DEDICATED TO MANY KIND FRIENDS. 

 A PLEA FOR THE CRIMINAL. 

 BEING A REPLY TO DR. CHAPPLE'S WORK: "THE FERTILITY OF THE UNFIT, "

 AND

 AN ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN THE LEADING PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINOLOGICAL & REFORMATORY SCIENCE. 

 By

 THE REV. J. L. A. KAYLL, CORRESPONDING MEMBER OF THE HOWARD ASSOCIATION. 

 INVERCARGILL! W. Smith, Commercial Printer, Temple Chambers, Esk Street. MCMV. 

AUTHORITIES CONSULTED IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS VOLUME. 

 Brockway, Z. R. Elmira. Corre, Dr A. Paris. Drill, Dimitri. Moscow. Du Cane, Sir E. England. Dugdale, R. L. America. Ellis, Havelock England. Ferri, Prof. E. Rome. Garofalo, (Baron) Prof. Naples. Kidd, Benjamin England. Von. Krafft-Ebing, Prof. Vienna. Lacassagne, Prof. Lyons. MacDonald, Dr. A. Washington, U. S. A. Mercier, Chas. M. B. England. Morrison, Rev. W. D. England. Manouvrier, Dr. Paris. Moleschott, Prof. Rome. Orano, Giuseppe Rome. Ribot, Th. France. Rylands, L. Gordon England. Salomon, Otto Nääs. (Sweden. ) Scott, Jos. Elmira. Spitska, Dr. E. C. New York. Tallack, Wm. England. 

CONTENTS. 

 PAGE. 

 CHAPTER I. Introductory 9

 CHAPTER II. The Criminal 14

 CHAPTER III. The Causes of Crime 28

 CHAPTER IV. The Methods and Philosophy of Punishment 61

 CHAPTER V. Elimination--Dr. Chapple's Proposal 87

 CHAPTER VI. The Obligations of Society Towards the Weak 120

 CHAPTER VII. The New Penology 133

 CHAPTER VIII. The Prevention of Crime 138

 CHAPTER IX. Some American Experiments--Elmira 155

 CHAPTER X. Conclusion 188

Chapter I. 

INTRODUCTION. 

This little book presents an appeal to society to consider its criminalswith greater charity and with more intelligent compassion. No other pleais advanced than that the public mind should rid itself of all prejudicesand misunderstandings, and should make an honest endeavour to understandwhat the criminal is, why he is a criminal and what, notwithstanding, arehis chances in social life. 

The criminal has a claim to be understood just as well as any othercreature. It is not necessary that his sympathisers should shut theireyes to the fact that he is capable of shocking crime, that he is oftenan ungrateful wretch that will bite the hand that feeds him and thatamong his ranks are to be found the most depraved specimens of humanitythat the mind can conceive. A failure to recognize these facts isactually a failure to do justice to his cause. Notwithstanding thehideous history that he may have to unfold, he does ask to beunderstood. 

The majority of people take a most prejudiced view of the criminal'scase. They will read the account of some fearful outrage or the detailsof a disgraceful divorce suit with absolutely no interest what ever inthe persons concerned but only for the sake of the morbid satisfactionwhich such reading gives them. A glance at the sentence will draw forthfrom them the exclamation that the wretch got no more than he deservedor that he didn't get half enough. This simply indicates that society asa whole has made very little real progress in the manner in which itregards its criminals. The old barbaric idea of revenge is still thedominant one and any scheme for the betterment of the criminal, even ifit should give unmistakeable signs that it will accomplish his absolutereform, is carefully investigated to see whether it provides for asufficient degree of penal suffering. Suffering which is of an entirelypenal nature, has very little deterrent value and absolutely noreformative value whatever. And yet our refined and educated men andwomen will read the accounts of crimes and, in their own minds, sentencethe actors to five, ten, fourteen or twenty years; even death, as ifcriminals were so used to this sort of thing that they thought no moreof it than their self-chosen judges would if deprived of a day's sportor disappointed over a ball. 

"But, " as an ex-member of the Justice Department said to me, "do youknow what the wretch has done?" Yes, I do know what he has done, and Iknow him personally and well, and I know of what he is capable and suchknowledge brings with it the conviction that society commits a greatercrime than that which he has committed when it undertakes to punish himfor his offence upon a principle of pure vengeance. 

"Vengeance is mine, " saith the Almighty, "I will repay. " Society is notGod any more than is the individual, so that by acting in the collectivecapacity no additional plea of justification may be advanced. 

The endeavour of this book will be to show that the best interests ofsociety are not served by the infliction of punishments which areessentially penal but by the accomplishment of the reform of thecriminal. This latter process is for the criminal himself, infinitelymore severe than the former, but it inflicts a pain which raises the manto a higher level; it is purgatorial, and not one which, being penal, leaves him a greater enemy to mankind than ever. 

The criminal is not excused for his wrong-doing, he is not regarded asan automaton, but simply as a creature of capabilities and possibilitieswhich require the intelligent sympathy of his fellows in order that theymay be properly developed. 

There are many persons who regard the reform of the criminal as anabsolutely hopeless task and a waste of time to think over; theyadvocate his extermination. They would fling back to the Creator His ownwork as having, in their judgment, proved worthless, even mischievous. 

Dr Chapple is astounded that the existence, or at least the birth, ofdefectives should be allowed. It is, he says, due in a large measure tothe tide of Christian sentiment which is to-day in full flood. TheChristian does at least recognize that of every defective God says, "take this child and nurse it for Me, " but to speak of Christiansentiment being at its flood-tide to-day is surely not the speech of onewho professes much belief in the future of Christianity. 

Dr Chapple preaches a Gospel for the defective, and his banner is theskull and cross-bones! Christian sentiment when at its flood-tide willhave swept away all such emblems. In replying to Dr Chapple, I haveendeavoured to show that his proposal touches but the fringe of theproblem, and even there after an unscientific and immoral manner. Thereis room for a measure of surprise that Dr Chapple should have undertakento write his book with such a scant knowledge of the facts as theyreally are. 

In presenting this little book to the public, the author does so withthe hope that it may tend to restore the confidence in human nature thatDr Chapple has somewhat weakened, but also in some measure to inspiresociety towards greater collective ameliorative effort, in which ourfull confidence may unhesitatingly be placed. The author hopes that thecriminal, a subject of patient study for the last ten years, will beseen in a somewhat new light. Criminologists declare the criminal to beseven-eighths of an average man. May society find in itself the abilityand good-will to contribute the other eighth!

Small as this volume is, it has required many communications with theold world, and the author's thanks are due to many students engaged uponthe study of this science in England and in the United States, and whohave rendered him valuable assistance. Also, the assistance of many kindfriends in New Zealand is gratefully acknowledged, and particularly thatof Mr Alfred Grant, without whose aid the preparation of these sheetsfor the press would have been an almost impossible task. 

Chapter II. 

THE CRIMINAL. 

The popular mind draws little or no distinction between criminals. In itthere exists the idea of a criminal caste, all the members of which areprepared to commit any and every act of a criminal nature. In thepopular mind, although it is just a question whether a man is bad enoughto commit the greater crimes, yet thieves, violators, swindlers, forgersand murderers are all assumed to fall into the same category. In onesense they do, that is, that they are all anti-social beings, or ratherthey all possess certain anti-social qualities; but as soon as weproceed further we find that there exists a very great distinction incriminals. Criminals are first classified according to the motive oftheir crime. This classication ranges them under five differentheadings, the political criminal, the occasional criminal, the criminalof passion, the instinctive criminal, and the habitual criminal orrecidivist. 

Again they are classified, according to the nature of their crime, intothieves, robbers, violators, assassins, murderers, swindlers, etc. Theseagain are sub-classified, e. G. , thieves are classified as housebreakers, those who rob with violence, those who use weapons, those who rob fromthe person, and those who break safes. Murderers may also be classifiedaccording to the nature of their murderous instinct, illustrated by theinstrument of destruction that they employ, whether it be the knife, firearms, poisons or other means, and again a classification existsbetween those who commit murder themselves and those who employ agents. All these classifications are entirely different, and although somecriminals may range under more than one heading, yet it is generally thecase that a criminal adopts both a certain form of crime and also aparticular method for carrying it into execution. 

=The Political Criminal. =--This man's offence is not against moralitybut against the governmental institutions of the country. He holdsadvanced ideas upon matters of government and upon the constitution ofsociety, and in his attempt to propagate these he becomes a politicalcriminal. The political criminal, as distinguished from all othercriminals, never commits violence, his morals may even approachperfection; but he holds "ideas, " ideas which are not acceptable to thegovernment under which he lives. 

The despotic rule of the Oriental countries is most favourable to theproduction of the political criminal: Russia and Germany are not withouttheir representatives. Occasionally bands of political criminals areformed, and then, in the midst of demonstrations, unpremeditatedviolence may be committed. The Stundists and the Young Turkish Party areexamples. 

=The Occasional Criminal. =--"Economic conditions are generallyresponsible for the production of the occasional criminal. His crime iscommitted in order to satisfy his present wants. In him the sensualinstincts may not be stronger than usual, and the social element, thoughweaker than usual, need not be absent. Weakness is the chiefcharacteristic of the occasional criminal. When circumstances are notquite favourable he succumbs to temptation. " (The Criminal, p. 18. ) Theoccasional criminal is clearly a subject for educational treatment. Heneeds to cultivate greater power of self-control, to strengthen hismoral sense, and above all to be thoroughly equipped for the battle oflife. Imprisonment will frequently ruin him and be the cause of hisbecoming a confirmed or habitual criminal. 

=The Criminal of Passion. =--He is generally of considerable culture andof keen moral sensibility. His crime proceeds from a sense of righteousindignation which, for the moment, completely blinds him. Personalinsults cannot disturb his calm, but the sight of a child being abusedor a defenceless one being attacked, will so infuriate him that he mayeven commit murder. Premeditation is never present, he acts under thepowerful inspiration of the moment, and his crime is an isolated eventquite unconnected with his conduct in general. 

=The Insane Criminal=. --Insane persons who commit criminal acts, showrather a variation of insanity than of criminality. It would be moreexact to describe them as "criminal lunatics" than as "insanecriminals. " Two classes exist, a fact which is often overlooked, forthere are both criminal-lunatics and insane-criminals. In the firstcase, criminality is the product of insanity, but in the second caseinsanity is the product of criminality. Not an hereditary product ineither case, but a product resulting from a cause within the person'smental or moral self. 

The pronounced lunatic, the incapable, irresponsible person whoseactions are beyond his power to understand or control, is regarded bysociety as a being too dangerous to be at large. Of him we do not herespeak to any extent, he is too well recognized. It should always beborne in mind, however, that he commits crime because he is a lunatic, and that although his confinement is absolutely necessary, yet there isno warrant whatever that it should be made penal in character. 

Although it is not possible in a work of this kind to deal largely withthe subject, the writer would urge upon the notice of society and uponthe special notice of jurists that there are a number of persons whosecrimes should excite for them the greatest sympathy instead of, as isthe case, the greatest detestation. Men there are who, perfectly sane inthe ordinarily accepted sense, and who have not only a clear conceptionof the immorality of their conduct, but also an intense abhorrence andshame for it, find themselves performing the most revolting acts underinfluences that are absolutely irresistible. The sensualist has nojustification, but our laws are excessively cruel in their dealings withthis class to which allusion is made. To be brief, no man charged withsadism (lust-murder) pederasty or the related crimes, should have hiscase made public until a most complete diagnostic examination (includinghis family and personal history) has been made by competent persons. 

A careful study of Krafft-Ebing's monumental work upon the subjectshould convince our lawyers that they could not proceed in these caseswithout the assistance of the alienist and of those who are experts inthe diagnosis of the various forms of patho-sexualism. The cases ofinsane criminals, that is, of the criminals whose vice is the cause oftheir insanity, is also divisible into two classes. There is thatuninteresting class who on account of their irregular, immoral andexcitable life become insane, and there is another class. These latterfrequently escape the penalty of their crimes. Insanity is disclosed andthey have no criminal record, therefore they are discharged. It would bea nice point to decide whether and to what degree, if any, responsibility exists. To give an example not altogether uncommon--a manwho will not brook opposition or hindrance of any sort. On every suchoccasion he cherishes most spiteful, even murderous, feelings towardshis opponent. He would do him any injury, even go to the length ofkilling him, but he dare not. 

He will storm, abuse and threaten, but he dare not go further. He isavoided by his neighbours as being a most cantankerous fellow; he isalways being involved in disputes. This man is undoubtedly criminal atheart and is cherishing anti-social feelings which are steadily growingin their intensity. Revenge becomes the almost dominating influence overhis mind, but it is held in check by fear. At last fear gives way andthere is no further restriction to the emotion of revenge, which thenbecomes supreme. At this climax insanity occurs and murder is committedsynchronically. Morally the act was committed years previously, and itwas by his own conduct in goading himself on to the climax that made itan actual fact. Subsequently, almost immediately, he may become rationalagain and retain consciousness of the deed and thoroughly understandsits outrageous nature. He will not then express any regrets but willdeclare that his deed was perfectly moral. This man is as near a monsteras we dare call any man, and should never be allowed to have his libertyrestored to him. 

=Instinctive Criminal. =--Called also the "born criminal" (Lombroso), orthe "criminal by nature. " The term "instinctive criminal" seems to bethat growing most in popularity, possibly because there is lesslikelihood of it having to be modified by the results of furtherinvestigation. 

By the instinctive criminal is understood a man in whom the criminalinstinct has gained a supremacy over the social instinct. He is notonly anti-social in deed but also in character. (It would be a mistaketo term him anti-social in nature, for that would indicate that he wasabsolutely hostile to humanity. One, anti-social in character, iscapable of betterment, and this is possible of every man. ) Many causesoperate to account for his production, some of them reaching far backinto his ancestry. When this is the case some physical handicap isalways present, such as e. G. Cerebral irritation and epilepsy. 

In childhood the instinctive criminal may be recognised by an excessivevanity which will often tempt him to steal, the thefts being generallyconfined to articles of personal adornment or which give an occasion to"swagger. " When accused he will deny the charge brought against him withan effrontery which will too often create the conviction that he isinnocent. When charged he will challenge the statements of his superiorswithout any hesitation whatever, but at a given moment will break downand make a most free and perhaps disinterested confession. Frequently heis very emotional in behavior and simulates the deepest regret, althoughhe is practically without any remorse whatever. He will undertake toperform the most afflicting tasks of penance in order to expiate thewrong and give every assurance for future good behaviour. Neither ofwhich is of the least value. 

Onanism and a morbid love for sweets is an important characteristic. Inthe adult, laziness, debauchery and cowardice are to be noticed. Hissignature is peculiar, involved and often adorned with flourishes. Heloves to be credited with the performance of great achievements, andwill tatoo medals upon his body or other symbols significant ofgreatness. The instinctive criminal generally complains that he isunfortunate, or that he has never had a chance, and that society isalways contriving to keep him down. 

=The Habitual Criminal, or the Recidivist. =--When once a man has falleninto the clutches of the law and been incarcerated it is very difficultfor him to keep his self-respect. His first crime may present manyfeatures to indicate that he is more the victim of circumstances thanwell-defined ill-will. But having been convicted, he finds himselfshunned by all but criminal society, and together with other influences, educational in character, he is frequently allured into a relapse. If aprisoner endeavours to behave himself in gaol and keep aloof from evilcontagion, he is bullied by his fellow-prisoners, and even his keepersregard him with suspicion. The one twit him with being a white-liveredcoward, the other consider him to be either a sneak or a "deep fellow. "He is almost sure to fall and identify himself with the ranks of crime. An instance that the writer has personal knowledge of is that of a man, passionate in nature, and moved by the tears of a young woman on behalfof her imprisoned lover, stuck up a small country gaol under arms andgained the release of the imprisoned man. To escape the consequences hehad to take to the "bush, " and for two years he lived the life of anoutlaw. He finally surrendered to the police and was condemned to death. As no personal injury had been committed and his manner of using hisweapons shewed plainly that he did not contemplate any, his sentence wascommuted to imprisonment for fourteen years, the first three to be spentin irons. At the end of that time the criminal habit was confirmed. Forvarious offences he was sentenced at different times to periodsaggregating in all to thirty years. After his last sentence hadexpired--six years ago--he began a new life and has not committed crimesince. His whole career showed many redeeming points in it. This case iswell-known to the New Zealand and Australian prison authorities. 

The number of criminals who are allured into relapse is computed byOrano to be 45 per cent of the whole. 

The distinction between the habitual criminal and the instinctivecriminal is not merely an academical one but emphatically a practicalone. Both are living the life of crime, and their acts may be, from anobjective point, of exactly the same nature; but in the one case we haveto deal with the criminal CHARACTER and in the other with the criminalHABIT. The distinction is first seen in the different ages at which eachcommences his criminal career; nextly in the different impelling causes. Again, the emotions, ideas and methods show a distinction. All thesevariations are in the aggregate of considerable practical importance, especially in the assignment of prisoners for reformatory treatment. 

 * * * * *

THE CRIMINAL TYPE. 

Prof. Lombroso writing the introduction to Dr Arthur's "Criminology"says:--"This point as to the type, is scarcely recognized even by themost respectable savants. The reasons for this are many: above all, there are the criminals by occasion or by passion, who do not belong tothe type and should not, for in great part it is the circumstances, andoften the laws, which make them criminals and not Nature. And then somehave strange ideas concerning the type. "

No doubt if the acceptation of the idea of type is carried out in itscomplete universality, it cannot be accepted; but as I have already saidin my previous writings that it is necessary to receive this idea withthe same reserve which one appreciates averages in statistics. 

When it is said that the average of life is 32 years, and that the monthleast (? most) fatal to life, is December, no one understands by thisthat all or almost all men should die at the age of 32 years and in themonth of December; but I am not the only one to make this restriction. In order to show this I have to cite the definition which MonsieurTopinard, himself the most inveterate of my adversaries, gives in hisremarkable work "The Type, " says Gratiolet, "is a synthetic expression. ""The Type, " says Goethe, is "the abstract and general image" which wededuce from the observation of the common parts and from thedifferences. "The type of a species, " adds Isidorus St. Helaire, "neverappears before our eyes but is perceived only by the mind. " "Humantypes, " writes Broca, "have no real existence, they are only abstractconceptions, ideals, which come from the comparison of ethnic varieties, and are composed of an ENSEMBLE of characters common to acertain degree among themselves. " I agree with these different points ofview. The type is indeed an ENSEMBLE of traits, but in relationto a group which it characterises, it is also the ENSEMBLE ofits most prominent traits, and those repeating themselves, whence comesa series of consequences which the anthropologist should never losesight of either in his laboratory or in the midst of the populations ofCentral Africa. " Manouvrier opposes Lombroso's theory and denies theexistence of the type. He argues that if it exist at all it must beuniversal, whereas the peculiarities noted by Lombroso are present inhonest as well as in criminal persons, the latter having, however, thegreater proportion. 

The doctrine of Fatalism seems at first sight to be bound up in theacceptance of Lombroso's theory: but such is not the case. Lombrosohimself declares that the type belongs to the born criminal only, andthat the born criminal can be nothing more than an epileptic;criminality being a neurosis. It would thus seem that the type was butthe indication of an organic defect which physically or psychicallyrendered the subject unable to adapt himself to the social condition;but not that unchangeable ideas, contradicting pure morality, wereinnate. Lombroso goes no further than to state definitely that the typeexists, and that there are very clear indications that a different typewill be found to correspond with the different forms of criminality. That the peculiarities are found also in persons living honest lives, proves nothing against his theory. For instance, there are many personsof distinctly criminal instincts who are kept in the paths of honestymerely by circumstances; and again, scientific investigation has not yetcompleted its work, and while certain typical peculiarities may be notedin the criminal and in the non-criminal alike, it is more than likelythat the type will be found to consist in different combinations whichwill be discovered to exist in the criminal (not necessarily, theconvict) exclusively. Or the type may consist in the peculiarities plusexpression. The following typical peculiarities have been noticed bydifferent criminologists:--

=The Cranium. =--The more frequent persistence of the metopic or frontalsuture. The effacement, more or less complete, of the parietal orparieto-occipital sutures in a large number of criminals. The notchedsutures are the most simple. The frequency of the wormian bones in theregion of the median and in the lateral posterior frontal. The backwarddirection of the plane of the occipital depression. (Dr A. Corre. )

Feeble cranial capacity; heavy and developed jaw; large orbitalcapacity; projecting superciliary ridges; abnormal and assymetricalcranium; the presence of a median occipital fossa. (Lombroso. )

=The Face. =--Scanty beard; abundant hair, prognathism, thick lips, dulleye, lemurian appendix to the jaw, pteleriform type of the nasalopening, projecting ears, squinting eyes, receding forehead and deformednose. "Those guilty of rape (if not cretins) almost always have aprojecting eye, delicate physiognomy, large lips and eyelids, the mostof them are slender, blond and rachitic. The pederast often has feminineelegance, long and curly hair, and even in prison garb, a certainfeminine figure, delicate skin, childish look, and abundance of glossyhair parted in the middle. Burglars who break into houses have as a rulewoolly hair, deformed cranium, powerful jaws, and enormous zygomaticarches, are covered with scars on the head and trunk, and are oftentatooed. Habitual homicides have a glassy, cold, immobile, sometimessanguinary and dejected look; often an aquiline nose, or, in otherwords, a hooked one like a bird of prey, always large; the jaws arelarge, ears long, hair woolly, abundant and rich (dark); beard rare, canine teeth, very large; the lips are thin. A large number of swindlersand forgers have an artlessness, and something clerical in their manner, which gives confidence to their victims. Some have a haggard look, verysmall eyes, crooked nose, and the face of an old woman. " (Dr MacDonald, page 40. )

The following proverbs, collected by Lombroso, show the recognition inthe popular mind of the criminal type:--"There is nothing worse than ascarcity of beard and no colour. " "Pale face is either false ortreacherous. " (Rome. ) "A red-haired man and a bearded woman greet at adistance. " (Venice. ) "Be thou suspicious of the woman with a man'svoice. " "God preserve me from the man without a beard. " (France. ) "Paleface is worse than the itch. " (Piedmont. ) "Bearded women and unbeardedmen, salute at a distance. " (Tuscan. ) "Men of little beard of littlefaith. " "Wild look, cruel custom. " "Be thou suspicious of him wholaughs, and beware of men with small twinkling eyes. " (Tuscan. )

It must be remembered that while physiognomy gives valuable hints it isby no means absolutely certain. Further investigation may add materiallyto its value. It is also to be remembered that habits play an importantpart in the physiognomy. So much so is this true that it has been saidof the reformed criminals from Elmira, that their faces have changed. 

Chapter III. 

THE CAUSES OF CRIME. 

In investigating the causes of crime we have first to understand what wemean by the word "Crime, " and also what we describe by the term"Criminal. "

Crime may be regarded both objectively and also subjectively, i. E. , asregards the deed itself and as regards the doer of the deed. In the pastit was customary to consider the crime only and to punish the doer, orthe criminal, according to the enormity of his deed. Scientific methodsrequire, however, that we should study the criminal and ask ourselves"what is he?" and "of what forces is he the product?" If these questionscan be satisfactorily answered, then society is better enabled to armherself against his invasion, in fact having successfully diagnosed hiscase she may be led on to discover the means whereby criminals may bereduced to their irreducible minimum, both as regards number and asregards their capacity for doing harm. 

Man has two natures, the animal and the spiritual. The animal is thepassive product of Nature, the forces of his development being guidedand restricted by the condition of the life in which he is born andreared. To this animal nature belongs the natural appetites, passions, faculties and senses. This nature is not sufficient in itself, and itsrealisation cannot be accomplished until it is brought into completesubordination to the higher or spiritual nature. The function of thisspiritual nature is to subordinate the animal nature by harmonising andcontrolling it, and it finds its partial realisation in the institutionsof family, church and state; and its ultimate realisation in theheavenly counterparts of these. Thus subordinating the animal nature, itdevelops the powers of man's natural inheritance along their true lineof advance and brings him steadily nearer the goal of perfect manhood. 

When, however, the spiritual influence is not exercised and man resignshimself to the uncontrolled influences which spring from his lowernature, he rapidly degenerates. Socially, this degeneracy is noticed byits process of gradually loosening, and finally severing the ties whichbind man to his race. He becomes an unsocial being and ceases tocontribute to the wealth, peace or establishment of society. His desirefor society is regulated by his capacity to draw from it thesatisfaction of the abnormal appetite of unregulated passion. In thismood he totally disregards the laws of society and seizes everyopportunity that presents itself to prey upon it and he thus becomes ananti-social being. Through all ages up to the present, society has atthe cost of much effort and suffering been progressing, stage by stage, towards a higher order. Each advance purchased at such a price, becomesa free gift, by inheritance, to the next generation, and from thisinheritance still further progress may be made. It is quite possiblethat in a dissolute age retrogression may set in and the ground be lost, in which case its recovery becomes the arduous task of a succeedingregenerate age. 

With each advance that it makes society embodies in its institution theprinciples of social life such as it has been able to discover them. These principles being finally accepted, we must assume that they areeternal or else we are compelled to admit that society may be for everat fault, that its development does not correspond with the truedevelopment of man, and that this present life is in no wise preparatoryfor a future. Though we declare that the principles of society areeternal, the social institutions which embody them are merely temporal, and may change with time and circumstances. They are, nevertheless, binding upon our allegiance, and any attempt to overthrow them becomesthe anti-social act of the criminal and is a punishable offence. Thecriminal is an enemy to social advance. He profanes that which societyholds sacred, he scatters that which society, at great cost hasacquired, and he attacks society at its most vulnerable points. 

