IV. CRIMES FROM VENGEANCE AND OTHER MOTIVES
Besides economic, sexual, and political criminality, there is still a fourth category of crimes, the motives of which are quite diverse. We shall treat, A. Crimes from vengeance, and B. Infanticide. The first group is important both quantitatively and qualitatively; the second, especially, qualitatively. The crimes committed from other motives are either very rare, or very insignificant, or may be explained by the same causes as those included under A, and hence may be passed over in silence. [987]
A. Crimes Committed from Vengeance.
In a sociological work like ours we need not consider the psychology of vengeance. [988] For our subject it is sufficient to show that the feeling is innate in everyone, although in different degrees. As soon as one person injures another, whether bodily, or in his interests, or his honor, the desire to retaliate in one way or another immediately appears. If this desire transforms itself into act, this act calls forth a stronger reaction on the part of the opposing party, etc. It is this that is called the instinct of vengeance. [989]
We must then begin by treating the causes calling forth feelings of revenge, and by fixing our attention upon the two principal categories of causes, those which spring from the economic life, and those which are due to the sexual life.
We shall speak first of the causes that are due to the economic life. The fundamental principle of the mode of production in which we live is competition, strife—in other words, doing injury to others. So there are innumerable cases in which the desire for revenge is excited by the economic life. Many sociologists extol the beauty of this struggle and pretend that its effect upon society is excellent. We shall refrain from examining the truth or falsity of this statement; for the matter in hand we need not concern ourselves with the fortunate victors, but simply with the vanquished. After the exposition of the present system of production it is superfluous to show all the opposing economic interests and the feelings resulting therefrom; we shall mention a few, and the others will be easily understood.
Imagine, for example, the state of mind of a small retailer who finds himself totally ruined by the competition of a large department store in the neighborhood; of that of working-men suffering great privations during a strike, who see themselves supplanted by others, who think only of their immediate interest in acting as strike-breakers. Or imagine, again, the innumerable cases in which questions of inheritance awaken vengeful feelings. And side by side with all this, picture the economic life of village-communities where all the economic interests were parallel, and where consequently the economic life engendered neither envy nor jealousy. Anyone who grasps the enormous difference between these two modes of production, will understand also how the feelings of revenge are excited by the present economic system. [990]
In the second place, how far are vengeful feelings aroused by sexuality? [991] As Sutherland remarks in his “Origin and Growth of the Moral Instinct”, there are no peoples who are not more or less jealous in sexual matters, [992] but great differences are to be observed in this respect. While Nansen, for example tells how the Eskimo women are almost ignorant of sexual jealousy, [993] there are other peoples among whom the woman is killed by her husband if another man evinces any regard for her. [994]
The facts show that the greater the power of the man over the woman, the greater also is the sexual jealousy of the man, a jealousy which, among other things, manifests itself in the very severe punishment of adultery. [995] He who has a right to something wishes to keep it for himself and does not tolerate injury to it on the part of anyone else. When the man considers the woman as his chattel, or when he has great power over her, sexual jealousy is strengthened by the feelings connected with property. These latter feelings were more predominant among the primitive peoples than true sexual jealousy, a proof of which is that fact that among many of these peoples the law of hospitality required putting the wife at the disposal of the guest.
From the present form of marriage (as among many primitive peoples) it follows that each party has a right with relation to the other. [996] The violation of this right is considered as a serious injury and gives rise to a desire for revenge. This phenomenon is not natural, but historical. If the present state of society did not necessitate an artificial stability in sexual relationships, if the man and his wife were economically independent, they would not believe that they had rights over each other. [997]
Here is the first bond between sexual jealousy and the social environment, but there is also a second, though a more remote one, namely, that it is with those who have a gross conception of the relations of man and wife, that revengeful feelings arise after love disappears. Those who, because of the environment in which they live, have formed a different idea of the relation between man and wife, while feeling the most violent grief, remain strangers to the desire for revenge. He who knows that neither love nor sympathy can be bidden, knows also that a right in this matter can bring no change in the feelings, and must remain only a nominal thing; he sees only the action of fate, where the brute sees an evil will. This is one reason why the number of crimes of passion is smaller among civilized people than among the partly civilized.
We must notice, further, one kind of crime of passion, the revenge of a woman seduced and then abandoned. Besides sexual jealousy there are, in these cases, other motives playing their part. Often the woman has not given herself for love alone, but also with the prospect of a marriage, or a betterment of her economic position. It is not sexual vengeance that is the sole motive here then, but also vengeance for economic reasons. [998] Further the prohibition of inquiring into the question of paternity may also enter in. [999]
After having pointed out the two principal categories of causes that awaken revengeful feelings we must now enquire why, with certain individuals, these feelings are translated into acts. Many criminologists prefer to find environment of small importance in these crimes and the individual factors the predominant ones. Let us see whether the facts will uphold this theory. To begin with let us ask what the movement of these crimes teaches us.
