, pp. xxiv., xxxv., and 1st ed. iii. c. 7.
Holdsworth, Hist. Eng. Law, p. 39.
W. Page, Early Assize Rolls, p. xx.
[122]. Of robbery by the judges, see Lingard, Hist. ii. p. 217.
[123]. For instance, at Northampton in 1323; see Coulton, Chaucer and his England, p. 284.
[124]. Pike, Hist. Crime, i. p. 288.
[125]. Riley’s ed. p. 448.
[126]. See Pike, Hist. Crime, i. p. 427.
[127]. Maitland, Const. Hist. p. 221, ed. 1908.
[128]. 22 Hen. VIII. c. 9.
[129]. W. Besant, Tudors, p. 380. London, 1904; and see 25 Hen. VIII. c. 14.
[130]. J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, p. 477.
[131]. A man was boiled to death in 1531; a woman was burnt in 1571, and in 1575.—Holinshed, Chron. pp. 926, 1226, 1262.
[132]. Besant, Tudors, p. 379.
[133]. J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, p. 468.
[134]. Besant, Tudors, p. 380.
[135]. W. Andrews, Old-Time Punishments, p. 92.
[136]. Henry Brinklow’s Complaynt of Roderwyck Mors, J. M. Cowper’s ed. London, E. E. T. Society, 1874.
[137]. See Holinshed, Chronicles, pp. 1081, 1082.
J. Wilkes, Enc. Londinensis, iii. p. 891. London, 1810.
E. C. S. Gibson, Life of John Howard, p. 47. London, 1901.
[138]. See Besant, Tudors, p. 387.
[139]. 39 Eliz. 4 and 5.
[140]. 7 Jac. I. c. 4.
[141]. Departmental Committee on Prisons. Minutes of Evidence, Appendix ii. p. 457. London, 1895.
[142]. As very early in the sixteenth century; see 19 Hen. VII. c. 10.
[143]. See John Brown, John Bunyan, His Life and Times, pp. 169, 182, etc.
[144]. The West answering the North: Relation of the Sufferings of George Fox, Edw. Pyot, and William Salt, p. 34. Printed 1657.
[145]. As to the pits and dungeons of an old English prison, see Charles Creighton, History of the Epidemics in Britain, p. 386. Cambridge, 1891.
[146]. 19 Car. II. c. 4.
[147]. The State of the Prisons, pp. 8 and 9. Warrington, 1780.
[148]. Many prisons had no yards or courts of any kind. See J. B. Bailey, The Condition of the Gaols as described by John Howard, chap. ii. London, 1884.
[149]. Ibid. p. 16.
[150]. See E. F. Du Cane, Punishment and Prevention of Crime, chap. iii. p. 43, etc. London, 1885.
[151]. Hall’s Chronicle, p. 632, ed. of 1809.
[152]. P. 353. London, 1730.
[153]. Creighton, Epidemics, chap. vii. p. 383.
[154]. Vol. ii. p. 48. London, 1827.
[155]. State of the Prisons, p. 10, ed. of 1780.
[156]. Ibid. p. 13.
[157]. Ibid. p. 12.
[158]. There were always a few poor creatures who, although sentenced to transportation, were left behind to remain in prison, a fate worse than exile and perhaps worse than death. See Dept. Com., 1895, Appendix, p. 459.
[159]. “... Of the 160 offences referred to by Blackstone as punishable by death, four-fifths had been made so during the reigns of the first three Georges.”—J. A. M. Irvine, Chambers’s Encyclopædia, ii. p. 743, art. “Capital Punishment.” London, 1888.
[160]. James Mackintosh, Miscellaneous Works, p. 718. Speech on the state of the Criminal Law, House of Commons, 2nd March 1819. London, 1851.
[161]. “The anecdotes which I have heard of this shameful and injurious facility I am almost ashamed to repeat. Mr. Burke once told me that on a certain occasion when he was leaving the House one of the messengers called him back, and, on his saying that he was going on urgent business, replied: ‘Oh, it will not keep you a single moment; it is only a capital felony without benefit of clergy.’”—Mackintosh, Miscellaneous Works, p. 718.
[162]. Mackintosh, Miscellaneous Works, p. 718.
[163]. There grew up, as an eminent judge of those days has declared, “a general confederacy of prosecutors, witnesses, counsel, juries, judges, and the advisers of the Crown, to prevent the execution of the criminal law.”—Sir William Grant, quoted by Mackintosh, p. 719.
[164]. Irvine in Chambers’s Encyclopædia, ii. p. 743.
[165]. Mackintosh, p. 718.
[166]. Reprinted in the Times, 18th January 1901.
[167]. Du Cane, Crime, pp. 35, 36.
[168]. Howard, State of the Prisons, p. 22.
[169]. See 8 & 9 Will. III. c. 27, A.D. 1697.
[170]. See, for instance, the removal of Governor Bambridge by 2 Geo. II. c. 32.
T. Bird, Letters from the Shades. London, 1729.
Re Governor Huggins, etc., see Report of a Committee of the House of Commons, pp. 25, 26, 27. London, 1729.
[171]. Gaol fees were abolished in 1774 by 14 Geo. III. c. 20.
[172]. J. M. D. Meiklejohn, Hist. Eng. ii. p. 276. London, 1890.
[173]. See The Tryal of William Acton, Deputy-Keeper of the Marshalsea Prison, p. 4, etc. London, 1729.
And also Cases in Parliament, 1684–1737. British Museum, 515, l. 5 (39), re Bambridge, etc.
[174]. Howard, p. 17.
[175]. Tryal of Acton, p. 5.
[176]. See Murray, English Dictionary, under “Bull,” iv. B.
[177]. See Report of the Committee of 1729, p. 9. Brit. Mus. Cat. 522, m. 9 (28).
[178]. There were seven trials for murder in 1730.—Du Cane, p. 36.
[179]. The old-time prisoners depended mainly upon their friends and upon outside charity for their sustenance (vide Britton; Bracton, lib. iii., etc.). After the reign of Elizabeth they were supposed to receive 1d. or 2d. a day, or seven to eight ounces of bread. (Du Cane, p. 40.)
From 1759, by 32 Geo. II. c. 28, each debtor was ordered to receive 2s. 4d. a week from his detaining creditor, but Howard found (p. 6) that, in practice, they could not get it, and numbers actually starved.
[180]. By an Act passed in 1784 (24 Geo. III. c. 54) the gaolers were to receive payment as compensation for the loss of their former profits made out of alcohol, which they were thereby forbidden to sell to prisoners from the year 1785.
[181]. Howard, p. 16.
[182]. Report of the Committee of 1729, p. 2.
[183]. Howard, p. 5.
[184]. Mayhew and Binny, “Criminal Prisons of London” (quoting from the Fifth Annual Report of the Prison Discipline Society), p. 97. London, 1862.
[185]. Du Cane, p. 43.
[186]. London prisons (British Museum Catalogue, 6056, b. 74), bound pamphlets, p. x. London, 1789.
[187]. Du Cane, p. 41, etc.
[188]. E. B. Tylor in Ency. Brit. ninth ed. art. “Ordeal.”
[189]. For account of the elaborate ritual, see W. Besant, Mediæval London, vol. ii. chap. vi.
W. Dugdale, Origines Juridiciales, chap. xxix.
[190]. Stubbs, Charters, p. 71.
[191]. Besant, Mediæval London, ii. p. 193.
[192]. Thorpe, fol. ed. p. 517.
[193]. Glanville, J. Beames’ ed. p. 350, note.
[194]. Maitland, Const. Hist. p. 128.
[195]. Reeves, Hist. Eng. Law, i. p. 234. London, 1860.
[196]. Pike, Hist. Crime, p. 131.
[197]. Madox, Hist. Exchequer, i. p. 546.
[198]. Ency. Brit. art. “Ordeal,” p. 820, ninth ed.
[199]. E. A. Freeman, History of the Reign of William Rufus, i. pp. 156, 157. London, 1882.
[200]. P. Labbé, Sacrorum Conciliorum, tom. xxii. p. 1007. Venice, 1778.
[201]. Stubbs, Charters, p. 25.
[202]. Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. 314.
[203]. Unless he went to the ordeal, or, in a later period, to a jury. See W. Forsyth, History of Trial by Jury, p. 202. London, 1852. Twiss’s Bracton, ii. 403.
[204]. Peers, on account of their position, and citizens of London, on account of their supposably peaceful avocations and by charter, were exempt from having to accept a challenge.—Blackstone, Commentaries, lib. iv.
[205]. The loss of certain teeth was looked upon as a handicap—the peasant fighters made a horrible use of them. Vide H. C. Lea, Superstition and Force, p. 131. Philadelphia, 1878.
[206]. Lingard, Hist. Eng. ii. p. 224.
[207]. Reeves, Hist. i. p. 61.
[208]. Lingard, ii. p. 222.
[209]. Besant, Mediæval London, ii. p. 198.
[210]. Ibid. p. 196.
[211]. Twiss’s Bracton, ii. p. 405. London, 1879.