What, then it may be asked, are the causes that produce this anti-socialbeing? In the case of the sane criminal, an immoral basis underlies allcauses, and without this they would each and all be impotent. Somecauses, as e. G. Alcoholism, are the result of the individual'simmorality; others again are independent. 

The principal causes are:--A bad ancestry (heredity), bad domestic andsocial conditions, alcoholism, imitation, and stress of circumstances. 

=Heredity. =--Among unscientific people there are many extravaganttheories held, some even affirming that from the moment of conception achild's character may be determined as criminal, as if characterunderlay habit instead of habit evolving character. 

It is therefore necessary that we should endeavour to discover ifpossible how far the influence of heredity extends, and especially todisclose its powers as a factor influencing conduct. A man may be seento have the same peculiar carriage and gait as his father; but to arguefrom that, that he will in obedience to a naturally transmitted impulse, follow in his father's footsteps as a thief or a forger is to stepentirely out of the bounds of science. Gait and carriage belong to adifferent sphere altogether from morals and conduct. But let it be atonce acknowledged that the morals and conduct of any given ancestry showa tendency to be reproduced in the posterity. The drunkard is the fatherof drunkards; the suicide is the father of suicides, and the parent'scrime is repeated by the child. Not in all cases is this by any means afact: but in a sufficient number to exclude the possibility ofcoincidence accounting for them all, and to demonstrate conclusivelythat some influence must be at work connecting the deeds of theprogenitor with those of his offspring. What is this influence? Can itbe at once declared to be the influence of heredity? The most usual wayof determining this question is by the process of exclusion. Ifenvironment, education, imitation and other causes do not account forthe phenomena, then heredity must. Heredity thus becomes a convenientname by which to denominate the insolvable. Sometimes the denominationis correct and sometimes incorrect, and very often, even when correct, it conveys a wrong impression. The impression being that the influenceof heredity is altogether irresistible and also ineradicable. 

Now, whatever the influence of heredity may be, it must be determinedscientifically and not merely guessed at. Nor must the failure to findan adequate cause for a certain crime be a sufficient reason foraccounting heredity as responsible. Heredity has limits to its range ofinfluence as well as any other cause for crime, and it may be found thatthere are certain fears which it can never invade. For instance, onesphere wherein its influence is manifestly great, is in the structure ofthe nervous, osseous, muscular, circulatory and vascular systems. Again, what is more common than to find intellectual ability running infamilies? Ribot, in his work on heredity, gives long lists of theworld's most famous poets, artists, musicians, statesmen and soldiers, all showing the tendency of ability, in these various directions, to betransmitted from one generation to another. Not always to the generationimmediately succeeding, for sometimes these various qualities disappearin the son to reappear in the grandson or great-grandson. However, convincing the evidence for transmission in these cases may be, it givesno warrant whatever for the conclusion that heredity may exercise aninfluence upon the MORAL conduct of man. 

Let it here be observed that the Moral Law is fundamental to all law. Nolaws in Nature ever contradict the Moral Law, but are always foundacting in obedience to it. All the works of God are in accord with thisLaw; God is the Moral Governor of the Universe. Therefore whatever mayhold good with all other laws, does not necessarily hold good with thisLaw. That a man should inherit his father's intellectual qualities isthen no argument that he should also inherit his father's immorality. Nothing less will suffice than distinct evidence that he HAS inheritedhis father's immorality. 

A further observation is necessary, and that is, that morality is notabsolute but relative. Strictly speaking, no man is moral. God alone isabsolutely moral. Nor can we compare the morality of one man with theaverage morality of mankind in general. To estimate a certain man'smorality of conduct we must compare his conduct with the degree of thesense of responsibility which exists within him, and also his power ofcontrol over his conduct. The murderous act of a lunatic for instance isan immoral act, because we compare the act with morality in theabstract; but it would be a mistake to call the lunatic an immoral man, for the simple reason that he had no control over his conduct and wastherefore not responsible for it. 

Take the case of the drunkard. A certain drunken father has severaldrunken sons. The influence of environment, of education, or ofimitation, we will suppose to be excluded. Is heredity the cause, and ifso, has it invaded the moral sphere? The influence of the father'sdrunkenness is first made manifest in his own nervous system. The nervecentres become clogged and poisoned and fail to discharge theirfunctions with the same healthy activity as formerly. The nervous systemdegenerates, and the consequence of this degeneracy is the production ofthat form of irritation within the system which we call the craving fordrink, and which requires alcohol for its immediate satisfaction. Theman will admit that he has no liking for the taste of drink; butdeclares that he is in a certain state of unsettlement which can only beovercome by the use of liquor. A temporary calm is induced, only to befollowed by a more intense irritation or unsettlement afterwards, andthus a circle of cause and effect is at once described. 

This is then the degenerate state of the father's nervous system. Now, it is undoubted that he may transmit this same degenerate nervous systemto his offspring and thus as his children grow up it is not to bewondered at if the same craving for drink is to be found in them as wasexisting in their parent. The influence of heredity has been at workupon the nervous system. Has its influence been restricted to thissystem, or has it invaded the moral sphere? The children's conduct isimmoral, for no amount of argument can determine drunkenness to beanything else: but are the children themselves immoral? They are notimmoral so far as they are acting in obedience to an impulse which isirresistible. The drunkard who is himself responsible for his habit, is, strictly speaking, an alcoholic and is vicious and degraded. Thedrunkard who drinks in spite of himself is, strictly speaking, adipsomaniac, and is diseased and insane. The alcoholic may become thedipsomaniac; but the child who is the victim of a transmitted taint iswithout doubt a dipsomaniac and not an alcoholic. He is insane. It maynot be an incurable form of insanity; nor need it be a very acute form;but insanity it is, and therefore he cannot be called an immoral manbecause he drinks, although he is guilty of immoral conduct. Heredityhas not invaded the moral sphere. It has given the man a diseasednervous system, which, while weakening his will, has not perverted it. Thus it is seen then that if any effort is to be made for the reform ofthe dipsomaniac, the direct influence of heredity must be overcome by acourse of treatment which would be addressed to the nervous system. Treatment which shall draw out the alcoholic poison and which shallquicken and invigorate the nerve centres. When the influence of heredityis discovered to be restricted within these limits, the case of thehereditary dipsomaniac becomes far less hopeless than it appeared atfirst sight, and it is for this reason that the causes of crime shouldbe thoroughly investigated. To moralise to the dipsomanic is but losteffort, one may as well abuse a driver for not stopping his boltinghorses. Some reformatory schemes have trusted entirely to moralagencies, and their failure has been quoted as evidence that all suchschemes are futile. But their failure has been due to an entirely wrongconception of the cause of crime. The primary cause is undoubtedly areprobate will: but this cause is not found in every case. Where theconsequences of the parent's conduct has been inherited we find not theprimary, but a secondary cause, such as e. G. A diseased nervous system. Sometimes both the primary and the secondary causes exist side by side, and then treatment must be addressed to both the will and to thephysical system. In fact whatever methods of treatment are employed, themoral temperament must not be neglected, for even if the will be notperverted, it is considerably weakened and needs strengthening. 

The case of the sensualist is somewhat similar to that of the drunkard. Ribot quoting Prosper Lucas, gives the example of a "man cook, of greattalent in his calling, has had all his life, and has still at the age ofsixty years, a passion for women. To this he adds unnatural crime. Oneof his natural sons living apart from him does not even know his father, and though not yet quite nineteen, has from his childhood given all thesigns of extreme lust, and strange to say, he, like his father, isequally addicted to either sex. " (Ribot; Heredity p. 89. )

The fact that this son imitated his father's vices at an early age, isnot sufficient in itself to assign the cause to heredity. Nor does thefact that he was separated from his father's influence or example, strengthen the assignment beyond dispute. The causes for such conductare so common that very few men escape from their influence, andwhosever does not resist them, falls and becomes a victim. But probablythis was a case in which an inherited influence pressed itself sostrongly upon him as to become irresistible. What, we ask was inherited?A perverted will? That is absolutely impossible. A perverted will is theoutcome of a deliberate choice of evil when the choice of virtue isequally possible. A weakened will, or a will subject to heavy stress isa different thing. There must be some stress upon the will. What is it?It is a well known fact that the exercise of the members of our bodyresults in a great facility of movement being attained. The pianist can, after long practice, execute rapid and complex performances offingering, which in the early stages of education were absolutelyimpossible. It is because the nerve centres controlling the musclesemployed have been brought to such a high state of activity that theyoperate almost independently of the will. The nerve centres controllingcertain of our functions DO operate independently of the will. Breathingis an example, and although an effort of the will is required tocorrect bad breathing, yet when once the habit of correct breathing isestablished, the directing influence of the mind ceases, and the nervecentres discharge their functions automatically. 

In the normal man the sexual instinct is inherited but the passion issubmissive to the control of the will. The will is supreme andself-restraint is always possible. The immoral man has refused toexercise this restraining power, he has, in fact, by his immoralthoughts, lent his mind to the strengthening of the passion until it hasgained an ascendancy. Continual sexual excitement has resulted in thenervous centres controlling the sexual organs becoming so powerfullydeveloped as to act almost automatically, and independently of the will. In the normal man, sexual excitement results upon the mental vision; inthe sensualist the excitement precedes the vision. Another effect isnoticed in the physiognomy which changes in accordance with thedevelopment of the nerve centres and presents all the appearances of thetypical sensualist or prostitute. 

In some cases the sensualist transmits this highly organised ordisordered nervous system to his descendants, and consequently when theyarrive at a certain age they find their bodies invaded by a passion overwhich they have small, and sometimes no, control. It is distinctly acase of functional insanity with them. Their will power is weak becauseof undue stress, but it has not been perverted. Perversion may follow;but may also be avoided, and even the will sufficiently strengthened sothat it may re-assume control and subject the passion to control. Theinfluence of heredity is here also confined to the nervous system. Thatis, the direct influence, the influence which was first felt and beforeit received any support which the mind of the victim may give it. Thecases of hereditary suicides, murderers and assassins afford a verylarge field for investigation, and we cannot do more than suggest somecauses which seem to give strong evidence of their existence. Thesecauses if their existence be allowed, and we see every reason that itshould, will restrict the influence of heredity to a much narrowersphere than is popularly supposed. The old story of the devil preachingupon the horrors of hell serves somewhat to illustrate our meaning. Whenthe abbot enquired whether it was not contrary to his interests to drawso vivid and terrible a picture he replied in the negative and gave ashis reason that the man who contemplated the horrors of hell was the manwho was bound to find his way there. 

The contemplation of criminal acts effects a strange fascination uponthe mind and very often induces imitation of the same acts. When asuicide or murder, in fact any crime, is committed by a member of afamily the other members either, according to their moral disposition, experience a greater or lesser repulsion for the deed than they formerlypossessed. The enormity of the deed is either stronger or lesser intheir eyes than before. In the latter case, murder or suicide does notseem nearly so heinous a crime when it is brought so closely under theirnotice. The very knowledge that a father or uncle or any other nearrelative, or even friends for that matter, committed suicide, makes theact appear far less terrible, and also far less impossible forthemselves. Most men have at some time or another an impulse to destroythemselves, it may not be very strong; but if it is felt at a time whenthe circumstances of life are unfavourable and, if added to this, thereis presented the example of a suicide very near at home, the impulse isundoubtedly strengthened. The whole chain of circumstances seem todirect the vision upon the rash act of the friend or relative, until atlast the vision becomes fascinating, and the act is imitated. To use aconcise expression one may call this the "hypnotic power ofcircumstances. " It is not an absolute cause in itself; but, strictlyspeaking, may we call any cause absolute? It is not a cause which wouldinfluence a man of strong will or of sound morality. But a sentimentalperson, one of morbid ideas, weak will, or overcome by the thought ofdetection, or the fear of misfortune, might easily fall a victim to itsinfluences. It will not account for all the cases of hereditary suicide, for a mental disease may be transmitted which would account for thesuicide of both father and son or whatever the combination may be. It, however, does account, we believe, for the majority of the cases, andthe similarity of the method employed strengthens this belief, for itindicates that the mind is dwelling upon the actual vision of therelative's suicide, and is not merely contemplating suicide in theabstract. This theory would imply that any case of suicide, upon whichthe mind would dwell and concentrate itself, would exercise the sameinfluence, and this is the case. A few years ago in Dunedin anaccountant who was involved in financial difficulties, shot himself witha pistol. His executor, against the advice of friends, took charge ofthe pistol. Becoming involved in financial difficulties himself, he toocommitted suicide by shooting himself with the same weapon! Almost, without a doubt, we may say that the circumstances of the first suicideexerted upon the mind of the trustee a hypnotic influence which combinedwith and gave the final impulse to the other contributing causes of hisact. 

Another instance is that of a young man who, contemplating suicide, carried a revolver about with him for a whole day. He spoke of suicideto his friends, occasionally discharged shots into the ground, andfinally, during the evening, blew his brains out. That he contemplatedsuicide was evident from his conversation, but that his mind was notmade up, is also evident from the delay he occasioned. In fact, hiswhole behaviour indicates a faint desire to cling to something strongerthan himself in order to brace himself against his haunting fears. Therevolver fascinated him. He dallied with it, made up his mind, changedit again, and finally the influence became supreme for a moment, and hefired the fatal shot. Throughout the day, he very probably thought ofthe grief of his relatives and of the young woman he was soon to marry, he pictured the consternation of his friends, read the newspaperaccounts of his act, saw his funeral, and let his mind run altogether inmorbid channels. Thus it was that the vision of his own act exerted anhypnotic influence upon him which became at the critical moment supremeand irresistible. 

When the picture is real and not imaginary, and when the circumstancesof a parent's or brother's or friend's suicide may easily be recalledand the mind allowed to dwell upon them, how much greater would theinfluence become, especially when the same example has served todiminish the idea of the enormity of the act. Where persons lendthemselves to the idea that an hereditary influence exists and mayspring upon them at any moment, they are almost sure either to destroythemselves or else to develop some form of insanity. There are cases ofmurder and assassination (apparently hereditary crime) where theconditions are so similar that the hypnotic power of circumstances maylikewise be urged as sufficient cause. 

So far, an attempt has been made to show that whatever the influence ofheredity may be, it is restricted outside the sphere of morality. Itcannot transmit an IMMORAL IDEA. So far as certain forms ofvice and crime are concerned it most probably is limited entirely to itseffect upon the physical structure of man. Combined with familytradition and working upon a diseased, or weakened will, it accounts forsimilarities of conduct. Suicides, murderers and assassins do not thenreceive by transmission from their ancestry any taint or tendency whichmay be called the direct cause of their crime. Another factor ispresent, a hypnotising power, and this is the final and directing power. It is a different influence to imitation, although its first result isthe same, viz: the lowering of the moral idea. But crimes where the actis the imitation of another person's act are generally committed fromthe desire to become notorious and to be the centre of observation. Thespirit of vanity, very strong in the low type, is appealed to andaroused. Or perhaps, the example of another's crime affords a suggestionfor the method of accomplishing a certain desired end. On the otherhand, the ancestral example, after having broken down the moral barrierdepends entirely upon its power to fascinate. Those of weak will orguilty conscience, alone succumb to its influence. If we consider thecases of thieves, vagabonds and paupers we find their crimes and viceslikewise running in families. It is nevertheless quite a mistake to jumpat the conclusion that heredity accounts for all these coincidencies. Exempting all cases of transmitted mental alienation and observing onlythose who are quite responsible for their action, it is impossible tosuppose that there is, somewhere in their organism, a power which willdirect their lives into the channels of vice or crime just asirresistibly as the influence which makes the hair grow on the crown oftheir heads. It is unthinkable. It supposes a responsible person whocannot control himself. Which is a contradiction. 

M. Moleschott, at the International Congress of Criminal Anthropologyheld in Paris in 1889, "mentioned an influence towards crime that hadnot been noticed, to wit, the hereditary social influence, or that is, the tradition which is instilled into the mind of every child before heknows the difference between right and wrong, that by which he obtainsthe rudiments of his knowledge of right and wrong. Whether it be corrector not it is the child's standard. He gets it not from any knowledge oftheory of justice, but from the tradition of his own neighbourhood, asit is taught by his parents and associates by the people, and as isbelieved by them. " (Criminal Anthropology; the Smithsonian Report for1891. )

It will be understood that the influences of which M. Moleschott speaksare not of an hereditary nature, that is, they are not transmittedthrough the blood; but they are influences which are present from thefirst moment of consciousness. They are quite sufficient to account forthe criminal type being found in the physiognomy of a person born andreared among such surroundings. It is a very popular error to supposethat a person's physiognomy never changes, and therefore that if thecriminal cast of countenance is seen it must be a faithful witness tosome innate depravity transmitted from an ancestry. The expression playssuch an important part in the moulding of the countenance, that of twobrothers very much alike in youth, one, afterwards given to crime, willstill retain his resemblance to his brother; but will display thecriminal type as well. It is thus that we have the different types inmurderers, assassins, thieves, swindlers and sensualists. They are allcriminal or vicious but their forms of criminality and vice are sodiverse that a different expression results from the different kinds ofthought passing through their minds. In their theories, few peopleacknowledge that the symmetry of the facial features may change, and yetit is a matter of common observance that they do. In the cases ofpersons becoming insane or persons who have suffered from long andpainful illnesses it is very remarkable. Likewise in the case of the manwho has fallen into crime, it is also most noticeable. Of course thereare limits to the changes which the expression may produce, but thesechanges are nevertheless very great and sufficiently so, not perhaps toproduce Lombroso's type in any given face, but to give that face atleast a distinctly criminal cast. 

The appearance then of this criminal cast upon the features is notsufficient evidence to account for an inherited tendency towards crime. Dr Manouvrier insists that Lombroso's theory that the criminal is bornand not made is based upon the exploded science of phrenology, anddeclares that all the anatomical distinctions and physicologicalcharacteristics quoted by Lombroso are to be found among honest men aswell as among criminals. The fact that a greater proportion are foundamong criminals to his mind proves nothing. 

[There is not vast difference between normal and abnormal personspossessing these peculiarities. In Lombroso's work "The Female Offender"he notices:--

 Normal Women Criminal Women Receding foreheads 8 per cent. 11 per cent. Enormous lower jaws 9 " 15 " Projecting cheek bones 14 " 19. 9 " Murderesses 30 " " ears 6 " 9. 2 " Flat nose 40 " Thieves 20 "

Gradenigo (quoted by Lombroso) gives the following table showing thepeculiarities of the ears of 245 criminals as compared with 14, 000normal women:--

 Normal Criminal Regular external ear 65 per cent. 54 per cent. Sessile ear 12 " 20 " Scaphoid fossa prolonged to lobe 8. 2 " 21. 2 " Projecting ears 3. 1 " 5. 3 " Prominent anti-helix 11. 5 " 14. 2 " Darwin's tubercle 3 " 2. 9 "

Other anthropometrists notice different proportions. ]

If Lombroso's theory, that a man was born a criminal, was to be taken asthe rule, Manouvrier declares that it must then be universal, and thatmen thus born must inevitably commit crime. If it be a rule then it mustoperate in all classes, and since it does not so operate, proof is giventhat it is not the rule. Manouvrier declares that the man possessed ofcharacteristics the very opposite of Lombroso's criminal, if subjectedto the conditions, influences, and temptations, which lead to crimewould as likely commit crime as he who possessed all the characteristicswhich Lombroso describes as typical. Manouvrier regards the social lifeof a person from childhood as being the most important factor inmoulding character. He emphatically denies that there is in the embryo apredisposition to crime. Dr Magnan likewise refuses his assent to thistheory. 

It may be rather daring to suggest a theory which would reconcile thedifferences between these eminent men: but as the facts presented byeach side are indisputable, some such reconciliation must exist. Possibly if we interpret Lombroso's phrase, "inherited tendency towardscrime" or "predisposition towards crime" in the same way as we interpretthe term ("predisposition towards disease") when speaking of tubercularpersons (or, as Mercier speaks of the insane), that is as persons, whoin a given favourable environment, are more likely to commit crime thanpersons without that inherited tendency, we may find these theories tobe more in accord with one another. Lombroso insists that there must bean inherited tendency, Manouvrier insists that there must beenvironment. As in the case of tubercular persons (of tubercularancestry) these two causes are complementary, may it not be also thecase with criminals of criminal ancestry? The INHERITED IMMORALIDEA seems to be really what Manouvrier rejects. A viciousconception of life which makes the man inevitably, incurably, andirresistibly a criminal, is apparently the interpretation he puts onLombroso's theory. But from Lombroso's works and speeches, theinterpretation does not appear to be at all a necessary one. Thetransmission of a disordered nervous system with its consequences, asone cause, the "hypnotic influence of circumstances" as another cause, and these two causes acting sometimes separately and sometimesconjointly, will very possibly account for the phenomena Lombrosoobserves. A most important factor, and one which cannot be disregarded, compels the acceptance of some such theory. This factor is the successresulting from reformatory effort. It is not only Lombroso andManouvrier that need to be reconciled, but Lombroso, Manouvrier andBrockway. This latter gentleman is the founder of the famous ElmiraReformatory which has reformed 82 per cent. Of 12, 000 felons which havebeen committed to it for treatment. 

We come then to this conclusion that heredity plays an important part inthe production of the criminal; but that there are other very importantfactors which are often confused with it and when separated from itreduce the popular estimate of its influence to the scientific one, which is considerably the lesser one. Furthermore, as a consequence ofthis investigation, the true foundations upon which reformatory scienceis to be built are clearly indicated. 

This statement, that heredity plays an important part in the productionof the criminal, needs to be carefully guarded. It means precisely thisand nothing more:--That where an hereditary influence (such as abovedescribed) making crime easier, has been transmitted, there thatinfluence is an important factor in the production of the criminal. Itdoes NOT mean that this influence is invariably transmitted by thecriminal parent, neither does it mean that the majority of criminals are"born" criminals. 

The following is an extract from a letter upon this subject which theauthor has received from Dr. Arthur MacDonald, one of the leadingcriminologists of to-day:--"There is no proof of any scientific valuethat criminality is inherited. " By criminality we understand "the moralbasis of crime. "

The famous "Jukes" family that lived in the State of New York, affordone of the most interesting studies in heredity to be found in theannals of criminology. Of this numerous family (some 709 persons ofwhich were clearly traced in five generations) the elder sons took tocrime and the younger sons to vagabondage. There was indeed a proportionof honest and industrious persons among them. Of the women 52 per cent. Were prostitutes. That a proportion of honest men among the sons, and afair number of virtuous women among the daughters is recorded, clearlyproves that an hereditary taint is not, in all cases, necessarilytransmitted from parent to child. Latency in one generation, withactivity in the next, is frequently observed in the transmission ofdisease; but in the case of crime, as distinguished from vice, this israrely so. 

That the younger sons of the "Jukes" family fell into habits ofvagabondage (leaving it to the elder sons to carry on the criminaltraditions of the family) is also worthy of notice. It serves to showthat whatever the influence of heredity may be, as a factor disposingtowards crime, it cannot be an independent and final factor. In familiesliving after a primitive manner of life, as this family did, the eldersons are invariably the companions of their fathers and accompany themon their depredatory raids. The younger sons are left to the milderenvironment of their mother's society. Thus from a criminal point ofview, the environment of the elder sons is more intense than that of theyounger sons. The difference in environment accounts for the differencein character formed; the more intense environment accounting forcriminals and the milder environment for vagabonds. Sometimes theinfluence of environment is overcome, and we noticed that among the"Jukes" a proportion of the family was honest and industrious. Acknowledging the transmission of a physical defect from a criminalancestry, we must bear in mind that the conditions of the criminal'slife are such as are calculated to produce in himself that defect whichhe transmits. His body becomes weakened, his nervous system disordered, and the physical substratum of his mind diseased. These defects hetransmits to his offspring and thus handicaps them in the effort that isrequired from the individual to adapt himself to the conditions ofsociety. 

This is the criminal "taint" or handicap that makes it more likely thatthe individual should fall into crime than the normal man. Althoughsociety regards this hereditary criminal as a monster, it has been madeclear that he is really more deserving of compassion than one not sohandicapped. To secure society from his injurious acts, our courtsfrequently take the illogical and unjust course of imposing a moresevere punishment upon him. This is in itself a clear evidence of thedemand that exists for penological reform. 

=Environment. =--By environment we understand bad homes, badassociations, and generally bad conditions. 

Of the condition of the 12, 000 persons who passed through the ElmiraReformatory between the years 1876-1902, only 1. 47 per cent. Came fromgood homes and 37. 4 per cent. From fair homes. Of the character of themen's associations, 56. 6 per cent. Was positively bad; 41. 9 per cent. Was "not good;" . 9 per cent. Was doubtful, and 1. 6 per cent. Was good. 

It is scarcely necessary from a practical point of view to enquire intothe actual amount of crime which results from a bad environment, for itis only too obvious that none but those of the strongest wills and ofthe highest morality can resist the influence of bad surroundings whenthese are constant. Our enquiry should rather be directed to ascertainwhat constitutes a bad environment and what are the causes that produceit. It should also seek to discover by what means its evil influence maybe checked and how to eradicate these influences when present. Theattitude of our law-courts towards the criminal is practicallythis:--"You have been reared amidst evil surroundings whose influenceyou could not resist, you are a criminal, an outcast from society, youmust be punished by being locked up in a school of crime in the hopethat it may inspire you to live a better life. The sentence of the courtis . . . " And society endorses this attitude!

