204 many in the middle of the 1700’s. Legislation was influenced concerning the treatment of flagrant criminals, often murderers, and concerned mainly with the specific intention of execution. These murderers thought that being well-prepared and with the priest’s absolution and blessing ringing in their ears, execution was the surest way to heaven. In Germany especially an intensive debate was carried on, mainly in consideration as to whether or not a clergymanwas to assist at executions. This was forbidden in Prussia in 1769 and in Hamburgin 1784. The German debate and following legislation affected the debate in Sweden. At the Parliament of 1800 many voices were raised by the elected clergy for an insertion in the new Manual, forbidding clergy to be present at executions. The result was that this Manual’s injunctions were altered so that it was no longer presupposed that a clergyman should be present. He could conclude his part in the process when the prisoner left the arrest. Acontinued criticism against the message execution conveyed led to the prohibition of any speeches at the gallows and from 1830, the clergyman was no longer expected to blindfold the prisoner. In 1723, the preparation of a condemned and the following himto the gallows was the responsibility of the clergy in the parish where the crime had been committed. By 1860 this regulation was changed and the responsibility now fell on the prison chaplain. Much earlier these duties had infact been takenover by the chaplains or in some cases by priests especially appointed for the task. In several dioceses arrangements were made by which the parish clergy contributed to the prison chaplains’ wages so that these prepared and followed the condemned to his death. This was as early as 1763. It also happened that the motivationfor the establishment of newprisonchaplains was on account of the need of such to prepare the condemned. From1833 the chaplain had to accompany the prisoner if he, the prisoner, requested this. Not only the clergy wanted to escape being present at executions. Those towns were executions took place could select twelve witnesses. At three of the four last executions no witnesses were selected. Another example is, that when capital punishment was debated in the Parliament of 1909, two members expressed their opposition to capital punishment, using their own experience as witnesses to augment their argument. Both State and Church altered their attitude against capital punishment. Simultaneously, society’s common falange shrunk to only a few persons, the Church’s opinion concerning execution changed: an opposite opinion resulted. The common liturgical frame under the leadership of the vicars was replaced by private religious instruction given by the specialised prison chaplain. The careful regulations for preparation and prayer at the place of execution in the Manual of 1693 was successively watered down and the clergy given more freedom. By 1894 these regulations had disappeared completely from the Manual. In a wider perspective we can find three phases in manuals and books of in-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=