Women furnish only one-fifth to one-tenth of the population of penal

institutions. Probably the percentage would be still lower if among

these were not a number of rather common convictions for acts which are

peculiar to women, like abortion, infanticide, child abandonment and the

like. As to the other crimes, few women are burglars or robbers, or

guilty of other crimes of violence, except murder. Women steal and

poison and blackmail and extort money and lie and slander and gossip,

and probably cause as much unhappiness as men; but their crimes, like

their lives, are not on so large or adventurous a scale. They do not so

readily take a chance; they lack the imagination that makes big

criminals or lays broad schemes. In many of their crimes they are often

the accomplices of men and take rather a minor part, although sometimes

a quite important one. For this reason they are often not detected and

frequently not prosecuted, a fact which leaves the percentage smaller

than it otherwise would be. Then too, juries are apt to acquit women of

crime even when they are indicted and tried. It must be a positive case

and one which calls for no possible feeling of sympathy or where there

is no personal appeal that will work the conviction of a woman. Men have

so long adopted an attitude of chivalry toward women that very few

juries will convict them. This too has much to do with the small number

of female convicts.

Some writers claim that the small number of women in penal institutions

shows that women are better than men; but this is a hasty conclusion

arrived at from insufficient facts. There are fewer female prisoners

because women have lived a more protected life; they have not been

engaged so generally in business; they have not been so constantly

obliged to fight their way in the world; their lives have been more

quiet and smooth; they have been surrounded by strong conventions and

closely watched. Especially is this true with regard to the girl as

compared with the boy. Such protection naturally keeps them from the

commission of crime. The great consideration shown to them by

prosecuting witnesses, prosecuting officers, judges and juries,

supplements the protected life and is an added reason for the showing

made by statistics. It is notorious that a woman is seldom convicted of

murder. This has been the subject of much complaint on the part of the

public; still a man may condemn such acquittals and when placed on a

jury will himself vote for acquittal.

After all, the juries are right. Most of the cases of murder against

women involve sex relations. Nature has made the bearing and rearing of

children first of all the woman's part, and this fact so dominates her

life that nothing else seems important to her in comparison. She is not

able to judge in a broad and scientific way matters so clearly affecting

life. It may even be possible that in the evolution and preservation of

life, her judgments are right. At least they are the natural judgments

for a large number of women, or these tragedies would not occur. No

doubt as woman enters the field of industry formerly monopolized by man,

and as she takes her part in politics and sits on juries, the percentage

of female criminals will rapidly increase. In fact, the percentage of

women prisoners has been climbing for many years. As she takes her place

with men she will be more and more judged as men are judged, and will

commit the crimes that men commit, and perhaps furnish her fair quota to

the penitentiaries and jails.

Whether this will be better or worse for the race is no part of the

discussion, and can only be told by long experience. Women must accept

the facts and make their choice of activities in view of these facts.

Quite apart from any sentiment, I think that it is a mistake to believe

that men and women should be judged alike. The structure and nervous

system of women cause physical and mental disturbances which affect

their judgment and life. If there were any justice in human judgment and

civilization, then each human being would be judged according to his

make-up, his tendencies, his inclinations and his capacities, and no two

would be judged alike.

Any sudden change in the treatment of women in the courts will work a

great injustice that will leave its effect on both women and men, and

still more on the life of the race.

IX

JUVENILE CRIMINALS

This subject would scarcely have been noted a few years ago. True, there

was in the past a small mixture of children in the grist ground out in

the criminal courts. Usually they received some leniency, and were

viewed with more curiosity than alarm. The juvenile criminal was

regarded as a prodigy with a capacity for crimes far beyond his years.

Something of the attitude obtained in regard to him which attaches to

the child chess player or the child mathematician. The child criminal is

now common, and for the most part is a product of the city.

All crime is doubtless much more common in the city than the country,

and the young criminal especially is a product of the crowded community.

To those who look for natural causes for all phenomena the reason is not

far to seek. The city itself is an abnormal thing. Primitive man and his

ancestors were never huddled together in great multitudes, as are the

dwellers in cities today. To a degree almost all animals are gregarious,

but the units of organization are much smaller with them than with man,

excepting possibly in the case of the ant and the bee, insects which

seem specially adapted to live a highly automatic and cooperative life,

such as human beings cannot possibly reach. But primitive men and their

direct ancestors lived in small groups. They could not have preserved

their life in any other way. They lived by fishing and hunting and by

gathering roots, berries and herbs. Later they tended their flocks and

cultivated the fields in a simple way.

With the introduction of the modern machine, the factory system and the

railroads, in the last century, our great modern cities were evolved. As

they grew more complicated, new problems arose. The life of the crowded

city is most difficult even for normal men and women. The adjustments

are too numerous and too complex for an animal made with simple tastes

and for a pastoral life. But, if it is hard for men, it is almost

hopeless for children, especially the children of the poor who fill our

prisons, asylums and almshouses.