The evil influence of bad surroundings is well exemplified by aninstance recorded by Viscount D'Haussonville in his work "L'Enfance aParis":--"Some years ago a band of criminals were brought before thejury of the Seine charged with a terrible crime, the assassination of anaged widow, with details of ferocity which the pen refuses to describe. The president of the court having asked the principal, Maillot, called'the yellow, ' how he had been brought to commit such a crime, hereplied:--What do you wish that I should tell you Mr President? Sincethe age of seven years I have been found only on the streets of Paris. Ihave never met anyone who was interested in me. When a child, I wasabandoned to every vicissitude--and I am lost. I have always beenunfortunate. My life has been passed in prisons and gaols. That is all. It is my fate. I have reached--you know where. I will not say that Ihave committed the crime under circumstances independent of my own will, but finally--(here the voice of Maillot trembled) I never had a personto advise me. I had in view only robbery. I committed robbery but Iended with murder. "

The following description of the manner in which parents may defeat thework of the juvenile reformatory or industrial school was given bySenator Roussel at the Fourth International Prison Congress:--"Thepernicious influence of parents relative to minors is manifest in twoways and at two periods of the child's life. First in extreme youth, when he is only a burden, his parents neglect him. He is left withoutproper care, often without proper food and subjected to all the hazardsof the streets; he is forced to be a vagabond and a beggar, and thissituation continues until a violation of the law places the littleunfortunate in the hands of justice. Later, everything is changed. Whenby maturity of age and good effects of penitentiary education, the childinstead of being a burden can be a source of profit, we see those sameparents, who had abandoned him in his infancy, and apparently hadforgotten him altogether, go to him and win him back to them by theirentreaties, and finally on his discharge regain him by virtue ofparental authority. This indiscretion of evil parents . . . Is the waythat the first-fruits of correctional or charitable education arecorrupted and that a great many minors who would have become usefulmembers of society, are definitely lost to it. "

It may be heresy to criticise our public school system but it is morethan an open question whether we are not producing a generation of badlyeducated people who are not aware of their own ignorance, who see nodignity in labour and who prefer to make their living by speculationrather than by work. The fault largely consists in estimating theefficiency of a school or a teacher solely by the results obtained atexamination and making the children work for this end and this end only. Their memories are taxed to the uttermost but no attempt is made todevelop them into reasoning, enquiring and labour loving beings. Thedifficulty with which children in the sixth and seventh standards followthe simplest arguments is simply amazing. The teachers, moreover, haveno opportunity for cultivating the art of pedagogy. Their whole time istaken up preparing matter to pour into the child's mind. The badsalaries that are paid can also have but one result, viz. , the deprivingthe State of the services of the most manly and most noble teachers andhaving the work committed to those of the genus prig. 

Bad homes, bad schools and playgrounds only once removed from cattleyards, will be, in this country, the most potent factors in producingcrime. 

=Alcohol. =--The influence of alcohol in the commission of crime is bothdirect and indirect. We see its direct influence in those crimes whichare committed whilst the culprit is either in a state of intoxication orelse just recovering from such a state. To detect and trace its indirectinfluence a much closer study is required. The inconsequent, lazy andthriftless life of the criminal demands some sort of stimulant, and thisis found readily at hand in alcohol. Alcohol is not the cause of thecrimes of these people but it is closely associated with such cause. Theman who stabs another in a saloon is not then guilty of his first crime. Under the influence of intoxication he has lost his power ofself-control and he commits a deed for which he may in a sober momenthave still a degree of moral abhorrence or be perhaps too much of acoward to perform. 

Many criminals, whose crime requires a certain amount of nerve andcalculation, as e. G. Assassinations, murders, robberies, swindlings, etc. , will not touch alcohol until their crime has been completed andthey have satisfied themselves that they covered up all trace of it. They then often indulge in a debauch. 

In the lower courts, offenders will frequently plead as an extenuationthat they were intoxicated at the time when they committed theiroffence. This is often done in order to escape the full penalty, andsuch pleas are not to be relied upon in estimating the real influence ofalcohol. In the higher courts, for the same reason, criminals oftenfeign insanity, and in not a few of such cases they become their owndupes by actually losing the possession of their senses. Drunkenness andcrime go together, although the increase in the consumption of alcoholdoes not necessarily mean that crime has increased. Neither does thereverse hold good. When crime appears first it is not long before allforms of animal indulgence follow. Sometimes drunkeness appears first, and when the home has been reduced to beggary, crime results. 

Under the immediate influence of drink, the crimes most commonlycommitted are those against morality and the person. In countries wherethe saloon is an institution, it is invariably the home of criminals andthe scene of many murders and deeds of blood. In France, e. G. Out of10, 000 murders committed, 2, 374 occurred in saloons. The indirectinfluence of alcohol is perhaps more terrible than its direct influence. There is this sad feature about it also that the greatest sufferers arethe victims, not of their own abuse, but of that of others. Many acriminal tells the story, which is easily corroborated, of the days ofhis childhood when his father came home drunk and the children for veryfear had to hide themselves or run out into the streets, often to sleepwherever they could, and perhaps steal to satisfy the pangs of hunger. Such children are quickly absorbed, the girls into the ranks ofprostitution, the boys into those of crime. Many too, by reason of theirparents' intemperance, are weaklings and unable to take their stand inthe ranks of honest labourers. Unless they are rescued by philanthropiceffort they very soon take to crime, and physically and psychicallypresent all the features of the "instinctive criminal. "

Of 12, 000 criminals at Elmira, in nearly 36 per cent, was a drunkenancestry to be clearly traced. 

To state exactly the influence of alcohol as a cause of crime will, fromthe nature of the case, never be possible; but this much is certain, that EVERY cause finds in it a strengthening contributary ofconsiderable potentiality. 

=Imitation. =--One of the principal characteristics of the criminal ishis excessive vanity. His great ambition is to gain notoriety and to betalked about by the public. Almost every criminal has his hero in crimewhose deed he tries to emulate as nearly as possible; or, better still, to outshine. Thus we find, that when some daring deed has beenperpetrated, there are not wanting others who quickly make an attempt toimitate it. A prisoner tried to kill his comrade because a third man, who was standing his trial for murder, was receiving in his estimationtoo much attention from the public and especially "too many bouquets. " Amurderer in New Zealand declared that the notorious bushranger Ned Kellywas his ideal of a man. A certain priest, beloved by all, was foundmurdered. None could account for the crime; afterwards it was discoveredto have been the act of a young criminal who performed it merely as anact of bravado. Instances of this sort might be multiplied all tendingto show that the vanity of the criminal leads him, as far as his couragewill permit, to imitate the most daring deeds in crime. The witnessingof executions and reading the accounts of fictitious and real crimesoften leads many into crime. As a deterrent to crime, it was once thecustom in England to conduct executions in public. Lombroso records itas being his conviction that such publicity does, by the law ofimitation, lead more into crime than it turns from it. This he considersis one of the most powerful arguments in favour of abolishing the deathpenalty. Out of 167 persons condemned to death in England, 164 had beenpresent at executions. The reading of sensational novels or thedescriptive accounts of great crimes has a most alarming effect uponthose who are of an impressionable nature. These persons are tothemselves the heroes of an imaginary world. They will put on an air ofbravado, adopt a "swagger" style of attire, carry sharp knives and posebefore their companions as dare-devils. If not sufficiently courageousto perform deeds of daring they will constantly be recounting imaginaryones for which they will claim the authorship; or else they will be forever threatening to do something of a staggering nature. The morecourageous of these frequently become dangerous criminals while themore timid descend into sneak thieves, or the assaulters and violatorsof the persons of the defenceless. This inflammatory reading matter alsoexerts an hypnotic influence over some which is almost irresistible. DrMacDonald ("Criminology" p. 131), gives the instance of a woman whoafter having read of the dreadful crime of a Parisian mother, came to DrEsquirol and pleaded with him to admit her into his hospital, declaringthat since reading of this crime she was tormented by the devil to killher youngest child. Reading of the crime and vividly picturing toherself the details of it, had resulted in the woman's mind being laidhold of by a fascinating power which continually prompted her to killher own child. Her wish was granted and she recovered. 

In this case we have another instance of the "hypnotic influence ofcircumstances. " Firstly, the picture is deeply impressed on the mind;next the moral sensibilities are hardened, and lastly the overt act iscommitted. Tropmann who murdered a whole family of eight, confessed thathis demoralisation was due to the reading of sensational novels. Thepublication of the details of crimes and the circulation of inflammatoryfiction is a most fruitful cause of further crime. One of the mostefficient safe-guards against crime and scandal is a sensitive publicmoral tone. This is undoubtedly hardened by the publicity given tosordid and gruesome details. One fails to see what good purpose canpossibly be served. Knowledge is power, but in this case, it is a powerfor evil. The weak-willed readily obey the law of imitation, thecriminal is gratified at seeing the big headlines in the newspapers andimpelled to further crime, and some neurotics are positively hypnotised. 

Any serious attempt to suppress the increase of crime must take thesematters into consideration, and it will unquestionably prove abortiveunless a much stricter censorship is exercised over the publication ofthe gruesome details of crimes and scandals and also over the sale ofthe type of literature referred to. 

Chapter IV. 

THE MANNER AND PHILOSOPHY OF PUNISHMENT. 

The various punishments which are inflicted upon our law breakers arefines, imprisonment, flogging, and death. 

=Fines= produce a very useful means of dealing with persons whoseoffences show a tendency to crime rather than to actual criminality. Inmany cases the self-respect of the offender has not been sacrificed, andwhile under arrest the sense of shame is deeply aroused. The shock frombeing brought face to face with the law is often sufficient in thesepersons to check any further tendency towards crime. The imposition of afine will satisfy the claims of justice and inflict that degree ofpunishment necessary to fix the idea of abhorrence towards crime in themind of the offender. In the case of boys charged with petty offencesfining is often a most valuable means of punishment. To dismiss with acaution may lead to nothing; to imprison is invariably a most disastrouscourse to pursue; to flog within a gaol may be too severe but to fine isan excellent method. The parent has to pay the fine, and as the child'soffence is generally due to the want of parental control and discipline, the punishment reaches right home and better control for the futuregenerally results. Where parental control is non-existent, and thereremains no possibility of creating it, other measures must be takenwhich will supply a substitute for the discipline of home life. 

In some case of theft, minor assault, disturbing the peace, and otheroffences which indicate a momentary and not very serious lapse ofself-control, or perhaps a somewhat vague conception of the supremacy ofthe law, fines serve all the purposes of justice. A four-foldrestitution for all damage done might be taken as a standard to beincreased or diminished in exceptional cases. In all these instances theculprit should be made to pay the fine himself even though it shouldrequire a fairly lengthy period in which to liquidate it. Section 16 ofThe New Zealand Criminal Code provides that the Court may exercise itsown discretion in imposing a fine upon any person whose offence renderedthem liable to a term of imprisonment. There are many cases, however, even of first offenders, in which fining is quite useless. 

=Imprisonment. =--So much has been written describing the various prisonsystems in vogue in different parts of the world that it is unnecessaryto do much more than briefly outline them here. 

(1). The congregate system. In which the prisoners are associatedtogether by day or by night or by both. Were the object to convert theprison into a school of crime, no better system could be devised. Thestandard of the lowest is the standard which must prevail under thecongregate system. 

(2). The solitary system. The extreme opposite of the congregate system. The prisoners are allowed to have practically no communication withanyone whomsoever. In some countries this system is made indescribablycruel. At Santiago in Chili in one part of the prison the inmates areemployed upon useful work under most humane conditions, and yet inanother part of the very same building a most barbarous system exists. Mr F. B. Ward (quoted in Penological and Preventive Principles)describes what he saw in 1893:--"In this splendid model institutionthere are noisome, slimy cells, where daylight never enters, in whichhuman beings are literally buried alive. Under the massive arches ofenormously thick walls, where even in the outside rooms perpetualtwilight reigns, are inner cells, two feet wide by six feet long, anddestitute of a single article of furniture. Until recently, thoseconfined in them were walled in, the bricks being cemented in placesover the living tomb. Now there is a thick iron door, which is securelynailed up and then fastened all around with huge clamps, exactly as thevaults are closed in Santiago Cemetery, and over all the great red sealof the Government is placed--not to be removed until the man is dead, orhis sentence has expired. The tiny grated window is covered by severalthicknesses of closely-woven wire netting, making dense darkness inside, so that the prisoners cannot tell night from day. There is noventilation except through this netting, and no opening whatever toadmit outside air into the tomb. Low down in the iron door, close to theground, is a tiny sliding panel a foot long by a few inches widearranged like a double drawer, so that food and water may be slipped inon shallow pans and the refuse removed. Twice in every twenty-four hoursthis panel is operated, and if the food remains untouched a given numberof days, it is known to a certainty that the man is dead, and only thencan the door be unsealed, unless his time is up. If the food is nottouched for two or three days no attention is paid to it, for theprisoner may be shamming; but beyond a certain length of time he cannotlive without eating. Not the faintest sound nor glimmer of lightpenetrates those awful walls. In the same clothes he wears on entering, unwashed, uncombed, without even a blanket or handful of straw to lieupon he languishes in sickness, lives or dies with no means of makinghis condition known to those outside. He may count the lagging hours, sleep, rave, curse, pray, long for death, dash his brains out, go mad ifhe likes--nobody knows it. He is dead to the world and buried thoughliving. They told us that only one man has ever survived a year'ssentence there. Those that survive six months are almost invariablydrivelling idiots or raving maniacs. "

It was under similar conditions to these that the assassin of KingHumbert of Italy was incarcerated. Such a system shows a cruelvindictive rage towards the criminal. Terrible as the offender's crimemay be, society must deal calmly and not lose self-control or give suchan exhibition of its own criminal ferocity. 

=The Separate System. =--Under which the prisoners are not allowed toassociate with each other, but receive frequent visits from gaolers, warders, chaplains, and other persons who are likely to bring beneficialinfluence to bear upon them. Each man has his own cell, in which hesleeps and works. His exercise is conducted in such a manner as toprevent contact with other prisoners. He is allowed books and givendaily instruction. Under this system perhaps the best results areobtained. 

=The Silent System. =--A system under which the prisoners associate withone another but are forbidden to communicate. This system cannot bestrictly enforced, and as it converts trifling matters into seriousoffences, it makes the prison life a state of petty persecution. 

=The Combined System. =--A system which the prisoners are kept apartduring the night but work together during the day. This system has beenadopted in New Zealand, and in the following description of the value ofimprisonment it will be understood that it is to this system thatreference is made. 

A man is sent to prison because he has proved himself unfit to be atliberty. His attack upon society was evidence of this, and societypunishes him by taking away the liberty which he has thus abused. Hisdread of the prison increases as he comes under the shadow of its grimwalls, and, once having passed within, a feeling of remorse anddesperation seizes him. Its intensity or weakness will depend upon histemperament. He is soon told in the most emphatic manner that he is toregard himself as a felon; that he is to live with felons as a felon andobserve the habits of a felon. He is given a uniform coarse in textureclumsy and grotesque in appearance and branded over with the broad-arrowand with his prison number. In this garb it is impossible for a man topreserve his sense of self-respect. If he should not be amenable to theprison discipline he may be held up to ridicule by being compelled towear a parti-coloured uniform. However can a man be expected to reformwho is held up to the ridicule of felons? It matters not from whichclass of life he is drawn, what his age is, or the nature of hisoffence, he is thrown into the company of the worst criminals in theland. If he were a cultured man, or a man who had known no associates inhis crime, or if his æsthetic taste was considerably developed itmatters not; he must do the same work and mix in the same company as themost ignorant and most brutal. To utterly disregard these qualities isto ignore the wide-open channels along which the most powerfulreformative influences may be transmitted. If his recovery is to beconsidered these are most substantial assets. They are, as it were, "thegeneral health" of the patient suffering from a local lesion. Yet ourprison system not only ignores them but patiently sets to work todestroy them, as if their possession were an additional offence on thepart of the criminal. Prisoners who try to keep aloof from theirassociates may often be made to suffer very considerably for it. Others, craving for some association, soon fall in with men whom they would haveregarded, a few days previously, as impossible companions. The almostentire absence of elevating influences makes it easy for theconcentrated power of evil to become irresistible. The gloom of theprison rises, the fear of the law vanishes and the new born tendency tocrime becomes a confirmed habit. A man needs either a very strong willindeed, or else to be supported by powerful social traditions to enablehim to resist the evil influences of prison life. A few men do resistand maintain their sense of self-respect in spite of all indignities andbad influences. Some sink as under a torture; some sink and are enticedand absorbed into felony. These last will plan their future crimes whilethey are serving their first sentence. Henceforth the prison is theirhome. 

What purpose is thus served? Why should a man who has lost self-respectbe continually reminded of it? If a man is diseased he is not placedamongst filthy conditions and the emblems of sickness and death crowdedupon him. His removal from all unhealthy surroundings is the firstessential necessary for his recovery, and the same should be observedwith the criminal. He should be entirely removed from criminalsurroundings and efforts made to eradicate the criminality which hasexpressed itself. Society has not the right to degrade a man, much lessto school him in crime. If he prove absolutely incorrigible (a verydifficult matter to ascertain) he should be banished from society forall time either by life-long imprisonment or by death. If not, thecarrying out of his punishment must be performed with a very sacredsense of responsibility. All manner of means are taken to relieve andcure the physically sick; much greater surely should be the meansemployed to heal the morally and socially sick. 

Another matter wherein our prison system might be justly criticised isthe scale of diet provided for the prisoners. No one asks that theyshould be given luxuries, but it might at least be recognised even inprison that one man's food is another man's poison, that one fattenswhere another starves, and that variety is essential to good health. Aprisoner who was serving a very long sentence once said to the author, "fancy having the same dinner every day of your life. " Let one fancy it, boiled beef every day except Sunday, when roast beef is provided. Thesame meal every day, the same clothes to wear every day and all day, andthe same routine to go through. What wonder is it that in the confirmedcriminal many faculties appear to have atrophied. They have obeyed a lawof nature. The popular comment is no doubt--"what else do you expect?They deserve it all, they have brought it upon themselves. " We expectthat our criminals should at least be treated like the by-products ofour mills and factories, i. E. Made the most of. Bitter prejudices mustgive way to the dictates of reason and humanity. 

Practically the "combined system" produces no good results. It satisfiesneither justice, humanity, nor economy. Neither is it efficient toafford protection to society. It satisfies prejudice and vengeancealone. The only system of imprisonment which is of any value and whichthe State ought to consider is one which converts the gaol in everyessential into a "crime-hospital. "

Concerning life imprisonment much apprehension exists in the publicmind. The prevailing idea is that this sentence implies incarcerationfor a period of twenty years. This is due perhaps to the fact that inEngland the sentences of "lifers" are reconsidered at the end of thatperiod, and in the majority of cases a pardon is granted. The NewZealand prison regulations contain this section (116) "No rule for theremission of life sentences will be laid down. Such sentences are passedon persons guilty of the very gravest offences; and the Governor willonly extend the royal prerogative of mercy to such persons inexceptional cases. " Under certain conditions life imprisonment is theonly way of dealing with criminals who refuse to reform. Thoseconditions do not exist in our New Zealand prisons, and a life sentenceserved within their walls is the most cruel form of punishment our lawsallow. The prisoner enters the gaol with a long, dark, hopeless futurebefore him. As the years roll by not one ray of light brightens his lot. He can never better himself. He suffers, he is meant to suffer, the lossof all he holds dear (and even a murderer holds some things dear). Thisabsolute loss, this complete severance of all ties, produces a mostagonising mental state and afflicts the poor wretch with untold horrors. He is made to drag out an existence under most unnatural conditions, conditions in which every effort he makes towards self-improvement is auseless one, every aspiration is routed, the natural affections crave invain for an object to fasten upon, and where an artificial atavisticprocess is set in motion so powerful as to defy the resistance of all intime. This is no imaginary picture, a man is a man, and one of thecruellest tortures to submit him to is to deprive him absolutely of hopeand make good his evil because it requires an effort which is useless, and evil his good because it is easier and costs the loss of nothing. Perhaps the majority of lifers are those whose sentences have beencommuted from the death penalty. Such a sentence is in reality the deathpenalty carried out under slow process extending over many years. Gradually remorse and despair do their work upon the natural instincts, the mind and the body. The man becomes brutalised, insane and dies. Anexception here and there may be pointed out; but given twenty men ofsame age and good health, and sentence ten to twenty years, and ten tolife imprisonment, and the chances are that (under reasonableconditions) the ten with the defined sentence will survive it, whereasof the lifers the majority will be insane within twelve years. Thefollowing testimony will, however, be of greater weight:--

The Directors of the State Prison in Wisconsin in their report for 1881add:--

"The condition of most of our life prisoners is deplorable in the lastdegree. Not a few of them are hopelessly insane; but insanity, even, brings them no surcease of sorrow. However wild their delusions may beon other subjects, they never fail to appreciate the fact that they areprisoners. Others, not yet classed as insane, as year by year goes by, give only too conclusive evidence that reason is becoming unsettled. Theterribleness of a life sentence must be seen to be appreciated; seen, too, not for a day or a week, but for a term of years. Quite a number ofyoung men have been committed to this prison in recent years undersentence for life. Past experience leads us to expect that some of themwill become insane in less than ten years; and all of them, who live, inless than twenty. Many of them will, doubtless, live much longer thantwenty years, strong and vigorous in body perhaps, but complete wrecksin mind. May it, therefore, not be worthy of legislative considerationwhether life sentences should not be abolished and long but definiteterms substituted, and thus leave some faint glimmer of hope even forthe greatest criminals?"

Sir E. Du Cane stated in 1878 before the Royal Commission on PenalServitude Acts:--

"I myself do not think much of life sentences at all. I would ratherhave a long fixed term. I think all the effect on the public outsidewould be gained by a shorter period. "

Mr W. Tallack, late Secretary of the Howard Association, writes in his"Penelogical and Preventive principles":--

"Of life imprisonment it may be conclusively pronounced very bad in eventhe best form of it. Years of enquiry and observation have increasinglyforced this conviction upon the writer. . . . A fixed limit of twenty yearswould greatly aid the discipline of its subjects. And what is of moreimportance so far as the public are concerned, it would, in most cases, avail to practically incapacitate or effectually deter the persons whopass through it from any repetition of their crime. The mere naturaloperation of age, decay, and disease would tend towards this result; andnot only so, but it would, in a considerable proportion of cases, renderthe limit of twenty years a virtual sentence in perpetuity by theintervention of death. But meanwhile the elements of hope and otherdesirable influences would be largely present, notwithstanding. "

To say the least of it our criminals have a claim for humane treatment, and no sentence should have a greater duration than twenty years. Theterm also should be fixed when the sentence is imposed. 

=Flogging. =--This is an extremely unpopular form of punishment, owing toits abuse in the old convict stations and in the army and navy. Yetthere is a great deal to be said in its favour. In 1898 the HowardAssociation instituted an enquiry among the most competent authoritiesas to what were the best methods of dealing with juvenile offenders. Nearly 40 replies were sent in answer to their circular of enquiry, andwith but one or two exceptions these replies advocated whipping as themost expedient method. The Chief Constable of Liverpoolstated:--"Whipping has been found a most efficient and HUMANEpunishment. During the last FIVE YEARS 489 boys were oncewhipped. Of these, only 135 have been again convicted. Of the 135, 44were whipped for the second time. Of the 44 only 10 were convicted athird time, and 2 only for a fourth time. No other punishment can showsuch a record. . . . "

Our Criminal Code describes a whipping as being a punishment of not morethan 25 strokes with the cat-o'-nine-tails inflicted upon a person ofnot more than 16 years of age. A flogging is limited to not more than 50strokes and not less than 25 inflicted upon a person of over 16 years. Three floggings at intervals for one offence is the maximum amount ofcastigation allowed. 

A description of the "cat" may not be out of place. The handle is roundand of uniform diameter of one inch. It is about 30 inches in length andis light as cork. The "tails" (nine in number) are made of cord similarto fishing cord, about an eighth of an inch in diameter and 33 inches inlength. In each tail a strand is taken out, wound round and put back, thus making a bob. There are 27 of these bobs in all. A flogging withsuch an instrument would no doubt be very severe, but it need not drawblood nor leave marks for all time. A flogging properly administeredshould produce sharp stinging pain and leave no bad results whatever. Then it becomes a very useful punishment to use upon such men as thosewhose crimes are characterised by cruelty. Men who violate, torture, orfrighten women, who are cruel to children or take advantage of the weak, imbecile or defenceless might well be punished with a flogging. In factit is questionable whether any punishment is so effective. These men arecowards one and all; they do not dread the lazy life of the prison, buta flogging has great terrors for them, and its moral value isconsiderable. In bygone years men who were flogged were often worse thanbefore. The flogging had demoralised them. These floggings were, however, shockingly cruel. Nothing is to be admitted but the sharpswishing and this, when properly carried out, is totally without anyobjectionable feature. 

There seems no necessity to combine a flogging and a long term ofimprisonment under one sentence. The maximum punishment of threefloggings might be given within a period of two months, and the culpritthen in most cases discharged. As to the advisability of ordering morethan one flogging a great deal might be said. Fifty lashes and the mandischarged within a week would be sufficient for the majority of cases. For a very brutal crime or for a second offence of the same nature, asecond flogging after a period of days might be thought necessary. Thevery greatest care, however, must be exercised in the administration ofthis punishment. The crimes of brutality rightly arouse the indignationof the public, but there is no need to show a brute that society can bea greater brute than what he is. Being a brute, leniency invariablyfails, but unimpressionable to these methods as his moral and humaneinstincts are, his skin remains sensitive, and through it his instinctsmay be appealed to and quickened. Flogging makes him consider that thepractice of brutality is in direct variance to his own personalinterests and comfort. From this he may be led to moralise further. 

