Attitudes towards crime and punishment changed dramatically across the 18th century, with London society viewing criminals, criminality, the courts and punishment very, very differently. Policy changed markedly, as did general opinion on the justice system and policy as a whole.

Public attitudes towards criminals and the criminal 'underworld'

To set the scene, 18th century London was going through a series of massive changes, which significantly affected its demographics and crime rates. The population was increasing dramatically, by 1715, nearly 650,000 people were living inside the boundaries of London, an increase of roughly 100,000 in twenty years alone. For the next decade, the population could only continue to grow, with an influx of previous rural inhabitants settling, often temporarily, in the city, and the situation was only heightened by a high birth rate, and tempered by a high mortality rate.

The city was becoming bigger, and so was the population of impoverished people. The culture of the city was also being dramatically changed: the 18th century saw more Sephardic and by the end of the 18th century, Ashkenazi, Jewish immigrants, as well as the creation of a black community and an increasing Irish population.

However, this increase would not last. By the mid 18th century, the population had stagnated, largely as a result of multiple financial crises, resulting in a damaged economy and a lack of basic necessities on some occasions. With the mid 18th century seeing such poverty, and dealing with a much larger population than there was space or allowance for, crime dramatically increased, with people quite literally stealing to survive, or becoming destitute and homeless.

In the early to mid 18th century, the 'face' of London crime was therefore changing. Immigrants were the new face and stereotype of crime- particularly the Irish- and London was becoming more segregated and divided by class and wealth, creating areas of mass poverty, where once poor and rich lived close together. In certain areas of central and East London, this created essentially small and deeply impoverished communities- and these communities were seen (and indeed, were) as a hotbed of crime. This divide and creation of 'criminal areas' only worsened throughout the century, but it truly started in the mid 18th century.

As a result of this divide, entire areas, especially immigrant communities, began to be known as criminal havens. From criminals who could be from anywhere, the public image of criminals now included specific geography, and sometimes ethnicity. By 1800, the Roma were seen as thieves and kidnappers, and Jews were seen as sellers of stolen goods.

However, with the various economic depressions, terrible conditions and rising rates of illegitimacy, the public was also changing its attitude more positively, relating to infanticide. Despite harsh punishments for those convicted of infanticide, the early and mid 18th century saw growing sympathy and empathy for the often unmarried, young and impoverished mothers who killed their children shortly after birth, or attempted to abort. By the beginning of the 19th century, convicting any mother of infanticide was deeply unpopular, although it did still occur, with the public becoming increasingly sympathetic, as shown through the creation of multiple charities dedicated to supporting poor, abandoned or homeless children.

Indeed, public attitudes towards women and crime as a whole was changing. Fewer women were being tried in courts, and the face of crime was now decidedly masculine in nature. Masculinity and criminal behaviour- particularly violent criminal actions- were seen to be closely intertwined, and criminal men were dealt with almost solely within the court system. In contrast, women tended to commit different crimes- or at least be caught for different crimes- and were also 'dealt with' differently, being sent off to relatives if possible, being supported by institutions, entering asylums (worse than many criminal punishments, in certain cases) or facing the court of public opinion, with disgrace and social isolation key tools of control and power.

So for public attitudes towards criminality, the public image of a criminal became: a man, poor, from an impoverished area such as the East End, with anti-Ziganism and antisemitism also becoming entrenched in public opinion.

Policing and Arrests

The most significant shift in public attitude in relation to crime and policing was undoubtedly when the majority of London society began to see crime as a social, rather than an individual, problem. Previously, prosecution of a crime was very much on the individual, and to some extent it still was by the beginning of the 19th century, how crime as being against an entire community- and the prosecution of a crime being necessary for the protection of the community- became central to the idea of crime, punishment and protection. Although London had largely ineffectual night watches, before the 18th century, if a criminal was not caught in the act and immediately taken to a Justice of the Peace, successfully prosecuting a crime would be nearly impossible, in cases of 'petty crime' particularly.

However as crime entered the public sphere, so did policing. There was an increasing pressure and expectation of prosecution- despite many prosecutors being wary due to the death penalty being a common punishment- for the sake of society as a whole. In response, catching criminals became an investigative and communal affair.

Thief-taking took off in the 18th century as a result. Thief-takers were employed by victims of crimes to find perpetrators and bring them to justice, for a fee, and they would also often negotiate for the return of stolen property. They were deeply entrenched in the London underworld, many themselves being criminals, sometimes turning in innocents or even encouraging or creating crime in order to find employment. Government, councils and courts even encouraged and rewarded thief-taking, and although thief-takers became notoriously corrupt criminals by the mid-18th century, they were still in use as being one of the only options for a victim of a crime. Their rise in importance- and ability to remain important- was as a result of prosecution being encouraged, the prosecution of all crimes, not just those not requiring investigation. Crime was seen as damaging and tearing the entire fabric of the community: thief-takers were one step towards repairing it.

With a growing understanding of the need for a public form of investigative policing, to protect society as a whole, the response to various political riots and rising crime rates as a result of poverty was to create a proto-police force, in the form of the Runners.