Welcome to the Historical Fiction Online forums: a friendly place to discuss, review and discover historical fiction.
If this is your first visit, please be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You will have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing posts, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

How do you hang an earl for murder?

User avatar
Susan
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 3746
Joined: August 2008
Location: New Jersey, USA

Post by Susan » Sun November 3rd, 2013, 3:29 pm

[quote=""lauragill""]Wouldn't an earl be dispatched by beheading? Hanging was for commoners.[/quote]

A bit late, just reading this thread now. Since this book is set in the 1830s, execution by beheading no longer existed. When I was reading the Outlander books in 2011, I researched Simon Fraser, 11th Lord Lovat, a real person, who was Jamie Fraser's grandfather via his (fictitious) son. In 1747, Lord Lovat was the last person to be beheaded in the UK.
~Susan~
~Unofficial Royalty~
Royal news updated daily, information and discussion about royalty past and present
http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/

DanielAWillis
Reader
Posts: 114
Joined: March 2012
Contact:

Post by DanielAWillis » Sun November 3rd, 2013, 4:26 pm

You are quite right that Peers would be beheaded and not hanged. In the 1830s this would have still been the case, however in actually, there had not been an aristocrat beheaded since the 1700s, but there also had not been one convicted of a capital crime either.

One away around this would be to have the Peer attainted of their title. It would be a normal course of action for a Peer being convicted of something as horrible as murder. Once attainted, the Peer would no longer be a Peer and could be hanged as a commoner. Attaintment is basically the Sovereign recalling the title to themselves, so the title is not passed on to the heir of the Peer who was attainted.

If such heir was no party to the crime, they could petition the Crown to restore the title to them. A famous case of this was the Duke of Monmouth, Charles II's eldest illegitimate son. His titles were attainted before his execution. However, since most of his titles were actually his wife's hereditary titles, his son (who was too young to be party to the Rebellion) was able to get those ones back, and they continue to the present day with the Duke of Buccleuch. The Dukedom of Monmouth was specifically not restored because it had been created for Charles' son.

Okay, I'll stop Peer-geeking out now.
Daniel A. Willis
Author: Chronicle of the Mages series
www.DanielAWillis.com

User avatar
Misfit
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 9581
Joined: August 2008
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by Misfit » Sun November 3rd, 2013, 4:40 pm

Don't stop, all this input is interesting.
At home with a good book and the cat...
...is the only place I want to be

User avatar
Susan
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 3746
Joined: August 2008
Location: New Jersey, USA

Post by Susan » Sun November 3rd, 2013, 6:47 pm

[quote=""DanielAWillis""]You are quite right that Peers would be beheaded and not hanged. In the 1830s this would have still been the case, however in actually, there had not been an aristocrat beheaded since the 1700s, but there also had not been one convicted of a capital crime either.[/quote]

Laurence Shirley, 4th Earl Ferrers was hanged in 1760 after being convicted of murder by the House of Lords. Supposedly, as a concession to his peerage, a silken rope was used. (That's the way to hang a peer!) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurence_S ... rl_Ferrers
Last edited by Susan on Sun November 3rd, 2013, 7:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
~Susan~
~Unofficial Royalty~
Royal news updated daily, information and discussion about royalty past and present
http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/

User avatar
Susan
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 3746
Joined: August 2008
Location: New Jersey, USA

Post by Susan » Sun November 3rd, 2013, 7:02 pm

Wikipedia has a list of peers who were tried in the House of Lords. According to the list, there were two more peers after Earl Ferrers who were convicted of a capital offense. However, they pleaded "privilege of peerage" and escaped punishment as it was their first offense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tr ... e_of_Lords
~Susan~
~Unofficial Royalty~
Royal news updated daily, information and discussion about royalty past and present
http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/

User avatar
Susan
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 3746
Joined: August 2008
Location: New Jersey, USA

Post by Susan » Sun November 3rd, 2013, 7:09 pm

This website http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/timeline.html says that the last beheading (Cato Street Conspirators) in the UK took place in 1820. However, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Street_conspirators says they were hanged for half an hour (and presumably already dead) and then were decapitated with a knife. Not really a beheading, I guess.
~Susan~
~Unofficial Royalty~
Royal news updated daily, information and discussion about royalty past and present
http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/

User avatar
Misfit
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 9581
Joined: August 2008
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by Misfit » Sun November 3rd, 2013, 8:03 pm

Thanks for finding all of this Susan, that helps a lot. So *my* earl could have been tried and hanged, but he would have to be tried by his peers, and not in court like a commonor if I have it correctly. And if convicted, he could wiggle out claiming his privilege as a peer since it was first conviction.

Do I have that right?

Now, I'm still scratching my head at nothing being done for two years, then all of a sudden his former in-laws are pushing to get him tried. Who brings charges against a peer of the realm?
At home with a good book and the cat...
...is the only place I want to be

DanielAWillis
Reader
Posts: 114
Joined: March 2012
Contact:

Post by DanielAWillis » Sun November 3rd, 2013, 10:55 pm

[quote=""Misfit""]Thanks for finding all of this Susan, that helps a lot. So *my* earl could have been tried and hanged, but he would have to be tried by his peers, and not in court like a commonor if I have it correctly. And if convicted, he could wiggle out claiming his privilege as a peer since it was first conviction.

Do I have that right?

Now, I'm still scratching my head at nothing being done for two years, then all of a sudden his former in-laws are pushing to get him tried. Who brings charges against a peer of the realm?[/quote]

Yes you have the first paragraph right.

The 2-year wait piece I can't help you with. It's your story.

As far as I know it takes a Peer to formally bring charges against another Peer. Perhaps the 2-years was how long it took the victim's famil to find a Peer willing to do it.

If this is taking place in the year 1830, there could be a piece about your Earl being good friends with George IV and the family waited until George was dead to go after said Earl. G4 died in 1830 and was succeeded by his brother William IV (and a young girl named Victoria became heiress-presumptive). Exciting year.
Daniel A. Willis
Author: Chronicle of the Mages series
www.DanielAWillis.com

User avatar
Misfit
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 9581
Joined: August 2008
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by Misfit » Mon November 4th, 2013, 9:45 am

I reread the first few pages. I did have the dates a bit off. The Fire happened in1838, so the story happens in 1840, so I believe the earl could still claim right of peerage? There is no mention of it, just the fire, he was burned trying to save the evil, adulterous wife, and had no actual memory of what happened - just that he has to solve it since her family was hot to have him convicted and hanged.

Odd, but it is also mentioned at the get-go that the wife was a well known in the local village for taking multiple lovers. You would think pickings in a small mining town in the north e of be a bit slim and London would be a better spot, but not in this world.

Sorry to get the dates wrong. It was mid week when I started and busy busy at work, so fairly breaking dead when it came around to reading time at night. Especially after finishing that stupid twilight book.
At home with a good book and the cat...
...is the only place I want to be

User avatar
Misfit
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 9581
Joined: August 2008
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by Misfit » Tue November 19th, 2013, 7:28 pm

FYI, just found this over at the Two Nerdy History Girls blog. http://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.co ... being.html
At home with a good book and the cat...
...is the only place I want to be

Post Reply

Return to “Questions and Research”