Gangs of boys who are becoming a nuisance to the neighbourhood theyinfest are quickly broken up if their ring-leader is treated to a dozenstrokes that he will not feel inclined to boast about. The mercifulnessof this punishment is seen in its power in thus effectively stopping thetendency to crime. Larrikins, unnatural husbands and fathers, brutes andtorturers, cattle maimers and stack burners, all see their personalinterests lying in a very different direction to that which leads to the"cat. "

=Capital Punishment. =--The authority to take the life of a fellow-man isbased on God's word to Noah, "whoso sheddeth man's blood by man shallhis blood be shed;" and upon the abstract idea of justice "a life for alife. " These words in no sense contain a command to us of this centuryto execute all murderers without exception. For the present state ofcivilisation a new principle has been evolved which is, that when a manshows himself to be unchangeably hostile to society then his life may beforfeited. As the methods of dealing with criminals improve so the wordLIBERTY is being substituted for the word LIFE. The sin on theman's soul may be left to God; all that men has to deal with is hisanti-social attitude. If impossible to change this attitude then eitherdeath or life imprisonment must result. This very question ofpossibility is so uncertain that few modern criminologists care toadjudicate, and most regard the death sentence as anticipating too much. Life-imprisonment, under the highest moral influences, becomes life-longby and only by the continued resistance of the criminal. It is not theobjectionable form of punishment previously described for it encouragesthe man to put forth his best effort to improve, and substantiallyrewards these efforts, even to granting him his liberty if he perseverewith them. Punishment by death is becoming more and more unpopular. Thedislike of juries to bring in a verdict of "guilty" in a murder case issufficient testimony to this. In the crowds who sign petitions for thereprieve of the condemned, the hysterical element is too prominent tomake any other estimate possible. But the reaction is steady, and itwill not be long before capital punishment becomes a thing of the past. To abolish it before a suitable substitute were provided would bemistake. 

Gradually society is awakening to the fact that the condition of thecriminal ought to be ameliorated, and that there can be no realamelioration which does not make definite efforts for the prisoner'sreform. The aim should be to assist every man to recover by his owneffort the place in society from which he has fallen. No man isincapable of improvement, and under a wise systematic discipline mostmen do improve. A remarkable witness is found in the experience of DrBrowning who was engaged as Surgeon-superintendent of convict shipsbetween 1831 and 1848. Of one voyage from Norfolk Island to Tasmania hewas in charge of 346 "old hands. " These men had agreed to take terriblerevenge upon some of their comrades who had been employed as constablesover the others. Under Dr Browning's instruction and discipline theirpurpose was abandoned. He landed the men in Tasmania without havinginflicted a single punishment upon the voyage. He remarks:--"The menwere given to me in double irons; I debarked them without an ironclanking among them. I am told that this is the first and only instanceof convicts removed from Norfolk Island having had their fetters struckoff during the voyage, and being landed totally unfettered. They werealmost uniformly double-cross-ironed and chained down to the deck, everybody being afraid of them. I was among them at all hours and theprison doors were never once shut during the day. To God be all theglory. " Three Governors of Tasmania expressed their high opinion of DrBrowning's system and of its subsequent effects upon their behaviour. (Vide "Christianity amongst Prisoners. " Howard Ass. :)

In the famous Dartmoor prison and at Borstal in Kent experiments arebeing made to secure a greater number of reformations among the youngerconvicts. It is too early to estimate the value of the systems beingtried, but they are being watched with much hope and expectation. InAmerica there is a decided tendency to substitute State reformatoriesfor prisons, especially in the case of the young. The Elmira Reformatoryhas been established for more than a quarter of a century, and itsclaims to have reformed 82 per cent. Of the men committed to it has beenupheld by the special enquiry instituted in 1890. 

If these different systems were more closely studied there would resulta great awakening as to the possibilities of the criminal, and societywould discover that its best interests were served by reforming itsoffenders and making them moral and industrious servants of the State, instead of by committing them to institutions where they were broughtinto contact with consecrated villainy and where the unwholesomeinfluence is calculated to confirm them in criminal habits and makethem a constant menace and expense to the community. That our criminalpopulation is on the increase, and that the proportion of recidivistsgrows larger every year, is scarcely to be wondered at in the midst ofsuch influences. Notwithstanding all that has been done to improve thestate of prisons from what they were even fifty years ago, yet the motto"once a criminal always a criminal" is often too sadly true. The reportof the English commissioners of prisons shows that amongst those whohave been convicted during the year 1902, 51. 9 per cent. Of the men and70. 6 per cent. Of the women had been previously convicted. In the pastthese results were regarded as inevitable. Now they are regarded withmuch disquietude. Formerly they were supposed to point to a defect inthe criminal, now they are understood to prove a defect in the penalsystem. The reason for this defect lies in having regarded certainobjects as primary which are in reality only secondary. These objectshave been defined to be the deterrence of crime by the example ofpunishing criminals; the repression of crime by the infliction ofpunishment, and the protection of society as a consequence. Thedeterrent value of the penal system has been greatly reduced by thesmall amount of dread which it excites in the criminally disposed. Therepresentative value is of a minus quantity. Crime is assisted more thanit is crippled. The protection of society is secured only during theperiod of incarceration. At the end of that period the criminal must bedischarged and he goes forth often a more skilful criminal than beforeand with a vow to take vengeance upon society. 

Regarding these objects as secondary the reformation of the offender hasbeen acknowledged as primary by criminologists, and they turned theirattention to study the criminal pathologically, to enquire into thecauses of crime and also to make trial of the best methods for securingreformation. "Punishment the principle and reformation the incident, "was the theory of the old school. The New school reverses the order to"Reformation the principle and punishment the incident. " Obviously thiscourse renounces the old principle of retaliation and vengeance andembraces that indicated by Christ in his precept "bear ye one another'sburdens. "

=The Philosophy of Punishment. =--The threatening attitude of thecriminal towards the peace and welfare of society makes it an obviousnecessity that society should protect itself against him, otherwise hewould soon master the situation and reduce social order to barbarism. 

What are the steps which it must take? It must first remember that itsright to punish is not an inherent, but a delegated one. Though itspowers are sovereign in the sense that there is no appeal from them, yetthey must not be exercised in an arbitrary way. So far as there is acapacity for the realisation of responsibility to God so far must thatresponsibility be observed. Where this responsibility is disregarded, society immediately becomes the greater criminal itself even though itsdeeds may be done in the name of the majority of its members. As historyis not without examples of this abuse of a sacred trust neither is itwithout instances of the Divine interference expressed in thedestruction of a community which had offended after this manner. Thisresponsibility must be acknowledged firstly--in the end to be attained;and, secondly or subsequently--in the means by which it is attained. Weare generally informed that our penal systems exist for the purpose ofrepressing crime, and that punishment is thus inflicted upon thecriminal in order that others may be deterred from following hisexample. Reformation is sometimes suggested. The public, however, concerns itself very little about its criminals and much less about theobjects which its penal system is supposed to secure for it. Theattitude of the general public towards the criminal is undoubtedly avindictive one. His sentence is discussed from this point of view only, viz. :--will the suffering that he will have to undergo be sufficient toaccord with the enormity of the crime he committed? The end which isunderstood is simply suffering, expiatory suffering; suffering whichneither man nor society has any right whatever to inflict upon a humanbeing. The old principle of an eye for an eye, while in accord withabstract justice, was often made the occasion for abuse, and the largelyprevailing conception of justice amongst us to-day is precisely theabuse of that same principle. Society does well in returning upon itscriminals the consequences of their acts, but the consequences should bea natural return and not an artificial one. The criminal should see thatby his attack upon society he is excluded from all the benefits of itssystem. He has isolated himself and this isolation is of itselfmiserable, and will, if persisted in, become intolerable. Its finalstate is Hell, a state in which society is destroyed while the socialinstinct remains and craves in its unquenched agony. It is perfectlyright to show the wrong-doer the ultimate end of his chosen course, butthere is no warrant for the strenuous effort which is made to force himtowards it. A criminal's punishment should be made purgatorial and notinternal. The old penology regarded him as a hopeless individual andproceeded with its hellish tortures without undue delay. Beneath itssystem no reforms were possible, and the fact that none were ever made, was pointed to in order to justify its horrors. Society took no interestin them whatever while they were being pushed lower and lower down thesocial scale, but met them at the lowest steps, and, halter in hand, gravely professed the utmost concern in their future and eternalwelfare. 

So far, society has failed to recognise the end of the punishment it isentitled to impose. In the words of Dimitri Drill, a Moscow publicist, the new penology expresses that it "renounces entirely the law ofretaliation as end, principle, or basis of all judicial punishment. Thebasis and purpose of punishment is the necessity of protecting societyagainst the evil consequences of crime either by the moral reclamationof the criminal or by his separation from society; punishment is not tosatisfy vengeance. " We must not jump to the hasty conclusion that hereinis meant that the criminal must be treated very gently and coaxed backto more virtuous paths. What is meant is that his punishment should bemade purgatorial and not infernal. The process of reclamation isaccompanied by far sharper pains than those which are expiatory, butthey are the pains of a healing surgery and not those of a souldestroying brutality. Where the means for reclamation fail thenseparation from society is advocated. Separation in the midst ofinfluences which would always tend to awaken the desire to reform andwhich would give immediate assistance to that desire when awakened. 

Thus the recognition of this fact that the authority to punish offendersagainst its law has been, by God, delegated to the social institution, brings with it a recognition of the responsibility which accompaniessuch authority. 

In primitive times most offences were punished by the death penalty, notas a vindictive measure but because the offender was hopeless andsociety helpless. That is, the social state being of a very simpleorder, any infraction of its laws would declare the offender a mostpronounced criminal, bitterly hostile to society and irreclaimable bysuch social machinery as then existed. The death penalty when inflictedmust ever be so regarded. Not as a life for a life but as the punishmentinflicted upon one who has by his own conduct given complete evidencethat his recovery to the social state is impossible. In this century ofcivilisation it is incumbent to look upon the criminal as being in ameasure a by-product of society and to deal with him accordingly. Outside of society crime is impossible, therefore society accounts forcrime and is also in a measure responsible for it. To this measureexactly (although the measure itself can never be determined withexactitude) is the criminal by-product. In a large measure he isresponsible (entire responsibility is conceivable), and it is this senseof responsibility which makes it possible to carry out his treatment. 

Large industries find that their by-products are an important asset andto disregard them would be ruinous. Mr Frazer in his book "America atWork" states that the expenses of the meat-packers of Chicago for 1901amounted to £150, 244, 848. The sales of meat realised £124, 263, 998, andyet a net profit of £6, 767, 638 resulted. What appears to be a paradox isexplained by the fact that a sum of no less than £32, 748, 488 resultedfrom the sale of by-products. All the waste must be turned to dollars. 

Commercial advance has certainly out-stripped social advance, andapparently for the reason that whereas in commerce a pig's tail isregarded as an important asset, in our social system the criminal andthe weakling are regarded as a heavy liability. When the point of viewis changed society will advance more rapidly. So, too, society findsthat it must utilise its by-products and to devise means which it canbring to bear upon the criminal, so as to bring him to a state ofusefulness. The enormity of the crime and the degree of criminality arealike impossible to estimate, therefore it is also impossible to definea punishment which makes an attempt to recognise any of these qualities. 

It is, however, quite possible to determine within very fair limits thecontinuance of the criminal habits, also the value from a reformatorypoint of view, of various social influences, and further there existsthe power to apply these influences. To sum up--society possesses withinitself the power to reform its criminals (to utilise its by-products)and to determine when they have been reformed. 

Separation from society is rendered absolutely necessary by thecriminal's own behaviour, if by his behaviour he shows that he is notcapable of using freedom profitably. But if his separation is to serveany real purpose whatever it must be accompanied by an educationalprocess which will work him back to that point where he left the socialtrack and then so propel him forward that he may recover his lostground, and when restored to society be enabled to identify himself withits progressive system. 

So far our penal system is a mistake. Whatever it may be theoretically, practically it is only vindictive. Its failure has caused some todespair and others to reflect. 

Chapter V. 

ELIMINATION--DR. CHAPPLE'S PROPOSAL. 

In the last chapter it was shown that capital punishment sought for itsjustification in the theory that certain criminals had assumed anattitude of permanent and aggressive hostility towards society. Theirpresence in society is regarded as a menace to human life, and no moralimprovement is expected to result from their imprisonment. So hopelessis this class of criminal regarded as being that, so it is declared, noother policy save that of extermination can be considered. 

In primitive society criminals were less numerous than in our own time;but those that did then exist belonged, almost all of them, to the worsttype. There being no public institutions for the administration ofjustice, practically one course only remained open, and that was, thatthe person wronged should seek to avenge himself as best he could, andthe death of the wrong-doer was generally the satisfaction that hesought. As civilization has advanced, criminals have become morenumerous; but they have taken to crime by more gradual steps. Society, too, has deprived the individual of the right of wreaking his ownvengeance, and has erected institutions for the purpose of determiningguilt and apportioning punishment. From the days of Noah, deeds of bloodand other crimes of a serious nature, have been punished by death andfrom then, until this present day, the one idea underlying theadministration of justice has been that society should get rid of itscriminals as speedily as possible. Repression alone was thought to beefficacious, reformation was scarcely thought of. 

Of late years the criminal has been more carefully studied by hisfellow-beings. Some have studied him as a monster and believed him tohave the heart of a beast; others have studied him as a man and hadfaith in his possibilities. The former have noticed the failure ofrepressive methods, such as flogging and other penal severities, andhave in despair been led to advocate that the only possible remedy isthat of extermination. The latter have discovered that the failure ofthese repressive methods but imposes upon society the obligation ofadopting a system of an entirely different order and with an entirelydifferent object, viz: a system for the reformation of the criminal. 

The "exterminators" have studied the criminal objectively and have hadregard to his crimes only; the reformers have studied him subjectivelyand have had regard to his possibilities. The policy of the"exterminators" must be condemned on this ground, viz: that they havemade but a half study of their subject, and they do know, and theyrefuse to listen to, of what the criminal is capable. Neither do theyestimate the capacity of the enormous social power that may be attachedto the criminal's own, but feeble, effort so as to raise him up, evenfrom the deepest depths of vice and villainy. The careful subjectivestudy--the truly humane study--of the criminal, has shown that alltheories which would declare any man to be incapable of improvement, areto be condemned absolutely. The possibilities of reform exist in everycase, and the probabilities are never to be denied. None can gainsaythis statement nor can it be termed extravagant, for with the imperfectmachinery now in use results are being attained which justify everysyllable of it. Yet in the face of these results, the "exterminators"still proclaim their policy. They bid us be deaf to the voice ofprejudice and follow the true light of science, ever remembering that weare passing through a wonderful stage in social evolution! But thepolicy that they adopt belies that which is indicated in all this finetalk. They say that we must exterminate the criminal, and this isnothing less than an acknowledgement that, to their minds, the problemof the criminal is one of outer darkness and that we have no means ofever penetrating it. They would take us back to a period anterior toAdam. 

Prejudice, indeed, needs to be overcome, but it is the prejudice thatprefers vengeance to mercy. And if we follow the true light of scienceit will lead us to discover that the criminal is best got rid of byconverting him into a useful citizen, or to be more exact, society'sbest effort is to be directed towards separating the crime from thecriminal. 

Recently a Wellington medical gentleman (Dr Chapple) published a workentitled "The Fertility of the Unfit. " The problem which this gentlemanattempts to grapple with in his book is the disproportionate rate ofincrease among the numbers of the unfit to the fit members of society. Under the classification of the unfit he places all those persons who, on account of mental, moral or physical defect, constitute a burden tosociety. These are, principally, the epileptic, the pauper, the insaneand the criminal. These either will not, or cannot support themselvesadequately and legitimately. For their treatment support and correction, hospitals, asylums, charitable aid boards, gaols and other institutionshave had to be established, and the upkeep of these has become a greatburden which necessarily has to be borne by the healthy, moral andindustrious section of the community. 

Dr Chapple draws attention to the undeniable fact that there is atendency on the part of those unfit to increase at a greater ratio thanthe fit. The rate of increase during the past twenty years has been sogreat and so disproportionate as to make the cost of their maintenancebecome an increasingly heavier one for the individual taxpayer to bear, and to cause for this and other reasons, a considerable amount of alarmin the minds of those who have the welfare of society at heart. 

The Doctor believes that the cause of this proportionate rate ofincrease is to be found in the methods adopted largely among certainclasses for the prevention of child-birth. 

In the conclusion of his book he states that sexual inhibition on thepart of the better classes accounts for their smaller rate of increaseas compared with the rate of the inferior classes. We cannot accept thisconclusion without more evidence. We want to know definitely whether thenatural rate of increase among the better classes is really lower thanthat existing among the inferior classes. That is to say, are the ranksof the defective being swelled by the influence of heredity or by someextensive force recruiting from among the ranks of the fit? Anotherquestion is this: Since the use of preventives is available to bothsections alike, the Doctor accounts for the supposed naturaldisproportion by assuming that the better classes restrain themselves. Is he right? Using the word "restrain" in its absolute sense we begleave for most emphatic doubt. In an enquiry such as this is, the onlyfactor of any real importance as accounting for a diminished birth-rate, is the use of preventives. If this method is confined to the betterclasses, we must refuse to call them any longer our "best stock, " for, if they are not producing a defective offspring, they are, as the recentAustralian Birth-Rate Commission has made abundantly plain, speedilymaking defectives of themselves, besides being guilty of lowering thesocial moral tone and hardening its sensibility. We are strongly of theopinion that the diminished birth-rate does not account for the increasein the number of criminals and defectives further than that the use ofpreventives discloses a species of criminality. 

Nevertheless, Dr Chapple proposes, not so much to restore theequilibrium as to get rid of the defective altogether. He assumes thatdefectives are born and not made, and then makes enquiry into the bestpossible means for the prevention of their birth. After passing severalmethods in review, he accepts an operation known as tubo-ligature asbeing the best from all points of view. This operation will render thefemale permanently sterile without having any deleterious effect uponher health. Absolutely no result follows, he assures us, but sterility. If the wives of all defectives were operated upon in this way, DrChapple assures us that the problem concerning the defective wouldspeedily be solved and society would be the happier and wealthier inevery way. The proposal might give something of a shock to the moralconscience but such a shock would only unfit us for our work. Thecriminal is upon us, he threatens us, and we must protect ourselves. Thenecessities of the case are so pressing and so urgent that we seek forthe most effectual remedy and use it unhesitatingly when we have foundit. Here it is, says Dr Chapple, and its morality is determined by therelief which it, and it alone, is able to bring. 

What are we to do? Why, sterilize the wife of the defective. As thecriminal is most harmful of all defectives he is summoned to comeforward first and to bring his wife with him, when behold, the manturns up alone. Where is his wife? Why, he hasn't got one. Has DrChapple considered this fact? Did he know, when he made the statementthat it was a matter of common observation that the criminal was amongthose who had the largest families, did he know then that the criminalrarely married? It cannot be said that the criminal's wife is as rare asthe Great Auk's egg, but Havelock Ellis states that "among men criminalsthe celibates are in a very large proportion. " And Féré further supportsthe value of the statement for our present purpose by saying that"criminals and prostitutes have this common character, that they areunproductive. This is true also of vagabonds, and of the idle andvicious generally, to whatever class they belong. "

Two years' experience as a prison chaplain may not be of much value, butit certainly conveyed the impression that the majority of the criminalswere young men who were unmarried. 

But Dr Chapple adduces evidence. He tells us of a family in which therewere 834 persons the descendants of one woman. Of this family 76 wereconvicts, 7 were murderers, 142 were beggars, 64 lived on charity. Amongtheir women 181 lived disreputable lives, and in 75 years this familycost their country £250, 000 in alms, trials, imprisonments, etc. Whatfamily is this? If the following comparison is conclusive in its resultsthen it must be the "Jukes" family. 

 Dr Chapple's Case. The "Jukes"

 Number estimated 834 834 " definitely traced 709 709 " of criminals 76 76 " convicted of murder 7 7 " of beggars 142 142 " receiving alms house relief 64 64 Illegitimates 106 106 Period reviewed 75 years 75 yrs. Cost to State £250, 000 £250, 000

If it will be allowed that the agreement in these nine lines ofstatistics establishes the identity between the two cases, then theevidence may be examined. 

In the first place, the "Jukes" family is the most exceptional one knownin the history of crime, and it must be treated as an exception and notas an example. In the second place, these 834 persons were not descendedfrom one woman in 75 years but from FIVE women who were the legitimateand illegitimate daughters of an old Dutch back-woodsman who lived in arocky part of the State of New York and who is known to criminologistsas "Max Jukes. " My authority for declaring that there were five femaleancestresses during the period reviewed as against one, stated to be thecase by Dr Chapple, is Mr R. L. Dugdale, who made a close personalinvestigation of the life and records of the family. He himselfcollected the statistics that are given above and which are identicalwith those given by Dr Chapple's authority, Prof. Pellman, andtherefore one must conclude that Prof. Pellman has studied the case atsecond hand and, in this important detail, is in error. 

That 834 persons should have descended from five persons in 75 yearscovering five generations, exclusive of the 5 ancestresses, does notstrike us as evidence of an exceedingly prosperous birth-rate. If therehad been another thousand descendants it would not allow for an averageof 3 children to grow up and marry in each family. We may then set asidethe contention that the "Jukes" were enormously prolific. 

Still the "Jukes" were an enormous cost to their country, and surely weshould prevent such a family ever appearing in our midst. The answer tothis is that the "Jukes" have only appeared once, and, so far as ourcommunity is concerned, our social progress makes their reappearanceabsolutely impossible. The "Jukes" were a tribe of vagabond outlaws. They gained a livelihood by fishing, hunting, robbery, and intermittentwork. They lived in a rocky, inaccessible region in the lake country ofthe State of New York. Their criminals were able, with a considerablemeasure of success, to defy the police, and travellers very rarelyapproached the vicinity of their habitat. Some drifted into the townsand villages. A proportion of these supported themselves by honestindustry, and a proportion became a burden upon the rates; Such nests ofcriminals can exist only in partially civilized countries. The advanceof civilization extinguishes them. Nowhere in New Zealand could such atribe prey upon and defy society for a period of two weeks together. Thecriminals that we have to deal with are those which society produces notthose which it extinguishes. 

But if the "Jukes" were at all reproductive what is the differencebetween them and other cases of criminals? Principally this, that the"Jukes" formed a little society of their own in which marriage andco-habitation was the rule. Of their women 52 per cent. Weredisreputable; but Dugdale refuses to call them prostitutes, but ratherharlots, indicating that their marital relations were of the order of aprogressive polyandry and by no means unproductive. Under theseconditions, a fairly large natural increase is not to be wondered at. 

No such family has, nor could, exist in the midst of our civilization, but as the case is advanced, not to show a distinct species ofcriminality, but rather as an example of the rate of natural increasethat may be expected of a criminal family, we will examine and comparethe conditions of life existing among the "Jukes" and the criminal thatwe have to deal with and thus discover features among the latter whichmilitate against a large birth-rate; but which are not present among theformer. 

Our criminals, for the most part, commence their career of crime at anearly age. The Rev. W. D. Morrison of Wandsworth Prison, England, declares that the most criminal age is reached between the years oftwenty and thirty. This holds good, he says, for Europe, Australia, andthe United States. 

It is a mistake to suppose that a man first commits crime and thenplunges headlong into vice. Though true in some cases, it is exactly thereverse course which is followed in the majority of cases. After havingpassed with a measure of success through the milder domestic andscholastic spheres, the youthful criminal become a failure in theseverer social or industrial sphere. Some criminologists go so far as tosay that the majority of criminals have displayed distinct evidences ofcriminality at so early an age as sixteen years. Whatever may have beenthe cause for committing crime, the crime itself shows that the youthrefuses to acknowledge the obligations which an organized society laysupon him. This refusal extends practically throughout the social order, and neither is it confined to this order, but extends also to the moralorder and is shown in a total disregard for the matrimonial state. Theyouth gives way to natural appetites and associates himself with womenof low repute. He is of wandering habits, works, when he does work, butintermittently, is restless, and totally disinclined towards matrimony. Socially, industrially and morally he is unstable. It is theseconditions of his life which so contrast him with that species ofcriminality which the "Jukes" family presents. And it is these sameconditions which support the statement of Féré and Ellis, that he isgenerally a celibate and non-productive. Concerning the progeny of thefemale criminal there is little to say except that the causes whichchiefly account for the male criminal operate to produce the prostituteamong women, and therefore criminal women are in a very small minority. Of these criminal women, Lombroso says that they are monsters who havetriumphed over the natural instincts of piety and maternity as well asover their natural weakness. They are bad mothers, and children are aburden to them from which they will readily rid themselves. 

Notwithstanding Dr Chapple's evidence, it is conclusive that hisstatement that criminals have the largest families, is entirely opposedto fact, indeed the exact reverse is the case. 

So far as the criminal is concerned, one may well ask whether he has notset himself to the useless task of threshing straw. 

The question concerning the proportionate rate of natural increase amongall classes of society is one which provides one of the fundamentalsupon which Dr Chapple has based his proposal. Instead of enquiring intothe actualities of this question he has assumed them, and from hisassumption proceeded to his result. His assumption that the betterclasses use preventive means which the inferior classes do not use, isopen to challenge; that there might exist among the inferior classescauses peculiar to these classes which militate against their increasingnaturally, he has failed to notice. There do exist such, and so potentas to disprove entirely his statement that the problem is one for thesolution of which we must search deep down in biological truth. The truesolution will not be found in biological truth but in sociologicaltruth, and there fairly near the surface. 

As Dr Chapple's evidence entirely fails, the conclusions of expertcriminologists must be accepted, viz. , that criminals arecharacteristically unproductive, and that, among male criminals, thecelibates are in a large majority. As, from these reasons, the vastmajority of criminals cannot be the descendants of a criminal ancestry, obviously tubo-ligature will not meet the case. 