As statistics show, they increase towards spring, reach their maximum in summer, after which a decrease follows with the minimum in winter, as the following table proves. [1000]
Germany, 1883–1892.
=============+====================================== | Crimes. +-------------------------------------- |On the basis of a supposed Average of |100 Crimes a Day the Daily Average for | the Different Months would be +-------------------+------------------ | Serious assaults | Homicides -------------+-------------------+------------------ January. | 75 | 88 February. | 78 | 84 March. | 78 | 100 April. | 84 | 95 May. | 102 | 108 June. | 116 | 113 July. | 119 | 118 August. | 116 | 133 September. | 110 | 124 October. | 106 | 106 November. | 93 | 93 December. | 80 | 78 =============+===================+==================
Some authors seek for a remote explanation, when there is one near at hand: in summer persons are more in contact with each other, a fact which gives opportunity for disputes, and an increased danger of consequent crimes.
We may sum up the principal data upon the movement of these crimes in relation to the economic situation (given in Part One of this work) as follows.
England, 1840–1890.
Fornasari di Verce draws attention to the fact that crimes against persons (represented in great part by crimes of vengeance) increase in times of economic prosperity and vice versa (see p. 144. See also the data of Mayr, pp. 43 and 44).
Bavaria, 1835–1861.
Mayr shows for this period that crimes against persons increase when the price of grain falls and vice versa (see pp. 40–42).
Italy, 1873–1890.
According to Fornasari di Verce there is a diminution of homicides and assaults when economic conditions grow worse, and vice versa (see p. 143).
New South Wales, 1882–1891.
The same author says that homicides and assaults increase, while minor offenses against persons decrease, when economic conditions grow worse and vice versa (see p. 144).
Prussia, 1854–1896.
Dr. Starke and Dr. Müller show that the crimes we are considering increase when economic conditions improve, and decrease when they grow worse (see pp. 66 and 83). However, they show at the same time that these phenomena did not take place at the beginning of the period observed by them. Later they follow the regular course. [1001]
Canton of Zürich, 1853–1892.
For the period mentioned Meyer proves that crimes against persons increase when economic conditions improve (see p. 69).
Examining these results we observe that the crimes in question increase in the periods of prosperity, and vice versa; but we see at the same time that there are also noteworthy exceptions (New South Wales and France), and that in Germany in the last 20 or 30 years, this tendency is no longer present. [1002] It is not difficult, it seems to me, to explain why these crimes increase in periods of prosperity. Men are thrown then into contact more frequently, they live a little more for amusement, and consume (and this is certainly one of the principal reasons) more alcohol than usual. Some authors see in this movement of crimes against persons a natural law, according to which criminality would be a fixed quantity, manifesting itself in economic crimes in periods of depression, and in crimes against the person in periods of prosperity.
As I have already said more than once this theory is erroneous. If it were really true that an improvement of the economic situation inevitably brought about an increase of crimes against persons, the class of individuals who are always in fairly good circumstances would also be largely guilty of these crimes. Statistics show us the contrary.
Thus we arrive at the very important question, what are the classes of the population which are especially guilty of these crimes? As the statistics already given show they are the poorest classes (see pp. 437 ff.). In Italy, for example, 89.8% of those who commit homicide, and 91.1% of those guilty of assault, were indigent or had only the bare necessities of life, though these form but 60% of the population. The same is true of Austria, and the statistics of occupations gives a similar result for Germany (see pp. 441 and 442).
The statistics that give information upon the degree of education of these criminals are more interesting still. As we have seen above, only 0.1% of those guilty of assault had a higher education, while 40.5% of these criminals were illiterate, and 59.4% knew only how to read, or to read and write. In France from 1896 to 1900 the completely illiterate constituted 16% of those guilty of assault, and 15% of the assassins, while in the general population there were only 4.5% who did not know how to sign their names. In Italy only 1% of the assassins and only 0.6% of those guilty of assault had a higher education, 99% and 99.4% respectively were illiterate or knew only how to read and write. These are striking figures.
