Witchcraft in South Australia Part II: Witchcraft Laws Around the World.

Witchcraft in South Australia

Part II:

Witchcraft Laws Around the World.

Last blog I introduced a very brief history of witchcraft persecutions across the world. There is much more I could say, but this isn’t the blog to do so. This week, I am going to cover some of the laws pertaining to the practice of witchcraft across the world, many of which have been repealed, but others remain intact, some in countries you would not suspect!

 Ye Olde witch, ‘malefici’ (male) or ‘maleficae’ (female) was thought to be a devil-worshipping practitioner, or in league with the devil to gain something for themselves. They were everyday people who were accused of witchcraft for political or social gain, or because they didn’t conform to someone else’s religious views, or sometimes it was purely for how they looked.

1542

In Britain and the English Isles, accusations of witchcraft were rife. In 1542, Henry VIII introduced the Witchcraft Act 1542 (33 Hen. VIII c.8) which was the first law to define witchcraft as a punishable felony. A witch found guilty could face a punishment of death or forfeiture of goods and chattels. It also removed the right to “benefit of clergy”, which was a legal device that anyone that could read a passage from the Bible, would be spared from death by hanging.

1563

Elizabeth 1 was next to make laws in England directed at witchcraft with the release of “Act against Conjurations, Enchantments and Witchcrafts. (5 Eliz. I c. 16).”[1]
 Within her new laws, Elizabeth 1 decreed that anyone who should "use, practice, or exercise any Witchcraft, Enchantment, Charm, or Sorcery, whereby any person shall happen to be killed or destroyed" would forego the benefit of clergy and be put to death.
However, for lesser charges of witchcraft, where a person, wasn’t not seriously hurt or killed, imprisonment was the preferred option.
 The same year the Scottish Witchcraft Act was set in place. This act established that both the practice of witchcraft and consulting witches were felonious offences punishable by death. It did not clearly define what witchcraft was, nor how to identify a witch. (Moir, 2014)

1604

 James I was next to add witchcraft laws with; “An Act Against Conjuration, Witchcraft and dealing with evil and wicked spirits”.  James' I, act broaden the scope of the act that anyone who practised

1649

The Scottish Witchcraft Act of 1649 expanded on some aspects of the previous, Witchcraft Act of 1563, by passing laws to enforce acts of godliness. It now became illegal to worship false idols, be guilty of blasphemy and cursing parents. It also enabled a new clause that allowed the death penalty for consulting with witches, devils or “familiar spirits”.

1735

With the passing of The Witchcraft Act of 1735 (9 Geo. 2 c. 5), previous acts in England and Scotland were repealed and replaced under one Act. The new act took away the death penalty for guilty parties, and instead enforced fines and imprisonment.
 The scope of “witchcraft” was broadened to become more inclined to represent those who claimed to be psychic. Any person who claimed to be able to tell the future, convene or talk with spirits, cast spells or various other acts could be arrested, fined and imprisoned.
 This is the act under which Helen Duncan was found guilty of witchcraft in 1944.
 The act remained current until 1951 when it was replaced with the Fraudulent Mediums Act of 1951.
 The Fraudulent Mediums Act of 1951 was repealed in 2008 and replaced by consumer protection regulations.

 South Africa still enforces The Witchcraft Suppression Act, 1957, which was based on the Witchcraft Act of 1753. (Juta and Company, Ltd., 2005.)
 This act states items such as Causing disease or injury to another person or thing, by supernatural means, indicating one is a wizard, or professing to use supernatural powers, witchcraft, sorcery, enchantment or conjuration shall be liable for a conviction can be imprisoned for 20 years.
 Any person who employs a witchdoctor, witch-finder or professes to be a wizard can be fined five hundred Rand or imprisoned for a maximum of 5 years, or both.
Anyone who pretends to use any supernatural power, witchcraft, sorcery, enchantment or conjuration, or undertakes to tell fortunes, or pretends from his skill in or knowledge of any occult science to discover where and in what manner anything supposed to have been stolen or lost may be found guilty and face a fine of two hundred Rand or two years imprisonment.

 The South African Act was then Amended in 1970 to repeal the 3^rd act of the to now read;
“To amend the Witchcraft Suppression Act, 1957, so as to make it an offence for a person who pretends to exercise supernatural powers, to impute the cause of certain occurrences to another person; and to provide for incidental matters.”