So far indeed the criminal descendant from criminal stock has alone beenconsidered, whereas a large number of criminals have come from a drunkenor from a pauper ancestry. Statistics indicate that 33 per cent. Ofcriminals come from an intemperate ancestry and 2 per cent. From apauper one. But in both cases, environment has a great deal more to beheld responsible for than has heredity. It is the conditions of the homelife which make the drunkard's child a criminal, and the same applieswith equal force to the pauper's child. So that, if drastic measures areto be taken with these classes, surely such measures will proceedgradually from the mean to the extreme, and severe measures will not beemployed until milder ones have failed. Where the question is one ofenvironment it is the man's character and habits which have to be dealtwith and not his nature. Environment is always capable of modification, and, when improved, the result is invariably a beneficial one for thoseconcerned. So that the least that may be said for the criminaldescendants of drunken ancestors is that a better way exists and should, by all moral laws, be first adopted. 

Further difficulties, of a physical, rather than moral nature, alsoexist. 

And here again Dr Chapple has assumed another fundamental position. Isit too much to require of him that he should prove that, where criminalshave sprung from a defective ancestry, this defect should be invariablytransmitted? That, in short, a criminally defective ancestry is aninvariable cause producing a criminal descent. (Note. --By criminallydefective ancestry we mean the ancestry from which criminals spring. Itmay not itself be criminal. It may be drunken or pauper. ) Such animportant question cannot be assumed; positive proof is demanded, andthis is nowhere forthcoming in Dr Chapple's book. 

If it were allowed that criminals were the most prolific of all classesof society, this question of heredity would still have to be cleared upbefore such a proposal as tubo-ligature were seriously discussed, forsurely so drastic a remedy would never be employed except under the mostpositive conditions, that is to say, that this operation would never beemployed until it had been ascertained, with scientific precision, thatthe birth of degenerates, and degenerates only, was being prevented. 

Dr Chapple failing to illuminate us upon this point we inquire, does acriminally defective ancestry invariably convey to its offspring a taintdisposing it towards crime? Or can it ever be ascertained that a certaingiven ancestry will certainly produce criminals?

In the treatment of the subject of heredity it has been made clear thaton account of the vicious habits of the criminal he is apt to transmitto his offspring a physical defect which will make it difficult for himto adapt himself to the conditions of the society in which he is placed. This difficulty becomes almost, though not quite, insurmountable whenthe environment is one in which the practice of vice and dishonesty iseasier than that of virtue and thrift. 

The transmission of a taint which is a cause of criminality cannot bedenied, but the close investigation of the criminal and of his familyhas revealed the fact that among the comparatively few criminals who areparents they do not all transmit a taint or defect to their offspring, nor among those from whom a taint has been transmitted has itnecessarily been transmitted to every child. 

The "Jukes" family being the most exceptional of all cases in whichcriminal heredity may be observed can be investigated for the purposesof discovering the extreme affirmative which the question proposed cangive. The answer is an emphatic no. When the "Jukes" intermarried therewas, strange as it may seem, almost an entire absence from crime in thefamily following upon such union. When they married into otherfamilies, crime frequently made its appearance. This, at least, showsthat an hereditary taint is not invariably conveyed. It may be claimedthat it proves that, under certain conditions, such taint is conveyed;but in cases of this nature we do not reach our particular and exclusiveaffirmatives anything like so rapidly as we reach our particular andexclusive negatives. The negative is often obvious, the affirmativegenerally remote. It may be that by cross marriages the element ofvirility, necessary to maintain criminality, is sustained: but if thatwere so it would be expected that pauperism would necessarily resultfrom consanguineous marriages which is not so far the case as toindicate cause and effect. A more plausible suggestion is that inconsanguineous marriages there is a tendency for the family ties to bereunited and the family ideal restored. Such, of course, effectivelydisposes of criminality. Of the three grandsons of Ada Jukes, who werethemselves the sons of her one illegitimate son, their family report isas follows:--The first was licentious, a sheep-stealer, quarrelsome, andan habitual drunkard. He married a disreputable woman and had severalchildren. Of his seven boys, five were criminals. The second grandsonkept a tavern and a brothel and was a thief. He married a brothelkeeper. Of his six sons, two were criminals. The third grandson wasindustrious but occasionally intemperate. He married a woman addicted tothe opium habit. Of his four sons, none were criminals. These arefairly average cases, and they, at least, affirm very distinctly thatthe criminal does not always transmit a taint to his child which willdispose that child towards crime. 

Although in the cases cited above only some 40 per cent. Of the childrenwere criminals, it must, however, be observed that a great deal ofcriminality goes unpunished, so that we might fix the average at 75 percent. And be more exact. Of the 75 per cent. We must find out whethertheir heredity or their environment was the cause of their beingcriminal. Dugdale's observations led him to conclude that heredity is alatent cause which requires environment for its development. These 75per cent. , however, will be referred to again. There being 25 per cent. Honest and industrious, brings us face to face with a question affectingthe morality of Dr Chapple's proposal. 

Since then all the children of criminal ancestry are not themselvescriminal or likely to become criminals through an hereditary taint, cana proposal be accepted which would not only prevent the birth of thehereditary criminal, but would also prevent the birth of several personswho would have become good and useful citizens. 

Thus far only the criminal descended from a criminal ancestry has beenconsidered, whereas, as was stated previously, there are a considerablenumber of criminals termed "hereditary" criminals who are descended froma drunken ancestry. The proportion of these is about 33 per cent. Ofthe whole. The impossibility of the success of Dr Chapple's remedy isvery apparent from the insurmountable difficulties that would beexperienced in determining with exactitude when a person was sodegenerate in his own system as to make it positive that his prospectiveoffspring would be born a criminal defective. Uncertainty, in thismatter, reigns supreme. 

There must remain then but very little support for Dr Chapple's proposalwhen we discover firstly:--that the criminal is very rarely a parent, and secondly:--that in every case a taint is not transmitted from parentto child. Its sphere of effectiveness is restricted by the verycircumstances of the case, and even within that restricted sphere itsoperation would be most clumsy for it would prevent the birth of all acriminal's children, good and bad alike. Thus it would become both amoral and economic failure. 

Dr Chapple has taken it for granted that a criminal's rate of increaseis at least equal to the average if not indeed, for certain reasons, considerably greater, and that he in all cases transmits an hereditarytaint to his offspring. Then he seeks for a remedy whereby thetransmission of this taint may be avoided and he can find none otherthan one which prevents the very possibility of the prospective childbeing born. Before coming to such a drastic conclusion enquiry mighthave been made to discover whether there might not exist a remedy whichwould be a remedy in the truest sense. That is a remedy which would, while it would prevent the transmission of the taint, yet it would notinterfere with reproduction. Such a remedy would be in fact a method forthe reformation of the criminal, for if the criminal were reformed theproblem would be solved. If he were transformed into an honest andindustrious man then the transmission of the criminal taint is at onceprevented. There are some, however, who maintain that the criminal isincorrigible and that reformatory agencies have invariably failed. Theylook upon all attempts on behalf of the criminal as a uselessexpenditure of energy and money. This question of the possibility orotherwise of the reform of the criminal must now be settled before wecan proceed further. 

Is the criminal incorrigible? Some criminals do not ever reform becausethey cannot. These are insane. Some do not because they will not; butthese may. The many who pass through our gaols and show no signs ofreform does not prove that although they may reform they never will. Ifnine hundred and ninety-nine cases were observed of men resisting reformit would not prove the impossibility of reforming the thousandth. Itwould point to the difficulty, the remote probability or the need ofdifferent methods; but it would not determine the impossibility. Whenthe term "incorrigible" is applied to certain criminals it does not meanthat these men are incapable of reform; but they are RESISTINGreform; and no one can tell when or whether the most obstinate of thesewill surrender his will to the dictates of conscience and commence alife of reform. The possibility is always an open question. No bettertestimony can be brought forward than that of Mr Z. R. Brockway, lateSuperintendent of the New York State Reformatory at Elmira. Mr Brockwayis one of the pioneers in reformatory work and is considered thegreatest living authority upon the subject. Some 10, 000 felons havepassed through their hands. Speaking at the Fourth International PrisonCongress held in St. Petersburg in 1890 he said:--"There is a sense inwhich nothing that lives is incapable of betterment, and so strictlyspeaking there are no incorrigible criminals. If it is possible to graspthe thought and cherish it, we should endeavour to discover in the veryworst characters some spark of humanity which unites us all in ties ofrelationship, some secret soul-chambers where superhuman influences mayfind lodgment, and so with good leaven pervade the whole man; at leastwe may find in our sphere a field for most fascinating scientificresearch and experiment. 

"I record it as my own conviction, after nearly a lifetime spent withand for criminals, that alike for all, corrigible and incorrigible, theaim to accomplish reformation is a true one. It most surely supplies allpossible repression upon the criminal classes in society. . . . The aim ofreformations is absolutely essential to any good degree of publicprotection from crimes. . . . Mr F. Ammetybock, Director of thePenitentiary of Vridsloselille, Denmark, added:--I would not dare chargeas incorrigible one of the 3, 000 criminals who have been confided to mycare. . . . During my career as a prison officer, I have seen manycriminals who offered, humanly speaking, characteristic signs ofincorrigibility and who now and for a long time had led respectablelives. . . . I believe that other prison officers as well asphilanthropists, can confirm the truth of my experience, and I hope thatmany will protest against the theory of incorrigibility and place in thebalance their experience against purely abstract ideas. "

On the other hand, it must be admitted that several criminologistsemphatically declare that the "instinctive" criminal (or "born" criminalto use Lombroso's term) is incorrigible. Garofalo takes such a hopelessview of the matter as to demand his elimination by death, but none ofthese men, eminent criminologists as they may be, have studiedreformatory science experimentally. Mr Brockway's testimony should betaken as final seeing that of the 12, 000 felons who have passed throughthe Elmira Reformatory, 82 per cent. Have reformed, i. E. , have notreturned to criminal practices. The statistics for the year 1903 are asfollows:--

 Total number of those paroled 445 Served well and earned absolute release 143 Correspondence and good conduct and maintained (parole not expired) 238 Died, doing well until time of death 1 Released by Special Executive Clemency, doing well 1 Returned to Europe by permission 1 ---- 384 or 86 per cent

 Returned to Reformatory for violation of parole 15 or 33 " _Probably returned to crime. _ Those who ceased correspondence while on parole and were lost sight of 37 Known to have returned to crime 9 -- 46 or 10 "

It will be seen that while the Reformatory claims only 86 per cent. Ofreforms, there were only 9 persons (or 2 per cent. Of the whole) whowere KNOWN to have certainly returned to crime. 

This exhibit is conclusive. Reformatory Science, which is yet but in itsinfancy, can already deal successfully with by far the greatestproportion of criminals, and this success at this stage guarantees amuch larger measure in the future. It is clear then upon the statementsof the highest authorities that the criminal is not incorrigible, andthat the prison (penal) system compares so unfavourably with thereformatory system that it ought to be abolished in favour of it. Thesystem in vogue at the Elmira Reformatory will be described in a laterchapter, and there it will be shown that the methods employed are upon amost scientific basis and that the results obtained cannot fail tosatisfy the most exacting. It will be seen that by a "reformed" man ismeant a man who can and will adapt himself to the conditions of society;a man sound in mind, healthy in body, industrious and honest in habit. Concerning this man's progeny, what have we to fear? It is in this waythat we may dispose of the proportion of 75 per cent. Of criminalchildren descended from criminal ancestry. It should here be againobserved that the majority of criminals commence their career in crimeat a very early age, and that therefore the reform of almost allcriminals may be undertaken before they are likely to become parents. Again, true reformatory science forbids the release of any criminal fromcustody who has not given satisfactory evidence of reform. 

Thus reformatory science effectually guarantees society against the evilthat Dr Chapple has proposed to eradicate, and it does it by a methodcompared with which tubo-ligature is most crude. 

The criminal is either set free as a reformed man or is to be kept incaptivity because his resistance to reformatory discipline has shown himto be unfit to rightly use his liberty. 

Not only are the chances of his becoming the parent of criminallydisposed children effectually removed but he is himself transformed fromhaving a negative to having a positive social value. 

Dr Chapple's study convinces him that the cause of the startlingincrease of crime, insanity, and pauperism is to be found "deep down inbiological truth. Society is breeding from defective stock. " Dr Waddell, who writes the preface of the "Fertility of the Unfit, " is so alarmed asto declare that "our civilization is in imminent peril of being swampedby the increasingly disproportionate progeny of the criminal. " The mostsuperficial observation of the life of the criminal would have shownboth these writers that criminal habits militated substantially againstthe probability of a natural increase. 

To repeat what Féré and Havelock Ellis both emphatically declare thatthe criminal and the pauper do not reproduce their kind is but to showthat the cause of the natural increase of the criminal is NOTto be found in biological truth, neither is our society in any danger ofbeing swamped by an increasingly disproportionate progeny of thecriminal. In short, society has no enemy in Nature. 

The true cause for the increase of the numbers of the criminal is to befound in sociological and not in biological truth. As Lacassagne says:"Society has the criminals that it deserves. "

Dr MacDonald, W. S. Expert in Criminology, writes to the author, "As totubo-ligature, or the like, it would not be supported by scientists. "

If, however, there were absolutely no scientific objection to theproposal that the Doctor advances, if, that is, the basal facts wereexactly he assumes them to be, would then his remedy be secure fromattack? Most emphatically not. For is it not possible, nay with thepresent shrinking from maternity so widespread, is it not highlyprobable that the measure would be greatly abused? Thousands as theDoctor himself says would avail themselves of it to-morrow, and for thesimple reason that they wish to escape from the responsibilities ofbringing up children. Thousands would no doubt repudiate their debtsto-morrow if they might do so with impunity, but their wish in thematter scarcely establishes the course as being a desirable one or onecalculated to promote the happiness of society. 

From the revelations of the Birth-rate Commission and from otherenquiries it is most evident that tubo-ligature would be very largelyabused indeed. 

But it may be said that it were far better that the woman shrinkingmaternity should employ this method than that she should use thepreventive drugs that she does. This is but to acknowledge the morality, or at least the necessity for the use of preventives and does nothingless than to charge the Deity with having made laws for the governing ofthe Natural Order which have got altogether out of hand and haveinvolved His creatures in confusion. 

Is it not a question whether marriage becomes a necessity when childrenare to be avoided? The evil to which Dr Chapple's remedy would run, isone in which the moral sentiment of society would be so hardened thatthe reason for marriage would disappear from the knowledge of man. 

There is a great difference between this operation taking place frompathological reasons and its being performed simply as a deliverancefrom maternal responsibilities. In the latter case it is performed atthe will of the woman who thus shows that she has conquered the maternalinstinct, and as such she is a monster for she has contradicted hernature. Lombroso declares that these are the women that commit the mosthideous crimes and that they are incorrigible. 

The Birth-rate Commissioners stated that the use of preventives washaving a most injurious effect upon the health of the women who usedthem. 

Clearly then Morality and Nature are both opposed to their use. 

If men and women are becoming so selfish as to be determined to livecontrary to their nature then Nature will deal with them according toHer terrible manner. If they are in an extremity and find that oursocial system makes it impossible for them to undertake theresponsibilities of parentage, then the reorganization of our socialsystem is a matter for urgent consideration. 

But Dr Chapple would only intensify the evil instead of remedying it. 

What he practically says is this:--Regard yourselves for the moment asbeing brute beasts and discuss the question upon that level. Murder thesocial instinct; murder the compassionate spirit; disregard the DivineLaw and stifle all faith in the Providence of God; let the mission oflife be the enjoyment of pleasure; shrink from the marriage that mightbe a burden, and dissolve the happy marriage should indications offuture burdens present themselves. He would have us compelled to takeour betrothed to a medical board and shamelessly confess ourselves. Confess ourselves under circumstances which would know no secrecy. Hewould have us regard our wives from the standpoint of selfishness andlust alone. But we are not brutes we are human, and we have instinctswhich the brutes have not. 

NOTE. --Dr. Chapple includes among the defectives not only thecriminal but also the lunatic, the epileptic and the pauper. How fartubo-ligature would meet the cases of these defectives seems veryuncertain. The information which the Doctor gives us, for the most part, is in direct opposition to him. On pages 74-76 he gives the history ofeight families which it will repay to examine. 

Cases I. --Cancer, consumption and epilepsy in the family. In the thirdgeneration there are seven persons, of whom five married. The onlyhealthy member left five children, three were childless and one who diedat 56 left five children. That is to say, twelve children represent thefourth generation. 

Case II. --Insanity, idiocy and epilepsy. Of five persons the one sanemember only has a family. Nine children, some (how many?) imbecile. 

Case III. --Drunkenness, insanity. Seven children, two died ofconvulsions. One an idiot, one a dement (suicidal), one repeatedlyinsane. These three are scarcely likely to be chosen in marriage. Onepeculiar and irritable, one nervous and depressed. 

Case IV. --In third generation there are two epileptics and oneimbecile--scarcely likely to marry. Seven others are dead. (S. P. )

Case V. --From an insane parent we have three children, one excitable, one dull and one imbecile. 

Case VI. --A family of mutes and scarcely relevant. 

Case VII. --Drunkenness, epilepsy, etc. In the third generation "familynow extinct. " No indications of tubo-ligature having been performed. 

Case VIII. --Apparently the issue in the second generation is from twoparentages. There are fifteen persons accounted for. Seven died ininfancy of convulsions. Epilepsy, scrofula, and idiocy can claim oneeach. One was drowned, and four are healthy. That is, of seven survivingchildren, four are healthy. 

In all from fifteen parents there is the alarming increase of fifty-sixpersons. Of these eleven are healthy, fourteen are not described, fourteen are defective and seventeen are dead. The total number ofliving descendants, representing no less than the third generation ofseven families, is but thirty-nine. These figures can scarcely be quotedto prove the "fertility of the unfit, " but that is the title that standsover them. As to the hereditary tendencies that they propagate, moreinformation is required. 

It is a well known fact that in cases of hereditary defect there is atendency for the defect to appear at either an earlier or later stagein life in each successive generation (Mercier). In the first case thefamily dies out, in the second case it recovers itself. In cases ofcongenital defect, there is very little to fear. The lunatic is lockedup and the epileptic is avoided. 

Nature deals most successfully with these cases. She saves wherepossible and destroys when recovery is hopeless. Very slowly perhaps, but very exactly--never making a mistake, and in her slowness she is butgiving man an opportunity to contribute something towards the recoveryshe aims at. 

=The Case of the Epileptic. =--The number of epileptics in whom thedisease may be traced to hereditary causes is estimated to be about 33per cent. Of the whole. This is indeed a very large percentage. It doesnot, however, follow that in all the cases or in by any means a largeproportion of them, the parents were also epileptics. Authorities arenot agreed as to the influence of heredity as a predisposing cause; butit is recognised by all that the children of insane, neurotic, hysterical or neuralgic parents are liable to become epileptics. Alsothat alcoholism in the parents conveys a predisposition to the child. The hereditary cases are therefore to be divided amongst all thesecauses. In what proportion it would be difficult to estimate; but veryfew persons in whom epilepsy has developed marry, and as 75 per cent. Ofthe cases are said to begin under the age of 20 years, and very fewafter 25 years (cases of hereditary epilepsy have been known to developat so late an age as 65 and 70 years) it limits the number ofepileptics who marry to a very narrow margin. For even these few, marriage should, however, be entirely out of the question. In cases, where from syphilis or shock epilepsy is developed in the married adultwe should expect to find treatment imposing a restriction upon thefreedom of the patient somewhat similar to that provided for lunatics. In almost every rank of society the developed epileptic would beexcluded from marriage by the law of sexual selection, and as the greatmajority develop epilepsy before coming to a marriageable age, fewepileptic children can claim a developed epileptic ancestry. 

The number of cases, where epilepsy results from an epileptic ancestry, is estimated by Sir Wm. Gowers at 22 per cent. Of the whole. These casesare to be distributed between the developed form and the petit mal. Asthe petit mal often escapes observation Dr Chapple's method would onlyapply to those cases of the marriage of persons who were afflicted withthe major form of epilepsy, which means that perhaps not more than 10per cent. Of the number of epileptics could be prevented from coming tobirth. If a ten per centum reduction is to be considered as solving theproblem in the case of epileptics what will the 86 per cent. Of reformsamong criminals be valued at?

=The Case of the Pauper. =--Paupers may be divided into two classes, those whose poverty is due to misfortunes and those whose poverty is dueto vicious idleness. Those whose poverty is due to drink or crime arenot properly to be classified as paupers. Society regards them asprimarily drunkards and criminals. Of these two classes the first aregenerally to be found making a courageous fight against adversecircumstances and feel their position keenly. They are deserving of thecompassion of society. Their families, it is true, are a burden uponprivate and institutional charity, but only a temporary one and after awhile become the very means of recovering the broken fortunes of theirparents. Very large sums are spent in relieving the necessities (oftenin providing the luxuries) of the undeserving poor, but this fact shouldnot be made the basis of a charge against the deserving but helplesspoor. My own acquaintance with the poorest parts of one of our largestcities leads me to believe that very little charity ever reaches thetruly deserving poor. They battle on and keep their sad condition as farfrom public observation as possible. The undeserving are very clamorous. These two incidents are by no means uncommon, they are fairly typical. (a) I was called one night to baptise a dying child. The mother statedthat she was too poor to buy a few necessaries ordered by the doctor. Ipurchased these myself and brought them to the mother. The next morningshe sent to say the child was dead and would I lend her money to wire tothe father. As he was in work I thought a collect telegram was moresuitable. In the evening a request came for monetary assistance toprovide the child with a coffin and to purchase a plot in the cemetery. A clergyman who does that sort of thing might as well keep a privatecemetery, undertaker and monumental mason of his own. I refused to do itand came in for a good deal of abuse. The mother appeared at the funeralin a new black silk dress!

(b) A crippled woman who earned her living by ironing. She made on anaverage 10s per week. I suggested to her the advisability of applyingfor an old age pension and proceeded to fill in her papers. When shediscovered that she was two months under the age of 65 she was horrifiedat what she thought an attempt on her part to swindle the Government. 

These cases speak for themselves. People seem afraid to refuse to givealms for fear of being called uncharitable, yet they have not thecharity to investigate the cases brought before their notice and seethat their relief is intelligently bestowed upon worthy persons. Somereligious societies are cruel sinners in this respect. The consequenceis that a premium is put upon professional begging and we have plenty ofit. Society will never murmur against the burden of the deserving poor. Concerning the life of the poor, however, Korosi gives thesestatistics:--The average age of the rich is 35 years, of the well-to-do20. 6 years, of the poor only 13. 2 years. These statistics are supposedto hold good for all large towns. The average life of the pauper (thatis the vicious pauper) will be shorter still seeing that in his idle, vicious life the parent refuses to acknowledge his responsibilitiestowards his children and makes no effort to save them from perishingthrough want and proper healthful conditions. The numbers of the paupermay increase, but it is seen then that they do not live to any greatlength of life. The pauper has, however, a certain rate of increase andhis children are brought up in pauper habits. To the criminal populationthey add about 2 per cent. Of the whole. They constitute a burden, notvery great, but one which society resents. To adopt tubo-ligature mightrelieve both society and the pauper, but its moral effect would be thatthe pauper would regard his vice as acknowledged and approved bysociety. To say that there are no other remedies, remedies which wouldcompel the pauper to earn his living, is an appalling confession offailure on the part of society. 

Chapter VI. 

THE OBLIGATIONS OF SOCIETY TOWARDS THE WEAK. 

The last century is admittedly one in which was witnessed the greatestadvances in civilization that the world has ever made. All classes insociety may be said to have benefited. The rich have been given greateropportunities for the enjoyment of their riches and an enlarged sphereof usefulness opened to them. The poor have had their lot so greatlyameliorated, that given health, very few men in these colonies at allevents, are poor except it be their own fault. The art of healing cannow restore to health millions who, had they lived in an earliercentury, would have suffered agonies. A universal education has openedthe doors of colleges and universities and made it possible for thoseborn in the humblest conditions of life, to attain to the mostdistinguished positions in the land. The private has become the general;the office boy the judge; the peasant boy the President; thefull-blooded aboriginal has graduated through our universities and beencalled to the Bar; and no man can urge class distinction as being thecause of his failure in any ambition that he has faithfully pursued. Allclasses have benefited; almost all classes have advanced. 

Undeniably this advance has brought greater happiness into the world;whether it will continue will entirely depend upon what basis it isintended to secure this advance. 