Every child needs the open air and the open life of the country. He

needs, first of all, exercise which should be in the form of outdoor

play. No healthy boy wants to live indoors, even though his home may be

a convenient city "flat." The woods, the fields, the streams, the lakes,

the wide common with plenty of room, have always made their natural

appeal to the young. And as sunlight kills most of the deadly germs, so

outdoor life with exercise and play takes care of most of the unhealthy

thoughts, habits and ideas of child-life. In the past, our schools both

in the city and country have done little to help the young. For the most

part healthy children have always looked on them more or less as

prisons. Here they have been confined and kept from exercise and play,

to study useless and unrelated facts and to commit to memory dry rules

which are forgotten as soon as their minds are ready to retain anything

worth while.

Schools should be made to fit the needs of children, and not children to

fit schools. The school that does not provide work and play for the

child which he is glad to do, has learned little of the psychology and

needs of youth. Botany, Zoölogy, Geology and even Chemistry can be

taught to children before they learn to read, and taught so that it will

seem like play, and through this the pupil will acquire a natural taste

for books. It is only within the last few years that the modern school

has really begun to educate the child. It has been a hard fight that

scientific teachers have waged with conventional education for the right

of the child. What has been done is too recent and scattering to show

material results.

Nothing is so important to the child as education. The early life is the

time that character is formed, habits are made, rules of conduct

taught, and it is almost impossible to up-root old habits and

inhibitions and implant new ones in later years.

It is true that "the child is father to the man," and he is the father

of the criminal as well as the useful citizen. Outside of the hopelessly

defective, or those who have very imperfect nervous or physical systems,

there is no reason why a child who has had proper mental and physical

training and any fair opportunity in life should ever be a criminal.

Even most of the mentally defective and those suffering from imperfect

nervous systems could be useful to society in a sheltered environment.

Poor as the country schools have always been, the outdoor life of the

country child is still so great an influence that he generally escapes

disaster. He is not sent to a factory, but lives in a small community

where he has fresh air and exercise.

Of course here as everywhere we must allow for the defective, the

imperfect, the subnormals and the children of the very poor. These

unfortunates furnish a large percentage of the inmates of prison, and

most of the victims for the scaffold which civilization so fondly

preserves.

The growth of the big cities has produced the child criminal. He is

clearly marked and well defined. He is often subnormal even down to

idiocy. In most cases he is the result of heredity. Many times he may

have fair intelligence, but this is usually attached to an unstable,

defective nervous system that cannot do its proper work, and he has had

no expert treatment and attention. He is always poor. Generally he has

lost one or both parents in youth and has lived in the crowded districts

where the home was congested. He has no adequate playground and he runs

the streets or vacant, waste places. He associates and combines with

others of his kind. He cannot or does not go to school. If he goes to

school, he dreads to go and cannot learn the lessons in the books. He

likes to loaf, just as all children like to play. He is often set to

work. He has no trade and little capacity for skilled work that brings

good wages and steady employment. He works no more than he needs to

work. Every night and all the days that he can get are spent in idleness

on the street with his "gang." He seldom reads books. He lacks the taste

for books, and such teachers as he knew had not the wit to cultivate a

taste for good reading. Such books as he gets only add to his unhealthy

thoughts.

Many writers have classified the crimes that the boy commits. It is

scarcely worth the while. He learns to steal or becomes a burglar

largely for the love of adventure; he robs because it is exciting and

may bring large returns. In his excursions to pilfer property he may

kill, and then for the first time the State discovers that there is

such a boy and sets in action the machinery to take his life. The city

quite probably has given him a casual notice by arresting him a number

of times and sending him to a juvenile prison, but it has rarely

extended a hand to help him. Any man or woman who has fairly normal

faculties, and can reason from cause to effect, knows that the crimes of

children are really the crimes of the State and society which by neglect

and active participation have made him what he is. When it is remembered

that the man is the child grown up, it is equally easy to understand the

adult prisoner.

X

HOMICIDE

Crimes against persons are not always as easy to classify and understand

as crimes against property. These acts are so numerous and come from so

many different emotions and motives, that often the cause is obscure and

the explanation not easy to find. Still here, as everywhere in Nature,

nothing can happen without a cause, and even where limited knowledge

does its best and cannot find causes, our recognition of the connection

between cause and effect and the all-inclusiveness of law can leave no

doubt that complete knowledge would bring complete understanding.