The South African witchcraft act is still enforceable to this day.

Next week we will explore current Australian laws regarding witchcraft.

Researched and written by Allen Tiller © 2018

https://www.facebook.com/TheHauntsOfAdelaide/

References

Goodare, Julian. “The Scottish Witchcraft Act.” In Church History, 39-67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Juta and Company, Ltd.,2005, WITCHCRAFT SUPPRESSION ACT 3 OF 1957, Juta and Company, Ltd. viewed 9 April 2018, http://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/1957-003.pdf

Moir, S, 2014, Scottish act of 1563, Washington and Lee University, viewed 9 April 2018, https://witchhunts.academic.wlu.edu/2014/12/09/scottish-act-of-1563/

Rosen, Barbara & Rosen, Barbara, 1929- 1969, Witchcraft, Edward Arnold, London

---

[1] UK.Gov, 2018, Act against Conjurations, Enchantments and Witchcrafts. (5 Eliz. I c. 16), The National Archives, Gov. UK viewed 9 April 2018, http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/8c14488f-6e52-41bb-bab9-23f2ca3bb07c

Trading in Sorrow – Criminal Clairvoyants

Trading in Sorrow – Criminal Clairvoyants 

In a move they didn’t see coming a number of self-proclaimed psychics, clairvoyants, palm readers and other meta-physicists were rounded up by South Australia police, and charged with “Trading in sorrow”

The year was 1917, and Australia was well and truly entrenched in the Great War (WWI). Australian women, often with husbands or sons fighting overseas, were anxious about the fate of their loved ones, and were particularly susceptible to psychic’s who traded upon that vulnerability.
Psychics, claiming to possess the occult powers that could tell their clients the where abouts, or upcoming movements of their loved ones, was a regular occurrence. The newspapers at the time stated that women of the era were “interested in the war, such haphazard guesses (by psychics) were apt to be singularly appropriate.”

 The meaning of this statement is quite clear. The authorities of the time were worried that these self-proclaimed psychics were keeping up to date with war news via the newspapers, and when a client came asking about their significant loved one at war, the psychic would make an educated guess as to where the loved one might be; thus the client would believe the psychic was really getting these messages from spirit, and would return to spend more money…and on the cycle goes.

 The first psychic to face the courts was Madam Fitzsimmons, who was accused of working her charms on a lady named Maude Wilcher.
This psychic had claimed that Maude’s husband was alive and well, and she would see him very soon. She claimed the husband was in Egypt, not France, and fighting among the Turks. She also claimed the couple would have, that another baby.

 Prosecutor Shierlaw laid the information through section 67 of the Police Act 1916. The Act proclaimed that rogues and vagabonds are liable to imprisonment with hard labour, for a period not exceeding three months, such people as pretended to tell fortunes, practice palmistry etc, in order to deceive the public.

 This act was handed down to South Australian War from our English ancestry. It came directly from the English Vagrant Act of 1824 (George IV), which put in place protections against fortune tellers.
In basic terms, the act made it illegal to practice in connection to a craft, means or device beyond physical dexterity, to employ some invisible agency to deceive and impose upon others. Fortune telling could only be sold as an amusement, not as a truthful piece of information.

As it turned out, Maude Wilcher’s husband had already departed, she was a widow, and her visit was part of a small sting operation by the Women’s Police Department. Fitzsimmons was found guilty and fined 10 pounds. (About $1000 in today’s money).

Other psychics found guilty in the trial included Madame Amalia, madam Phyllis, Madam Rosa, Mrs Vear, Madam Mora, Charabella Fisher, Mrs Hamilton, Mrs Glennie and Mrs Loftus – all of whom were find 9 pounds.

 The following psychics all pleaded not guilty, and went to further trial: Madam Luna, Professor Mernox, Madam Illah, Mrs Kennedy, Mrs Barr, Madam Zillah, Miss Melrose, Madam Thelma, and Mrs Duguett. (At this point I do not know the outcomes of their trials, perhaps that will be another blog.

In South Australia, the current laws still take into account fraudulent psychics claims. 

Section 40 Part 8 of the South Australian Police Act (https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/SUMMARY%20OFFENCES%20ACT%201953/CURRENT/1953.55.UN.PDF)

40—Acting as a spiritualist, medium etc with intent to defraud A person who, with intent to defraud, purports to act as a spiritualist or medium, or to exercise powers of telepathy or clairvoyance or other similar powers, is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: $10 000 or imprisonment for 2 years.

