Some of the inspirations in my research for Episode 1

November 2, 2009

Hi,

I hope that you enjoyed the first episode of Garrow’s Law yesterday.  As they said in the opening sequence, the show is inspired by real cases from the time.  Below I mention a few of the things that helped play a role  in inspiring part of Sunday’s episode.

One of the themes of Episode 1 was Thieftakers.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, they were a bit like a cross between private detectives and policemen.   You may remember the exchange where Forrester the Thieftaker gets the better of Garrow?  Garrow asked him how long he had been in the honourable business of thieftaking, and Forrester comes back with the line ‘Longer than you’ve been a counsellor.’ And also the exchange “What, there was no blood money last Sessions? – If there were no thieves, how would you get a brief?”  Well, have a look at an actual exchange between Garrow and a Thieftaker in a case from 1785 where the Thieftaker gave as good, or better, than he got from Garrow!

http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/images.jsp?doc=178501120038

The Thieftaker case in the Episode was about highway robbery.  There are loads of cases like this during our period.  A great place to go if you want to find out more is the website of the Old Bailey Proceedings Online.  If you are interested, go to www.oldbaileyonline.org and then select ‘Highway Robbery’ on the advanced search options.  I suggest looking at this case, with Garrow defending a Mr Pace accused of Highway Robbery. Garrow lost and Pace was sentenced to death. http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17881022-23-off105&div=t17881022-23#highlight

Another case you might enjoy is this one, again a Highway Robbery case with Garrow unsuccessfully defending and the accused being sentenced to death.  Here, Garrow goes into a lot of detail about the identity of a grey mare that was used in robbery:  http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17881022-19&div=t17881022-19&terms=grey|mare|garrow#highlight

Infanticide was the theme of the main case in Episode 1.  It was a special because in infanticide cases, the burden of proof was the opposite to what it was today. Whist on the one hand, if the woman was married and was prosecuted for killing a newborn child, the offence would be of murder and she would be presumed innocent.  However, if she was unmarried, like Elizabeth Jarvis in our episode, she would be presumed guilty, and the offence would be infanticide / concealing a birth.

A number of cases and played a part in helping to  inspire the case created for the show. Elizabeth Jarvis is the name of a woman accused of infanticide in 1800. She was found not guilty. http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t18000115-20-off104&div=t18000115-20#highlight

The cutting of the throat of a child happened in a number of cases during the 1700s.  If you would like to look at examples of cases where a cord was wrapped around the neck and the neck cut by mistake, I suggest looking at the following three infanticide cases. One ( http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17570526-22-off111&div=t17570526-22&terms=throat#highlight ) refers to a cord around neck, throat cut by mistake with a knife; a second, http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17570526-22-off111&div=t17570526-22&terms=throat#highlight  turned on the use of scissors and accidental cutting of neck; and third case http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17810530-1-off2&div=t17810530-1&terms=throat#highlight was about a poor wretched woman cutting cord with rough knife.

There are references in the Old Bailey archive to the ‘ hydrostatic test’ being used in evidence in infanticide cases. We also took some inspiration from a practice that was used whereby doctors would remove the dead babies’ lungs and try to float them, if they floated, the child breathed, but if they sank it was stillborn. This idea of floating a child’s lungs to see whether it breathed dates back a long way and was first used in the Old Bailey as an argument as early as 1737 http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17370420-18-off88&div=t17370420-18&terms=floated#highlight , and was used in court on several occasions subsequently. But by Garrow’s time, as he showed in his cross examination of the Doctor, medical authorities were beginning to move on.

Do you remember when Garrow was complaining about the thinness of his papers?  All of the restrictions that he faced – like not being allowed to address the jury – are true.  I’ll try to post some stuff about it this week if I get a chance.

If there are any other aspects that you’re interested in hearing more about, don’t hesitate to post a comment and I’ll do my best to help.

