Criminal penalty for arson in 1840s

[Walter Abramson]

Can anyone tell me what the criminal penalty for arson may have been in the middle of the 19th century?  According to parish records, an ancestor was acquitted of such a charge and then moved to a different village soon after. I wonder how difficult it would have been to gain acquittal in the courts to say nothing of the stigma one must have felt from criminal charges in a rural setting during that time.
 
Any thoughts?

[Ingela Martenius]

In 1840 the old Penal Code (missgärningabalken) from 1734 was still valid (though amended). The new Penal Code (strafflagen) was introduced in 1864 (and replaced in 1965, by brottsbalken).
The old 1734 Penal Code was already in 1840 regarded as obsolete, and the courts seldom went for the maximum penalty possible.
 
If no one was actually killed, only property destroyed, I should think that a conviction would have meant a very long prison sentence, hard labour (e.g. stone cutting, just like Nelson Mandela). Prison conditions were rather awful, the prisons often located in old damp and draughty castles and the cells very reminiscent of dungeons - and yet prison conditions had been greatly improved by king Gustavus III in the late 18th century.
And yes, chain and ball.
 
The court proceedings in themselves were not that different from today. Perhaps you even had an advantage in those days (or disadvantage, depending on who you were) since at least one or two men on the permanent jury would know you, or have heard about you, and be favourably disposed if you were known to be of good character. (In Sweden, there is no temporary jury like in Anglosaxon countries; our jury (nämnd) is appointed and the jurors (nämndemän) serve for years - in the 19th century more or less for life, and the office was often inherited by a son.) Criminal proceedings were usually quite swift in those days, but the person charged would have to remain in custody throughout. There is no bail system in Sweden - and custody in those days meant that you were incarcerated in prison, and treated like any other prisoner (though no hard labour, of course).
But judges in Sweden weren't bad - they even acquitted people accused of being witches back in the 17th century. Quite clearheaded about what constituted proof - and not given to taking bribes.
 
As you point out, the real challenge lay in coming back to the village after having been acquitted. Plenty of people to say no smoke without fire (no pun intended!) etc. And there would always be that note in the parish records... But, if your ancestor moved only to another village and not out of the parish, the gossip probably wasn't too bad. You'd have to move far, maybe even out of the county, to escape it.
 
Ingela