User:Franberg5/sandbox2

see my User:Franberg5/sandbox for notes.

History of Receiving
The fence, or receiver, is an old kind of criminal, historically attested in many countries and with deep and complex dynamics within society.

Modern Age England
Receiving was a widespread crime in Modern England and an increasingly crucial concern for the English government of that period. It involved many other kinds of activities and crimes, and it saw its peak in the early XVIII century with the infamous Jonathan Wild. Receiving is intrinsecally connected to theft, as receivers, by definition, sell previously stolen goods. When organised theft grew increasingly important in London, the establishment started to fight it off with new laws, often aimed at receivers: receiving was aknowledged as the very core of property crime.

The 1718 Transportation Act, together with other measures, made a felony of returning goods for a fee, revealing that by then, receiving had already been taken to the next stage: returning goods to their owner, for a fee, instead of selling them away. Standard receiving was already a crime (a felony) because stolen goods were used to earn further money, but returning them was not until 1718, and victims were willing to pay a fee, in order to get back their goods. Another factor comes into account here: for many centuries during the Modern Age, prosecution in England was entirely at the expense (of personal money, time and effort) of the prosecutor. Common people, especially shopkeepers, often preferred compounding, feeling that prosecuting was not worth it and giving an advantage to receivers who would act as go-between.

These go-betweens needed to personally know thieves or have ways to easily interact and bargain with them: nobody was in a better position to do so than the thief-takers. Thief-takers became increasingly popular (or unpopular) in England as a reward was introduced by the Crown for each successfully condemned criminal. Some of them, such as Anthony Dunn, publicly referred to as "pretended Thiefe-taker" in a 1707 document, used their social power as thief-takers as an advantage for receiving: in exchange of clemency or support in trials or more generally, protection from capture or condemnation, they could intimidate thieves or organise theft through thieves who worked under their command and then sell or return those goods for a fee.

Confirmation of how thief-taking and receiving were tightly connected could be seen in the carreer of Charles Hitchen, who was known as a thief-taker. He bought off the position of Under City Marshal through his wife's money in order to have one of the best positions amongst the thief-takers of the City. However, a vast part of his income actually came from the receiving activity related to the web of connections with London's underworld he gained through his official (that is to say, legal) position.

The synergy between receiving, theft and corruption, as well as offical activities such as thief-taking or pawnbroking was a huge dynamic bond where each element enhances the others in a vicious circle.

The master of this powerful synergy of London underworld was Jonathan Wild, who boldly replaced his previous master, Charles Hitchen, and rapidly gained control of London's crime and the title of "thief-taker general". His power was due to his ruthless thief-taking and intimidation activities, but again overly bold receiving was his undoing, as it grew so large and complex a matter to prompt the English government to promote further laws against receiving, such as the extension to the Transportation Act, in 1720, which made returning goods for a fee a felony of the same importance and treatment as the crime related to the goods returned (which means a capital offence in most cases).

Women and Receiving
There is no registered case of female receivers of the same fame of Wild or Hitchen. However, women had active roles in receiving and theft. Elizabeth Hitchen, Hitchen's wife, gave her inheritance money to his husband in order to buy the Under City Marshal for his plans, or we have the case of Elizabeth Fisher, who managed receiving in her husband's alehouse.

English Modern Literature
Receiving grew increasingly important in English Modern society, and combined with the increasing interest of society on reading, it became the source for many writers, such as Daniel Defoe, with Moll Flanders and John Gay, with The Beggar's Opera.

Moll Flanders
Moll Flanders is a novel intended to narrate the whole life of its protagonist, referred to as Moll Flanders, but a relevant part of it is about her becoming a master thief, whose activity relied on the fundamental protection and aid of her Governess, who acted also as a receiver for the goods stolen by her affiliates. She usually recycled stolen goods through her pawnbroking activity or smelting metals when possible.

The Governess is officially a legal pawnbroker, but she actually protects many criminals and thieves and she is the one who buy Moll's stolen goods the first time, sealing her fate as a thief. With this event, Defoe shows how crucial as well as subtle receiving was in building the whole of crime activity in London.

The same Governess goes on in protecting and offering refuge to her affiliates whenever possible, or recruiting thieves into small groups, always via middlemen, in order to protect their thieves' identities in case some of them were caught and willing to confess.

She was also responsible as direct instigator of theft such as in the case of the fire in the neighbourhood, and finally became a go-between for goods stolen by Moll to a drunken gentleman. The amount gained was allegedly greater than what she would have gained by standard receiving.