The stereotypical image of the Georgian law courts is that of a fat judge donning the black silk to pass the death sentence on some poor soul whose desperation for a crust of bread led them to steal a lace handkerchief. The records of the Central Criminal Court show a rather more complex set of values.
It was difficult to be a child witness: you had to testify in court, but your testimony was not necessarily taken into account. If your testimony was deemed 'notable', it would no doubt influence the jurors, but it would not secure a conviction if there was not substantial evidence to back it up. The main crimes committed against children are murder and manslaughter (no testimony from the child) and rape. The first two are pretty clear cut, with only niceties dividing them in some cases, but the latter is a quagmire, and one that will require a strong stomach to investigate, or read, further. I judge you forewarned.
Infanticide has long been deemed one of the foulest crimes. Mothers who kill their children are deemed 'unnatural' and the usual punishment was death. A typical scenario, of which I have found more than twenty between 1674 and 1700 was of a serving girl, who finds herself pregnant, delivers the baby in secret and whether it is alive or dead, disposes of it in the 'House of Office'. How many babies perished in cess-pits is hard to say, but the routine nature of the court reports mean it was no uncommon occurrence. Little accommodation was made for the mother: failing to make another aware of your labour and delivering in secret was illegal (presumably to avoid baby-swapping/smothering). A case of 1674, in which the Ordinary, or court reporter recorded the reactions of those present, and the complexities of the law which led to a guilty verdict:
The next seemed to be an object of Compassion to most people present, a poor young Wench lodging about Thames street, betrayed (apparently the father of her child had promised to marry her) and getting her with Child, which being perceived by the Woman that she lodged with...this etous woman...cruelly turned her out of doors, and set her in another Parish, and there left her in pains, telling her than now the said Parish were bound to provide for her. In this sad condition in the street, and without any help was this poor Creature delivered, and being found lying as one half dead by the watch, and her condition perceived; a midwife was called, who found the Child dead, but not separated from her Body, when she came to her; who asking her if it were still-born, the Prisoner both then and now said, it was not, for she heard it, cry, but denied that she intended or used any wilful means to make away the Life of it nor did there any signs of Violence appear save only some little spots or marks of a Bruse or Pinch on the Throat, which some conceive might be occasion'd Involuntarily in struggling to Promote its Birth; by an ignorant Woman in her circumstances: however being a Bastard Child, and the law makeing it death in that case for any woman to be delivered alone without calling help, she was thereupon found Guilty (and sentenced to death).
A fairly grim example of 17thC justice, although report makes it clear that neither the observers or the recorder were happy about it. Not every court was so unsympathetic, and more than one case brings to light the recognition of post natal depression.
The fact upon the Evidence given into the Court appeared to be thus; this woman had (not long before the fact) been delivered of the Child...she was observed for some time before to be some what discomposed and distempered in her mind;...The day whereon this tragedy was acted, this unnatural Mother Orders her Nurse to make her a Sea-Coal fire in her Chamber, and to blow it up well pretending she was cold; this being done, she sends the aforesaid Nurse upon some arrand out of doores; and then takes her little Infant in her hands...she cruelly thrust the poor Innocent into it, and then threw the Coals upon it, where it was burned to Death; A little while after the Nurse returning and perceiving some of the Child cloths upon the fire, snatching to take them off, caught hold of some part of the Child that was not then consumed, whereupon Surprized with the horror of the sight, she shreikt out and askt who had done it, which the Cruel Mother presently confessed to be her self, and was thereupon taken into the hands of Justice, and at this Sessions tryed for her Life, as I have before told you, she was at last Cleared by the Jury who judged her not to be of sound mind before, and at the time of doing the fact, and therefore brought her in not Guilty (with a verdict of non compos mentis).
The potentially dangerous nature of life on the unregulated London thoroughfare is attested to by the many children killed by carriages and stagecoaches. One particularly horrific incident involves a little girl's face 'being ground against a post' until dreadful things happened, but what follows is an account of a typical accident in 1732, and a typical punishment: branding.
Joshua Floyd was indicted on the Coroner's Inquisition, for feloniously in the parish of St Paul's of Covent-garden John Urly, aged 9 Years, by driving 2 Horses, Harness'd to a loaded Dray, whereby the said John receiv'd one mortal Bruise in the Head, of which he instantly dy'd, the 28th of April last. The Child was sitting at a Bench, when the Prisoner came along with a Dray, which he drove close to the Houses, that the Off-wheel broke down the Bench, and wedged the Child's Head up against an Iron-Grate; the Blood gush'd from his Neck, his Nose, and Eyes, and he dy'd on the Spot. Guilty.
Of course, accidents and murder weren't the only thing that happened to children: almost all the cases of rape that appear at the Old Bailey at the turn of the 17thC concern the rape of children. It was illegal to have sex with a child under ten years old, no argument. If it could be proven that a child had been penetrated by an adult male, then he would be hanged, no excuses. To establish said penetration, the girl would have to be examined by a midwife, or often two, and a surgeon. Modesty played no part in the court proceedings, and the state of the victims injuries were put before the jury in graphic terms. Indeed, one Philip Roberts was judged innocent of 'ravishing' Jane Harris in 1683, because of mother and daughter's 'over-much modesty'. It was very common for proof of rape to include the testimony that the child had contracted venereal disease as a result of the rape. This is more likely to have been a physical result of the damage done by abuse, rather than disease, but that cannot now be verified. In one extraordinary case of 1678, various witnesses attested to the fact that 8 year old Elizabeth Hopkins 'took pleasure in' being raped by Stephen Arrowsmith (it appears from their testimonies that they had been bribed), but the jury had none of it, and he hanged.
One final case sad account of a child in court is the case in 1678 of two young Westminster boys:
Another unhappy Murther haypened at Westminster by the discord of two young Lads, who quarrel'd about cutting their Apron-strings, being Shoomakers, the younger not knowing how to revenge himself, took a three peny Knife and stabb'd the other, who run out of the Shop with his Bowels in his hands, cri'd, Lord have mercie upon my Soul, Daniel has kill'd me. The Lord Chief Baron after he had heard the Evidence, wish'd the Jury to consider whether the boy understood what he had done or not, he being but thirteen years and a month old, the Jury afterwards brought him in guilty of Man's Slaughter.
There is no record of any punishment for the boy, but I suspect what he had done marked him as clearly any brand.
