English law kept harsh public punishments while juries quietly grew lenient

Evidence

By 1830–48, public executions, preceded by torture, had almost entirely disappeared. Of course, this generalization requires some qualification. To begin with, the changes did not come about at once or as part of a single process. There were delays. Paradoxically, England was one of the countries most loath to see the disappearance of the public execution: perhaps because of the role of model that the institution of the jury, public hearings and respect of habeas corpus had given to her criminal law; above all, no doubt, because she did not wish to diminish the rigour of her penal laws during the great social disturbances of the years 1780–1820. … Its severity (in fact, the juries regarded the penalties laid down as excessive and were consequently more lenient in their application) had even increased: in 1760, Blackstone had listed 160 capital crimes in English legislation, while by 1819 there were 223. — Michel Foucault, Discipline & Punish- The Birth of the…, 50

Categorization

• QUESTION: The gap between law on the books and judicial leniency is a mechanism worth chasing — does it echo how panoptic power operates through uncertainty about actual enforcement?
• XREF: connects to: Law changes norms even when it never produces prosecutions — , The Rod and the Child: A Global History…, 7224; Disciplinary punishment targets failure to conform, not just law-breaking — Michel Foucault, Discipline & Punish- The Birth of the…, 276; English juries originally judged from personal knowledge, not presented evidence — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1405

Broader Connections

• Law changes norms even when it never produces prosecutions #complicates (0.80) — , The Rod and the Child, 7224
• Disciplinary punishment targets failure to conform, not just law-breaking #expands (0.72) — Michel Foucault, Discipline & Punish- The Birth of the…, 276