[212]. Lingard, ii. p. 223.
[213]. Lingard, Hist. p. 224.
[214]. Blackstone, bk. iv., Sharswood’s ed. ii. p. 348. Philadelphia, 1878.
[215]. Bracton, Twiss’s ed. p. 405.
[216]. It grew to be condemned by the Church. See, for instance, C. Valentinum, iii. c. 12, held A.D. 855.
[217]. Unhappily to be succeeded by a dreadful revival of torture all over Europe, where it was in full blast in the fourteenth century, and in England from 1468. Having abandoned supernatural means of extracting men’s secrets, Church and State made ruthless and pitiless use of more material methods. The Inquisition took up torture, and the custom spread to the lay courts towards the end of the thirteenth century. Consult, for instances, Lea, Superstition and Force, pp. 421, 458; Maitland, Const. Hist. p. 221; Lea, History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages, i. p. 423, etc. New York, 1906.
[218]. Barnewall and Alderson, Report of Cases, i, pp. 405, 426, etc. London, 1818.
[219]. 59 Geo. III. c. 46.
[220]. See, for instance, Westermarck, Moral Ideas, ii. 628 seq.
[221]. J. Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, iii. p. 203. Oxford, 1855.
[222]. Ibid. p. 204.
[223]. Ibid. pp. 205, 217.
[224]. Ibid. p. 213.
[225]. H. H. Milman, History of Latin Christianity, ii. p. 59. London, 1864.
[226]. Bingham, iii. pp. 209, 211.
[227]. By the Dooms of Alfred there was but a three days’ sanctuary in a mynster-ham. A fugitive was not to be dragged from a church for seven days, though none were to bring him any food the while.—Thorpe, fol. ed. pp. 27, 28, 29. If he delivered up his weapons, however, it appears he might dwell in safety for thirty days, while his relations were got together to ransom him.—Thorpe, p. 29; Reeves, i. p. 32. On this thirty days’ refuge allowed in the early Church, see Bingham, iii. p. 207. A deliberate murderer might be plucked from the altar, just as by Hebrew law.—Thorpe, p. 27.
[228]. Concilium Aurelianse, Labbé, tom. viii. p. 350.
[229]. J. L. Mosheim, Ecc. Hist. i. p. 461. London, 1863.
[230]. Migne, Patrologiae, tom. 216; “Regni Carraclae,” p. 1255.
[231]. Bingham, iii. p. 214.
[232]. A. Friedberg (Decretal Gregor. IX. lib. iii. tit. xlix. cap. vi.), Decretalium Collectiones, ii. pp. 655, 656. Leipzig, 1881.
[233]. John Johnson, Ecc. Laws, quoting Spelman, ii. p. 305.
[234]. The Statute 9 Ed. II. c. 10 (1315) is also to this effect.
[235]. Besant, Mediæval London, p. 201.
[236]. Besant, Mediæval London, p. 212.
[237]. Frequently Dover, where numbers congregated awaiting shipment. See Pike, Hist. Crime, i. p. 232.
[238]. Britton, lib. i. ch. xvii.
[239]. And see 9 Ed. II. c. 10: “They that abjure the realm shall be in Peace so long as they be in Church or Highway.”
[240]. Blackstone, Commentaries, bk. iv., Sharswood’s ed. ii. p. 332. Philadelphia, 1878.
[241]. 22 Hen. VIII. c. 14.
[242]. As to branding, vide 21 Hen. VIII. c. 2.
[243]. A. P. Stanley, Westminster Abbey, p. 346. London, 1882.
[244]. Besant, Mediæval London, p. 202.
[245]. Ibid. p. 206.
[246]. Bingham, iii. p. 215.
[247]. Besant, p. 208.
[248]. Stanley, p. 346.
[249]. Besant, Mediæval London, p. 212.
[250]. 26 Hen. VIII. c. 13.
[251]. 27 Hen. VIII. c. 19.
[252]. 32 Hen. VIII. c. 12.
[253]. Stanley, p. 352.
[254]. 1 Jac. I. c. 25, s. 34.
[255]. 21 Jac. I. c. 28, s. 7.
[256]. 8 & 9 Will. III. c. 27, s. 15.
[257]. 9 Geo. I. c. 28.
[258]. 11 Geo. I. c. 22.
[259]. Ency. Brit. art. “Wager of Law.”
[260]. Lea, Superstition and Force, p. 23.
[261]. Ibid. p. 21.
[262]. C. Valentinum, iii. c. xi., A.D. 855.
[263]. Forsyth, p. 76.
[264]. Reeves, Hist. i. p. 33.
[265]. Holdsworth, Hist. i. p. 138.
[266]. Reeves, p. 33.
[267]. Holdsworth, p. 139.
[268]. Lea, Superstition, pp. 66, 81.
[269]. Holdsworth, Hist. i. p. 138.
[270]. Lea, p. 35.
[271]. Ibid. p. 33.
[272]. Ibid. p. 64.
[273]. 3 & 4 Will. IV. c. 42, s. 13.
[274]. S. Cheetham, History of the Christian Church during the First Six Centuries, p. 171. London, 1894.
[275]. Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. p. 267.
[276]. 1 Corinthians vi.
[277]. In A.D. 341 by the eleventh and twelfth Canons of the Council of Antioch; in 397 by the ninth Canon of the Third Council of Carthage; and in 451 by the ninth Canon of the Council of Chalcedon.
[278]. Lingard, Hist. ii. p. 120.
[279]. Cheetham, p. 171.
[280]. H. C. Lea, History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages, i. p. 309. New York, 1906.
[281]. Canons of Councils, Papal Decrees, and the many Collections.
[282]. See Lingard, ii. 126.
After the appearance of the Collection of Ivo of Chartres (b. 1035, d. 1115),[[283]] and still more upon the compilation of Gratian’s Decretals (A.D. 1151), they began to rival, if not surpass, the Secular Courts in reputation and influence.[[284]] The Courts Christian were the defenders of dogma; in those times, without right believing nothing else profited. The Church Courts also enforced Christian morality. “The bishops,” says Archdeacon Cheetham,[[285]] “took cognizance, as was natural, of matters which were rather offences against the moral law than against the State, and sometimes succeeded in overawing even high-placed offenders.” “The doctrine of penance,” says Mr. Thrupp, “dealt with a series of immoralities which the laws disregarded.”[[286]]
J. Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. p. 189, note F., ed. 1851.
N. Marshall, Penitential Discipline, p. 136.
[283]. Stubbs, Charters, p. 136.
[284]. Lingard, Hist. ii. p. 126.
[285]. History of the Christian Church, p. 171.
[286]. Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 254.
[287]. Lea, Inquisition in the Middle Ages, i. p. 312.
[288]. They would be brought before the Court by its apparitors, of whom there were many; citations were not to be made through the vicars, rectors, or parish priests, lest the secrecy of the confessional should become mistrusted and the people cease to confess their sins.—Vide Archbishop Stratford, A.D. 1342, C. Lond. Can. 8. J. Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. p. 371. Chaucer has given us a specimen of one of those “moral” agents in his account of the sumptnour or summoner.
[289]. As usual, blackmailing was not infrequently resorted to. Vide H. W. C. Davis, England under Normans and Angevins, p. 209. London, 1909.
[290]. See S. Pegge, Life of Bishop Grosseteste, p. 183.
[291]. S. Pegge, Life of Bishop Grosseteste, p. 46.
[292]. Some years later Archbishop Boniface, in his Constitutions, declared (17) that the State must not interfere with moral inquisitions. Vide J. Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. p. 205, ed. 1851; and observe “Note on Anselm’s Canons,” p. 28 of the same volume.
[293]. The visitations of the archdeacons were highly unpopular, creating any number of spies and informers; see Ecclesiastical Courts Commission, p. xxiv. London, 1883.
[294]. 1 Cor. vi. 3.
[295]. Ibid. 2.
[296]. Rufinus, Hist. Ecc. lib. i. cap. ii. p. 184, ed. of Basel. 1611.
[297]. On the packing and intimidating of juries until, as Wolsey observed, “they would find Abel guilty for the murder of Cain,” see W. Eden (Lord Auckland), Principles of Penal Law, p. 176. London, 1771.
[298]. H. C. Lea, Studies in Church History, p. 171. Philadelphia, 1869.
[299]. C. Agathense, c. 32.
[300]. C. Epaonense, c. 11.
[301]. The same was also referred to by the eighteenth Canon of the Council of Verneuil about 755.
[302]. C. Matisconense, i. c. 7.
[303]. C. Matisconense, i. c. 8.
[304]. C. Aurelian, iii. c. 32.
[305]. C. Parisiense, v. c. 4.
[306]. Gregor. I. lib. vi. Epis. xi.
[307]. Haddan and Stubbs, Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents, i. p. 133. Canones Wallici, c. 40 (37). Oxford, 1869.
[308]. Lea, Studies, p. 178.
[309]. Lea, Studies, p. 179.
[310]. Ibid. p. 182.
[311]. Epis. xcvii. 70. Migne, Patrologiae, tom. 119, p. 1006.