It is always to be borne in mind in considering this class of crimes

that the motive power of life is not reason but instinct. If men lived

by reason the race would not survive. The primal things that preserve

the race, the hunger for food, drink, sex, are instinctive and not only

are not awakened or satisfied by reason, but oftentimes in violation of

it. Nature, first of all, sees to the preservation of the species, and

acts in a broad way that life may not perish. Nature knows nothing about

right and wrong in the sense in which man uses these words. All of our

moral conceptions are purely of social origin and hence not instinctive

in human life, and are forever giving way to the instincts on which

Nature depends. The preservation of life has called for the emotions of

hate, fear and love, among the other emotions that move men. The animal

fears danger and runs away, and thus life is preserved. The weaker

animal is almost entirely dependent for life upon his fear. He is

sometimes afraid when there is no danger, but without fear he would be

destroyed. Sometimes the animal hates and kills and thus preserves

himself. The love of offspring is the cause of the care bestowed upon it

which preserves its life. The herd instinct in animal species develops

packs and clans and tribes and states. Man is the heir to all the past,

and the instincts and emotions of the primitive animal are strong in his

being. These may have been strengthened or diluted as the ages have come

and gone, but the same instincts furnish the motive power for all his

acts. Man fears and hates, and runs or kills and saves his life. He

loves, and preserves his offspring.

Man sees an object. Instinctively he may fear it or he may hate it. He

may run from it or destroy it. He gathers impressions through his

senses. The nerves carry them to the brain. He comes to fear certain

persons and things, to hate certain other persons or things, and to

love still others. If the hatred is strong enough or the danger great

enough or the desire sufficient, he may kill. Whether he plans the

method or deliberates upon the act can make no difference. He is

prompted by the instinct, and the reflection simply means the

consideration of reasons for and against, or the reaching of

inhibitions. If he acts, it is one of the primal emotions that causes

the act. He is the "machine" through which certain emotions find their

path and do their work. Infinite are the causes and circumstances that

give rise to an emotion strong enough to take human life.

Killings which result from a sudden passion are easily understood.

Everyone has been overwhelmed by rage, where reason and judgment and all

acquired restraints are entirely submerged. The primitive man with his

primitive emotion reasserts himself. It is mainly accident or the lack

of some particular circumstance that prevents a murder. Of course some

people are overwhelmed more easily than others. Some natures are less

stable, some nervous systems less perfect, and the built up barriers are

weaker. The whole result of stimuli is determined by the strength of the

feeling acting upon the machine. Such a person is not ordinarily

dangerous to the community. The act itself would generally assure that

it could never happen again. Some killings, however, are more

deliberate. They are preceded by a settled hatred which preys upon the

mind and fights against the preventive influences that training and

habit have formed. Under a certain combination of circumstances these

restrictions are swept aside and the emotions have their way.

There are, of course, certain broad classifications of homicides. A

considerable number, perhaps more than any other, come through the

commission of robbery, burglary and larceny. In the midst of the act the

offender is caught, and kills in an effort to escape. These murders fall

under the heading of property crimes; the cause is the same, and the

rules governing them are the same. The second group, with respect to

numbers, grows from the relations of men and women. Wives kill husbands

and husbands kill wives; sweethearts kill each other. Jealousy and

revenge are commonly mixed with sex life and sex association. Many

socialists have argued that under an equal distribution of property,

where women were freed from fear of want, these crimes would disappear.

But this argument does not take human nature into account. Jealousy is

inevitably associated with sex relations. The close contact of men and

women over long periods of time inevitably causes friction and

misunderstanding. These conditions often grow chronic, and in marriage

are aggravated by the necessity of close association regardless of the

real feelings that may exist. Certain claims are made by husbands and

by wives, which are probably inherent in the relationship; sometimes

they flow from habit and custom, but, from whatever cause, such claims

are so exacting that either the husband or wife finds them hard to meet.

Because of the fact that the feelings of men and women for each other

are deeper and more fundamental than those of any other relation, they

are more subject to misfortune and tragedy. The hatreds born from the

deepest affection are most beyond control. Then the desire of possession

is overwhelming. It would be strange if more killings did not result

from the relations of men and women than from any other cause. It is

easy to understand why this is true. It is likewise easy to understand

how laws, reason and judgment are powerless to prevent. Juries seem to

understand this when women kill husbands and lovers, but a

long-established code of chivalry and a cultivated attitude toward

women, which is partly right and partly wrong, make it impossible to see

that men are just as helpless under strong feelings as women. No doubt a

public opinion that would favor divorces on a greater number of grounds

and make them easily obtainable would prevent large numbers of such

killings, but the cause can not be altogether removed.

The law has long singled out killing as the greatest crime, doubtless

because man prizes life first of all. Of course every effort should be

made to protect life. Still, in measuring the character of the offender,

in determining his possibilities as a useful citizen, homicide is

probably one of the lesser crimes. Many times it implies no moral

turpitude, even with those who believe in moral turpitude. It may imply

very little lack of physical stability. Homicide practically never

becomes an occupation. Most killings are accidental in the sense that

they are casual and dependent on circumstances, and there is as a rule

much less danger of repetition than there is of the original commission

of a homicide by one of a defective nervous system who has never before

committed an unlawful act. A large number of men convicted of murder are

used as "trusties" in our penal institutions, even when their

imprisonment is for a long term, or for life. This shows from the

experience of prison officials that this class of offenders is, as a

rule, of a better fibre than almost any other class.

