"The Chain Room"

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Good Photobucket worked.

Have you ever seen so many Cap Wrist Locks and riveted leg irons in one place?
I particularly like the very heavy riveted leg irons at the bottom of pic 2.
There are also a few waist sized oval shaped things which I don't think are leather belts but hinged steel belts.
The whipping frame would have been outlawed around 1870 (in the Navy anyway).

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

The Chain Room was in Millbank Prison. You can read about it in a book entitled:
"The criminal prisons of London, and scenes of prison life" by Henry Mayhew, John Binny published in 1862. The book is available on line from Google Books at:http://books.google.com/books?id=TGAJAAAAQAAJ

Here is a selection.

The Chain-room." Here," said the warder, as he opened the grating of one of the cells, in the lower ward of pentagon 1, and threw back the wooden door with a bang, "here is our chain-room, or armoury, as we call it."

It was one of the ordinary cells, but literally hung in chains, which were arranged against the walls in festoons and other linear devices. In front of the window there was set out a fancy pattern of leg-irons, apparently in imitation of the ornamental fetter-work over the door of Newgate. The walls glittered with their bright swivel hand-cuffs, like stout horses'-bits, and their closely-linked chains like curbs, reminding one somewhat of the interior of a saddler's shop. But the brilliancy and lightness of some of the articles were in places contrasted with a far more massive style of ironmongery, which appeared to have been originally invented for the Cornwall giants. A few of the manacles of the latter class were literally as large as the handle of a navigator's spade; and there were two massive ankle-cuffs, with chains, such as highwaymen are supposed, by Victoria dramatists, to have danced in, but which would have effectually prevented all attempts at hornpipes on the part of any light-footed as well as light-fingered gentlemenweighing, as they did, something more than twenty-eight pounds. There were neck-pieces, too, heavy enough to break an ordinary collar-bone; whilst everything was on so gigantic a scale, that we were struck by the absurdity even more than by the cruelty of such monstrous contrivanceseven aa the horrors of an utterly extravagant melo-drama inspire us with mirth rather than fear. Still, there was something too real about the scene before us to induce any but the grimmest smiles, for by the side of the colossal swivel-cuffs, figure-of-eight-cuffs, and iron waistbands which would have formed appropriate girths for the bronze horse, there were little baby handcuffs, as small in compass as a girl's bracelet, and about twenty times as heavyobjects which impressed the beholder with a notion, that in the days of torture either the juvenile offenders must have been very strong or the jailers very weak otherwise, where the necessity for manacling infants?

"They did not show much mercy to prisoners then," said the warder, to whom we communicated our reflections; "and I can remember in my time, too, when the prison authorities weren't much better. I've Been a little boy six years and a half old sentenced to transportation; and the sentence carried into effect, too, though the poor child couldn't speak plain."

The handcuffs with bars attached, and ingeniously fashioned to represent the letter Pthe chains as heavy as iron cables, and which were used for fastening together entire gangsthe ankle-cuffs, which seemed adapted only for the ankles of elephants, were all shown to us, and we reflected with a sigh that this museum of fettersthis dep6t of criminal harness this immense collection of stupidities and atrocities in shortwas not only a vestige of the sanguinary criminal legislation of the last century, but also a reminder of the discipline of our lunatic asylums as they existed at no very distant period. If it showed us what Newgate was until long after the days of Howard, it also suggested what Bedlam must have been previous to the accomplishment of Pinel's beneficent mission.

""We never use anything here," said the warder, "but a single cuff and chain. "With one cuff," he continued, "I'd take the most desperate criminal all over England."

We could not help expressing our satisfaction at the abandonment of so inhuman and useless a practice as that of loading prisoners with fetters which, independently of the mere weight, inflicted severe torture on them whenever they moved.




"Yes, it's given up everywhere now," was the reply, "except Scotland; and there they do it still. The prisoners who come up to us from Scotland have leg-irons and ankle-cuffs; and the cuffs are fastened on to them so tightly, that the people here have to knock away at them for some time with a heavy hammer before they can drive the rivets out. Occasionally the hammer misses the rivet which fastens the cuff, and hits the man's ankle. Any how, he must suffer severe pain, as the cuffs are very tight and the rivets are always hammered in pretty hard."

The most desperate and intractable prisoners, the warder informed us in the course of this conversation, used formerly to be sent to Norfolk Island; but none had been transported there now for some years. The last who was consigned to that settlement was Mark Jeffrey, the most daring ruffian they had ever had in Millbank prison, and who ultimately attempted to murder the chief-mate of the hulk at "Woolwich, whereupon he was shipped off to Norfolk Island.

"One man made an attempt to break prison here," continued the warder, "some years sinee, and with great success. It was not the man spoken of with the false keys, but a fellow named William Howard, who was known to all his companions as 'Punch' Howard. He was in the infirmary for venereal at the time, and got through a window about nine feet from the ground. With a knife he cut through the pivot which held the window, and fastened it up so as to remain there until night. He then forced back the iron frame, which was not more than six and a half inches square, and made it serve as a sort of rest, like the things used by painters for window-cleaning. This done, he got upon it, tied his bed-clothes to it, and let himself down by them; after which he scaled the outer walls and went straight off to his mother's, at "Oxbridge. I took him there in a brick-field. Of course, I didn't go into the brick-field where he had all his friends, but I got his employer to call him out on some pretext, and then slipped a handcuff on him and brought him back."