[312]. C. Ravennense, c. 4.
[313]. For instance, by Charlemagne in 789 and at the Synod of Bamberg A.D. 1491; vide Lea, Studies, pp. 178, 192, 196.
[314]. Privilegia Clericorum, Constitutio Frederici Imperitoris, p. iii. B. M. Cat. i. a. 6515, Constitutio Caroli, 1498.
[315]. G. H. Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Legum, tom. ii. p. 244. Hanover, 1837.
Lea, Studies, pp. 191, 196.
[316]. Ibid. pp. 191, 192.
[317]. P. F. Lecourayer, Histoire du Concile de Trente, tom. ii. p. 658; and see p. 585, etc. 1736.
[318]. For post-Tridentine claims, vide Lea, Studies, p. 216, etc.
[319]. Holdsworth, Hist. Eng. Law, iii. p. 253.
[320]. Even insidiatores viarum et depopulatores agrorum were ultimately allowed clergy by 4 Hen. IV. c. 2, A.D. 1402.
[321]. Matthew Hale, Pleas of the Crown, ii. p. 333. London, 1800.
[322]. Lingard, Hist. ii. p. 192, etc.
[323]. Holdsworth, i. p. 382.
[324]. Lea, Studies, pp. 213, 218.
[325]. Lingard, ii. p. 127.
[326]. D. Rock, The Church of Our Fathers, i. p. 144. London, 1903.
[327]. J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, i. p. 461.
[328]. A. S. Green, Henry II., p. 85. London, 1903.
[329]. Lea, Studies, pp. 178, 203.
[330]. Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. p. 194.
[331]. 25 Ed. III. c. 4.
[332]. J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, i. p. 461.
[333]. Meiklejohn, Hist. Eng. vol. i. p. 165. London, 1895.
[334]. Lord Auckland, Principles, p. 173.
[335]. Thomas Smith, De Republica Anglorum, Alston’s ed. p. 103. Cambridge, 1906.
[336]. D. Barrington, Observations on the More Ancient Statutes, p. 443.
[337]. Hale, Pleas of the Crown, ii. p. 372.
[338]. J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, i. p. 460.
[339]. Pollock and Maitland, Hist. Eng. Law, i. p. 426.
[340]. W. Stanford, Plees de Coron., lib. ii. cap. 48. London, 1560.
[341]. Holdsworth, Hist. Eng. Law, i. p. 382.
[342]. J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, i. p. 461.
[343]. See Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, v. p. 459.
[344]. Concilium Tarragonense, c. 4, A.D. 516.
C. Autissiodorense, c. 34, A.D. 578.
C. Toletanum, xi. c. 6, A.D. 675.
[345]. Excerptiones Ecgberti, Arch. Ebor. 156.
[346]. Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. p. 60.
[347]. C. Lat. iv. c. 18.
[348]. C. Toletanum, iv. c. 31, A.D. 633.
[349]. C. Autissiodorense, c. 33, A.D. 578.
[350]. As, for instance, Theodosius, fourth century; Emperor Henry IV., eleventh century; Henry II., twelfth century.
[351]. Thrupp, Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 238.
[352]. Ibid. p. 243.
[353]. King Æthelwulf, in the ninth century, obtained an ordinance from the Pope that no Englishman was to be condemned to make a pilgrimage in irons outside his own country.—Lappenburg, Saxon Kings, ii. 26. A pilgrim from Canterbury would be recognised by his carrying back a bottle or a bell; a shell if he had arrived from Santiago de Compostela (Spain), and a palm from the Eastern Land.—R. F. Littledale, Ency. Brit.
[354]. Thrupp, Anglo-Saxon Home, p. 256.
[355]. See W. J. Thoms, Early English Prose Romances, i. p. 31, etc. London, 1858.
[356]. Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. p. 449.
[357]. So much would depend upon the view taken by the penitentiary. See, for instance, Charles Reade’s historical story, The Cloister and the Hearth.
[358]. Usually for half the time, and often for three days in a week for the second half. Vide Pen. Ecgberti, Arch. Ebor. etc.
[359]. Lea, Studies in Church History, p. 245.
[360]. Thorpe, fol. ed. pp. 280, 315.
[361]. See the Penitential of Archbishop Theodore of Canterbury (A.D. 673), Thorpe, p. 278.
In the year 1139 a Council of Lateran condemned murderers of the clergy to excommunication, removable by the Pope alone (Labbé, tom. xxi. p. 530). Nevertheless we find Archbishop Richard complaining of want of protection (Petrus Blesensis, Opera, Epistola 73, Giles’s ed. i. p. 217, Oxford, 1847; also Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, ii. p. 577, London, 1862); and Henry II. provided lay penalties (Reeves, Hist. Eng. Law, i. p. 133; Lingard, Hist. ii. p. 193; Carte, Hist. i. p. 689; C. H. Pearson, History of England during the Early and Middle Ages, p. 511. London, 1867).
[362]. Vide Penitential of Theodore, De Temperantia Poenitentium, etc.
[363]. Penitential of Ecgberht, Archbishop of York (eighth century), Thorpe, p. 377.
“The common penance for murder” (ninth century) was seven to ten years.
[364]. J. Johnson, Laws and Canons, note E, ii. p. 11.
[365]. C. Ancyranum, c. 5, A.D. 314.
C. Nicaeni, c. 12, A.D. 325.
C. Chalcedonense, c. 16, A.D. 451.
C. Ilerdense, c. 5, A.D. 524.
[366]. For England, see Thorpe, i. p. 278; Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. pp. 10, 11, note D.
[367]. Johnson, p. 446.
[368]. Marshall, Penitential Discipline, pp. 109, 110.
[369]. The king’s familiar friends and associates were to be received into the communion of the Church and were not to be cast out, decreed a Council of Toledo.—C. Toletanum, xii. c. 3, A.D. 681; Labbé, tom. xi. p. 1030; Marshall, Penitential Discipline, p. 126.
[370]. C. Clovenhonense, cc. 26, 27, A.D. 747.
[371]. Maitland, Domesday Book, p. 281.
[372]. St. Ambrose, De Elia et Jejunio, c. xx.; Migne, Patrologiae, tom. xiv. p. 724.
[373]. See J. Johnson and B. Thorpe; also Lea, Middle Ages, i. pp. 464, 473.
[374]. Carte, Hist. i. p. 581. I think it was Herbert Spencer who remarked how completely mere outward material performance or conformity could generally satisfy the mediæval claims.
[375]. 5 Rich. II. c. 5, A.D. 1382.
2 Hen. IV. c. 15, A.D. 1400.
2 Hen. V. c. 7, A.D. 1414.
[376]. C. Triburiense, c. 3, A.D. 895.
Lea, Studies, p. 384.
Stubbs, in Appendix II. Ecc. Courts Comm., 1883, pp. 55, 56.
[377]. He might even be proceeded against on suspicion of heresy if he continued contumelious. See twenty-fifth session of the Council of Trent, Lecourayer, tom. ii. pp. 648, 653.
[378]. Stubbs, Const. Hist. iii. p. 374.
[379]. Chaucer, John Saunders’ ed. p. 83. London, 1889.
“Significavit is a Writ which issues out of the Chancery pon a Certificate given by the Ordinary of a man that stands obstinately excommunicate by the space of forty days, for the laying him up in prison without Bail or Mainprice, until he submit himself to the Authority of the Church.” “And it is so called because Significavit is an emphatical word in the Writ.”—T. Blount, Law Dictionary. London, 1717.
[380]. See A. Abram, Social England in the Fifteenth Century, p. 111 (London, 1909); also Chancery Warrants for Issue, The Patent Rolls, etc.; J. Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. p. 192, De Excommunicato Capiendo, and p. 399; Holdsworth, Hist. i. pp. 358, 433.
[381]. Henry II. of England was severely scourged by eighty ecclesiastics; the bishops present gave each five strokes, and every monk gave three. The king’s penance brought on illness.—Lea, Middle Ages, p. 464; Meiklejohn, Hist. i. p. 102.
[382]. Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, vi. p. 172.
[383]. Bingham, ii. p. 128.
I once saw a cell belonging to a Spanish prelate at Majorca; it was a little dark lock-up and was untenanted.
[384]. For instance, Tinmouth Priory was employed as a prison by the abbots of St. Albans. See W. Dugdale, Monasticum Anglicanum, iii. p. 309. London, 1846.
Bingham, vii. p. 43.
Ingulph’s Chronicle of the Abbey of Croyland. Riley’s ed. p. 98.
[385]. Lea, Middle Ages, i. p. 488.
[386]. Ibid. p. 490.
Charles Molinier, L’Inquisition au XIIIe et au XIVe siècle, pp. 435, 440, etc. Paris, 1880.
Concilium Albiense, c. 24, A.D. 1254.
Lea, Superstition and Force, p. 426.
Findings of the Commission of Cardinals sent by Pope Clement V. in 1306; see Molinier, p. 450, and B. Hauréau, Bernard Delicieux, p. 134, etc. Paris, 1877.
[387]. C. Tolosani, c. 11.