With an increase of wealth and leisure there is the danger ofdemoralisation. Our society may substitute a false aim for its true one. Already there are an illimitable number of social reformers who areprepared to describe in very definite terms what is the state ofperfected society and what laws are necessary for immediate enactment inorder that we might rapidly reach that state. We all acknowledge theexistence of the prophetic vision, but we limit its range and regard himmost audacious who declares that he can describe the heaven in whichsociety shall finally shelter itself securely from all that prey uponher. Advance as quickly as we may, there is a limit to our speed, andthe future being all unknown we scarcely like to take it at a plunge. Nevertheless, these social reformers do a good work--their schemes areat least suggestive, and moreover they point out signs of the times. They show us unmistakably that with our advance there is a tendency tobecome more and more selfish and to regard with less true charity thecondition of the weak. One social reformer will say that there will notbe any suffering because therapeutics will have overtaken every diseasethat the flesh is heir to, or better still, that some new discovery willhave made it possible to heal all sicknesses without the tedious work ofsurgeons and nurses. Healing will become a pastime like table-turning. Neither will there be any criminals because the whole social state willbe so happy, contented, and knit together that inducement to crime willcease. Others will treat the criminal "scientifically, " ensuring reformsat the rate of 100 per cent. With lightning-like rapidity. Which allpractically amounts to this, that the problem concerning the future ofthe weak is shelved. To study it deeply would spoil our best theoriesand therefore it must be got rid of. Dr Chapple has done nothing morethan shelve it, for as we have seen his remedy is both practically andmorally impossible. Like all others it betrays the selfish spirit. Likethem it regards the weak as if they were nothing less than anintolerable incubus on society, a grit in its bearings. It may be thatour social advancement will account for this. In old time whencommunities were small and fixed, the burden of nursing the helplessnecessarily fell upon those who were immediately related by ties ofblood or neighbourhood, but now the many changes in the method of livingand treatment, has made this to a large extent impossible. Institutionshave everywhere sprung up, and it is invariably to the advantage of oursick and afflicted that we should commit them to these institutions, which practice has engendered the belief that all our social obligationscan be discharged by monetary payment. Not for one moment need weentertain the idea that this belief will ever become a dominating one. Charitable influences are more powerful. Nor must we charge the authorsof selfish systems with being as uncharitable as their systems. Theygive expression to a fairly strong and somewhat universal sentiment, asentiment which we would perhaps disown at once upon its being unmaskedand which many refuse to obey upon its appeal to them to act inaccordance with its principles. This indicates that society sees many ofits assailants in but a half-light. It observes neither their malice norstrength but only a dark ugly form which irritates us and which we wouldif we could banish by an act of will. 

This being impossible we must meet our assailants in a clearer light anddestroy them. How can this be done, since it would mean the destructionof evil and the powers of evil? Then it cannot be done, but since evilfeeds itself upon its victims we can greatly diminish its power andinfluence by rescuing all who fall within its grasp. Many we know wecannot rescue for there are certain types of disease mental and bodilywhich defy our skill and some of all types of moral disease also defyour effort. Still it would be better to say that we do not rescue them, than that we cannot, for what was incurable yesterday is curable to-day, and the most deadly diseases are giving clear evidence that their powersto baffle science are fast giving out. That they will give out, scientific men confidently hope. Neither is this hope groundless forpast success warrant it and there again point to another assurance, almost a guarantee. The miracles of healing which Our Lord wrought werenot only to confer relief upon the suffering, not only to give evidenceof His Divinity, but also to promise the triumph which would reward theefforts of man seeking to assist his afflicted brother. We will neverheal by a word, neither will we raise the dead, for in these works ofmight we have peculiar evidence of the Divine Providence; but Christ'smiracles seem to promise that He, the Light of the World, will yet grantthe fullness of that illumination by which the works of healing aredone. 

The sick, it is true, receive greater compassion from their fellowmenthan the abnormal, the insane and the criminal. But these latter alsodemand our consideration if for no other reason than that they menacesociety. To exterminate them is impossible. A persecution with that endwould defeat itself, and the persecutors would become morally infinitelyworse than the persecuted. 

Secondly: their consideration is demanded from the fact that society hasproduced the evil plight of very many of them. In the great advance, they have fallen and been trampled on. Their right to fall may bedenied, but whose right was it to trample on them? To declare it to havebeen inevitable that they should be trampled on, simply excuses guiltbut not obligation. And the obligation is to make reparation as far aspossible. 

Thirdly: because what should be a valuable asset to society, contributing substantially to her strength, becomes a hostile powerweakening her and hindering her progress. Any of these threeconsiderations received separately is sufficient to convince us of ourobligations to this uglier section of the weak, when combined theirforce is very great. But when we speak to them of peace do they not makethem ready to battle? No, their case is not so hopeless as that. Davidlived under the Mosaic Dispensation, and Moses could give but the lawwhereas Christ has given His Life. Our method will determine everything. Good advice, good books, good laws will do but little; good work willaccomplish all. "The greatest good of the greatest number" is a falseideal and absolutely unworthy either of our charity or our science. "Theultimate good of all" is the end society is destined to accomplish, andanything less is too little for her, anything more is impossible even toconceive. 

In working towards this ideal, which we cannot describe with greaterdefiniteness, we are bound to recognise that GOODNESS is oursafe and only guide. The general direction of our advance in the past wecan easily trace, but the purpose of the devious paths through which wewere led is too difficult to understand. Our present puzzles us, ourfuture sometimes appals us. Some rush ahead to see what lies before usand come back injured and pass away as pessimists, others hesitate toadvance at all. We cannot outstrip our guiding pillar of light; butfollowing it we are safe to advance. And in following, one of the firstconvictions that comes home to us is that we must allow no waste, neither in the lives of others nor in the energies of ourselves. Withthis conviction soon comes the startling fact that the energies we areallowing to waste are identically those which were given to us to savethe lives of others which are wasting. A wonderful independence existsamong us. The social system is bound together by ties of nature, and notmerely by those of commerce or benefit. Man is social, not merelygregarious. He enters into the life of his fellow-man and establishesrelations which we are bound to call spiritual. Through the media ofthese relations, influences traverse which are of the most profound weknow. These relations when established compel us to acknowledge ourduties to one another and give us a delight in discharging them. Thisdelight in turn becomes the power, which opens the eyes to therealization of the great principle of self-sacrifice. Egoism andaltruism are not to be mutually exclusive. To seek our own happiness isnot to be indifferent to the happiness of society. For what ishappiness? not pleasure, but self-realization, and we cannot realiseself without realising society. 

This interdependence which exists between man and man, and which makesit possible for us to influence one another so powerfully for good orfor evil, points out to us that the true aim of every man, namely, tounite his work with that of his fellow-man in a grand co-operativeundertaking for the advancement and betterment of society regarded as awhole and with regard for its units. We cannot realise self if engagedin competition man against man in order to satisfy private ambition. Ourobject should be to unite and our hostility be provoked, not against oneanother, weak or strong, but against the powers which attack usindividually and collectively. 

Necessity then lays the obligation upon us to give our first attentionto the rescue of the weak. It was the recognition of this obligationwhich sent the Christian-Maidens into the suburbs of Rome seeking theexposed offspring of unnatural parents. To say that they would have beenbetter dead, is to speak with that facility which requires neithermental nor moral perception. 

It is the recognition, in part, of this obligation which accounts forhospitals, asylums and other charitable institutions. Hence also weendeavour to shelter those born deficient in mental or moral power. DrChapple seems to think that the result of all this is that we have madea pretty mess of society. He says, of these weaklings, that Nature hasdecreed that they should die. A most unscientific statement. Are thesecharitable efforts to be regarded as profane interference with thesacred decrees of Nature? Nature's decrees are inviolate and none candisturb them. Because these weak, if left unaided, would perish, is thatto say that Nature has decreed that they should die? If so, we must sayof a man, stricken with typhoid fever, that Nature has decreed that heshould die, and that any effort to save him would be but a profaneinterference on our part with Nature. 

 What does Nature say of these that they do not live, they cannot live, or they must not live?

History has shown that in the past they do not live. 

But in order to discover the decree of Nature we must make a full andexhaustive enquiry into the possibilities which exist under the laws ofNature. So far as this enquiry has advanced it has been made quite clearthat the charitable effort of man will recover many that would otherwiseperish. The whole science of therapeutics is based upon this discovery. 

Dr Chapple says of defectives that they do live but that they must not. Two arguments he brings forward. The first is that Nature has decreedthat they should not. This must be a secret communication, for it is notuniversal knowledge, and the operation of Nature's laws certainlyappears to contradict it. The second argument is that they are a burden. The burden analysed amounts to this:--

 (a). They are a misery to themselves. (b). They are too costly. (c). They hinder the progress of society. (d). They threaten to overwhelm society. 

(a). Who can tell whether the weak are absolutely a misery tothemselves. Pain is a mystery which cannot be solved, although to thesuffering its benefits are well known. If they would be better out ofthe way might they not be left to decide that matter for themselves?They, knowing best, cry to us for help. If we were merely gregariouscreatures like wolves or sharks we would tear or destroy them in theirmisery; but as social beings we are bound to answer their cry. To cryfor help is instinctive with them, and to respond to the cry isinstinctive with us. Surely this is the voice of Nature and this is thedecree of Nature. 

(b). If this argument be admitted then we are bound to declare that theone aim of both society and individual is to amass wealth. The idea istoo sordid for further consideration. 

(c). So far from hindering the social progress they most powerfullyassist it. The mere bearing of one another's burdens has the mostrefining and deepening influence upon character. It is most active increating and establishing our relations one with another. Compassion forthe suffering creates a tie between them and us. The intention to helprequires our co-operation with others, and so the bond extends unitingfirst individuals then groups and then the whole of society. Nor must weforget the immense advance in surgery and medicine which is due entirelyto the consideration of the lot of the apparently hopeless. Had theseeven been allowed to perish we should still have needed our surgeons andphysicians in a well equipped society, if only to teach us how toprevent seizure by dangerous complaints. 

A short time ago many died from ailments which surgery can to-day curewith but very little suffering on the part of the patient. Is not this asubstantial gain which the bearing of the burden of the weak has broughtto man? To mention other triumphs is but to enlarge. If therefore Naturehas spoken there can be no doubt that it was to give a promise that shewould reward diligent research by revealing the cure of all the ills ourflesh inherits. Thus assured, scientific men are most zealously studyingthe most deadly and most obstinate diseases. Against plague, smallpox, and consumption they can at least give us an effective protection, andalmost hourly we expect to hear the shout of triumph accompanying theannouncement that the victory over cancer has been gained. When strickenwith these diseases we immediately fall into the ranks of the unfit; butwe will thank society for having borne its burden when the healing artis brought to such an excellence that, when so stricken, we may soon berestored to the ranks of the fit. The benefit which the past confersupon us declares imperatively our obligation to the future. 

(d). Do they threaten to overwhelm? The power of disease is beingovercome, and therefore the number of the diseased is being lessened. Bybeing cured, instead of dying, these increase the proportion of thestrong to the weak. The obstinacy of certain hereditary diseases butasserts the necessity of prosecuting study more enthusiastically. 

But if the strong limit their increase they cannot demand thatexterminating methods should be applied to the weak in order to restorethe proportion which they, the strong, have thus by their selfishnessdisturbed. Nature gives adequate protection so far as numerical increaseis concerned, and no scientific man will dare to state that thisprotection may be disregarded and another demanded. 

The Government of India has been charged with pursuing a suicidal policyin safeguarding the natives against plague and smallpox and inpreventing human sacrifice. Their numbers will increase, food supplieswill give out, or, worst of all, they may become so powerful as to wrestthe supremacy from the European. Charity, however, demands that thesemeasures shall be taken, and the terrors of the future are at besthypothetical. This is but another case in which consideration for theunknown future is apt to hinder us in the discharge of our known dutiesto the present. History assures us that the guarantee of the future liesin the fulfilment of these duties. The height of absurdity is reachedwhen the attempt is made to establish the proportions of the future. Such efforts defy man. 

The burden of the weak is the burden of the strong, and in the bearingof it is brought into view the grand and true ideal of society--the goodof all. 

Man is endowed with natural powers for assisting his weaker brother, and, above all these powers he has, through supplication the means ofengaging the Divine Influence, which simply defies all calculationagainst the possibility of reform or recovery. 

Where charitable effort in the past has not succeeded it is because ithas not gone far enough. Building institutions is sometimes due to acraze and not charity. Thus evils are sometimes accentuated and notmitigated. Such failures must spur to redoubled effort. Hope was neverlarger than at present. 

Chapter VII. 

THE NEW PENOLOGY. 

The old method of dealing with criminals was based entirely upon adoctrine of vengeance. The criminal was regarded as being in every way anormal man, a man who deliberately chose to be a criminal. Thepossibility of a criminal's moral sense being defective, of his notbeing able to bring his actions under the control of his will, or ofsome other sad handicap existing, was never contemplated. His crime waslooked upon as a desperate act, for the committal of which he wasabsolutely without any excuse. The consequence was that an elaboratesystem of torture was devised in order to deal with him. Readers who arefamiliar with such books as Marcus Clark's "For the term of his naturallife, " and Charles Reade's "It is never too late to mend, " will requireno further description of the horrors of "the vengeance system" whichwas supposed to be the only rational method of dealing with criminals inthe days of the convict settlements. 

Since then, popular vengeance has considerably relaxed and the devisingof painful forms of punishment has become almost a lost art. Thenew-born science, with its first powers of articulation, loudly repeatthe words of Revelation, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith theLord. " A system of vengeance instituted by man against man isimpossible. As has been stated in a previous chapter, the new penologyrepudiates all such systems. The amount of pain which an individual isto be called upon to suffer may well be left to the higher tribunal. Theobvious duty of man to his fellow-man who is depraved, is to endeavourto recover him. There is no satisfaction in punishing him, but there isevery satisfaction in reforming him. 

The new penology covers the investigation and study of everycircumstance surrounding the criminal as such. No circumstance is sotrifling as to be passed by, every detail is carefully studied with theobject of discovering what the criminal is and how he came to be such, what are his possibilities, and by what methods those possibilities maybe reached. 

Maconochie ventured upon the bold assumption that the criminal was ahuman being, and this assumption proved to be justified. In 1840 he wassent to Norfolk Island to take charge of 1400 double-convicted felonsthere. He describes them in these words:--"For the merest trifle theywere flogged, ironed or confined in gaol for days on bread and water. The offences most severely punished were chiefly conventional; thoseagainst morals being little regarded, compared with those againstunreasonable discipline. Thus the horrid vices with acts of brutalviolence, or of dexterity in theft and robbery, were detailed to me bythe officers with little direct censure, and rather as anecdotescalculated to astonish and amuse a new-comer. While the possession of apipe, a newspaper, a little tea, etc. , or the omission of some mark ofrespect, a saucy look or word, or even an imputation of sullenness, weredeemed unpardonable offences. They were fed more like hogs than likemen; neither knives, forks, nor hardly any other conveniences wereallowed at tables. They tore their food with their fingers and teeth, and drank out of water buckets. The men's countenances reflectedfaithfully this description of treatment. A more demoniacal lookingassemblage could not be imagined; and nearly the most formidable sight Iever beheld was the sea of faces upturned to me when I first addressedthem. Yet three years after, I had the satisfaction of hearing SirGeorge Gipps ask me what I had done to make the men look so well?--hehad seldom seen a better looking set. "

Maconochie had invented the mark system (the principle of theindeterminate system) and made the prisoners' liberation depend upontheir conduct and character and not upon the original offence. Maconochie's experience led him to write in after years to a friend, "ifyou would try a social-moral one (prison system) you would soon getimportant results. If our punishments were first of all madeREFORMATORY, and generally successful in this object theprejudices of society against the early criminal would abate. " Inspiredwith this hope of reforming the criminal and restoring him to societyas a useful member, philanthropists began the exhaustive study of thecriminal. In prisons where the value of this science is recognized thecriminal upon his entry is subject to a most thorough examination, everyitem of his family history is carefully enquired into. Informationconcerning the occupation, education, health and character of all whoare nearly related to him is obtained, as also the moral and economicconditions of his home life, and the character of his associates. Hehimself is studied for the existence or traces of disease; forabnormalities, arrested or exaggerated physical and mental development. The strength of his various muscles, the vitality of his organs, hismental and nervous capacity, and his moral susceptibility are allestimated. His powers of self-control are determined. His disposition iscarefully studied. His opportunities in life, his educationaladvantages, his early career, the nature of the crime, the immediateinfluencing circumstances, as provocation, hunger, cold, atmosphericdisturbances are all noted. 

Such is a brief outline of the examination, the object of which is todiscover as far as possible the real cause which led to the crime, what, if any, were the social, physical, psychical and provocative elementscontributing to the cause; what their value; and what are the mostpromising lines upon which the criminal's reform may be directed. He isby no means regarded as a passive product of forces over which he has nocontrol, nor his crime as the consequence of himself. It is essentialto the success of all reformatory discipline that moral responsibilitymust be recognised and observed. In fact it may be said, thatreformation is complete when moral responsibility, insisted upon by thediscipline, becomes at last acknowledged by the man. 

Perhaps it may be thought that it is not possible to conduct such astudy with anything like accurate results, and that the greater part ofit would be mere guess work, as e. G. The determining the capacity ofa man's nervous system or his degree of moral susceptibility. This isquite a mistake. There is nothing whatever of a speculative quality inthe results advanced by criminologists. Their methods are exact andcompare equally with those for the investigation of other phenomena. 

It is not claimed that the absolute or the relative value of the datacollected is as yet determined, nor yet that any one investigation hasbeen exhausted; but this much can be claimed, that the results obtainedare of high practical worth and justify the assurance that the solutionof the problem concerning the criminal will soon be reached. 

Chapter VIII. 

THE PREVENTION OF CRIME. 

The result of Criminological studies has indicated most clearly that nomeasures for the prevention or repression of crime will ever be adequatewhich are not based upon a scientific system of education. Whatever thissystem may prove to be, it must have one distinct aim, and that is totrain all its members to love, and to work for, the social state. Thisaim must be accomplished most thoroughly no matter what the cost may be. 

The decreasing birth-rate points to other conclusions than the obviousone that a large number of persons must be using preventive means. Itpoints to a widespread selfishness which regards children as anintolerable burden, as in fact nothing less than a grievous misfortune. It is obvious that where children are so regarded a blight has fallenupon the domestic life. Home cannot be the brightest spot on earth tothem; neither can the father and mother be their sympathetic guides, counsellors, and protectors. Nor can those children be studied (by thosewho alone have the special faculty for studying them) in order thattheir secret aims and ambitions and the difficulties which obstructthese aims and ambitions, may be understood. 

It follows then that from parental selfishness a great number (and closeobservation leads one to believe that by far the greater proportion) ofthe children of this generation and in this colony, are growing up withless care and attention being bestowed upon them than what their parentsare prepared to bestow upon even their very horses or their dogs. Thisfactor of parental selfishness cannot be ignored either academically orpractically. It must in some way be overcome, or at least its influencefor harm must be considerably reduced. 

It would be interesting to discover how far this parental selfishnesswas a deviation from true parental pride. Possibly it may not be so verygreat as the vast difference in results may lead us to suppose, and ifthis be so the reorganisation of the child's educational system will notbe insuperably difficult. 

In many homes where there are more than two or three children, there isa total lack of domestic sympathy and pride. The children are not taughtto love one another nor to understand and help one another. Adultinfluence is very seldom brought to bear upon them, and, worst of all, parental influence is either wanting, deficient or injurious. Whatchildren suffer from this want in the development in their natures mustof necessity be, and it unquestionably is, sufficient to handicap themthroughout their whole life. Parents profess that they have done theirbest with this or that child and that they have failed, but the faultlargely lies in the parents undertaking the task with every expectationof failure, and the chief characteristics noticed by the child have beenthe parental irritability, impatience and incompetence. Having estimatedthese the child then knows exactly how to gain its own ends and hassufficient determination to persevere until it does. A certain amount ofharsh treatment will suffice, until the child is old enough to rebel, inorder to keep it in check, or, as is just as often the case, the childmay be allowed to have its own way entirely. Under such circumstances itis not a matter of great wonderment that the child should be looked uponas a burden to be fed, clothed, and tolerated until it is old enough to"do something" for itself. 

But our school system is also at fault, for by it our children arecrammed with an amount of information the whole, or even the greaterpart, of which very few of them will ever use. Imagine the object, ifone can, of spending the precious hours of a child's educational life inteaching it the names of every dozen or so of the different towns ofeach county in the United Kingdom, and at the same time entirelyneglecting its moral training and giving very little attention to thephysical. 

If a child be bright he has every consideration from his teachers andreceives from his companions the opprobious nickname of "Teacher's Pet. "He gains a reward, perhaps a medal, and at the annual distribution ofprizes the speech-makers point to the coming legislators and successfulmen of business in a manner which conveys to this scholar the idea thatthe one thing to live for is to gain an exalted position in the world. This would not be so bad in itself, were it not that the love for honestlabour is not inculcated at the same time, and consequently the childrenimagine that they are going to be pitchforked into prominence. As anevidence, witness the speculative spirit so universal among our youth. They hope to make their way in life simply by "striking it lucky. "Personally I have spoken to a large number of boys about the ages offrom fourteen to sixteen years and I have never yet been able to find aboy who could tell me definitely what he would like to be. His fatherlooks about for something for him to do without any knowledge of theboy's possibility of greatest success lying in one well markeddirection. The boy remains in a billet only so long as he fails to getanother with a greater wage attached to it, and when perhaps twentyyears of age are reached he is conscious of where the true lines of hisdestiny lie; but it is then too late for him to begin the necessaryeducation, and the consequence is that his life loses its inspiration. Now it is quite possible that if our school system were so reorganisedthat parents saw as a result that their children developed a true lovefor labour and worked with definite purpose, that they would take a moreintense pride in them and enter more sympathetically into their laboursand ambitions. The education of the child would thus be brought to reactupon the parent and tend immediately to reorganise the domestic lifeand bring it closer to the Hebrew conception, which conception whenrealised would most thoroughly solve the problem of the moralregeneration of the race. It is impossible for the State to have tocommence to educate the parent except by reactionary methods and bycompelling the observance of all legitimate obligations. That ourpresent school system does not react favourably upon the parent must beobvious from what has already been said. In the past when only thefortunate few were able to secure the advantages of a good education, they, for the most part, recognised the greatness of their opportunityand prosecuted their studies with zeal. But to-day, with an universaleducational system the value of these opportunities is, by the child andsometimes by the parent, very much lost sight of. The child needs now astimulant, something to arouse and sustain his interest in his work. Heshould learn to regard his school work with pleasure and his home withaffection. 

The three principal standpoints from which education is regardedare:--(a) the utilitarian, (b) the disciplinarian, and (c) a compromisebetween the two. 

The Utilitarians consider that an educational system should store themind of the child with such knowledge only as shall be of direct valueto it in its after life. The disciplinarians consider that a child'seducation should content itself with so developing the faculties thatwhen matured they may be adequate for such mental tasks as the afterlife or vocation may provide. The middle course is held by those whoendeavour to train the faculties of the child in the manner prescribedby the disciplinarians, but in so doing, they employ the mind uponexercises, the accomplishment of which, is of immediate and permanentvalue. 

The education system in New Zealand is constructed upon the utilitarianbasis. The children's minds are crammed with knowledge--USEFULknowledge let it be called--and they are encouraged to be diligentbecause of the great benefit this knowledge will be to them when theybecome men and women--which development the child of eight expects willbe attained sometime before the end of the world, and will then come bychance. The reward of the child's labour is thrown into the far distantfuture, and is so entirely lost sight of as an inspiring factor, thatartificial rewards have to be provided and the child ponders over hislessons in the hope of winning one of Ballantyne's or Henty's "Books forBoys. "

Now, the facts of a child's life demonstrate conclusively that the childis capable of having all its interests absorbed in its work. Thediligence with which it will build up a doll's house out of a soap box, a jam tin, a few stones and any odds and ends that it can lay its handson, is sufficient evidence of this. The child loves to make things foritself, and its affection for the rude creations of its own mind is fargreater than that for its most gorgeous and expensive toys. Upon therecognition of these facts, the kindergarten system is based. 

In Sweden a very successful attempt has been made to construct the wholeof the primary system upon this basis, and for this purpose Sloyd hasbeen introduced into the schools. Certain Sloyd exercises have madetheir appearance in our New Zealand schools and have met with somewhatsevere criticism, the whole system being condemned as being idealtheoretically, but valueless practically. It took many years before theSwedish system was perfected, and it should follow obviously that a verypartial experiment, such as the colonial one has been, gives no idea ofwhat value the complete system may achieve. 

By Sloyd, we understand a system of educational hand-work. The childrenare employed upon various kinds of hand craft with the object ofdeveloping their mental, moral, and physical powers. The object isNOT to make artisans of the children, although undoubtedlythose children who afterwards become tradesmen find that the educationalprinciples of their trade has already been grasped by the intellect, butthe same will apply to those entering any legitimate vocation withoutexception. 

Although there are many different kinds of Sloyd, woodwork has beendiscovered to be the most useful, and it alone survives the severe testsimposed. A glance at the accompanying table will explain what is meant. 

COMPARATIVE TABLE OF DIFFERENT KINDS OF SLOYD. 

Key:A - Does it accord with children's capability?B - Does it excite and sustain interest?C - Are the objects made useful?D - Does it give a respect for rough work?E - Does it train in order and exactness?F - Does it allow cleanliness and neatness?G - Does it cultivate the sense of form?H - Is it beneficial from an hygienic point of view?I - Does it allow methodical arrangement?J - Does it teach dexterity of hand?------------------+--------+--------+---------+--------+-----------+Branches of Sloyd. | A | B | C | D | E |------------------+--------+--------+---------+--------+-----------+ | | | | | |Simple Metal Work |Yes & No|Yes |Yes |Yes |Yes & no |Smith's Work |No |Hardly |Tolerably|Yes |No |Basket Making |No |Hardly |Tolerably|Yes |No |Straw Plaiting |Yes |Yes? |Yes |Yes & no|Yes |Brush Making |No? |Yes?? |Yes |Yes? |Tolerably |House Painting |No |No |Yes & no |Yes |No |Fretwork |Yes? |No & yes|No & yes |No |Yes | | | | Yes | | |Bookbinding |No |No & yes|Tolerably|Hardly |Tolerably | | | | | | Yes |Card-board Work |Yes & no|Yes? |Yes |No |very high |Sloyd Carpentry |Yes |Yes |Yes |Yes? |Yes | | | | | |partly (not|Turnery |No |Yes |Yes? |Hardly |quite No) |Carving in Wood |Yes? |Yes & no|Yes & no |No |Yes |Clay Modelling |Yes |Yes |No |No |Yes & no |------------------+--------+--------+---------+--------+-----------+ From "Theory of Sloyd, " Salomon. 