Researched and written by Allen Tiller ©2017

https://www.facebook.com/TheHauntsOfAdelaide/

1917 'CLAIRVOYANTS IN COURT.', The Register (Adelaide, SA : 1901 - 1929), 23 June, p. 10. , viewed 18 Sep 2017, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article59147540

1917 'FORTUNE TELLING AND CRYSTAL GAZING', Daily Herald (Adelaide, SA : 1910 - 1924), 23 June, p. 6. , viewed 18 Sep 2017, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article105413057

South Australia's Weird Laws

South Australia has some unusual laws, most are very old and may have been reasonable in their time period, but seem out of place in this day and age. The following is just a few of them in no specific order

Living with person of “Bad Character”

A person who is the occupier of a premises frequented by reputed thieves, prostitutes, persons without lawful means of support or persons of notoriously bad character is guilty of an offence. Maximum fine $750.

Disrupting a wedding ceremony

Under the Summary Offences Act obstructing or disturbing a wedding ceremony in South Australia can attract a fine of up to $10,000 or two years in jail.

Asking for money or goods in a public place

Asking or begging for money or goods is an offence in South Australia, with fines of up to $250.

The act also includes a person going from house to house asking for alms, encouraging children to do the same, or exposing a wound or deformity with the objective to receive money or goods.

Dont sell ya big Fridge!

A person must not sell or hire, or offer or expose for sale or hire, a refrigerator, ice chest or icebox having in it a compartment of a capacity of 42.5 litres or more unless that compartment is so constructed or equipped that every door or lid can be opened easily from the inside of the compartment when any lock or catch that can be operated from the outside of the compartment is fastened. Maximum fine $750.

Gate crashing

Turning up to a party uninvited can provide unruly and uninvited revellers with a maximum $5,000 fine or one year imprisonment.

If a person trespasses on premises that are being used for a private party and does not leave when requested to by the owner or organiser, they automatically qualify for the offence.

If the person begins to behave offensively, an extra $2,500 fine can be added.

If the name and address of the person is then requested and the person refuses, the total maximum fine could reach $10,000.

Placing advertising posters

Sticking advertising posters or 'bills' on the side of buildings, structures, roads, paved surfaces or objects of any kind without lawful authority can attract a fine of up to $2,500 or six months jail.

The person who distributes the material is guilty of the offence unless it can be proven they took precautions to ensure the posters were not placed illegally on property.

Poster-placers can also be made liable for removal costs.

Drunken tattoos

Party goers are protected from waking up with 'I love ...' tattoos the next morning under the Summary Offences Act.

Tattooists can face fines of up to $5,000 or one year in jail for performing any kind of 'body modification' on someone who appears intoxicated as a result of alcohol or drug consumption.

Faking clairvoyance or medium

If a person pretends to be a clairvoyant, spiritualist or medium, and those involved in a reading believe they are fake, the medium can be charged under the Summary Offences Act with fines of up to $10,000 or two years imprisonment.

Those who pretend to have powers of telepathy or clairvoyance can be charged with the offence - those who actually can provide the service already knew this.

Offering a 'no questions asked' reward for the return of goods

Those posting public notices requesting the return of lost property with 'no questions asked' or 'no prosecution' can themselves be fined $500.

Any person who prints or publishes an advertisement can also be guilty of the crime.

Singing A song with Profanity

A person who uses indecent or profane language or sings any indecent or profane song or ballad in a public place or police station is guilty of an offence. Maximum fine $250.

Ring and run

A person who, without reasonable excuse, decides to ring a door bell or knock on a door is guilty of wilfully disturbing another person and can be fined up to $250.

Close you car door!

A person must not cause a hazard to any person or vehicle by opening a door of a vehicle, leaving a door of a vehicle open, or getting off, or out of, a vehicle. Maximum fine $225.

Pigeon power

Homing pigeons are a law amongst themselves when it comes to protection, with an individual clause in the Summary Offences Act detailing those found guilty of unlawfully killing, injuring or taking homing pigeons may face fines of up to $250.

The gate keeper

A person who opens a farm gate and leaves it open, or in turn closes a farm gate and leaves it closed is guilty of an offence that can attract a fine of up to $750.