[388]. Lea, Middle Ages, i. p. 491.
[389]. C. Biterrense, c. 23, et C. Biterrense, A.D. 1233; De Custodia Claustria, Labbé, tom. xxiii. p. 275.
[390]. Lea, Middle Ages, i. p. 487.
[391]. Lea, Middle Ages, p. 486.
[392]. In 1234 a Council of Albi decreed that the holders of confiscated property of heretics should make provision for the imprisonment and maintenance of its former owners.
[393]. For instance, in A.D. 1300 we find certain prisoners at Albi condemned “Ad perpetuum carcerem stricti muri ubi panis doloris in cibum et aqua tribulationis in potum, in vinculis et cathenis ferreis solummodo ministrentur.”—Molinier, p. 94, quoting Doat, tom. xxxv.
[394]. “We do with special injunction ordain that every bishop have one or two prisons in his bishopric; he is to take care of the sufficient largeness and security thereof for the safe keeping of clerks according to canonical customs that are flagitious, that is, caught in a crime or convicted thereof. And if any clerk be so incorrigibly wicked that he must have suffered capital punishment if he had been a layman, we adjure such an one to perpetual imprisonment....”—J. Johnson, ii. pp. 207, 208; Constitutions of Archbishop Boniface, A.D. 1261.
[395]. Dugdale, Monasticum Anglicanum, vi. p. 238.
[396]. Lea, Middle Ages, p. 487.
[397]. James Stephen, Studies in Ecclesiastical Biography, p. 38. London, 1907.
[398]. J. W. Willis Bund, Episcopal Registers, ii. p. 182. Oxford, 1902.
[399]. H. T. Riley, Gesta Abbatum Monasterii Sancti Albani, i. p. 266. London, 1867.
[400]. History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages, i. p. 487 and note; and see H. R. Luard, Annales Monastici, t. ii. p. 296, t. iii. p. 76; F. W. Maitland, Law Quarterly Review, ii. p. 159.
[401]. Bund, Epis. Registers of the Diocese of Worcester, ii. p. 189.
[402]. Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, vii. p. 18.
[403]. Ibid. p. 12.
[404]. Addis and Arnold, Cath. Dict. p. 276.
[405]. S. Lugio, Cath. Ency. iv. p. 678. New York, 1908.
[406]. Coulton, Chaucer and His England, p. 288.
Lea, Studies in Church History, p. 189.
“Degradation was a penalty rarely inflicted, since the Church was reluctant to admit that the sacred office once conferred could be taken away for any offence short of heresy.”—Davis, Normans and Angevins, p. 207.
[407]. Degraded clerks were forbidden to live in the world as laymen by a Council of Rouen.—C. Rothomagense, c. 12, A.D. 1074.
Those who threw off their habit were not to be admitted into the army or into any convent of clerks, but were to be esteemed excommunicate.—Lanfranc’s Canons, c. 12, A.D. 1071; J. J. ii. 9.
[408]. Lecourayer, Concile du Trente, tom. i. p. 543.
[409]. Stubbs, Ecc. Courts Comm., 1883, Appendix ii. p. 57.
[410]. A lay officer was supposed to be present to take over the fallen cleric into his custody.—Cath. Ency. iv. p. 678.
[411]. C. Remense, A.D. 1157.
[412]. C. Oxoniense, A.D. 1166.
[413]. C. Turonense, A.D. 1163.
[414]. 2 Hen. IV. c. 15.
[415]. Lea, Hist. Inq. Middle Ages, i. p. 222.
A deacon was burned at Oxford in 1222, having been tried before Archbishop Langton for embracing Judaism in order to marry a Jewess.[[418]] From that time until 1400 no one is said to have been burned to death for heresy in England.—Maitland, Law Quarterly Review, ii. p. 153. London, 1886.
[416]. Professor E. P. Evans throws an interesting side-light on this offence. “It seems rather odd,” he observes, “that the Christian lawgivers should have adopted the Jewish code against sexual intercourse with beasts, and then enlarged it so as to include the Jews themselves. The question was gravely discussed by jurists whether cohabitation of a Christian with a Jewess, or vice versa, constitutes sodomy. Damhouder (Prax. rer. crim. c. 96, n. 48) is of the opinion that it does, and Nicolaus Boër (Decis, 136, n. 5) cites the case of a certain Johannes Alardus or Jean Alard who kept a Jewess in his house in Paris and had several children by her; he was convicted of sodomy on account of this relation and burned, together with his paramour, ‘since coition with a Jewess is precisely the same as if a man should copulate with a dog’ (Döpl. Theat. ii. p. 157). Damhouder includes Turks and Saracens in the same category.”—The Criminal Prosecution and Capital Punishment of Animals, p. 152. London, 1906.
[417]. Lea, Middle Ages, i. pp. 220, 221, etc.
[418]. A pious old lady left a bequest to the city of London to defray the expenses of incinerating misbelievers.—Meiklejohn, Hist. i. 223.
[419]. W. Stubbs, Charters, p. 136.
[420]. G. B. Adams, Political History, p. 270. London, 1905.
[421]. It was represented to him that in the nine years through which he had reigned innumerable offences and one hundred murders had been committed by clerks who had escaped all punishments save the light sentences of fine and imprisonment inflicted by their own courts.—W. R. W. Stephens, The English Church, p. 165. London, 1901. William of Newburgh, lib. ii. p. 130, H. C. Hamilton’s ed. London, 1856.
[422]. In the thirteenth century there were, for instance, twelve clerks in the village of Rougham.—Augustus Jessopp, Coming of the Friars, p. 84. London, 1889. See also J. E. Thorold Rogers, Six Centuries of Work and Wages, i. pp. 24, 160, 161.
[423]. Carte, Hist. i. p. 581.
[424]. Eirikr Magnusson, Thomas’ Saga Erkibyskup, i. p. 144, note.
[425]. William FitzStephen; J. C. Robertson’s Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, iii. p. 45. London, 1881.
David Hume, Hist. Eng. i. p. 391. London, 1818.
[426]. See Herbertus de Boseham; Robertson, Materials, iii. pp. 264, 265.
[427]. Magnusson, Thomas’ Saga Erkibyskup, i. p. 145.
[428]. William of Canterbury; Robertson’s Materials, i. pp. 12, 13.
Edward Grim; Robertson, ii. p. 375.
Anonymous; Robertson, iv. p. 24.
K. Norgate, England under the Angevin Kings, ii. p. 21. London, 1887.
[429]. R. de Diceto, Works, Stubbs’s ed. i. p. 313. London, 1876.
[430]. F. W. Maitland, Eng. Hist. Rev. vii. p. 226. London, 1892.
[431]. Stephens, Hist. Eng. Church, p. 166.
[432]. Nahum, i. 9.
[433]. Norgate, Angevin Kings, ii. p. 23.
[434]. Stephens, Hist. Eng. Church, p. 166.
[435]. Holdsworth, Hist. i. p. 382.
[436]. Pollock and Maitland, Hist. i. p. 442, and note 2, ed. of 1898.
[437]. James Gairdner, The English Church, p. 42. London, 1902.
[438]. Reeves, Hist. Eng. Law, iii. p. 41.
[439]. If a clerk were accused, the Crown got his goods till he had completed purgation, after which they were usually returned (Hale, Pleas of the Crown, ii. p. 384). If, however, he was delivered over absque purgatione, or if he had first pleaded guilty, the king retained them, and had the produce of his lands for the prisoner’s life.—A. T. Carter, History of English Legal Institutions, p. 255. London, 1906.
[440]. Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. p. 208.
[441]. 2 Ed. I. c. 2.
[442]. 4 Ed. I. c. 5.
[443]. Following a Canon of the Council of Lyons, A.D. 1274. C. Lugd. c. 6.
[444]. For other instances of the dislike to remarriage, see Westermarck, Moral Ideas, ii. pp. 450, 451; and E. S. Hartland, Primitive Paternity, i. p. 134.
[445]. Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. p. 267.
[446]. 25 Ed. III. c. 4.
[447]. See, for instance, a law passed in 1378 (1 Ric. II. c. 15) against arresting priests during divine service.
[448]. Archbishop Islip’s Constitutions, A.D. 1351. Johnson, Laws and Canons, ii. p. 414, etc.
[449]. See, for instance, F. C. Hingeston-Randolph, Register of John de Grandisson, Bishop of Exeter, Part ii. p. 1118. London, 1897.
[450]. For instance, they could not be accused by disreputable persons; vide C. Carthag. A.D. 390; Labbé, tom. iii. pp. 694, 870; C. Chalced. c. 21, A.D. 451; Labbé, tom. vi. p. 1229; C. Trident. Ses. 13, c. 7, A.D. 1551. It was complained that the clergy could not be accused by the laity and would not accuse each other.—Lea, Studies in Church History, pp. 208, 211.
[451]. For instance, Simon Fish in his Supplicacyon of Beggars, written about 1529, J. M. Couper’s ed. p. 12. London, 1871.
Shakespeare, writing of the fifteenth century, refers to the matter:
... You know our king
Is prisoner to the bishop here, at whose hands
He hath good usage and great liberty.
