Magic moments

It was Henry VIII who made witchcraft a felony. Before that, the offence did not have a statutory footing as the ecclesiastical courts dispensed their own savage justice, and the clergy went about the business of inquisition as they saw fit.

However, James I took the offence together with its associated misdemeanors to a new level, imposing the death penalty for full witchcraft, and a year's imprisonment with pillory for some of the lesser offences (1 Jac I, c.12). Jane Wenham was the last to be tried under James's Act in 1712, but her death sentence was pardoned by Queen Anne. It is a common belief that Jane Wenham's case was the last witch trial in England, but this is incorrect and many examples can be found in Victorian times.

Before we consider these strange cases, remember that, while society has long ceased to believe in witchcraft, our ancestors lived in pathological fear of the evil eye. This goes some way to explain why the draconian Statute of James was not repealed until 1735. The Witchcraft Act of that year also abolished the death sentence for the offence, sparing the lives of many an innocent spinster, and repealed all previous witchcraft legislation. By this Act, the legislator came out of the dark ages, shifting emphasis from punishing superstitious nonsense to protecting society from persons pretending to exercise witchcraft. The new law was aimed at sentencing, with a maximum penalty of 12 months' imprisonment for those who deluded or defrauded ignorant people by the pretence to exercise or use any kind of conjuration.

Targeting the poor

Section 4 of the Vagrancy Act 1824 imposed pains and penalties for witchcraft in the ranks of the homeless and street peddlers, targeting 'all persons pretending to be gypsies or wandering in the habit or form of Egyptians'¦ persons pretending or professing to tell fortunes or using any subtle craft by palmistry or otherwise to deceive and impose on'.

One of the last Victorian rogues charged under this statute was William Rapson Oates, who was brought before Bodmin Assizes on 26 January 1894. He was accused of unlawfully pretending to exercise witchcraft and sorcery, after convincing a labourer's wife that he was related to the 'old wizard' and could relieve her bewitched daughter of a spell; for which he charged three shillings and then retuned the following day for a further five.

His lawyer's defence of a well-meaning 'white witch' got him off the section 4 charge, but Mr Justice Vaughan Williams found him guilty on two counts of falsely obtaining money pretending the girl was under the influence of a spell, and, as The Times stated on 27 January 1894, 'that he was able, by using and exercising witchcraft, and by means of skill in occult and crafty science, to remove the spell and enchantment'.

For the 'great and the good' there was little fear of prosecution under the Witchcraft Act but there was no such immunity for the lower orders in Victorian society. One sensational prosecution took place in 1867, when a Plymouth woman, Mary Catherine Murray, was charged under warrant for witchcraft. She was accused of 'ill wishing' a victim and using 'certain subtle means and devices to impose on one Thomas Rendle'.

Mr Rendle paid the prisoner to cure his paralyzed wife and was told that his money would be returned if she failed to cure the poor woman. Needless to say, there was no cure, but, on the contrary, Rendle believed that Murray had 'ill wished' his wife. In desperation, Mr Rendle then consulted a Plymouth 'white witch' called Gribble to break the spell, but strangely Gribble was not joined in the prosecution.

During her trial at Plymouth Guildhall, Murray argued that she had the right to charge for her medicine. The arresting officer, Inspector Murch, produced the charm Murray had sent to Rendle together with another charm of a similar nature, which was worn by the prisoner when she was taken into custody. There were signs on the parchment and against them the words: 'Whosoever beareth this sign all spirits do him homage'¦ This sign is against witchcraft, putrid infection, and sudden death'¦ Whosoever beareth this sign need fear no foe'¦ and this is the sign against witchcraft and suicide, and against evil demons.' Murray's lawyer argued that no offence had been committed against law and that the prosecutor was as big a fool as the prisoner!

Counsel's contempt did not avail Murray, who was sentenced to three months' imprisonment with hard labour. There was also another charge against her for having imposed on one Grace Brimblecome, from whom she had conned ten shillings, but that hearing was postponed.

Fighting back

The last significant prosecution under section 4 of the Witchcraft Act 1735 was R v Duncan and Others (1944). Helen Duncan first came to the attention of the authorities when she successfully predicted the sinking of a British warship, with all hands, during the Second World War. Duncan was subsequently charged for holding séances on 14 and 19 January 1944 and the case for the prosecution was that the whole performance was an 'elaborate pretence, a fraudulent performance, a mere imposition on human credulity'.

But Duncan, a former bleach factory worker, was an acclaimed professional medium, commanding high fees and her meetings were attended by pillars of society including an elder statesman. At her trial, Duncan invited the recorder to hold a séance in the courtroom to prove her tremendous supernatural powers, but leave was not granted. She was convicted and duly imprisoned.

Convinced of the absurdness of the Witchcraft Act, the statesman concerned vowed that he would one day do something about the archaic legislation that imprisoned Duncan. When he was re-elected, the Fraudulent Mediums Act 1951 was made law on 22 June 1951 which repealed the Witchcraft Act 1735 '“ and the said statesman who kept his promise to Helen Duncan was no other than the great Winston Churchill.