different realities and reactions with the government. Richard Evans has discussed the Prussian bureaucrats as striving to control the behaviour of the condemned and the crowd, and the understanding of the execution by the crowd. The aim was to instil no other reaction than ”contempt and revulsion” for the crime through the execution. Disturbances and sympathies for the condemned would be less probable through the isolation of the condemned. Further a quick journey to the scaffold and, when it had arrived, a quick execution aimed to provide no time for the delinquent to address those attending.484 The abolition of Halsgericht by the Criminal-Ordnung fits well into such a theme of fewer ceremonies and more haste.485 All special clothing for the condemned were also forbidden. If the clothes worn by the condemned in gaol were not approved by the judge, clothes in grey sackcloth were provided.486 In 1829 the confessional difference was abolished, no priests at all were allowed to accompany anybody to their execution. They were, however, to have access to the condemned in gaol until the departure for execution.487 In 1842 the rules again were changed. If condemned and priest so wished could the king grant them that the priest would accompany the condemned to the site of execution. Friedrich WilhelmIV, having issued the new rule, three months later ordered that the courts in all cases should together with their judgement send in their thoughts concerning this question.488 Before an execution in Berlin 1845 the gaol priest was asked if the delinquent deserved to be escorted to his death.489 Inapro484 Evans 1984 p 215 sq, Evans 1997 p 199 sqq (quotation p 200). 485 Criminalordnung § 547 Allgemeines Criminalrecht 1830 p 197 sq. On Halsgericht see e g Ausführliche Beschreibung 1798. 486 Allgemeines Criminalrecht 1830 p 196 § 543, Alker 1842 p 255. 487 Kabinets–Ordre 27 February 1829 in bl 323 vol 7781 repositur 84a Hauptabteilung I GSTAPK. An iterated and slightly changed version in the form of Allgemenine Verfügung 4 February 1839 was printed in Justiz-Ministerial-Blatt für Preußen 1839 p74. The description of the preparation of Charlotte Sophie Henriette Meyer and her execution in Berlin 2 March 1837 fits well to the legislation. Several preachers were involved in her preparation, but none accompanied her to her death, Ein Brand s a p 7, 11. 488 Allgemenine Verfügung 29 December 1842 in Justiz-Ministerial-Blatt für Preußen 1843 p 2, see also Allerhöchster Kabinets-Befehl 23 March 1843 in Justiz-Ministerial-Blatt für Preußen 1843 p 90. 489 Uhden 1881 p 46. 140
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=