With best wishes

Mark Pallis


From Crime to Punishment – Thieftakers

October 28, 2009

OK, so the crime has happened. How else would the suspect be brought to court?  A common option was to use a Thieftaker.  As you’ll know if you’re read the outline for this Sunday’s episode, Garrow defends Peter Pace, who is accused by renowned thief-taker Edward Forrester of robbing a man at gunpoint.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00nsp4s Thieftaking was most notorious in the 1720s – 50s, but carried on as long as there were rewards paid.  The Times newspaper was writing against the corrupting effects of the reward system well into the 1780s.  Thieftaking didn’t stop finally until 1818 when the reward system was abolished by Parliament.

The core idea is that Thieftakers are driven by the reward money.  They will do anything to get it.  However, they were not all bad, and many performed useful functions.   These included,

1) Recovering stolen property and claiming any private reward that was offered from the victim eg man’s horse stolen.  He offers a reward and puts an advert in the paper. You find it, bring it to him and claim the reward.

2) Apprehending criminals:  Often, private citizens would go to a Thieftaker and ask them to intercept a criminal.  Basically, the Thieftaker is like a private policeman. The Thieftaker is paid by getting some of the reward money offered by the state for successful conviction of criminals.

That’s it, let’s wait and see what happens in Episode 1 !!!

If you are interested in learning more about Thieftakers, have a look at the historical section of the Old Bailey Proceedings Online.  It gives you a great overview of the development of policing over a long period – much longer than just Garrow’s time.


From Crime to Punishment – part 2

October 27, 2009

If there were no watchmen around, there was no choice other than to run after the criminal yourself.  If you discovered a felony, you were legally obliged to apprehend those responsible and notify the constable.  Also, if a constable was trying to catch a felon, he could require people to join the ‘hue and cry’.

In this case, a man explains the steps he took to catch the highwayman:

This isn’t a Garrow case and it shows you just how swift and harsh the justice was.  No defence counsel, not even a prosecution.  Basically, the judge was in charge and played all the parts …

http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17830115-6&div=t17830115-6&terms=stop|theif|garrow#highlight


Mark Pallis speaking on Garrow in London

October 26, 2009

Hi,

If you enjoy Episode One of Garrow’s Law on Sunday and want to find out more, you can come and catch me giving a lecture on William Garrow at the Legal Biography Project of the London School of Economics on 3rd November from 1800h – 1930h . For more details:  http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/law/projects/legalbiog/lbp.htm

Hope to see you there!  Mark


From Crime to Punishment – part 1

October 26, 2009

In this category of blogs, I am going to set out what happened from the moment a crime was committed right up until the person was sentenced.  But I won’t tell the story myself, I’ll leave it to the people who actually experienced it ….

A common way for crimes to be detected is that a Night Watchman would hear or see something.  Have a look at the case of Henry Morgan 15 September 1784, we hear from a Watchman examined by Garrow in the Old Bailey.

http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17840915-1&div=t17840915-1&terms=stop|theif|garrow#highlight

Tomorrow, we’ll see how Victims could also bring cases ….

Mark Pallis


Garrow’s London

October 23, 2009

Garrow’s law is set in London at the end of the 1700s.  It was quite a time to be alive:  the American Revolutionary War had just ended, leaving thousands of disgruntled British soldiers looking for work; the had been a revolution in France, and back in England there winds of change were starting to blow.  People were starting to talk about rights, and about democracy. The movement to end slavery was getting going, women, like Mary Wollstonecraft, were asserting themselves and talking about the rights of women.  And reform was in the air, people were getting frustrated with the corruption in parliament and were hungry for change.

And all this was being played out in a new public arena.  There had been an explosion of newspapers and journals:

  • In 1770, London has 5 daily papers;
  • In the 1780s, it had 9 dailies, 8 tri-weeklys and 9 weeklys;
  • In the 1790s, it had 14 dailies, 7 tri-weeklys and 2 weeklys.

But whilst there was change on one side, on the other the ruling classes were battening down the hatches and steeling themselves.  They were quite with things as they were thank you very much!

Mark Pallis