Third Part of King Henry VI. iv. 5.
See also Hook, Archbishops of Canterbury, ii. p. 398.
[452]. J. C. Robertson, Materials, iv. p. 49; Epist. Nicolaus de Monte.
[453]. Coulton, Chaucer, p. 288.
[454]. Lea, Studies in Church History, p. 196.
[455]. Hale, Pleas of the Crown, ii. p. 384.
[456]. Pollock and Maitland, p. 444, ed. 1898.
Ibid. pp. 427, ed. 1895.
[457]. Riley, Chronica Monasterii S. Albani, iii. p. 48. See also Britton, Nichols’ ed. p. 27.
[458]. 4 Hen. IV. c. 3.
[459]. 1 Hen. VII. c. 4.
[460]. 4 Hen. VII. c. 13.
[461]. J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, i. p. 463.
[462]. Holdsworth, Hist. i. p. 382.
[463]. 12 Hen. VII. c. 7.
[464]. 4 Hen. VIII. c. 2, A.D. 1512.
[465]. T. Rymer, Foedera, tom. xiv. p. 239. London, 1712.
[466]. Lea, Studies in Church History, p. 189.
[467]. 23 Hen. VIII. c. 11.
[468]. 25 Hen. VIII. c. 3.
[469]. 28 Hen. VIII. c. 1, s. 7.
[470]. “In 1533 unnatural offences, in 1541 witchcraft, were made felonies. In 1603 bigamy was made a felony.”—Holdsworth, Hist. i. p. 388.
[471]. 18 Eliz. c. 7.
[472]. Special, and moral, prosecutions were carried out through the Court of Star Chamber (3 Hen. VII. c. 1) (vide Lingard, Hist. vii. p. 377; Carter, Outlines of English Legal History, p. 101; Hudson, Treatise on the Star Chamber) and by the hated Court of High Commission (1 Eliz. c. 1) (see Hale, Precedents and Proceedings in Criminal Cases, p. 1., and Ecc. Courts Comm., 1883, p. xxxviii.), which imposed some enormous fines and inflicted various painful penalties, till they, with the ecclesiastical courts, were overthrown in the year 1640 (16 Car. I. c. 10 and 11).
[473]. Blackstone, iv. p. 28.
[474]. Women received certain allowances by 21 Jac. I. c. 6 in 1623.
[475]. 10 & 11 Will. III. c. 23.
[476]. 5 Anne c. 6.
[477]. Carter, Hist. Eng. Legal Inst. p. 247, ed. 1902.
[478]. J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, i. 463.
[479]. 4 Geo. I. c. 11.
[480]. Holdsworth, Hist. p. 383.
[481]. J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, p. 463.
[482]. 19 Geo. III. c. 74, s. 3.
[483]. 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 28, s. 6, A.D. 1827.
[484]. Yet as Professor Menger expressed it, “Nothing can be so unequal as the equal treatment of unequals.”
[485]. J. F. Stephen, Hist. Crim. Law, iii. p. 27.
[486]. William Andrews, Old-Time Punishments, p. 153.
[487]. Dictionary of National Biography. There was an Act of Henry VIII. which has been called the whip with six strings, which may have some reference to the hangman’s usual weapon.
[488]. On the old convict ship Success.
[489]. See Murray, Dictionary, vol. iv.
[490]. “Hangman, I charge you to pay particular attention to this lady. Scourge her soundly, man; scourge her till the blood runs down. It is Christmas—a cold time for madam to strip. See that you warm her shoulders thoroughly.”—Mr. Justice Jeffreys, quoted in Andrews, Old-Time Punishments, p. 154.
[491]. 57 Geo. III. c. 75.
[492]. See Statute of Labourers, 25 Ed. III. c. 2.
[493]. L. Jewitt, “The Pillory and who they put in it,” The Reliquary, i. p. 210, April 1861.
[494]. Besant, Tudors, p. 381.
[495]. Andrews, Old-Time Punishments, p. 68.
[496]. Jewitt, p. 213.
[497]. Ibid. p. 221.
[498]. 56 Geo. III. c. 138.
[499]. 7 Will. IV. and 1 Vict. c. 23.
[500]. Besant, Mediæval London, p. 354.
[501]. J. A. Rees, The Grocery Trade, p. 57. London, 1910.
[502]. W. Hudson, Treatise on the Court of Star Chamber, ii. p. 225.
[503]. Lea, Hist. Inq. Middle Ages, i. p. 441.
[504]. Hudson, Treatise on the Court of Star Chamber, p. 225.
[505]. James Gairdner, English Church, p. 53.
[506]. Pike, Hist. i. p. 237.
[507]. Barrington, Ancient Statutes, p. 422.
[508]. Andrews, Old-Time Punishments, p. 152.
[509]. Ibid. p. 140.
[510]. Jewitt, “Scolds and how they cured them,” Reliquary, October 1860.
[511]. Andrews, Old-Time Punishments, p. 45.
[512]. See Jewitt, “A few Notes on Ducking Stools,” Reliquary, January 1861.
[513]. Andrews, Old-Time Punishments, etc., etc.
[514]. Holdsworth, Hist. ii. p. 327.
[515]. At some of the American lynchings the injured woman applies a match to the wood upon which the offending negro is to be burned to death.
[516]. “They died alone and unpitied,” says Lecky; “... their very kinsmen shrank from them as tainted and accursed.”—History of Rationalism, p. 149. London, 1865.
[517]. Meetings of a more or less bacchanalian character really took place in Europe through the middle ages, survivals of old rites and nature-worship. See Professor Karl Pearson’s long and learned account of these in The Chances of Death. London, 1897.
[518]. These were often domestic pets or animals about the yard. Even feeding the sparrows on the winter snow would have been dangerous for a suspected person. See kind of evidence sought for by R. Bernard in his Guide to Grand Jurymen, p. 235. London, 1627, etc. The miserable witches, in the agony of sleeplessness and torment, ultimately doing or saying anything that was already expected of them. See, for instance, F. Hutchinson, An Historical Essay concerning Witchcraft, pp. 37, 57. London, 1718.
[519]. On the power of suggestion and imagination, see, for instance, G. le Bon, Revue scientifique, March 26 and April 2, 1910.
[520]. The whole hideous and devilish procedure is given by J. Sprenger and H. Institor in their Malleus Malificarum, about 1485–89. Frankfort ed., 1580.
Paulus Grillandus, De sortilegiis, lib. 4, De questionibus et tortura. Lyons, 1533.
J. Bodin, De la démonomanie des sorciers. Paris, 1580.
R. Scot, The Discoverie of Witchcraft. London, 1584. B. Nicholson’s edition. London, 1886.
H. Boguet, Discours des sorciers. Lyons, 1608.
[521]. Esquirol gives this as a symptom in some forms of insanity. See E. K. Hunt’s translation of Mental Maladies, p. 245. Philadelphia, 1845.
R. Scot, Descoverie Booke, ii. chaps, v.–viii.
Bodin, Démonomanie, p. 170.
James I., Daemonologie, p. 81.
H. Boguet, chap. xlvi.
[522]. The Cenci.
[523]. Historical Essay, p. 139.
[524]. See J. P. Migne, Encyclopédie théologique, vol. xlix. tome second, p. 72. Paris, 1848.
Charles Mackay has observed: “It was no unusual thing then, nor is it now, that in aged persons there should be some spot on the body totally devoid of feeling,” p. 137. In Scotland there were a number of witch-finders who were known as “common prickers,” p. 146.—Popular Delusions, London, 1869.
[525]. Michael Dalton, The Countrey Justice, p. 242. London, 1618.
James I., Daemonologie, p. 80.
Matthew Hopkins quoted, p. 33, ante.
Sinistrari of Ameno Demoniality, p. 27. J. Liseux, trans. Paris, 1879.
D. Neal, History of New England, p. 137. London, 1747.
[526]. Hutchinson, Essay, p. 138.
[527]. T. Wright, Dame Alice Kyteler, London, Camden Society, vol. xxiv., 1843.
[528]. H. L. Stephen, State Trials, vol. i. p. 211. London, 1899.
[529]. Hutchinson, p. 34.
[530]. See long and interesting essay on witchcraft in the Ency. Brit. ninth ed.
[531]. The Act is quoted at length in R. Royston’s Advertisement to Jurymen of England, in which he criticises del Rio’s and Perkins’ “proofs.”
[532]. Alluded to by Cotton Mather, The Wonders of the Invisible World. Boston, 1693.
[533]. James Williams, Ency. Brit. ninth ed. vol. xxiv. p. 622. Kincaid was one of the “common prickers” or professional finders, who in those superstitious times were numerous.
[534]. For instance, Michael Dalton, The Countrey Justice, p. 242; Richard Bernard, A Guide to Grand Jurymen, p. 240.
[535]. Whether the story of his immersion is true or not, he undoubtedly died despised and discredited.
[536]. Hudibras, Part iii. chap. iii.
[537]. Coming down, may be, from the prehistoric mother cult. See Karl Pearson, Woman as Witch in his Chances of Death.