In this connection let us stop for a moment to consider the geography of these crimes, and place beside the figures on this point those of illiteracy. We will begin with a table of figures for homicide and assaults followed by death, for some of the countries of Europe. [1003]
==============+========+==================+=======+=========== | | Homicides and | | | | Assaults followed| | Country.[1004]| Years. | by Death to |Years. |Illiteracy | | 100,000 | | %. | | Inhabitants. | | --------------+--------+------------------+-------+----------- Italy | 1880-84| 70.0 | 1882 | 57.43 Spain | 1883-84| 64.9 | 1889 | 68.10 Hungary | 1876-80| 56.2 | 1880 | 59.70 Austria | 1877-81| 10.8 | ,, | 40.10 Belgium | 1876-80| 8.5 | ,, | 21.66 Ireland | 1880-84| 8.1 | 1882 | 30.00 France | ,, | 6.4 | ,, | 13.10 Scotland | ,, | 4.4 | ,, | 11.00 England | ,, | 3.9 | 1883 | 14.00 Germany | 1882-84| 3.4 |1881-82| 1.54 Holland | 1880-81| 3.1 | 1880 | 11.50 ==============+========+==================+=======+==========
No one will deny the striking parallelism between these columns, the highest figures for homicide being found where there are also the largest figures for illiteracy. As we have seen already, however, international statistics have inherent defects. The following figures are better in this regard: [1005]
United States.
========================+====================+========== | Number of Homicides| Illiteracy Birthplace. | to 100,000 | %. | Inhabitants. | ------------------------+--------------------+----------- Sweden, Norway, Denmark | 5.8 | 0.42 Germany | 9.7 | 0.57 England and Scotland | 10.4 | 2.50 Austria | 12.2 | 16.73 Ireland | 17.5 | 41.65 France | 27.4 | 43.60 Italy | 58.1 | 51.77 ========================+====================+===========
We have here also, then, a striking parallelism. We will now take up the geography of homicide, etc., in different parts of one country; some of the faults inherent in the geography of crime are thus eliminated.
Germany, 1893–1897. [1006]
======================+======================+==============+======================== | Number of Persons | Percentage of| | Convicted for Serious| Illiterates | Percentage of Votes States and Provinces.| Assaults to 100,000 | among the | Given to the Socialist | Inhabitants over 12 | Recruits | in the Election | Years of Age.[1007] | 1892-1893. | of 1898.[1008] ----------------------+----------------------+--------------+----------------------- Bavaria | 391 | 0.03 | 18.0 West Prussia | 334 | 4.01 | 4.9 Posen | 326 | 1.72 | 1.7 East Prussia | 265 | 0.98 | 18.3 Silesia | 252 | 0.57 | 22.3 Baden (Grand Duchy) | 250 | 0.02 | 19.1 Hesse | 248 | 0.03 | 33.9 Alsace-Lorraine | 237 | 0.30 | 22.7 Pomerania | 227 | 0.22 | 17.2 Westphalia | 223 | 0.08 | 17.7 Germany | 219 | 0.38 | 27.1 Prussia | 211 | 0.59 | 24.1 Rhine Province | 201 | 0.08 | 15.0 Wurtemberg | 197 | 0.04 | 20.3 Saxony (Province) | 185 | 0.07 | 34.0 Brandenburg | 184 | 0.15 | 35.6 Hesse-Nassau | 161 | 0.14 | 30.9 Hanover | 146 | 0.04 | 25.6 Sleswick-Holstein | 106 | 0.10 | 38.9 Saxony (Kingdom) | 82 | 0.01 | 49.4 ======================+======================+==============+========================
The parallelism between the first two columns is undeniable; the states and provinces with low figures for illiteracy show also a small number of assaults, and vice versa, with some exceptions—notably Bavaria. The reason why Bavaria is at the head of the list is undoubtedly because of the alcoholism that prevails there.