Table continued

------------------+---------+--------+--------+--------+---------Branches of Sloyd. | F | G | H | I | J------------------+---------+--------+--------+--------+--------- |Tolerably| | | |Simple Metal Work | No |Yes |Yes? |Yes |YesSmith's Work |No |No? |Yes & no|Perhaps |NoBasket Making |Yes? |No |No |No |NoStraw Plaiting |No & yes |No? |No |Yes |NoBrush Making |Yes |No |No |No |NoHouse Painting |No |No |No |No |NoFretwork |Yes |No & yes|No |No & yes|No | | | | |Bookbinding |Yes? |No |No? |Perhaps |Tolerably | | | | |Card-board Work |Yes |Yes? |No |Yes |No?Sloyd Carpentry |Yes |Yes |Yes? |Yes |Yes | | | | |Turnery |Yes? |Yes |No |No |NoCarving in Wood |Yes |Yes & no|No |Yes |NoClay Modelling |No |Yes |No |Yes |No------------------+---------+--------+--------+--------+---------

The objects of Sloyd are:--(a) to instil a taste for, and love of, labour in general. 

NOTE. --(For this analysis of the Sloyd system the author hasbased his study upon Herr Salomon's works "The theory of educationalSloyd" and "The Teacher's hand book of Sloyd. ")

Children love to make things for themselves and prize their own workmuch more than ready made articles. The educator should follow Nature'slead and satisfy this craving. By a skilful direction of the child'sinterest a love for labour in general is instilled, and rewards arefound to be unnecessary, the children being only too eager to achieve. To sustain their interest in the work they are engaged upon must beuseful from THEIR OWN STANDPOINT. The work should not bepreceded by fatiguing exercises, but the first cut should be a stroketowards the accomplishment of the desired end. The exercise must affordvariety. The entire work of the exercise must be within their power andnot requiring the aid of the teacher to "finish it off. " It must be realwork and not a pretence; and the objects should become the property ofthe children. To give children intricate joints to cut is of no realvalue. The child has no genuine interest in what are simply the parts ofan exercise, it must make something complete and useful in itself. Tomake a garden stick accurate according to model is of more value than tomake the most intricate joint. One may say that the child who could dothe one could do the other, but that is not the point, for the objectis not merely to gain manual dexterity but to develop all the facultiesof a child, and this is what the complete exercise achieves and in whatthe partial exercise absolutely fails. 

(b) To instil respect for rough, honest, bodily labour, which isachieved by the introduction of the work into schools of all grades sothat ALL classes of the community may engage upon it, and by theteachers taking pride in it themselves, and by their intelligentteaching of it to their classes. 

(c) To develop independence and self-reliance. The child requiresindividual attention, the teacher must not tell too much, the childshould endeavour as far as possible to discover by experiment the bestmethods for holding and manipulating tools, and also to be allowed asmuch free play as possible for its judgment. 

(d) To train in habits of order, exactness, cleanliness, and neatness. 

Which are acquired by keeping the models well within the children'srange of ability, demanding that the work shall always be done in anorderly manner and with the greatest measure of exactness that the childis capable of. How far cleanliness and neatness may be instilled isapparent from the nature of the work. 

(e) To train the eye, and the sense of form. To cultivate dexterity ofhand and develop touch. 

The models are of two kinds:--rectilinear and curvilinear. The formerare tested by the square, the rule and the compasses, but the accuracyof the latter depends upon the eye, the sense of form and that of touch. This training enables the child to distinguish between good and bad workand to put a right value upon the former, to understand the right use ofornament, and also cultivates the æsthetic taste upon classic lines. Anenormous number of jerry built articles are sold, which the publicreadily buy simply on account of their ornamental appearance. If theability to distinguish between good and bad work were more universal itwould go far towards improving trade morality. 

(f) To cultivate habits of attention, interest, etc. The success of thework requires that the mind shall be closely concentrated upon it. Thenature of the work excites the interest of the child, and under carefuldirection this interest is sustained throughout. A genius has beendescribed as a man capable of taking pains--a master of detail. Sloyd iseminently suited for concentrating the attention upon the details ofwork and for training the Sloyder to be thorough and never content with"making a thing do. "

The desire of the child to finish the work and to finish it well, overrides any element of impatience or irritability that may be in hischaracter, and in a natural way introduces the elements of patience andperseverance in his work. These qualities are not confined to his Sloydwork but extend throughout his character, so that he realises that thework of life all contributes to some definite aim. 

(g) Uniform development of the physical powers. Statistics collectedfrom any country show that many forms of disease before unknown amongthe young, are now very prevalent among the children taught in theschools. These diseases are attributed to the many hours during whichchildren are required to sit and to the bad positions they assume duringthose hours. Skoliosis--curvature of the spine--a serious disease, as itproduces displacement of the internal organs, nose bleeding, ænemia, chlorosis, nervous irritation, loss of appetite, headache, and myopia, are diseases which are declared by experts to accompany the presentsystem of education. 

Sloyd when properly taught tends to develop the frame according to thenormal standard. It may not be as good as gymnastics in this direction:but it has this advantage that it trains the pupil to engage in his workin such a manner as not to hinder nor stunt the development of his body, and not to cramp the vital organs in such a manner as to interfere withthe discharge of their functions. The pupils are taught to use bothhands and to develop both sides of the body. The following chart fromHerr Salomon's work will show to what degree the body may develop on alopsided manner when one side only is used in performing work. The chartshows the sectional measurement of the chest of a boy of thirteen yearsof age who for three years had worked at a bench using the right sideonly. 

The foregoing brief analysis may show the ends which Sloyd is destinedto accomplish, and upon the value of those ends no explanation isrequired. Habits of industry, patience and perseverance are inculcated. The child learns to know his own power and how best to use it. Histastes are cultivated and he learns to love work and understand the truedignity of labour. Such results are not the results of the copy book butthey are permanently impressed upon the child's character. That such aneducation must react upon the parent is obvious. The child's life isfull of aim and he does everything with a purpose, and in such a childonly the most depraved parent will fail to take interest, and childrenhave this characteristic, that they force their knowledge upon thenotice of their parents whenever they can. The boy who begins to learnhouse painting soon expresses the wish to paint his own home; ifcarpentry, he wishes to build a shed; if joinery, he wishes to make atable; and how often one notices a home where tidiness and order are dueto the educated child, and where taste in furnishing is accounted for bythe daughter's cultivated æsthetic taste. Children then, so trained asthe Sloyd system provides, may contribute enormously to the happinessand brightness of the home life. Instead of regarding them as a burdentheir parents will behold them with delight and pride, and instead oflooking out for "something for them to do, " indifferent whether it bedriving a cart, selling in a shop, or clerking in a lawyer's office, they will find that the child himself has a definite idea of where hisafter course should lie, and they will do their utmost towards assistinghim to follow it. 

[Illustration: _To perceive the amount of distortion, fold the paperalong the axis of the diagram, and hold it between the eye and thelight. _

_From "Theory of Sloyd"_--SALOMON. ]

It cannot be supposed that Sloyd will succeed in the midst ofincongruous surroundings. To train the eye to a sense of the beautifulin a dirty schoolhouse is somewhat difficult. The glorious handiwork ofGod will not be taught in the playground which, with its mudholes, ruts, and filth, more resembles a cattle yard than anything else. A school andits grounds must at least show that the authorities themselves reallyappreciate the lessons they are endeavouring to have instilled into theminds of their scholars. So, too, a similar system must underlie themethod of teaching the ordinary lessons at the school desk. How manychildren will say "I love history but I detest dates"? What value arethe dates? Let history be taught as Fitchett teaches it in his "Deedsthat won the Empire" and the end will be accomplished, patriotism willbe inspired, and the nation loved. Dates, names of deeds, causes of war, international policies may easily be introduced incidentally. Letgeography be taught as Fraser teaches it in his "Real Siberia" or SavageLandor in his "In the Forbidden Land" and the map will be studied withinterest and the subject never forgotten. Let the notation be dispensedwith until the child understands the problem or theorem and Euclid willbecome fascinating. 

Without a shadow of doubt the best preventive of crime is an universalsystem of education so designed that the whole interest of the child isabsorbed in its work. An absolute solution of the whole problemundoubtedly requires that the religious education of the child be alsoundertaken and effectively carried out. The question of the religiouseducation of the young is one which is exciting attention throughout thewhole of the English speaking world. There are those who advocate thatinstruction in the Bible lessons should be given by teachers duringschool hours to the scholars attending the Government schools, and thereare those who vigorously oppose such a course. 

The advocates base their arguments upon their belief that no system ofeducation which ignores religious teaching can be effective or complete. Their opponents declare that it is unjust to call upon the teachers of asecular education to give instruction in religion, or for the State to, in any way, subsidise the various religious denominations or tosupplement their efforts in this particular direction. Both sidespetition the Government and both sides prepare the people for a possiblereferendum upon the question. 

The State cannot be expected to regard the matter from other than apurely utilitarian standpoint. "Will it make the people bettercitizens?" it enquires. "Will it lesson crime and promote honesty, thrift and loyalty?" These questions still remain unanswered, and in themidst of so much rationalistic teaching, and especially with theexample of the noble lives of many rationalists before it, the Statebelieves that there is room for much difference of opinion, andtherefore it cannot move in the matter. The advocates of religiouseducation seem to take it for granted that their beliefs areunassailable and that they are simply fighting against the powers ofDarkness: but they forget that they are doing very little to bringothers to hold the same convictions as themselves. It should not be adifficult task to answer to the utilitarian position with an emphaticaffirmative and to bring conclusive evidence to support thataffirmative. Where, it may be asked, are to be found the men who areleaders in thought and action who have, without any religious influencewhatever, risen from the depths of misery, crime and filth? Where are tobe found the families now living in honesty and virtue, though still inpoverty, families in the midst of which every form of wickedness wasonce to be seen, who owe nothing to religious influence? The rationalistmay claim that when his educational theories are adopted and put intopractice all dens of misery and vice will disappear, but he cannotsupport his statement with convincing proofs. The teacher of religion isinfinitely better off. While he strenuously supports the adoption ofbetter and larger educational effort, he insists that, in order to gainthe active co-operation of those on behalf of whom it is to be employed, religious influences must be brought to bear, and for the support of hisstatement he need only say "open your eyes and look around you. "

The influence of religion in regaining criminals cannot be gainsaid byany, and the United States Educational Report for 1897-98 declares thatit is most important for the inculcation of sound morality, thatchildren should, from a very early age, be brought under the influenceof good religious teaching. 

When the State is convinced that religious education is an absolutenecessity, it will approach the question of ways and means with adetermination that a satisfactory solution must be arrived at, and whatit will then demand is not so much an emasculated Bible as the bringingto bear upon the children of the vital regenerative influences ofreligion. 

Chapter IX. 

SOME AMERICAN EXPERIMENTS:--

THE PROBATION SYSTEM. 

THE ELMIRA SYSTEM. 

=The Probation System. =--In several of the States of America an attempthas been made to devise a substitute for imprisonment in the cases ofpersons convicted for minor offences. 

The State of Massachusets was the first to take the lead by initiating asomewhat elaborate system of probation. 

Briefly described, it is an attempt to reform a prisonerOUTSIDE. 

Imprisonment for minor offences has had many bad features and should, where possible, be avoided. Firstly, there is the stigma that attachesto every man who has worn the broad-arrow. Secondly, there is the lossof self-respect which, together with the contaminating influencesexisting in a prison, often convert the minor offender into the hardenedcriminal. Thirdly, there are the hardships that the wife and family arecalled upon to endure while the bread-winner is in gaol and not earningwages. 

The Probation System seeks to overcome all these difficulties. Insteadof sentencing an offender to a period of imprisonment, the judgeconfides him to the care of the probation officer for a periodco-terminous with that which he would otherwise have had to spend inprison. The minimum period of this sentence is six months, and theaverage about twelve months. 

In the cases of female offenders and of youths under the age of 18 yearsthe probation officer is usually a woman; for adult males, a man acts asofficer. 

The officers are invested with very considerable authority. It is theirduty to keep the very closest watch over their wards and to reportcontinually upon their behaviour. They frequently visit the homes and dotheir utmost to become acquainted with the conditions of the home andindustrial life under which their wards live. The visits are so arrangedthat they by no means imply an official errand, the officers endeavourto discover the weaknesses of their wards and the temptations to whichthey are most likely to succumb, and as far as possible to remove themout of the reach of these temptations or to strengthen them againsttheir power. Some officers provide for meetings to be held for thosecommitted to their charge. Especially is this the case with those whohave the charge over youthful offenders. At such meetings games, edifying entertainment and instruction are provided. It is also quitecompetent for an officer to receive the wages of a probationer. In thesecases, he will give the man's wife a sufficient sum to meet the ordinaryhousehold expenditure, allow him enough for his personal expenses, andretain a small sum to be returned when the period of probation hasexpired. This course is invariably pursued in the case of drunkards. Adrunkard may, upon the authority of the probation officer, be forbiddento enter a public-house or to enter it during certain hours only, and hemay also be obliged to remain at home after a certain hour. In fact, theprobation officer may make almost any such rules that he thinks best tobe observed by his ward, and there is always the threat of being sent toprison to discharge his sentence, if he should refuse to behave properlywhen under probation. 

To have an officer constantly watching over a man may affix a certainstigma to the man, but even so, it is not indelible nor nearly so greatas that which the prison leaves behind it. To make this disadvantage assmall as possible, the officers wear no uniform and, within theirprescribed area, work among the convicted and unconvicted alike. 

The type of officer required is not easily found. Of humane instincts, and yet a firm disciplinarian, well educated, competent to give goodadvice and able to gain the affections and confidences of those amongstwhom they work, is the type of person required. The ex-soldier or theex-policeman is just the man who is NOT wanted. The advantages of thissystem Miss E. P. Hughes thus sums up:--

Firstly. --Instead of a few highly-paid officials and many badly paidwarders, you have a number of independent, well-paid probation officers, chosen for their knowledge of human nature, and their skill in reformingit. 

Secondly. --Far greater adjustment of treatment to individual cases. 

Thirdly. --The stigma of the prison is avoided, and while great care istaken that the prisoner shall be strictly controlled and effectivelyrestrained, his self-respect is carefully developed. 

Fourthly. --The family suffers less. The home is not broken up, the wagesstill come in, and if the prisoner is a mother and a wife, it is, ofcourse, most important that she should retain her position in the home. 

Fifthly. --The prisoner does not "lose his job, " nor his mechanicalskill, if he is a skilled workman. "I was told that six months in prisonwill materially damage this in many cases. " He does not lose his habitof regular work. 

Sixthly. --He has one intelligent friend at his side to give him all thehelp that a brother man can. And this friend has the uniqueopportunities for studying his case, and has also an extraordinary powerover his environment. 

Seventhly. --Good conduct and a capacity for rightly using freedom isconstantly rewarded by a greater freedom. 

Eighthly. --It is far cheaper than prison. The prisoner keeps himself andhis family, and one officer can attend from sixty to eighty prisoners. 

=The Elmira Reformatory. =--"The New York States Reformatory at Elmira"is the official designation of this institution. It was established in1875 and had for its first superintendent a Mr Z. R. Brockway. 

Mr Brockway had from the age of nineteen years been working in anofficial capacity among prisoners, and his religious beliefs led him toacknowledge that the men committed to his charge had their place in theredemption of the world. 

Maconochie's humane method of dealing with the criminals of NorfolkIsland attracted his attention, and from Maconochie's mark system heevolved the now famous indeterminate sentence. 

When the New York State established a Reformatory at Elmira, Mr Brockwaywas placed in charge and given practically a free hand in the adoptionof such methods as he deemed most likely to effect the permanent reformof the men committed to imprisonment there. A restriction was placedupon the age of the offenders who should be admitted, the law readingthus:--"A male between the ages of 16 and 30, convicted of felony, whohas not heretofore been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonmentin a State prison, may, in the discretion of the trial court, besentenced to imprisonment in the New York State Reformatory at Elmira, to be there confined under the provisions of the law relating to thatreformatory" (vide section 700 Penal Code). 

This by no means implies that all the inmates are first offenders. Manyof them have been in juvenile reformatories, penitentiaries, and housesof correction, so that in some cases a considerable advance in thecareer of crime has been made before they are handed over to theauthorities at Elmira. Again, only felons are received, not minoroffenders. 

The principles upon which the reformatory system is based arepractically those set forth in the declaration of the National PrisonCongress held in Cincinnati in 1870 as follows:--

 1. Punishment is defined to be "suffering inflicted upon the individual for the wrong done by him, with a special view of securing his reformation. "

 2. "The supreme aim of prison discipline is THE REFORMATION OF CRIMINALS, not the infliction of VINDICTIVE suffering. "

 3. "The progressive classification of prisoners based on character, and worked on some well adjusted mark system, should be established in all prisons above the common gaol. "

 4. "Since hope is a more potent agent than fear, it should be made an ever present force in the minds of the prisoners, by a well devised and skilfully applied system of rewards for good conduct, industry, attention to learning. Rewards, more than penalties, are essential to every good prison system. "

 5. "The prisoner's destiny should be placed, measurably, in his own hands; he must be put into circumstances where he will be able, through his own exertions, to continually better his own conditions. A regulated self-interest must be brought into play and made constantly operative. "

 6. "Peremptory sentences ought to be replaced by those of indeterminate length. Sentences limited only by a satisfactory proof of reformation should be substituted for those measured by mere lapse of time. "

The old system of penology may be described as "so much sufferinginflicted for so much wrong done and with the object of expiating thatwrong. "

The principles upon which the reformatory system is founded must beclearly grasped before the system itself can be understood. Criticism isfrequently levelled against it on the ground that the prisoners aregiven "too good a time. " This criticism is based upon some theory thatvindictive retaliation is the attitude that should be assumed towardsthe criminal. When this theory is renounced, then the system stands orfalls according as it accomplishes the objects for which it is designed. When it is asked why should a prisoner in captivity be better lookedafter than he would be if left in his old haunts of crime, the questionmust be answered from the prisoner's point of view, and he will candidlyreply that the prison which deprives him of his freedom until hisreformation has been effected is not the place which has any attractionsfor him. The life of discipline and industry does not at all agree withhis idea of blissful surroundings. Upon admission at the reformatory, the prisoner is placed in the middle of three grades of classification. From this grade he can, by industry and good behaviour, advance to thehighest grade. If he should prove refractory, he sinks to the lowest orconvict grade. Each grade has its own particular privileges, these beingof course at their maximum in the highest grade. They consist chiefly ina better diet, better bed and freer access to the library. His fate ispractically placed in his own hands. If he shall show himselfindustrious and shall apply himself diligently to the task set beforehim he may make such progress in his grades as will secure his releaseafter a comparatively short period of detention. If, on the other hand, he will not exert himself to embrace the opportunity, he is kept underdetention until the maximum limit of his sentence is reached. Theauthorities urge for legislation making the sentence absolutelyindeterminate, so that those who resist the reformatory measures may bekept in prison for a period co-terminous with that of their resistance. The principles upon which the system is founded are developed in acourse of training described as a three M course, i. E. Mental, moral andmanual. The machinery consists of, the indeterminate sentence, theschool of letters, the trade school, and the gymnasium. 

=The Indeterminate Sentence. =--The ideal Indeterminate sentence providesthat when once a criminal falls into the clutches of the law he shall bedeprived of his liberty until he has given satisfactory evidence that heis able to conduct himself as an honest and industrious citizen. Itmakes no distinction between different crimes, such as to provide thatthe man who embezzles shall receive a longer sentence than the man whocommits arson or vice versa, but makes the restoration of liberty dependentirely upon reformation. It refuses to tolerate the idea that anycriminals should be at large to prey upon society, and it thus imposesupon society the obligation to undertake the reform of all criminals. This IDEAL sentence, however, does not exist. At Elmira, theauthorities are obliged to recognise a maximum, so that if at the expiryof this maximum, the prisoner should have made no progress towardsreform he must, nevertheless, be discharged. Since, however, a man mayat Elmira reduce a sentence of ten years to something like 22 months, agreat incentive is given to him to identify himself with the effortsbeing made on his behalf. From every point of view the indeterminatesentence in the case of those sent to reformatories appears the mostreasonable. The business of the trial court is concluded as soon as thequestion of guilt is determined. The judge has not imposed on him theimpossible task of measuring out a punishment which in its severityshall exactly accord with the degree of crime committed. The question ofthe prisoner's sanity is not left to the jury to decide but to qualifiedalienists. Neither does this question determine his GUILT butonly his RESPONSIBILITY. No account has to be made of theprovocation from which the prisoner suffered at the committal of hiscrime. If but a small degree of criminality exist, the safest adjustmentof punishment is to be found in the indeterminate sentence. From thesocial point of view, it gives the best safeguard to the society. Itguarantees that a criminal once convicted shall cease to prey uponsociety. He will either reform and return to society as a useful memberthereof and a contributor to its wealth, or else, refusing to reform, hewill never regain his liberty. This sentence lays it down that societyought not to tolerate criminals in its midst. Imprisonment for a fixedperiod under our present penal system serves but to exasperate thecriminal, and at the end of his sentence, when he is a more dangerouscriminal than ever, the law demands that he shall be released. It isonly by indeterminate sentences that society obtains the guarantee itmay justly demand. For its effect as a means of discipline a prisonerwill give his own experience. The following extract, was written by aninmate of the Reformatory in 1898:--"From the view-point of a 'man up atree' I would say that the character of our sentence has everything todo with furnishing a motive which induces and stimulates us to a degreeof activity we could never acquire under a fixed penalty. Where, under adefinite sentence, we would spend most of our time crossing off daysfrom the calendar and lay awake nights counting over and again theamount of time yet necessary for us to serve before the dawn of freedom, now every moment is utilised in taking advantage of all opportunitiesfor improvement that are offered, well knowing that only by advancementin the trade-school and school of letters, together with strictcompliance with the rules of the disciplinary department, can liberty beearned. And the word earn is used advisedly, for a man to get along inthis reformatory can be no sluggard but must be alert, ever ready toadvance and not drag behind. "

The ideal sentence, so far as an incentive to reformation goes, would bean ABSOLUTELY INDETERMINATE ONE, where a man must either reformor remain in prison for life, for where would be the welfare of societyconsidered if a man be released prepared to prey upon it as he didbefore imprisonment? In the case of the absolutely indeterminatesentence there is a motive that will quicken every energy and arouse thedullest to life and exercise, for he would be fighting for life andliberty--liberty that could never be his until he had shown by hisconduct that ready compliance with all requirements here was intended, and willingness to discard the old and detrimental habits, taking on newand profitable ones. The fact that a man could get along in here wouldindicate his ability to live in accord with society in the outsideworld. 

Under such a system no one fit to be released would fail to gain it. Why? Because the motive is so strong as to force the most unwilling towillingness; because a man who would rather rot in prison than try toregain his freedom by legitimate means is better off where he is. Hewould only be a stumbling block to society in general if he were setfree, and would sooner or later land again in some penal institution orother, and thus his life would be wasted, and public funds wasted inarresting, discharging and rearresting the useless drone, the balance ofwhose life would be passed in various prisons of the country. 

That the indeterminate sentence furnishes a powerful motive forreformation is shown daily in this institution. You have only to watchthe student over his books, or mechanic over his tools to see the effortthat is being made to win that golden prize--a parole. How that motiveis undermined or taken away entirely when the sentence is definite isreadily perceived by taking a cursory glance over the records of mensentenced here for a definite period. The greatest percentage of themare careless, insolent, and furnish most of the class that goes to formthe nucleus of the lower or convict grades. Why? Because there isnothing to work for. No parole can be gained by attention to duty. Time, and time alone, counts for this class. Only to pass time and get to theend of the sentence, that is all. No one can make a study of, or evenlook about him and compare the records made by definite and indefinitelysentenced men, without becoming a warm advocate of the indeterminatesentence. The longer the maximum sentence of the man sent here, thegreater is his effort to travel along the straight and narrow path, picking up such advantages as offer him through his stay in thisinstitution. The longer the maximum the stronger the motive, the smallerthe maximum, the smaller effort to earn a release. For example, men senthere with two or two and a half years as the limit of their maximums, onan average, remain here longer than those with a five, ten or twentyyears maximum hanging over them. The reason is obvious--the motive isstrengthened or weakened according as the sentence is lengthened orshortened. The deterrent value of the absolutely indeterminate sentencewould be enormous. Not a question of a few months or years would thecriminal have to face; but a period which would not terminate until heeither reformed or died. As we have seen it gives a tremendous stimulusto reform, and it would likewise give a powerful check to criminaltendencies. Thus it relieves the Judge of an impossible task, is mostsatisfactory to society, and most humane to the culprit. 

It may be urged that since liberation would depend in a measure uponproficiency in the trade-school and school of letters, that somecriminals whose criminality might be of a lesser degree, would be at agreater disadvantage than others. That is not so. The system isobviously a very complicated one, and only the bare outlines are beinggiven here. In operation it is absolutely fair, neither is anyinducement offered to commit crime for the benefits which thetrade-school confers. The managers know no such defect in their systemor otherwise they would report it. They have a free hand in theemployment of their methods, they are continually experimenting, andthey owe no devotion to "red tape. "

A further advantage that the indeterminate sentence has, is that itprovides for a second period of probation. A man may behave himself wellin prison but upon his release betake himself immediately to his oldsurroundings and then to his old habits. The most critical moment iswhen the prisoner steps outside the gaol walls and finds himself a freeman. The habits of industry and good conduct acquired when inconfinement have to be accommodated to new conditions, and if unassistedthe task is often too great. The consequence is that he falls away andrejoins his old companions and soon becomes a recidivist. Theindeterminate sentence allows for his freedom being regained gradually. Having given evidence of reform and of abilities to support himself, employment is found for him, and he is granted a parole. That is he isreleased conditionally. For the next half year he must report himselfevery month, and if at the end of that period he has behaved well he isgranted absolute discharge. Opportunity is thus given for him toestablish himself gradually amidst the conditions of free social life. The sense of freedom comes without shock, and when it comes, thecritical period has long since passed away. 