[538]. Exorcism, etc. Paul Regnard, Les Maladies épidémiques de l’esprit, is full of engravings of old pictures illustrating the point. Paris, 1887.
[539]. Although the Popes, such as John XXII., Innocent VIII., Julius II., and Adrian VI., legislated on witches, the Protestants were quite as vindictive. See, for instance, J. Michelet, Life of Luther, bk. v. chap. vi.: “The crazed, the halt, the blind, and the dumb are all possessed with demons. Physicians who treat these infirmities as arising from natural causes are fools who know not the power of the devil.” We shall deal later with the works of Puritan divines in England and America.
[540]. Chapters xi., xiv., etc.; French edition of 1579.
[541]. This theory was advanced by George Gifford in A discourse of the subtill practices of Devilles by witches and sorcerers, etc. London, 1587.
[542]. A dialogue concerning witches and witchcraft. In which is laid open how craftily the Devill deceiveth not only the witches but many others. London, 1603. And by John Webster, who was sceptical of the miraculous in his Displaying of supposed Witchcraft, 1677.
[543]. In 1609 a terrible commission scourged the regions round Bordeaux and Labourt in Western France. See P. de l’Ancre, Tableau de l’inconstance den Mauvais Anges, 1612. Under Louis XIV. the lurid Chambre Ardente was set up in 1679, and lasted till 1682. La Reynie, the Lieutenant-General of Police, was an active inquisitor. See F. Funck-Brentano, Princes and Poisoners; G. Maidment, trans. London, 1901.
[544]. Cautio Criminalis, 1631.
[545]. Saducisimis Triumphatus, 1681.
[546]. In Dutch, 1681; French translation, Le Monde enchanté. Amsterdam, 1684.
[547]. The Certainty of the World of Spirits. London, 1691.
[548]. The Wonders of the Invisible World: Observations upon the Nature, the Number, and the Operations of the Devils.
[549]. R. Calef, More Wonders of the Invisible World. London, 1700.
[550]. D. Neal, History of New England.—“The prisons were hardly able to hold the number of the accused.”
[551]. As it did as late as 1861, round the little village of Morzines in Savoy; see A Constans, Une Relation sur une épidémie d’hystério-démonopathie. Paris, 1863.
Dr. R. Madden gives a long account of various historical outbreaks in his Phantasmata, chap. x. “Maniacal Epidemics, etc.” London, 1857.
E. Pronier, Étude sur la contagion de la Folie. Lausanne, 1892.
L. F. Calmeil, De la Folie. Paris, 1845.
[552]. An Historical Essay concerning Witchcraft.
[553]. Lecky, History of Rationalism.
[554]. One mediæval writer was said to have estimated the exact number of the various devils, which he stated as 7,405,926; see Jules Garinet, Histoire de la Magie, p. xxviii. Paris, 1818. Another declared that there were six principal genera of demons; R. Madden, Phantasmata, p. 293. Another author puts the devils at 2,665,866,746,664; see P. Carus, History of the Devil, p. 346. London, 1900.
[555]. “Quae quidam nefandissima opera si non vere fierent, sed delusoria, vane contra ea fuissent promulgatae leges et in legum ipsarum auctores, etiā in ipsum Deum, ista retorqueretur vanitas; quod extrema blasphemia est.”—B. de Spina, Quaestio de strigibus, p. 8. Rome, 1576.
[556]. Sortilège, p. 599. Paris, 1622.
[557]. A Tryall of Witches, 10th March 1664, Sir Matthew Hale, Kt. Appendix by C. Clark, p. 20. London, 1838.
[558]. State Trials, i.
[559]. Saducismus Triumphatus.
[560]. The Roman Catholic view of sorcery and evil spirits is treated at length by R. R. Madden, Phantasmata, chap. ix.
[561]. A. Chalmers, Biographical Dict. art. “Cotton Mather.” London, 1815.
[562]. “We cannot help lamenting that a sect among us looks upon the abolition of the penal statute against witchcraft not only as an evil but as a sin.... The Seceders published an Act ... in 1743 (reprinted at Glasgow, 1766). In this Act is contained the annual confession of sins.... Among the sins national and personal there confessed are ... (that) the penal statutes against witchcraft have been repealed by Parliament, contrary to the express law of God.”—H. Arnot, Criminal Trials in Scotland, p. 370. Edinburgh, 1785.
[563]. Lecky, History of Rationalism, p. 134.
[564]. Arminian Magazine, v. p. 366. London, 1782.
[565]. Dr. H. More employed the same argument in his Antidote against Atheism, lib. iii. chap. ii. London, 1653.
[566]. Lay Sermons. London, 1870.
[567]. H. L. Stephen, State Trials.
[568]. History of Rationalism, chap. i.
[569]. J. Williams, Ency. Brit., ninth ed. art. “Witchcraft.”
[570]. Mackay, Delusions, pp. 184, 187, etc.
[571]. History of Rationalism, p. 4, etc.
[572]. See article on the case by E. F. Benson, Nineteenth Century, vol. xxxvii. June 1895. A somewhat similar case occurred at Tarbes in 1850.—History of Rationalism, p. 4.
[573]. “What sort of distemper ’tis shall stick the body full of pins?”—Quoted by Calef, More Wonders, p. 5.
[574]. Scot quotes a ghastly passage from Grillandus, who writeth “that when witches sleepe and feel no paine upon the torture, Domine labia mea aperies should be said, and so, saith he, both the torment will be felt and the truth will be uttered.—Discoverie of Witchcraft, p. 17. And we find in del Rio: “Narravit mihi ... anno 1599 captam puellulam strigatricem, quae nec pedum ustulationem saevissimam, nec flagra validissima sentiebat; donec Sacerdos cujusdam monitu illi Agni benedicti ceream imaginem in collum injecere, tum enim vi sacra amuleti daemonis praestigiosa ludibria depulsa et illa vim doloris coepit persentiscere.”—Disquisitionum magicarum, p. 184. Venice, 1616. See also E. Gurney, Phantasms of the Living, p. 181, who considers the insensibility to pain may have been due sometimes to auto-hynotism.
[575]. Mentioned, for instance, in Twelfth Night.
[576]. Les sorcières furent les sages-femmes et les sorciers les médecins du moyen âge.—P. Christian, Histoire de la magie, p. 400. Paris, ? 1871.
[577]. E. Gurney, Phantasms of the Living, p. 183.
[578]. Lecky, History of Rationalism, p. 77.
[579]. R. Calef, the opponent of Cotton Mather, quotes an instance of this kind. One Margaret Rule, having been seized with fits, “... some of the neighbours were forward enough to suspect the rise of the mischief in a house hard by, where lived a Miserable Woman who had been formerly imprisoned on the suspicion of witchcraft, who had frequently cured very painful hurts by muttering over them certain charms which I [? C. M.] shall not endanger the Poysoning of my Reader by repeating.”—More Wonders of the Invisible World, p. 3. Boston, 1700.
[580]. See O. M. Hueffer, The Book of Witches. London, 1908.
[581]. See action of Richard III.
[582]. The full indictment against Lord Hungerford, who was beheaded on Tower Hill along with Thomas Cromwell, by Henry VIII.
[583]. P. de l’Ancre, Seconde Considération. As to the kind of offences “qui se trouvent enveloppés dans le sortilège,” Tableau de l’inconstance des Mauvais Anges. Paris, 1612.
[584]. J. Bodin, Démonologie, p. 60. Paris, 1580.
[585]. Shamanism, etc. See, for instance, Elie Reclus, Primitive Folk, pp. 68, 70. London, 1889.
[586]. The most tainted or prejudiced evidence was received in these kinds of cases. See Concilium Biterrense of A.D. 1246, c. 12. Labbé, tom. xxiii. p. 718.
[587]. Scot, Discoverie, bk. i. chap. iii.
[588]. Mostly poor, miserable old women, Glanvil admits.—Saducismus, p. 29.
[589]. “None ever talked to themselves who were not witches,” asserted one of the common prickers.—Mackay, Delusions, p. 147.
[590]. Especially as they often pretended, or really believed in, powers and curses, and, being quite helpless on the material side, invoked the aid of supernatural terrors to get assistance and be looked upon with fear.
[591]. Various persons accused of witchcraft, says Boguet, “ont confessé qu’ils faisoient la gresle en Sabbat afin de gaster les fruicts de la terre.”—Discours des sorciers, p. 144. Storms were supposed to be occasioned by the devils. “Telle est l’origine de l’habitude de sonner les cloches pendant les orages.”—L. F. A. Maury, La Magie, p. 102. Paris, 1860.
[592]. Bodin, Démonologie, p. 171.
[593]. Scot, Discoverie, p. 17. And this was also practised on a prisoner accused of sorcery before James I.—Lecky, History of Rationalism, p. 114.
[594]. One of the early inquirers as to the witch trials took a friend in with him to witness a torturing. As an experiment, he asked the prisoner if his companion, an entire stranger, had not been one of her accomplices, and the poor creature moaned out that he had.
