larceny—simple theft—accounted for a large number of executions, in part be-
cause of the number of women condemned for an offence for which they could
not claim benefit of clergy (Table 6. 4 ). Men were also hanged in significant
numbers for simple larceny, often on the grounds that they had been granted
clergy at least once before or because the judge went out of his way to insist on
a reading test for a man he considered a dangerous old offender, a test that the
defendant had not been able to pass to the bench’s satisfaction. The reasons why
some men were condemned and others spared are rarely clear. The nature of
the offence clearly played a large part. But other, more personal, considerations
influenced pardon decisions in particular cases. Such factors are hinted at in
royal warrants that in increasing numbers in the 1680 s allowed free, or absolute,
pardons—pardons without a conditional punishment—as the difficulties of
transportation mounted. Free pardons became necessary because merchants
would not take transportees, the government would not pay to send them, and
in any case America would not accept them. But none of that could be said in
the pardon warrant to the recorder. Rather, something plausible needed to be
advanced to justify a pardon that simply allowed an offender to go free. The rea-
sons offered strike notes that are entirely to be expected. For the most part justi-
fications rest on the character or the circumstances of the offenders: they had
been ensnared by evil companions; they were young; it was their first offence;
they had shown signs of remorse and penitence and had demonstrated it by
giving information about other offenders; in the case of married men, they had
wives and children who would suffer if they were left without their help.^103
The outcome of the Old Bailey trials in the decades following the Restoration
confirms the evidence assembled by Sharpe andJenkins of a striking decline in
the number of offenders executed in England in the seventeenth century. Our
The Old Bailey in the Late Seventeenth Century 299(^103) See, for example, CSPD 1679 – 80 , p. 555 ; CSPD 1680 – 1 , pp. 527, 627; CSPD 1684 – 5 , p. 91.
Table 6. 4 .Property offences for which offenders were hanged: City of
London cases at the Old Bailey, 1663 – 1689
Men Women Total
Number % Number % Number %
Grand larceny 13 28. 3 9 64. 3 22 36. 7
Burglary 19 41. 3 3 21. 4 22 36. 7
Picking pockets 5 10. 9 2 14. 3 7 11. 7
Housebreaking 4 8. 7 — 4 6. 7
Horse-theft 3 6. 5 — 3 5. 0
Robbery 2 6. 5 — 2 3. 3
Total 46 100. 1 14 100. 0 60 100. 1
Source: Sample