March 26

The Murder Act of 1752 and the Birth of Frankenstein

(Affiliate disclosure: Some links on this blog may earn us a small commission at no cost to you. Every bit helps keep the lantern lit.)

On March 26, 1752, the Parliament of Great Britain quietly passed a piece of legislation that would alter the relationship between death, science, and the human imagination for the next three centuries. Its formal title was unwieldy, as parliamentary titles tend to be. Its purpose, stripped to essentials, was this: the corpses of convicted murderers, after hanging, would no longer be buried. They would be handed to the Company of Surgeons for public dissection.

The lawmakers who drafted the Murder Act were thinking about deterrence, not literature. They could not have anticipated that the chain of events they set in motion—legal corpses, desperate surgeons, grave robbers, galvanic experiments on twitching executed bodies—would eventually lead a nineteen-year-old woman named Mary Godwin to sit in a rainstorm in Switzerland sixty-four years later and dream up the creature we now know simply as Frankenstein's monster.

But that is precisely what happened. And understanding how requires us to follow the body—quite literally—from the gallows to the dissection table to the novel that changed how Western civilization thinks about the boundaries of life, death, and scientific ambition.

The Bloody Code

To understand the Murder Act, one must understand the world into which it was born. Eighteenth-century Britain operated under what later historians would call the Bloody Code—a penal system of almost theatrical severity, with over two hundred offences carrying the death penalty by the 1820s. You could hang for stealing a sheep. You could hang for cutting down a young tree in an orchard. The gallows at Tyburn, London's great public execution ground, was a regular entertainment, drawing crowds in their thousands.

Yet death, the authorities had begun to feel, was perhaps insufficient as a deterrent for murder specifically. Something more was needed. Something that would strike terror not just into the living but into the condemned themselves—a punishment that followed the body beyond death.

For the population of eighteenth-century Britain, informed by centuries of Christian theology about bodily resurrection, dissection was that something. The belief that the body must be whole and intact for the soul to rise on Judgement Day was widespread and deeply felt. To be dissected was not merely humiliating—it was, in the understanding of the time, to be denied heaven itself. The Murder Act therefore added a theological dimension to its punishment: it did not merely kill you. It imperilled your immortal soul.

The Act passed on March 26, 1752, and came into force on June 1 of that year. The first man to suffer under its provisions was Thomas Wilford, a seventeen-year-old who had stabbed his wife of one week to death. He was hanged at Tyburn and then publicly dissected at Surgeon's Hall in the Old Bailey, before a large audience of spectators. The sentence handed down by the judge concluded with words that capture both the legal and the theological weight of the moment:

"You are to be taken to the common place of execution, and there hanged by the neck until you are dead; after which your body is to be publicly dissected and anatomised, agreeable to an Act of Parliament in that case made and provided; and may God Almighty have mercy on your soul."

The God Almighty invocation was not ironic. It was genuine—and genuinely chilling, because the sentence that preceded it had just made divine mercy considerably more complicated to obtain.

Body Snatchers and Resurrection Men

The Murder Act had a problem it did not anticipate. Medicine was advancing rapidly. Anatomy was becoming central to surgical training. And the number of convicted murderers hanged each year—somewhere between ten and twenty in London, fewer elsewhere—was nowhere near enough to supply the growing appetite of the nation's medical schools.

The gap between legal supply and medical demand was filled by one of the more macabre cottage industries in British history: the resurrection men, or body snatchers. These were gangs—sometimes working independently, sometimes in loose networks—who made their living by digging up freshly buried corpses at night and selling them to anatomists and surgical lecturers. The trade was technically illegal but widely tolerated, because the alternative—no bodies, no surgical training, no surgeons—was worse. Anatomy professors at prestigious institutions quietly purchased bodies they knew were stolen, chose not to ask too many questions, and paid well for fresh specimens.

