Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Judge Jeffreys, the 'Hanging Judge'.

"I remember finding this grave for a little 12-year old girl ..." So said Evelyn Evans to me during the course of yesterday's interview. She went on to tell me the story of how the girl had been in service to a family in Dorchester and had stolen a loaf of bread from her employers to help feed her parents and ten siblings who were starving back at her home. The mistress of the house discovered the theft and had the child arrested, whereupon she was thrown into prison to await trial. The judge at the Assize Court was the infamous Judge Jeffreys, known as 'The Hanging Judge', and he sentenced the child 'to be hanged by the neck until dead.'

This story obviously had had a profound effect on Evelyn when she first uncovered it, and the memory has stayed with her. How different then to the sentences handed out these days. Then a young girl was killed for trying to feed her starving family, whilst nowadays people murder and maim and yet receive minimal sentencing, often little more than a slap on the wrist. Even when they are incarcerated 'at her Majesty's pleasure', they have most modern luxuries available to them.

The question for me in this case is whether it was the girl who was the bigger criminal for her crime of compassion or the Society in which she lived that allowed such draconian punishment to be meted out for it. What do you think, dear reader?

1 comment:

  1. To me, as a long-tine researcher (and a big fan) of Jeffreys, it is a very interesting case, because it was never mentioned in any source before. I suspect the story is more a legend than the documented history, but I'd be very grateful for any additional information about the whole episode. First of all, what's the name of the girl?

    Answering your question I'd say that the Society is guilty for the lack of understanding that overpopulation = over-criminality. Thomas Robert Malthus was the first philosopher to call things by their proper names. Now the modern society seems to be guilty again - for the lack of morals and strictness, so the offenders of the law may not fear for their lives precious to no one but themselves.

    ReplyDelete