Children, juveniles, and crime in early modern London: Old Bailey trials, 1674–1750

Abstract

Abstract This article uses the early records of the Old Bailey to examine how the court handled cases involving children and juveniles, whether as offenders, victims or witnesses. It argues that though juvenile courts belong to a later age, the early modern court was already applying different criteria in trying young offenders. It demonstrates how juries used age, gender and related considerations to justify the ‘pious perjury’ that sheltered many from the full rigour of the law. Previous work on children as victims has focused on child-rape and infanticide. This article explores other categories. It argues that in cases of death following a severe beating the court's sympathies lay firmly with the defendants, determined to uphold the authority of employers and parents. Lastly, the article explores cases involving children as witnesses, which raised difficult questions about the admissibility of evidence. Judges had to decide if the youngster was sufficiently mature to give evidence on oath.