Of crimes against property, involving punishments of one year's
imprisonment, or more, we find:--
+================+==========+
YIn Pennsylvania Y1 in 4,400Y
+----------------+----------+
YIn New York Y1 in 5,900Y
+----------------+----------+
YIn MassachusettsY1 in 5,932Y
+================+==========+
While in England, in the year 1834, their convictions for offences
against property, involving punishments exceeding one year's
imprisonment, was 1 in 3,120.
Now, that these numbers are fairly given, as far as they go, I have no
doubt; but the comparison is not just, because, first, in America crime
is not so easily detected; and, secondly, when detected, conviction does
not always follow.
Mr Carey must be well aware that, in the American newspapers, you
_continually_ meet with a paragraph like this:--"A body of a white man,
or of a negro, was found floating near such and such a wharf, on
Saturday last, with evident marks of violence upon it, etcetera.
etcetera, and the coroner's inquest is returned either found drowned, or
violence by person or persons unknown." Now, let Mr Carey take a list
from the coroner's books of the number of bodies found in this manner at
New York, and the number of instances in which the perpetrators have
been discovered; let him compare this list with a similar one made for
England and Wales, and he will then ascertain the difference between the
_crimes committed_ in proportion to the _convictions_ which take place
through the activity of the police in our country, and, it may be said,
the total want of police in the United States.
As to the second point, namely, that when crimes are detected,
conviction does not follow, [see Note 5] I have only to refer back to
the cases of Robinson and Goodwin, two instances out of the many in
which criminals in the United States are allowed to escape, who, if they
had committed the same offence in England, would most certainly have
been hanged. But there is another point which renders Mr Carey's
statement unfair, which is, that he has no right to select one, two, or
even three states out of twenty-six, and compare them all with England
and Wales.
The question is, the comparative security of person and property in
Great Britain and the United States. I acknowledge that, if Ireland
were taken into the account, it would very much reduce our proportional
numbers; but, then, there crime is _fomented_ by traitors and
demagogues--a circumstance which must not be overlooked.
Still, the whole of Ireland would offer nothing equal in atrocity to
what I can prove relative to one small town in America: that of Augusta,
in Georgia, containing only a population of 3,000, in which, in one
year, there were _fifty-nine assassinations_ committed in open day,
without any notice being taken of them by the authorities.
This, alone, will exceed all Ireland, and I therefore do not hesitate to
assert, that if every crime committed in the United States were followed
up by conviction, as it would be in Great Britain, the result would
fully substantiate the fact, that, in security of person and property,
the advantage is considerably in favour of my own country.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1. Miss Martineau, speaking of the jealousy between the Americans
and the French creoles, says--"No American expects to get a verdict, on
_any evidence_, from a jury of French creoles."
Note 2. America though little more than sixty years old as a nation,
has already published an United States Criminal Calendar (Boston, 1835.)
I have this book in my possession, and, although in number of criminals
it is not quite equal to our Newgate Calendar, it far exceeds it in
atrocity of crime.
Note 3. Some allowance must be made for the license of the reporters,
but in the main it is a very fair specimen of the recorder's style and
language.
Note 4. There is, as will appear by the quotations, as much fun in the
police reports in New York as in the best of ours: the _style_ of the
Recorder is admirably taken off.
Note 5. Miss Martineau, speaking of a trial for murder in the United
States, says, "I observed that no one seemed to have a doubt of his
guilt." She replied, that there never was a clearer case: but that he
would be acquitted; the examination and trial were a mere form, of which
everyone knew the conclusion beforehand. The people did not choose to
see any more hanging, and till the law was so altered as to allow an
alternative of punishment, no conviction for a capital offence would be
obtainable. I asked on what pretence the young man would be got off, if
the evidence against him was as clear as it was represented. She said
some one would be found to swear an _alibi_.
"A tradesman swore an _alibi_; the young man was acquitted, and the next
morning he was on his way to the West."