Should he violate his parole in any way, he is rearrested and may becalled upon to serve the maximum penalty for his crime. 

=The School of Letters. =--As has been said the system of the Reformatoryis classified under the headings of mental, moral and manual. There isno sharp distinction between all three, inasmuch as no mental or manualtraining is considered of any value which does not also assist todevelop the moral character of the pupil. 

The whole aim of the system is to develop minds and bodies, arrested intheir growth, in order that they may become more susceptible to moralinfluences, and that habits of correct thinking and useful industry maybe established. Every prisoner upon entering the institution is assignedto the school of letters, care being taken that the task imposed uponhim is well within his mental grasp, but at the same time shall requirean effort on his part in order to master it. 

The school is divided into three sections--The Primary, the Intermediateand the Academic or Lecture division. Each section is subdivided intoclasses and each class again subdivided into groups. The usual method ofmaking the lower classes large and the upper classes small is exactlyreversed at the Reformatory. There may be as few as twenty pupils in thelower classes and as many as two hundred in the upper ones. The schoolis under the management of a director who is assisted by a competentstaff of civilian teachers, as well as by a number of the inmatesthemselves. Some of the prisoners, being illiterate, have to commencetheir education at the very bottom of the ladder. Others, according tothe education they have received, enter the course at higher points. Inthe case of foreigners much of their education consists in teaching themthe English language and instructing them in American customs andmanners. The training is of immense advantage to them. 

The classes are held in the evening and the routine of the Reformatoryis so arranged that throughout the whole of the prisoner's waking timehe is kept employed. 

From the elementary instruction in reading, writing and arithmetic, given to illiterates, the course progresses so as to include History, Civics, Political Economy, Ethics, Nature study and Literature. Attachedto the school there is a well stocked library from which books areissued under regulations relative to good conduct and progress made. There is also a weekly paper issued within the institution called "TheSummary, " to which the prisoners may contribute articles. Attendance atthe school is in all cases compulsory. The inmate has no optionwhatever. He is not consulted as to what course of study he would liketo pursue but this is chosen for him and he is set to it. In selectinghis course, every attention is paid to the man's abilities, tastes andattainments. No useless studies are undertaken. Every study must be ofvalue from a reformative point of view and also from an educational one. That is, it must serve to correct bad and wandering habits of thinkingand to cultivate good and consecutive habits. It must assist to broadenthe outlook of life and to bring the individuals into living touch withthe life and traditions of the country to which he belongs. It mustserve to inspire hope, confidence and zeal. It must cultivate a tastefor the beautiful, a love for the natural, and an adoration for theDivine. When released, the student must find himself equipped with sucha knowledge as will enable him to steadily advance in his station oflife. And yet there is on an average, only two years in which to impartsuch an instruction. How is it done? Firstly, nothing useless is taught, the object primarily aimed at being the formation of character. Attendance is therefore compulsory, and attention and application arenecessary in order to obtain a parole. Monthly examinations are held andfailures at these gives a set-back in the matter of obtaining a release. A failure, however, may be overtaken by extra exertion during the nextmonth. However distasteful it may be to the prisoner to study regularlyand methodically, or however difficult his former irregular life mayhave rendered this task, yet it is so intimately bound up with hisinterests that he soon finds a motive powerful enough to correct meredis-inclination. He must work and work at his best, and invariably hedoes so. 

Upon entering the class room each student receives a printed slip whichgives an outline of the lesson to be studied. This serves to convey anidea of the amount of work to be undertaken, to show the progressivesteps and to prevent any idle speculation concerning the development ofthe lesson. These slips are kept by the student and they are made thebasis of the monthly examination. These examinations are conducted withgreat strictness. In order to pass 75 per cent. Of the maximum number ofmarks must be obtained, and marks are given for exact knowledge only. For instance, if in a sum in arithmetic a right method is employed but awrong answer given no marks are rewarded. The student has shown aninability to use his knowledge. In other subjects the men in answeringtheir questions must give the exact "how, " or "why, " or "when, " or"where, " or "which" before their work will pass. They may write sheetsbut it will not count if they miss the point. They soon find thereforethat in order to pass their examinations they must pour forth all theirenergies upon their work. Needless to say, no catch questions are everintroduced, neither does the examination task exceed the men'sabilities. 

When English literature was first introduced the men regarded it as animposition. They did not know what the new study meant nor what wasexpected of them. A great amount of coaxing and gentle treatment wasnecessary to overcome the general bewilderment. The first examinationpassed off measurably well. Soon a change took place and Englishliterature rose rapidly to become the most favourite study. The demandupon the librarian for the supply of English and American Classicsbecame so great that special restrictions had to be placed upon theirissuance. 

Marked success from a Reformatory point of view has attended this study, and the men enthusiastically enter upon a new and broader life. 

The late Prof. S. R. Monks, for twelve years Lecturer at theReformatory, says:--"But does such education contribute to thereformation of the criminal and the protection of the public?"Unqualifiedly and unhesitating I answer, Yes. Men are found to acquirein this school month by month a growing application of better things, areadier apprehension of truth and a heartier sympathy with virtue, andbest of all, a greater capacity for sustained and consistent effort inpractical undertakings. These transformations are the successive stepsof a real reformation, and every step puts the man at a greater andsafer distance from past shiftlessness and viciousness. "The virtues, "says Felix Adler, "depend in no small degree on the power of serial andcomplex thinking, " but, continues that practical philosopher, "theordinary studies of the school exercise and develop this faculty ofserial and complex thinking. Any sum in multiplication gives a trainingof this kind. " It is hardly possible to exaggerate the benefit that trueeducation will confer on one who has come under the condemnation of thelaw. His improved education will counter-balance some of the disgrace ofhis past criminality; it will with industrial training extricate himfrom the hopeless mass of ignorant unskilled labour where competition isalways hottest and most perilous, it will teach him, better than hecould know without it, the relative value of things; it will so elevatehis thoughts and refine his tastes that the path of duty in its roughestand steepest places, will yet steadily attract his footsteps. 

The charge is sometimes made that the criminal is made more dangerous byeducation. The assertion begs all it carries. It assumes that educationstrengthens character but does not transform character which is falsefor it does both. . . . No man can use his mind in the carefulinvestigation of moral principles, and become thereby merely a moredangerous cheat. No man who has opened his eyes to see the revelationsof eternal wisdom and goodness written in letters of light on all thehandiwork of Nature, can be made thereby merely a more dangerousvillain. On the contrary, every hour of honest search after reality, ofcareful industry governed by principles and lined to accuracy, everyhour spent in happy contemplation of wisdom and goodness, wherevermanifested will make the man forever the better for it. 

=Physical Culture. =--This Department of the Reformatory falls into threedivisions--the Gymnastic, the Military and the Manual. 

=The Gymnastic. =--The idea of a gymnasium within a gaol must deliver nosmall shock to the prejudices of many, but in studying the Elmira systemwe must endeavour to keep before us the end which the authorities areaiming at, viz. , the restoration to society of their criminals in a notonly harmless state but in their most useful state, and this can only bemade possible by the most careful and thorough training of the mind, body and soul. 

Neither is there any cause to think that the prisoners are getting toogood a time, and that, being treated better than the industrious worker, a premium is being offered to crime. The investigation of theauthorities has revealed no case in which a man has entered theinstitution on account of advantages offered. To criminals they are notrealised as advantages. They understand them only as the rough roadleading to their release, and it is about the last thing for men ofshiftless, lazy, inconsequent habits of mind and body, to suppose thatthey are having a good time when sent to a gymnasium every morning fortwo hours' steady work. Work which brings all the muscles of the bodyinto play and which demands the fixed attention of the mind and itssubmission to the word of command from the instructor, is many timesmore distasteful than the "hard labour" of lazily cracking stones. 

Until 1900 the whole prison population went through a regular gymnasticcourse. This is now changed and assignments are made to the gymnasiumonly upon the certificate of the physician. All new arrivals howeverspend a period, averaging about five weeks, in the "awkward squad, " halfof whose morning time is spent in the gymnasium. They come in a veryungainly looking set of men. Many are undersized, underweight, ricketyand diseased in body and generally of a slovenly, unmanly appearance. Amultitude of causes have been at work to produce this condition. Chiefly, these are a bad ancestry, foul atmosphere of their dwellings, their idle dirty habits, intemperance and sexual abuse. 

The course of treatment prescribed for these is one which brings intoexercise all their latent muscular power. Special attention is paid todeformities and weaknesses resulting from any cause whatsoever. 

Turkish baths, swimming baths and massage also play an important part intheir treatment and help to bring the dregs of disease, the results ofexcessive drink and the use of tobacco, out of their systems. 

The effects of such treatment are at the end of a few weeks veryapparent. The body is supple, the carriage is erect, the cutaneous, circulatory, muscular and nervous systems are in a healthy state, andthe stupid, bewildered or stolid expression has given way to one ofmanly concern. 

At the end of five weeks most of the men graduate from the awkward squadand engage in the work of other departments. Some, however, for variousreasons have to remain for a longer period of physical exercise. 

The majority of these are classified into three groups:

I. Mathematical Dullards. II. Deficient in self-control. II. Stupids. These groups are described by Dr Hamilton Wey in his report for 1896 asfollows:--

Group I. --The Mathematical dullards. These were incapable of solving themost elementary problems in Mental Arithmetic or else did so withhesitation and difficulty. They were instances of sluggish and draggingwalk, and presented a sleepy or dreamy appearance at work or in repose. They suggested arrested mental growth. From a careful study of these menby observation and immediate contact exercises were selected that wouldtend to act upon their defects. In addition the exercises prescribednecessitate the direct employment of their mathematical faculties. Thefollowing schedule was adopted, though subject to constant change asoccasion for change presented itself. The exercises of their group aswith others are confined to one hour's practical work five days perweek. The men receive a daily rain bath and rubbing down immediatelyafter their exercises. With this group the hour is divided into sessionsof half-an-hour each, subdivided into periods of fifteen minutes. Thefirst fifteen minutes are devoted to light calisthenics executed bycommand with loud counting and simultaneous movements. This is followedby 15 minutes of marching and facing movements with step counting. Thefirst 15 minutes of the second half hour are occupied in the laying outof geometrical fields for athletic events. Employing the 50ft. Tape andthe 2ft. Rule with divisions of an inch. After being instructed as todimensions they are required to lay out the following:--

(a) Baseball diamond; (b) basket ball field; (c) track for 30 and 40yards running races; (d) placing of hurdles at intervals, in harmonywith established athletic field rules. The closing 15 minutes embracedpractical work, viz. , high and long jump, hop skip and jump, highkicking, target throwing, etc. 

Group II. --Those deficient in self-control. The members of Group II, compared with those of Groups I and III, are physically of betterquality. In general appearance they show a better all-round physicaldevelopment, and in some instances the deteriorating effects of sexualabnormality were not so apparent, this class would, in the performanceof athletics, compare favourably with the scholar outside prison walls. In the general performance of their work they have shown more interestthan either Group I or III, and in some instances have acquired skill insome of their athletic branches. The tendency of the athletics selectedfor this group by the Gymnasium Director was of a nature conducive tothe cultivation and encouragement of self-control and self-relianceamong its members as shown by the spirit of good-fellowship displayed bythe successful towards the unsuccessful player, and in a measuresubduing the ebullition of passion and the spirit of jealousy thatformerly influenced their every notion in competitive contests. . . . Itcan be safely asserted that one essential feature in athletics, viz. , will-power, which was conspicuous at the first by its absence, has beenstrengthened and inculcated, especially in this group. 

It was observed by the Director that perhaps by their exuberance ofanimal spirit, the men were prone to make frequent excuses for changesfrom one game to another, instead of striving to excel in one branch. Another observable feature was the attempt to shirk the exercises whichrequired any exertion on their part. These defects have been remedied, not entirely, but sufficiently to justify the efficiency of athletics asa fact in the production of self-control; and instances can be cited ofcomplete subordination of will to the controlling powers. 

Group III. --The Stupids. The members of this group are not far above thestandard of feeble-minded boys. They are what might be termed "all-rounddefectives. " The object of the athletics selected for this group hasbeen to awaken and arouse them from that lethargic state into which theyperiodically relapse. This has been in a measure accomplished, a greataid to which has been the daily rain bath. The following physicaldefects (some of which have been remedied wholly or in part) come undermy observation: general weakness, weak chest (respiratory organs), bentcarriage of the body, stiffness of wrist, joints, and clumsy movementsof fingers, spinal curvature, extreme (comparative) development of rightarm. To overcome these defects systematic exercise was necessary, including free-hand exercises, club-swinging, dumb-bell exercise, etc. , meted out according to the respective deficiencies and requirements ofthe men. This group also spent one half-hour in practical outdoorgymnastic and athletic work. After a general resume of the workaccomplished it can safely be asserted that outdoor athletics andgymnastics have proven to be in a measure, a prophylactic for a numberof the ills which these three groups of defectives are subject to. 

=Military Instruction. =--Military drill was introduced into theReformatory as a direct outcome of the Prisons Bill of 1888 whichforbade all machine labour in prisons being conducted for profit. Thestatute requiring the "shutting down" of all industrial plants the workof the institution was practically brought to a standstill. In thisdifficulty the management conceived the idea of forming a militaryregiment. Most beneficial results immediately followed. The men began towalk with more erect carriage and to respond to quick words of command. Besides this, the open-air exercise developed their lung-power andstimulated their circulatory system. A pride in their performance wasalso inspired by the opportunity given to rise through the differentranks to that of lieutenant. Above all, good habits of discipline werecultivated. Although the circumstances that rendered necessary theintroduction of military drill have passed away, yet the organizationhas been found of such great reformatory value that it has become anintegral part of the Elmira system. 

The regiment consists of sixteen companies, four companies to thebattalion, company roll of about seventy. The colonel's staff iscomposed of colonel, four majors, inmate adjutant, and sergeant-major, and national and state colour-bearers. The uniforms are blue, black, andred, corresponding to the grades. White belts, with nickel buckles, areworn and white cross-belts. Proper insignia of rank is also worn. Dressparade is held daily at four p. M. On the regimental grounds, or, ifweather be inclement, in the armoury. 

So far as is possible the regiment is drilled on exactly the same linesas those observed by the United States army. 

=Manual Training. =--Manual training was introduced into the Reformatoryin 1895. The number of men who had been in the institution for aconsiderable period of time and upon whom the ordinary reformativemeasures exerted little influence rendered the adoption of some othermeans absolutely necessary. The men, with whom the ordinary methodsfailed, belonged to the defective classes already described asmathematical dullards, deficient in self-control, and stupids. Thehabits of vice seem to have wrought such a destructive work upon thewill-power of these men that in order to repair it some potent influencewould have to be brought into operation. The conception was to entirelydisengage the mind of its connection with the past and to concentrate itupon healthy, useful and interesting work. Habit produces character, andif the old habits of thought could be destroyed and new ones implantedit would naturally follow that the character would be improved anddeveloped. The character of the normal man requires for its developmenta moral, religious, intellectual and physical training, and the abnormalman requires the same, in a greater degree. 

It was with this knowledge that the managers introduced manual traininginto the Reformatory. As the usefulness of manual training (Sloyd) isdescribed in a preceding chapter no more need be said upon its value asa factor in education now. It needed the greatest skill on the part ofthe managers to adopt the various Sloyd exercises to the requirements ofthe different defectives, but each year has given additional proof oftheir success, and its inclusion in the reformatory system was amplyjustified. In 1899 it was discontinued on account of the smallappropriation that was made for the maintenance of the institution, making it necessary to curtail expenses. 

Before the abolition of Sloyd the following course was employed fordefectives:--

(With each year the group was divided into three terms, there being 17weeks in each term and 35 hours in each week. )

GROUP I. --(Mathematical Dullards. )

FIRST TERM. 

Mechanical drawing, Sloyd, athletics, and calisthenics, clay-modelling, and mental arithmetic. 

SECOND TERM. 

Card-board construction takes the place of clay-modelling. 

THIRD TERM. 

Wood-turning instead of card-board construction. 

 * * * * *

GROUP II. --(Deficient in self-control. )

FIRST TERM. 

Athletics and calisthenics, geometric construction involving theintersection of solids, etc. , wood-turning, pattern making, mechanicaldrawing and Sloyd. 

SECOND TERM. 

Athletics and calisthenics, wood-carving, clay-modelling, mechanicaldrawing and Sloyd. 

THIRD TERM. 

Athletics and calisthenics, chipping and filing, moulding, mechanicaldrawing and Sloyd. 

 * * * * *

GROUP III. --(Stupids. )

FIRST TERM. 

Athletics and calisthenics, free-hand drawing from solids and familiarobjects, elementary Sloyd, clay-modelling, mental arithmetic, andsentence building. 

SECOND TERM. 

Sloyd, free-hand drawing, wood-carving, mental arithmetic, andcalisthenics. 

THIRD TERM. 

Sloyd, free-hand drawing, wood-turning, athletics and mental arithmetic. 

=The Trades' School. =--Of all crimes, about 95 per cent. Are committedagainst property. It therefore appeared imperative to the management ofthe Reformatory that every man passing through the institution shouldbe taught a useful trade so that he would be able to provide an honestand sufficient livelihood for himself and for those who would bedependent upon him. For this purpose the trades' school was establishedand a regulation passed that all men entering the Reformatory withoutthe knowledge of a trade should be required to learn one before theywould be granted a parole. 

Under conditions of free life it would be impossible to teach these mena trade. In their haunts of crime the criminals live a lazy ambitionlesslife and regard work as an evil to be avoided; the reformatory system, however, captures his interest on behalf of industry by making hisliberty depend upon his having reached the status of an honest andenthusiastic tradesman. 

Two or three days after his arrival the newly committed prisoner ispersonally interviewed by the superintendent. This interview, which isin the nature of an exhaustive examination, generally discloses thespecies of criminality to which his crime belongs. This knowledge ismade the basis of the plan which is then formulated for the course oftreatment to which he will be submitted. 

In the selection of a trade, the prisoner is given the opportunity ofchoosing for himself. If the choice show sincerity and intelligence, heis applied to it. If, on the other hand, it should reveal mereindifference or a desire to shirk hard work, the managers take allmatters into consideration and select the trade for him. Once placed ata trade he is given to understand that he will be kept rigidly to it andno release from imprisonment granted until his progress has satisfiedthe authorities. Changes from one trade to another are rarely granted, and then only when the learner has given unmistakable signs that hecannot succeed at his first task. Within the trades school, his identityis not lost sight of. Day by day, a record of his conduct and also ofhis progress is kept. Every persuasive means is used to awaken hisunderstanding to the fact that his best interests are to be served byhabits of industry and application. The whole system is an appeal to hisdesire for freedom. Freedom is offered to him but at a distance, and hecan reach it by no other means than that of following a given road, thedirection of which is very clearly pointed out to him. 

The work is graduated according to his ability to make progress, andcare is taken to so arrange his course that he shall be taughtthoroughly all the fundamental principles of his trade. The ordinaryapprentice works so that he will be able to fulfil the orders that aregiven to his master. The consequence of this is that two ideas exist, the apprentice having the desire to learn a trade, his master desiringto profit by his work. The end of the apprentice is served by constantlyadvancing to new work, even though this should mean the loss of time andthe waste of material; his master's object is attained by keeping himat that work which he learns quickest and giving the difficult work tomore experienced men, consequently he passes through his time and learnsbut very little. Now, the pupil of the Elmira trades' school is notconsidered to have completed his course until he has gained a thoroughknowledge of every department of his trade. Besides the practicalinstruction given in the workshops, classes are also held in theevenings and instruction given in mechanical drawing so that the men maybe able to understand any plan that may be put into their hands, andalso to draw plans for themselves. Trade journals are subscribed for andcirculated among the men. 

The value of this industrial training extends beyond the providing themeans of obtaining an honest livelihood, for by making release dependupon success, interest is thereby combined with industry. Thiscombination is bound to react upon the voluntary system and produces amoral effect. Again it re-acts, this time beneficially upon thecharacter of the man. 

The following is a list of all the trades taught in the Reformatory:--

 Barbering Bookbinding Brass-smithing Bricklaying Cabinet-making Carpentry Clothing-cutting Electricity Frescoing Hardwood-finishing Horseshoeing House-painting Iron-forging Machine-wood-working Machinist's Moulding Music Paint-mixing Photo-engraving Plastering Plumbing Printing Stenography & typewriting Shoemaking Sign-painting Steam-fitting Stone-cutting Stone-masonry Tailoring Telegraphy Tinsmithing Upholstery Also, Mechanical-drawing

In the year 1903 there were 1986 pupils instructed in these trades. 

=The Results of the System. =--English critics have regarded the systemas being somewhat extravagant and as placing the honest labourer at adisadvantage to the criminal. This criticism has been considerablyweakened of late years and the results investigated instead of beingimagined. The most careful investigation has made it impossible to denythat the Reformatory achieves all that it claims to, viz. :--that itcontributes nothing to the strengthening of the criminal habit[1] andtherefore it is not a partial remedy, and that it actually returns tosociety as useful citizens no less than 82 per cent. [2] of thosecommitted to it. 

Lombroso speaks of the system as a practical application of the resultsof the science of Criminology. 

Should the system be adopted in other countries, it would need to be sotranslated that it would accord with the traditions and customs of thepeople. 

FOOTNOTES:

[1] It is generally supposed that such a system cannot act as adeterrent to crime. The American delegates to the International PrisonCongress (held in Paris in 1895) declared that the obligation imposedupon the prisoners, in such institutions, to raise themselves by mentalas well as by industrial labour, into higher grades as a necessarycondition for liberation, is felt by many of them, to involve so muchexertion, that they would rather be consigned to some ordinary prison, where self-improvement is not specially enforced. This system, theydeclared, was more deterrent than was generally supposed. 

[2] Of some 13, 000 criminals who have passed through the Reformatory, the number known definitely to have returned to crime is a little lessthan 1 per cent. Of the whole!

Chapter X. 

CONCLUSION. 

The reader will have formed his own conclusion. He may conclude that theauthor has a sentimental affection for the criminal and would have alldisturbers of the public peace treated with more compassion than thehard-working and honest labourer. But that reader will have jumped tohis conclusion from his preconceived prejudices. The reformation of thecriminal is no chimera, it has been undertaken for thirty years andevery year has seen better results. The results for 1903 (86 per cent. Of reforms) ought to convince the most sceptic that the reformation ofthe criminal is the true aim for society to pursue. 

Another reader may ask why, if all these results are so good, does notthe Government adopt some such system as the Elmira one instead ofcontinuing the present obsolete penal system. The New York StateGovernment experiences a difficulty in finding, for their reformatorystaff, men who will undertake their work with a real sense of mission. 

Nor is this the only difficulty. If New Zealand is going to undertakethe reformation of its criminals and to restore them to society ashonest and industrious persons, society itself must be prepared to dropits prejudices and suspicions and receive the men at their presentworth, and not forever stamp them as outcasts. Nothing less, then, isrequired than an earnest desire among all classes to recover those amongmen who have fallen into villainy and vice and to receive back amongtheir ranks all those who, having responded to the efforts made on theirbehalf, can make a claim upon the confidence and good-will of society. 

But the reformation of the criminal is not the only obligation laid uponsociety, there is also the education of the child. It is frequentlybeing stated that criminals are on the increase; it has been shown thatthis increase is not a national one, it must be then that for somereason the practice of virtue is becoming more and more difficult, whereas that of vice is becoming increasingly easier. Recruits aresteadily joining the ranks of crime, and when one sees that, as a resultof their home and school training, the rising generation is developingall the characteristics of the criminal, a somewhat alarming conclusionvery strongly suggests itself. Society has the criminals that itdeserves. It may fail to recover those who have entered upon a criminalcareer, or it may be actually guilty of manufacturing criminals. Whatare we doing? New Zealand has this hope, that its traditions do notfetter it, and its institutions are young and plastic. 

THE END. 

 +------------------------------------------------------+ | Transcriber's Note: | | | | Inconsistent hyphenation and spelling in the | | original document have been preserved. | | | | Typographical errors corrected in the text: | | | | Page 12 Gcd changed to God | | Page 12 criminoligists changed to criminologists | | Page 14 violaters changed to violators | | Page 20 effrontry changed to effrontery | | Page 24 tpyes changed to types | | Page 34 healty changed to healthy | | Page 35 alcholic changed to alcoholic | | Page 46 physichological changed to physicological | | Page 74 maxium changed to maximum | | Page 80 Obviviously changed to Obviously | | Page 93 removed duplicate word "and" | | Page 98 Chappel changed to Chapple | | Page 98 celebate changed to celibate | | Page 104 exacttitude changed to exactitude | | Page 111 Chappel's changed to Chapple's | | Page 116 syphillis changed to syphilis | | Page 121 unkown changed to unknown | | Page 128 aguments changed to arguments | | Page 133 consideraly changed to considerably | | Page 134 Charle's Reades changed to Charles Reade's | | Page 137 removed duplicate word "of" | | Page 140 approbious changed to opprobious | | Page 141 abont changed to about | | Page 143 demonstate changed to demonstrate | | Page 144 kindergartem changed to kindergarten | | Page 148 betweeen changed to between | | Page 151 removed duplicate word "the" | | Page 163 destinction changed to distinction | | Page 178 defficient changed to deficient | | Page 180 prophylasic changed to prophylactic | | Page 181 lins changed to lines | | Page 184 indiffererence changed to indifference | | Page 186 stone-masonery changed to stone-masonry | +------------------------------------------------------+