[595]. “Le diable est si bon maistre que nous n’en pouvons envoyer si grand nombre au feu, que de leurs cendres il n’en renaisse de nouveau d’autres.”—Florimonde de Raemond, Antichrist, p. 103. Lyons, 1597.
[596]. It became a common prayer with women of the humbler class that they might not live to be old. It was sufficient to be aged, poor, or half-crazed to ensure death at the stake or on the scaffold.—Mackay, Delusions, p. 116.
[597]. History of Rationalism, p. 3.
[598]. Mackay, Delusions, p. 159.
[599]. Lecky, History of Rationalism, p. 4.
[600]. Quoted by W. B. Gerish, A Hertfordshire Witch. London, 1906.
[601]. Mackay, Delusions, p. 139.
[602]. H. C. Lea, History of the Inquisition in Spain. New York, 1907.
[603]. W. F. Poole, Salem Witchcraft. Boston, 1869.
[604]. 300,000 women are said to have been slaughtered since Innocent’s Bull of 1484. See an important article in Chamber’s Encyclopædia, x. p. 698, ed. of 1901.
[605]. F. de Raemond, L’Antichrist, p. 102.
One writer estimated the number of sorcerers living in Europe at 1,800,000. See Calmeil, tom. i. p. 217.
[606]. James Howell, Familiar Letters, 1688.
[607]. Scot, Discoverie, p. 16.
[608]. Ency. Brit. ninth ed. vol. xxiv. p. 622.
[609]. “On the enactment of the statute to repeal the law, vanished all those imaginary powers so absurdly attributed to old women oppressed with age and poverty.”—H. Arnot, Criminal Trials, p. 369.
[610]. The late Mr. Gurney, of the Psychical Research Society, found, after a most extensive investigation, “a total absence of respectable evidence, and an almost total absence of any first-hand evidence at all, for those phenomena of magic and witchcraft which cannot be accounted for as the results of diseased imagination, hysteria, hypnotism, and occasionally, perhaps, telepathy.”—Phantasms of the Living, i. p. 172.
[611]. See E. B. Tylor, Primitive Culture, ii. p. 130.
[612]. J. B. Tuke in the Ency. Brit.
[613]. E. Westermarck, The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, i. p. 269.
[614]. Westermarck, Moral Ideas, i. p. 270.
[615]. E. B. Tylor, Primitive Culture, ii. p. 117.
[616]. See, for instance, the story called “The Sleeper Awakened” in the Arabian Nights.
[617]. The severities to which the insane were subjected by various tribes are mentioned by Westermarck in Moral Ideas, i. p. 271.
[618]. John Conolly, Treatment of the Insane, p. 4. London, 1856.
[619]. F. Beach, Psychology in John Hunter’s Time; “they served as a sport to visitors at assizes, fairs, and other times,” p. 4. Hunterian Oration. London, 1891.
[620]. For an account of these wandering Tom o’ Bedlams, see Isaac D’Israeli, Curiosities of Literature, ii. p. 343. London, 1849.
[621]. “Come, march to wakes and fairs and market-town. Poor Tom, thy horn is dry.”—Lear, iii. 6.
[622]. Lear, iii. 4.
[623]. Walter Besant, London in the Eighteenth Century, p. 378. London, 1902.
[624]. This lasted right into the nineteenth century; see D. H. Tuke, Chapters in the History of the Insane, p. 128. London, 1882.
[625]. See, for instance, W. Besant, London in the Time of the Stuarts, p. 236. London, 1903. And for a particularly filthy mixture advised “For a man haunted by apparitions,” Cockayne, i. p. 365.
[626]. Oswald Cockayne, Leechdoms, Wort Gunning, and Starcraft, pp. 361, 365. London, 1864.
[627]. Cockayne, pp. 101, 161, 169.
[628]. Cockayne, i. p. 249.
[629]. Tylor, Primitive Culture, ii. p. 127.
[630]. Joseph Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, i. p. 322.
[631]. Bingham, p. 323.
[632]. F. A. Gasquet, Henry VIII. and the English Monasteries, p. 463.
[633]. There were, says Maury, “de véritables litanies d’anathèmes contre Satan.”—La Magie, p. 319.
[634]. J. Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, i. p. 321. See also Paul Verdun, Le Diable dans la vie des saints, p. 2; Ency. Brit. ninth ed. vol. viii. p. 806.
[635]. “The so-called Fourth Council of Carthage (anno 396) prescribes a form for the ordination of exorcists the same in substance as that given in the Roman Pontifical, and used at this day.”—Addis and Arnold, Catholic Dictionary, art. “Exorcism.” London, 1903.
A man who was said to have been possessed by seven devils was exorcised by seven clergymen at the Temple Church, Bristol, in 1788.—Tylor, Primitive Culture, ii. p. 128. See also L. A. Maury, La Magie, p. 331.
[636]. Already in the fifth century Pope Innocent I. forbade the exorcists from exercising their ministry without the express permission of the bishop, and that order is in force. See also Louis Duchesne, Christian Worship, M. L. Maclure’s trans. p. 349. London, 1904.
[637]. Addis and Arnold, Cath. Dict. p. 444.
[638]. Or this prayer of Pope Leo XIII.; “S. Michel Archange ... repoussez en enfer par la vertu divine Satan, et les autres esprits mauvais, qui errent dans le monde cherchant des âmes à perdre.” Quoted by P. Verdun, ii. p. 314.
[639]. D. H. Tuke, Hist. Insane, p. 14.
[640]. F. Beach, Psychology in John Hunter’s Time, p. 2.
[641]. L. A. Maury, La Magie, p. 329.
[642]. Cockayne, Leechdoms, ii. bk. iii. p. 335.
[643]. W. A. F. Browne, What Asylums were, are, and ought to be, p. 101. Edinburgh, 1837.
[644]. See Tylor, Primitive Culture, i. p. 258.
R. Routledge, Hist. Science, p. 5. London, 1881.
Edward Carpenter, The Art of Creation, p. 36. London, 1904.
[645]. It may be interesting to compare 1 Kings xxii. 20.
John Lubbock (Lord Avebury), Origin of Civilisation, p. 32. London, 1889.
[646]. Certain savages mentioned by Tylor endeavoured to stay the progress of small-pox germs after this fashion.—Primitive Culture, ii. p. 115.
[647]. See, for instance, Abbot Richalmus, Liber revelationum de insidiis et versutiis daemonum inversus homines.
[648]. “... but as I knew it was the Devil,” wrote Luther, “I paid no attention to him and went to sleep.”
[649]. Primitive Culture, i. p. 409.
[650]. E. B. Tylor, Ency. Brit. ninth ed. vol. vii. p. 63, etc.
[651]. Cheyne and Black, Ency. Bib. art. “Satan,” by Gray and Massie.
F. T. Hall, The Pedigree of the Devil. London, 1883.
J. Tulloch in Ency. Brit. ninth ed. art. “Devil.”
[652]. Satan, said Tertullian, is God’s ape. He was indeed supposed to possess a tail; this might be severed, but it would grow again.
[653]. A. Reville, The Devil, pp. 40, 42. London, 1871.
[654]. L. W. Cushman, The Devil and the Vice. London, 1897.
[655]. Tylor, Primitive Culture, p. 77.
[656]. P. Verdun, Le Diable dans la vie des saints, p. 97.
[657]. S. Baring Gould, Lives of the Saints, v. p. 278. London, 1897.
[658]. P. Carus, The History of the Devil, pp. 255, 256. London, 1900.
[659]. John Ashton, The Devil in Britain and America, p. 87. London, 1896.
[660]. Carus, The History of the Devil, p. 343.
[661]. R. Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, Pt. i. sec. ii. p. 57, ed. 1806.
[662]. Maury, La Magie, p. 310.
[663]. The same idea is found among many savages. In a certain tribe referred to by Dr. Tylor, “The dancing of women by demoniacal possession is treated ... by the doctor thrashing them soundly with a stick, the demon, and not the patient, being considered to feel the blows.”—Primitive Culture, ii. p. 124.
[664]. See, for instance. Abbot Richalmus, capud xxvi. De efficacia salis et aquae.
[665]. D. H. Tuke, History of the Insane, p. 21.
[666]. In many ancient drawings they are depicted blown from the mouth, little black monsters mingled in a cloud; there were other manners of egress.
[667]. The Scarlet Letter, chap. iv.
[668]. The people even of those early days, say Maury, “bien qu’attribuant la folie à une cause imaginaire n’en avaient pas moins connu que c’était une véritable maladie.”—La Magie, p. 309.
[669]. Chap. xxxvii. London, 1542.
[670]. Twelfth Night, Act iii. Sc. 4.
[671]. W. Besant, London in the Eighteenth Century, p. 536.
[672]. W. E. H. Lecky, History of England in the Eighteenth Century, vi. p. 257. London, 1887.
[673]. Andrew Halliday, Lunatic Asylums, p. 10. London, 1828.
[674]. W. A. F. Browne, What Asylums were, p. 105.
[675]. J. Conolly, Treatment of the Insane, p. 7.
