User talk:Franberg5

Source

Beattie's book on Policing and Punishment will be useful for this --Jfclegg (talk) 18:55, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have left my copy of Howson's book on Wild (Thief taker general) for consultation in the library ( BALI). I also have photocopies of some chapters from Lyons Prince of Robbers. Best wishes --Jfclegg (talk) 00:16, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Women and receiving

Useful for this would be rhe essay by Garthine Walker in *Women, crime and the courts in early modern England / edited by Jenny Kermode and Garthine Walker Chapel Hill ; London : The University of North Carolina Press, 1994 (which is in BAUM) --Jfclegg (talk) 14:45, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'm looking for it on Tuesday. In the meanwhile, Police and Punishment has already been back in BAUM since Wednesday (afternoon). Franberg5 (talk) 10:29, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

presentation

Would you like to talk briefly to the class about Defoe on receivers? Maybe next week or the week after? Could be useful for you for feedback.--Jfclegg (talk) 22:30, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd gladly do that, but I haven't finished reading Moll Flanders yet. I've been working on "historical material" so far, and I'm publishing in my sandbox soon about it (therefore a partial version of my final article, which will include references to Defoe as well). I hope I can prepare the talk for 8-11 (so not next week, the week after), if that is fine. Franberg5 (talk) 14:43, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So, I think I am ready for a short presentation about receiving in Moll Flanders, in particular about the various activities of her Governess (you can see my own notes on top of my /sandbox page). However, unfortunately, while I plan to also read Colonel Jack as the second reading for my essay, I haven't done so, yet. Let me know whether you prefer a partial presentation tomorrow (9-11) or a more complete one, later on. Franberg5 (talk) 16:40, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Partial tomorrow fine. 5 minutes max !If you can link up with the Proceedings and Ordinary's Accounts for 12 and 26 October 1720 respectively - which we will be looking at tomorrow - that would be great. But your contribution on MF will certainly be appreciated --Jfclegg (talk) 00:23, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Time to publish

Hi Franberg5, I see you have done a lot of note-taking in your sandbox, but still nothing as been added to the Fence article. It's time to move on, so that others can revise, criticise and contribute to your edits!--Navarco (talk) 14:33, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

-- done. i still need more references, but what i have wrote should be complete enough to prompt eventual discussion with other users. i will keep editing anyway.Franberg5 (talk) 20:57, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

early modernity

Periodisation is always subject to controversy, but the eighteenth century is not usually classed as outright "Modern". Early modern is ok, or just use "the eighteenth century". --Jfclegg (talk) 18:57, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

legal history

better check on the sequence of the legislation. As far as I remember receiving was a felony from way back, but you could only be convicted if the thief was convicted first. This changed with the so-called 'Jonathan Wild Act' (1720??). In any case it was very difficult to convict receivers (you could do a little statistical enquiry using the Old Bailey Proceedings - which would also show you the proportion of women accused)). Mandeville's Enquiry on the Causes... has quite a bit to say, as I remember; I have written some pages on the subject - not published yet but cd send you draft to read. Thanks for the useful talk! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfclegg (talk • contribs) 19:04, 17 November 2015 (UTC) --Jfclegg (talk) 19:12, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

-- yes, as far as I have understood in Beattie, receiving is an old felony, but not returning for a fee / compounding (which I have considered as a special case of receiving, being a sort of short-circuit), which became a felony only with the first transportation act, 1718, with an improvement in its extension, 1720, where returning for a fee precisely becomes a felony of the same importance and punishment as the theft of the related goods. I have kept note of pages on Beattie about those things on my sandbox, so I'll check and write it in a clear way as soon as I can get my hands back on the book. As suggested, I'll add some statistics out of OBO soon, maybe together with some hint from TftHC, which I haven't directly used as reference, yet. I'd certainly appreciate your works on the subject (although it's quite a pity I can't quote them). Thanks also for the correction about periodisation, I'll keep correcting and improving the article. Franberg5 (talk) 23:05, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

|| Im not sure that you can consider compounding a special case of receiving; in fact I had suggested it as a topic in its own right (but no-one chose it). Receivers often acted as brokers for compounding - but then they also acted as thief-takers. And many people compounded directly, without an intermediary (the boys do this in Colonel Jack, but it's not just fictional). Perhaps you could move that part to another article and creat links. As for Beattie, I can lend you a copy of Crime and the Courts, and even (briefly) Policing and Punishment (its too fragile to photocopy from but you could take notes, and the relevant pages are not too many). --Jfclegg (talk) 07:20, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

alright, I'll keep them clearly separated then, as i did with thief-taking (I'll adjust soon). I can improve the page on compounding, but first I think it is better if I polish my own. as for the books, I have checked, and indeed Policing and Punishment is not available right now, so if you could lend it on Monday, it would be great. I think i can return it within the end of your ricevimento, on Monday. Crime and Courts is available in BAUM right now. I hope I can get it.Franberg5 (talk) 09:33, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]