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

Thanks Joe,
that is great information.
Paul

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

I don't get it!
If this is a prison in Merry ole England and the story was written by an Englishman, why are all the linear measurements in INCHES and weight in POUNDS?

I am not sure if metric measurements were used in the early 1880's in England but I believe they did not use pounds and inches then


mark
O--O

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

Huh?
The foot was supposed to be based on the length of the foot of the English King Henry. An inch, the width of the thumb.
In this olde British Colony of Australia we changed from Imperial feet, inches, miles etc to Metric in 1972 or 1973.
There are still a few countries using Imperial measurement, and not Standard measurement either.
Paul

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

This, I never heard before. Must have been living under a rock somewhere.
It is obvious that a "foot" is the lenght of a foot. I wonder why an "inch" is not called a thumb. I will do my due diligence and attend to my etomology studies to learn the origin of an "inch".
Too bad we still don't use cubits (the first recorded unit of lenght).

mark
O--O

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

I think the King Henry theory is flawed and may be one reason why I never heard of it before. According to Wikipedia, the foot was a unit of measure, used long before King Henry could even stand on his own 2 feet.

Here is what is written:
The foot as a unit of measure was used in most Western cultures and was usually divided into 12 or sometimes 10 inches/thumbs, or into 16 fingers/digits. The first known standard foot measure was from Sumer, where a definition is given in a statue of Gudea of Lagash from around 2575 BC. Some metrologists speculate that the imperial foot was adapted from an Egyptian measure adapted by the Greeks (the ðïò or pous of between 296 mm and 330 mm)[29] which subsequently became a more consistent measure (the pes of 296 mm) under the Romans.[30]

The popular belief is that the original standard was the length of a man's foot. In rural regions and without calibrated rulers, many units of measurement were in fact based on the length of some part of body of the person measuring (or for example the area that could be ploughed in a day). In that sense, the human foot was no doubt the origin of the measuring unit called a "foot" and was also for a long time the definition of its length. To prevent discord and enable trade, many towns decided on a standard length and displayed this publicly. In order to enable simultaneous use of the different units of length based on different parts of the human body and other "natural" units of length, the different units were redefined as multiples of each other, whereby their lengths no longer corresponded to the original "natural" standards. This process of national standardization began in Scotland in 1150 and in England in 1303, where many different regional standards had existed long before.

Some believe that the original measurement of the English foot was from King Henry I, who had a foot 12 inches long; he wished to standardize the unit of measurement in England. Though there are records of the word "foot" being used approximately 70 years before his birth,[31] it is supposed that this old standard was redefined ("calibrated") according to Henry's foot. In fact, there is evidence that this sort of process was common before standardization. A new, important ruler could try to impose a new standard for an existing unit, but it is unlikely that any king's foot was ever as long as the modern unit of measurement.


Many people are of the opinion that collecting handcuffs is a waste of time. One reason I find it rewarding is to enable me to learn more about the world I live in. I doubt I would have ever had the notion to research the origin of foot (as a unit of measure) if not for this discussion board.

mark
O--O

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

Thanks Paul and Joe for sharing the pics & article.

It just amazes me how ultra perfect everything is arranged, especially compared to how large quantities of restraints are kept in modern prisons, ie; assorted cuffs and LIs piled high in a milk crate - all nicked up and missing plating in spots.

Mark: You're dead-on about this hobby enlightening ones self to the many facets of history and or human culture - in fact, I personally find some of the non restraint related discussions to be just as interesting!

Best,
--Vince

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

I am sure that metric measurements were not widely used in everyday UK in the 1880s.

I had a boat repaired in Denmark in the 1970s. The boat-builder measured in FEET!

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

The Foot most likely came to Britain from the Romans, who used the foot as a unit of measure. So, it's been around for a long time.

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

Since King Henry I was the King, he ruled over his kingdom.
That would make him a ruler.
If he had a 12 inch foot and this measurement recalibrated the standard foot, the device used for recording that measurement could therefore become known as a "ruler".
Makes sense to me even though Wiki has no mention of this.


mark
O--O

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

Dear Mark,

The origin of the length-measuring device is the Latin word for a straight edge, regula.

Cheers,

Jack
http://www.editing.org.uk/tanis/collectibles.htm

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

Dear Mark,

The origin of the length-measuring device is the Latin word for a straight edge, regula.

Cheers,

Hi Jack,
Thank you for sharing your fine etemology wisdom.
I wonder if the measuring stick was still named for the King as his royalty was not regared as anything too outstanding.
He was just a kinda regula sort of ruler!

Mark
O--O

Can't remember where on the Web I found these.
I believe it was a British prison and someone had the responsibility to keep them cleaned.




Paul

Click to expand...

I don't think the term "ruler" has much to do with who is the monarch, but rather its use in "ruling" straight lines. The fact that it has a scale on it is a bonus.