[676]. See M. Esquirol, Mémoire sur la Maison Royale de Charenton, p. 10.
[677]. D. H. Tuke, Hist. p. 52.
[678]. W. Besant, London in the Time of the Stuarts, p. 237.
[679]. J. B. Tuke, art. “Insanity,” Ency. Brit. ninth ed.
[680]. Many asylums were built under the Act of 1808, but before that the pauper patients had been “crowded into the damp dungeons of our public workhouses, or shut up in houses of detention and ill-regulated prisons.”—A. Halliday, Lunatic Asylums, p. 10.
[681]. Treatment of the Insane.
[682]. Oscar Wilde, Ballad of Reading Gaol, p. 24.
[683]. Robert Jones, An Inquiry into the Nature of Nervous Fevers. London, 1785.
[684]. W. Cullen, First Lines of the Practice of Physic, iv. p. 153. Edinburgh, 1789.
[685]. Cullen, p. 171.
[686]. Ibid. p. 164.
See also R. Mead, Monita et praecepta medica, p. 67; he says, however, that fast binding is sufficient. London, 1751.
[687]. Page 149, ante. Dr. Haslam flogged lunatics at stated periods to avert outbreaks.—Conolly, p. 12.
[688]. D. H. Tuke, Hist. p. 107.
F. Beach, Psychological Medicine. He also alludes to John Wesley’s Prescriptions, p. 6, etc.
Andrew Wynter, The Borderland of Insanity, J. M. Granville’s ed. p. 70. London, 1877.
[689]. “The vagrant action of the limbs was suppressed, but the source of irritation in the brain was left out of consideration.”—Conolly.
[690]. Quoted by Beach, Hunterian Oration, 1891.
[691]. W. Massie, A History of England during the Reign of George III., iii. p. 207. London, 1865.
See also J. M. D. Meiklejohn, Hist. Eng. Pt. ii. p. 330.
[692]. Massie, Hist. p. 208.
[693]. Wynter, Insanity, p. 80.
[694]. J. H. Jesse, Memoirs of the Life of George III., iii. pp. 95 and 274. Later on he was placed in the better care of Dr. Willis, a clergyman who was much celebrated for his management of mad people; see Jesse, iii. p. 90, etc.
[695]. Hunterian Oration, p. 5.
[696]. Besant, London in the Eighteenth Century, p. 377. See also Charles Reade’s book, Hard Cash.
[697]. See Conolly’s description of the old-time reception of a private patient.—Treatment of the Insane, p. 138.
[698]. D. H. Tuke, Hist. p. 171.
[699]. R. Gardner Hill, Lunacy; its Past and its Present, p. 7. London, 1870.
[700]. R. Gardner Hill, p. 6.
[701]. J. B. Sharpe, Report and Minutes of Evidence on the Madhouses of England; evidence of G. Higgins, pp. 12 and 13; of R. Fowler, p. 308; and of H. Alabaster, p. 326. London, 1815.
[702]. Edinburgh Review, xxviii. p. 445. Edinburgh, 1817.
[703]. Jonathan Gray, History of York Asylum, p. 12. York, 1815.
[704]. See Conolly’s amazing denunciation in his Treatment of the Insane.
[705]. A female patient was got with child by the head keeper; he was subsequently given a piece of plate, and kept a private madhouse of his own; see Sharpe, Report and Min. of Ev. p. 14.
[706]. Gray, chap. iv.; ibid. p. 26; Beach, p. 4.
[707]. S. W. Nicoll, An Enquiry into the Present State and Visitation of Asylums, p. 10, etc. London, 1828.
[708]. Sharpe, p. 12; Gray, p. 23.
[709]. Sharpe, Report and Min. of Ev. pp. 277, 290, 297.
[710]. Ibid. p. 46.
[711]. For instance, at Bethnal Green Asylum.—Beach, p. 12.
[712]. As late as 1837.—Tuke, Hist. p. 81.
[713]. Sharpe, p. 46.
[714]. Ibid. p. 85.
[715]. Ibid. p. 48.
[716]. See Besant, London in the Eighteenth Century, where a print is given of this prisoner in his cell at p. 375.
[717]. Treatment of the Insane, p. 28.
[718]. Sharpe, Report and Min. of Ev. p. 120.
[719]. Ibid. p. 59.
[720]. Tuke, Hist. p. 153.
[721]. Sharpe, Report and Min. of Ev. p. 68.
[722]. For an account of some of these, especially as used in Portugal into later times, see G. A. Tucker, Lunacy in Many Lands, pp. 16, 1346, etc. Sydney, 1887.
[723]. John Haslam, Observations on Madness, p. 317. London, 1809.
[724]. Besant, London in the Eighteenth Century, p. 377. There is also a reproduction of Hogarth’s “Scene in Bedlam” from the “Rake’s Progress.”
[725]. R. Gardner Hill, A Concise History of the Non-Restraint System, p. 139. London, 1857.
[726]. W. A. F. Browne, p. 119.
[727]. One large asylum is said to have made £400 a year from exhibiting lunatics, but this would probably not include the keepers’ tips; see Tuke, Hist. p. 73.
[728]. Conolly, p. 33. See also P. Pinel, Traité Médico-philosophique sur l’Aliénation Mentale, p. 65. Paris, An IX.
J. B. Tuke, Ency. Brit. ninth ed. vol. xiii. p. 111.
[729]. See E. Westermarck, Moral Ideas, i. p. 274.
[730]. H. W. Carter, Principal Hospitals, p. 42. London, 1819.
[731]. P. Pinel, Traité, p. 64.
[732]. A. Halliday, Lunatic Asylums, p. 76.
[733]. M. Esquirol, Mémoires de Charenton, pp. 46, 48.
[734]. F. Beach, p. 11.
J. Conolly, p. 10.
R. Gardner Hill, Concise Hist. p. 141.
[735]. Animadversions on the Present Government of York Asylum. York, 1788. It deals mainly with the question of finance.
Edinburgh Review, vol. xxviii. p. 433.
These produced A Letter from a Subscriber to the York Lunatic Asylum. York, 1788, etc.
[736]. He died in 1797, and an inscription was erected to him in Westminster Abbey. See Dict. Nat. Biog., and Jonathan Gray, History of York Asylum, p. 18.
[737]. Samuel Tuke, Description of the Retreat, p. 22. York, 1813.
[738]. The Description of the Retreat near York, already alluded to.
[739]. To the York Herald, dated September 23, 1813. It was signed merely “Evigilator,” but had been written by Dr. Best, the head of the York Asylum.
See J. Gray, Hist. p. 28; also D. H. Tuke, Hist. pp. 129, 148.
[740]. Edinburgh Review, vol. xxviii. p. 433. Edinburgh, 1817.
[741]. S. W. Nicoll, An Enquiry, p. 11; and see Jonathan Gray, Hist. p. 31.
[742]. D. H. Tuke, Hist. p. 79.
[743]. J. Gray, Hist. chap. vi.
[744]. D. H. Tuke, p. 161.
[745]. D. H. Tuke, p. 157.
[746]. Nicoll, p. 21.
[747]. D. H. Tuke, Hist. p. 162.
[748]. Ibid. p. 173.
[749]. J. B. Tuke, Ency. Brit. ninth ed.; D. H. Tuke, Hist. p. 85; R. Gardner Hill, Lunacy, p. 5.
[750]. See, for instance, Hunterian Oration, 1891, etc.
[751]. R. Gardner Hill, Lunacy, p. 42.
[752]. Andrew Wynter, p. 100.
[753]. Hill, pp. 87, 88.
[754]. Halliday, Lunatic Asylums, p. 2.
[755]. F. Willis, A Treatise on Mental Derangement, p. 6. London, 1823.
[756]. Lunatic Asylums, p. 2.
[757]. W. A. F. Browne, p. 4.
[758]. Borderland of Insanity, p. 11.
[759]. Alexander Gibson, in Ency. Brit. ninth ed. art. “Insanity (Law).”
[760]. “That” (kleptomania) “is one of the diseases I was sent here to cure,” a certain judge is said to have observed; but he did not cure it.
[761]. One of these legal tests had been a knowledge of the multiplication table. W. A. F. Browne, p. 3.
[762]. The “robust” attitude has been shown by Dickens. “That young Pitcher’s had a fever.” “No!” exclaimed Mr. Squeers. “Damn that boy, he’s always at something of that sort.” “Never was such a boy, I do believe,” said Mrs. Squeers; “whatever he has is always catching too. I say it’s obstinacy, and nothing shall ever convince me that it isn’t. I’d beat it out of him.”—Nicholas Nickleby, chap. vii.
[763]. D. H. Tuke, Hist. p. 96.
[764]. W. Tallack, Penological and Preventive Principles, pp. 249, 250. London, 1896.
[765]. Departmental Committee on Prisons Report, p. 8. London, 1895.
- Transcriber’s Notes:
- Missing or obscured punctuation was silently corrected.
- Typographical errors were silently corrected.
- Inconsistent spelling and hyphenation were made consistent only when a predominant form was found in this book.