Doubtless no sort of treatment will ever entirely get rid of homicide.

Brains and nervous systems are so made, that inhibitions are unable to

protect in all cases. Nations and men readily engage in killing, either

from sport or because of a real or fancied wrong. Mob psychology shows

how whole communities are turned into ravenous beasts, hunting for

their prey. The world war, and all wars, show cases of mob psychology

that have led large masses of men to take an active part in killing. The

pursuit of those charged with crime shows that all people like the chase

when the emotions are thoroughly aroused. Under certain impulses,

communities gloat over hangings and commend judges and juries because

they have the courage to hang, when, in fact, they were too cowardly not

to hang and when their reason did not approve the verdict and judgment.

Men who do not kill often wish others might die and are pleased and

happy when they do die. We approve of death when it is the right one who

dies. Whether all persons are murderers or not may depend upon a

definition of murder. But, beyond doubt, all persons are potential

murderers, needing only time and circumstances, and a sufficiently

overwhelming emotion that will triumph over the weak restraints that

education and habit have built up, to control the powerful surging

instincts and feelings that Nature has laid at the foundation of life.

XI

SEX CRIMES

Most of the inmates of prisons convicted of sex crimes are the poor and

wretched and the plainly defective. Nature, in her determination to

preserve the species, has planted sex hunger very deep in the

constitution of man. The fact that it is necessary for the preservation

of life, and that Nature is always eliminating those whose sex hunger is

not strong enough to preserve the race, has overweighted man and perhaps

all animal life with this hunger. At least it has endowed many men with

instincts too powerful for the conventions and the laws that hedge him

about.

Rape is almost always the crime of the poor, the hardworking, the

uneducated and the abnormal. In the man of this type sex hunger is

strong; he has little money, generally no family; he is poorly fed and

clothed and possesses few if any attractions. He may be a sailor away

from women and their society for months, or in some other remote

occupation making his means of gratifying this hunger just as

impossible. There is no opportunity for him except the one he adopts. It

is a question of gratifying this deep and primal instinct as against

the weakness of his mentality and the few barriers that a meagre

education and picked-up habits can furnish; and when the instinct

overbalances he is lost.

Incest, which is peculiarly the crime of the weak, the wretched and the

poor, has a somewhat different origin. Westermarck in his "_History of

Human Marriage_" shows that in the early tribe there was no inhibition

against the marriage of blood relations; that the restriction then was

against the members of the tribe that used one tent; these might or

might not be blood relations. The traditions and folk-ways against the

marriage of close relations grew from the familiarity that came from the

living together of brother and sister, for instance, in one home. This

feeling gradually worked itself into custom and habit and from that into

folk-ways and laws. Sometimes we read accounts of the marriage of a man

and woman who found, after years had gone by, that they were brother and

sister who had been separated in infancy and grew up without knowledge

of their relation to each other. Whether Nature forbids the marriage of

relatives by preventing offspring or by producing imperfect offspring is

a doubtful question. Certain communities in Europe have lived together

so long that all are related and still they seem to thrive. Considering

the general custom and feeling on the subject, however, the man and

woman who know that they are closely related and who marry are different

and weaker than the others; and this may show in their offspring.

Although the subnormal may have no such feeling, they are judged by the

traditions and customs of the normal and on that judgment are sent to

prison.

Many sex crimes are charged to children in the adolescent age; children

who have no knowledge of sex and its development and are helpless in the

strength of their newly-discovered feelings. This class of offenders is

almost always the inferior and the poor who are moved by strong

instincts which they have not the natural feeling, the strength, the

education, nor the desire to withstand.

While most crimes against persons are not directly due to economic

causes, still the indirect effect of property is generally present in

these crimes as well as others. The fact that the poor and defective are

generally the subjects of prosecution and conviction in these offences

shows how closely economic conditions are related to all crimes.

Other criminal statutes are of more modern date, and as a rule involve

not much more than adultery, except in regard to the age of the girl

offender, which is generally placed below eighteen. Still the sex age of

neither boys nor girls can be fixed by a calendar. It depends really

upon development, which is not the same with all people or in all

environments. Many girls of sixteen are more mature and have more

experience of life than others of twenty. Most laws provide that below

sixteen one cannot give consent and that a sexual act is then rape. It

is doubtful if there should be any intermediate age between sixteen and

eighteen, where an act is not rape but still a minor offence.

XII

ROBBERY AND BURGLARY

Crime: Its Cause and Treatment · 第 4 / 15 段