The families of the recently dead knew this. Wealthy families commissioned iron coffin cages—mortsafes—to be bolted around the graves of their loved ones. Churches employed watchmen. Relatives took turns standing guard through the night by fresh graves until the body had decomposed enough to be useless to the surgeons. The poor, who could afford none of these precautions, simply hoped.

Fights broke out regularly at the gallows between the dissectionists—who had legal right to the body—and the condemned person's family, who would sometimes rush the scaffold to try to reclaim the corpse. The scenes were chaotic, violent, and deeply human: people battling over a body with their bare hands, because what happened to it after death still felt, to everyone involved, like it mattered enormously.

The situation reached its logical and horrifying conclusion in Edinburgh in the late 1820s, where William Burke and William Hare dispensed with the grave-robbing altogether and simply murdered people—sixteen victims in roughly a year—selling the fresh bodies directly to the anatomist Dr. Robert Knox. Burke was eventually hanged for it. In a grim irony entirely consistent with the era, his body was then publicly dissected.

The Spark: Aldini at Newgate, 1803

Here is where the Murder Act's legacy takes its most extraordinary turn. Because the legal corpses it supplied to surgeons were not only being dissected. By the early nineteenth century, they were being subjected to something that seemed, to horrified witnesses, like an attempt at resurrection.

Luigi Galvani, an Italian physicist, had discovered in the 1780s that applying an electrical current to the dissected legs of a frog caused them to twitch and contract as if alive. He proposed the existence of what he called animal electricity—a vital force inherent in living tissue that electricity could apparently stimulate. The implications were intoxicating. If electricity could make dead muscle move, could it, under the right conditions, restore life itself?

Galvani's nephew, Giovanni Aldini, decided to find out. On January 18, 1803, at the Royal College of Surgeons in London, Aldini applied electrical arcs to the fresh corpse of George Forster—a man just hanged at Newgate Prison for the murder of his wife and child, and delivered to the surgeons under the provisions of the Murder Act. The results were witnessed by a large audience and recorded in detail. The Newgate Calendar described the scene:

"On the first application of the process to the face, the jaws of the deceased criminal began to quiver, and the adjoining muscles were horribly contorted, and one eye was actually opened. In the subsequent part of the process the right hand was raised and clenched, and the legs and thighs were set in motion."

The spectacle was so disturbing that Mr. Pass, the official beadle of the Surgeons' Company who was present in an administrative capacity, died shortly after—reportedly of fright. The experiment was widely reported in newspapers including The Times. It caused a public sensation. And it planted a question in the minds of everyone who heard about it: if electricity could do that to a corpse, what might it do with a little more knowledge, a little more power?

Some scholars believe Aldini himself was the direct inspiration for Victor Frankenstein. Whether or not that is precisely true, there is no question that his experiments — and the broader culture of galvanic research they represented—formed the essential scientific backdrop against which Frankenstein was written.

Birth of a Monster

In the summer of 1816, a volcanic winter gripped the northern hemisphere. Mount Tambora in Indonesia had erupted the previous year with catastrophic force, ejecting enough ash and sulfur into the upper atmosphere to block sunlight across the globe. 1816 became known as the Year Without a Summer. Crops failed. Skies remained grey and cold through July. People stayed indoors.

Among those confined indoors was a group of remarkable people gathered at the Villa Diodati on the shores of Lake Geneva: Lord Byron, his physician John Polidori, Percy Bysshe Shelley, his stepsister Claire Clairmont, and eighteen-year-old Mary Godwin—the woman who would become Mary Shelley. Kept inside by relentless rain, they read German ghost stories to each other and Byron proposed a challenge: each of them would write one.

Mary struggled for days to find her story. Then, one night, the group's conversation turned to the nature of life itself—to Erasmus Darwin's speculations about spontaneous generation, and to the galvanic experiments that had been thrilling and horrifying Europe for over a decade. Mary later described the conversation in her 1831 preface to Frankenstein:

"Many and long were the conversations between Lord Byron and Shelley, to which I was a devout but nearly silent listener. During one of these, various philosophical doctrines were discussed, and among others the nature of the principle of life, and whether there was any probability of its ever being discovered and communicated... Perhaps a corpse would be re-animated; galvanism had given token of such things: perhaps the component parts of a creature might be manufactured, brought together, and endued with vital warmth."

