Rape in the Eighteenth-Century Metropolis: Part 2 (original) (raw)
2006, Journal for Eighteenth-century Studies
In opening a rape prosecution to an Old Bailey jury in 1789, the celebrated barrister William Garrow summed up the problems attendant on most rape cases, then as now. They were difficult for courts and juries to consider because by the very 'nature of the offence, it is almost always attended with a secrecy which makes it necessary for Courts and Juries to find their way as they can, and to judge from the probability and improbability of the story told by the person who complains of the injury'.' Contemporary notions about evidence often put complainants at a disadvantage. Prosecutions suffered from the traditional reluctance of juries to convict on capital charges in cases where most of the evidence was victim generated. Finally, complainants were always female, defendants usually male. In the eighteenth century, women were commonly felt to be more governed by their emotions and less 'rational' than men, yet the most important aspect of the Crown's case was usually the complainant's testimony. The Role of Complainant Reputation Complainant credibility went to the heart of rape cases. Blackstone felt that it was an indication of the compassionate nature ofEnglish law that, unlike some civil law jurisdictions, even a prostitute could be the victim of, and prosecute, a rape.2 However, the experience of Elizabeth Galloway, a prostitute who accused the Scottish Lord John Drummond (an erstwhile client) of the crime in 1715, would suggest that there was not much truth in this, though she did get her case past three examining JPs and had Drummond committed to Newgate for five days before the matter was thrown out by the Middlesex Grand Jury at the Old Bailey. (That his Lordship was a notorious Roman Catholic may help explain why the case progressed as far as it did.3) In reality, as even Blackstone candidly noted, the reputation of the victim was vital in any prosecution for the crime. Far more than today, rape trials were as much an examination of the complainant as of the accused man. Chastity played a crucial role. Women of bad reputation had little prospect of success, and any suggestion that a complainant had been sexually active outside marriage would hugely undermine her case. Indeed, in early modern Europe