movement ws the touhstone of penl reform not only in Ameri, ut lso in Itly n
Engln through its influene on suh votes s Beri n Howr. Compre with the other hrsh olonil oes in fore t the time, the Great Law of the Qukers ws quite humne. This oy of lws envisione hr lor s  more effetive punishment thn
eth for serious rimes, n pitl punishment ws eliminte from the originl oes.
Lter, in supplementry ts, murer n mnslughter were inlue s soil rimes.
Only premeitte murer ws punishle y eth, with other riminl ts trete -
oring to the irumstnes. It is interesting to note tht the Qukers’ Gret Lw i wy with most religious of- fenses n stuk to stritly seulr riminl jurispruene,  eprture from the oes of other olonies n the erlier Europen oes. Uner the Gret Lw,  “house of orre- tions” institution ws estlishe where most punishment ws mete out in the form of hr lor. This ws the first time tht orretionl onfinement t hr lor ws use s
 punishment for serious rimes, n not merely s  prefe to punishment sheule for
 lter te. The Quker Coe of 1682 ws in fore until 1718, when it ws repele, ironilly, only one y fter the eth of Willim Penn. The English Anglin Coe reple the Gret
Lw, n the mil Quker philosophy gve wy to hrsh punishments. The new oe ws even worse thn