When she went to bed that night, she could not sleep. And in the half-waking state between consciousness and dreaming, she saw it:

"I saw the pale student of unhallowed arts kneeling beside the thing he had put together. I saw the hideous phantasm of a man stretched out, and then, on the working of some powerful engine, show signs of life, and stir with an uneasy, half vital motion."

She had her story. The novel she wrote from that vision—published anonymously in 1818, when she was twenty years old—drew directly on the world the Murder Act had created. Victor Frankenstein visits charnel houses and graveyards to collect his materials, combining the roles of resurrectionist and anatomist in a single figure of terrible ambition. The bodies he works with are obtained from sources that would have been immediately, uncomfortably recognizable to her readers. The creature he assembles is, in a very real sense, a product of the same culture that had been legally dismembering the bodies of hanged murderers for sixty-six years.

A Deeper Current

For the readers of Modern Occultist, what makes the Murder Act's legacy so fascinating is not merely its role in the history of medicine or gothic literature. It is the question it forced an entire civilization to confront, in the most visceral possible terms: what is the body, and what does it mean to violate it?

The popular resistance to dissection was not mere squeamishness. It reflected a genuine and ancient understanding that the body is more than a mechanical apparatus—that it retains a sacred quality even after death, that what is done to it matters, that the boundary between the living and the dead is not simply a biological fact but a metaphysical threshold. The crowds who fought at Tyburn for the body of a hanged man were not being irrational. They were defending a worldview.

The galvanists, with their twitching corpses and their electrical arcs, were not simply conducting scientific experiments. They were probing that threshold—asking, with increasing urgency, where exactly life ends and death begins, and whether the boundary could be crossed in either direction. Mary Shelley heard those questions and followed them to their logical and terrifying conclusion: a creature assembled from the dead and shocked into life, who then spends the novel asking, with anguished eloquence, whether he has a soul.

Victor Frankenstein creates his creature in the spirit of the Enlightenment—rational, ambitious, convinced that knowledge has no legitimate limits. The creature's existence refutes him. The novel's enduring power comes from the fact that it takes the scientific question of 1803—can electricity restore life?—and immediately transforms it into the ethical and metaphysical question that the Murder Act had been raising since 1752: what are we owed, as embodied beings? What are our obligations to the dead? And what happens when the hunger for knowledge outstrips our wisdom about what to do with what we find?

The Act was repealed in 1832, replaced by the Anatomy Act, which solved the body shortage by different means—directing the unclaimed bodies of workhouse paupers to the dissection table instead of the bodies of murderers. The ethical problems it raised were simply redistributed rather than resolved.

Frankenstein has never been out of print. Every generation finds in it the mirror it needs. The 1818 readers saw the grave robbers and the galvanic experiments. The twentieth century saw atomic science and the Holocaust. The twenty-first century sees artificial intelligence and genetic engineering. The question at the novel's heart—what have we made, and what do we owe it?—is asked freshly in every generation because every generation finds a new way to create something it does not fully understand.

It all began, on March 26, 1752, with a parliamentary act about what to do with the bodies of hanged murderers. The lawmakers were thinking about deterrence. They ended up, without knowing it, writing the first chapter of the most consequential ghost story ever told.

The question is never whether the dead can be raised—it is whether we are wise enough to ask what we owe them if they are.

(Every day, Modern Occultist News will present "This Day in Occult History" and will dive into the birthdays, rituals, breakthroughs, and crucial moments that shaped today's many esoteric traditions. From the Hermetic revival to Witchcraft, from Crowley to cyberspace, we'll bring the best stories and latest trends to today's own modern occultists everywhere.)

Modern Occultist