United States, 1890–1900. [1009]
=============+===========+============= | Number of | Percentage |Inhabitants| of | in 1900 to| Illiteracy |Each Murder| in States. | (Annual | Population | Average | Over 10 | from 1890 | Years of | to 1900). |Age (1900). -------------+-----------+----------- Nevada | 1,086 | 12.8 Colorado | 2,141 | 5.2 Montana | 2,704 | 5.5 Texas | 2,986 | 19.7 Mississippi | 3,001 | 40.0 Florida | 3,367 | 27.8 California | 3,519 | 7.7 Delaware | 3,849 | 14.3 Louisiana | 3,859 | 45.8 Alabama | 3,966 | 41.0 Wyoming | 4,206 | 3.4 Maryland | 4,250 | 15.7 Arkansas | 4,300 | 26.6 Utah | 4,855 | 5.6 Tennessee | 4,957 | 26.6 Washington | 5,079 | 4.3 Oregon | 5,235 | 4.1 Kentucky | 5,394 | 21.6 Georgia | 5,817 | 39.8 Idaho | 5,992 | 5.1 S. Carolina | 6,064 | 45.0 Virginia | 6,079 | 30.2 Kansas | 6,253 | 4.0 Nebraska | 6,360 | 3.1 N. Carolina | 6,645 | 35.7 United States| 7,649 | 13.3 Rhode Island | 8,241 | 9.8 Missouri | 8,582 | 9.1 S. Dakota | 8,924 | 4.2 N. Dakota | 11,005 | 6.0 W. Virginia | 11,021 | 14.4 Indiana | 11,037 | 6.3 Minnesota | 11,105 | 6.0 Iowa | 11,147 | 3.6 Michigan | 11,810 | 5.9 Connecticut | 12,443 | 5.3 Ohio | 12,523 | 5.2 Wisconsin | 13,435 | 6.7 New York | 14,195 | 5.5 Illinois | 15,306 | 5.2 New Jersey | 15,697 | 6.5 Pennsylvania | 20,169 | 6.8 Massachusetts| 29,222 | 6.2 Maine | 38,581 | 3.3 New Hampshire| 45,732 | 6.8 Vermont | 57,274 | 6.7 =============+===========+==============
Although less complete than in the preceding table, the parallelism here is nevertheless striking; all the states below the average for illiteracy, except one, rank low also in the number of murders. There are however some very remarkable exceptions to the general tendency, some states with small figures for illiteracy having nevertheless high figures for homicide. It is not possible for me to explain the cause of this, the details with regard to this country being lacking (it is very remarkable that the newest states are those that constitute the exceptions). The relation between these crimes and illiteracy is undeniable however.
Italy, 1880–1883. [1010]
=================+========================+================== | Simple Homicides | Illiteracy among | and Assaults Followed | the Conscripts Provinces. | by Death | (1896). | to 100,000 Inhabitants.| %[1011] -----------------+------------------------+------------------ Girgenti | 36.5 | 65.15 Campobasso | 29.5 | 56.35 Avellino | 29.5 | 56.07 Caltanissetta | 29.0 | 58.02 Cantanzaro | 27.3 | 65.76 Trapani | 26.1 | 58.49 Cosenza | 25.7 | 44.17 Palermo | 22.3 | 45.21 Naples | 22.2 | 45.15 Potenza | 21.4 | 55.63 Caserte | 21.3 | 43.11 Aquila | 20.7 | 38.56 Calabria | 19.5 | 43.95 Rome | 17.7 | 35.33 Salerno | 17.4 | 60.37 Catania | 16.7 | 64.04 Chieti | 16.6 | 57.44 Sassari | 16.1 | 53.09 Leghorn | 14.0 | 15.68 Teramo | 13.8 | 61.37 Arezzo | 13.4 | 38.60 Ancona | 13.1 | 36.24 Lucca | 11.9 | 18.49 Messina | 10.9 | 49.52 Forli | 10.2 | 49.63 Grosseto | 10.2 | 61.42 Bari | 10.1 | 64.60 Ravenna | 10.1 | 43.23 Perugia | 10.0 | 48.99 Cagliari | 9.7 | 68.08 Pesaro e Urbino | 9.4 | 53.94 Massa e Carrara | 8.3 | 34.46 Macerata | 7.5 | 43.43 Italy | 7.0 | 36.65 Lecce | 6.9 | 58.57 Ascoli Piceno | 6.7 | 53.81 Pisa | 6.0 | 35.86 Treviso | 5.9 | 24.95 Cueno | 5.5 | 18.68 Alessandria | 5.2 | 9.86 Turin | 4.9 | 19.71 Florence | 4.3 | 35.16 Genoa | 4.2 | 24.16 Mantua | 4.0 | 25.06 Udine | 4.0 | 11.08 Venice | 3.9 | 31.92 Bologna | 3.9 | 24.68 Sienna | 3.9 | 48.56 Piacenza | 3.5 | 37.82 Padua | 3.0 | 34.32 Porto Maurizio | 3.0 | 13.64 Novara | 2.9 | 12.18 Bergama | 2.8 | 27.00 Vicenza | 2.5 | 31.41 Brescia | 2.5 | 20.72 Emilia | 2.4 | 33.08 Como | 2.3 | 8.89 Pavia | 2.3 | 21.39 Verona | 2.3 | 31.86 Ferrara | 2.2 | 36.97 Modena | 1.8 | 35.41 Belluno | 1.7 | 25.62 Cremona | 1.6 | 12.71 Milan | 1.4 | 18.85 Parma | 1.1 | 31.68 =================+========================+===================
In this country also the parallelism is undeniable; almost all the provinces with low figures for illiteracy have also low figures for criminality, and vice versa.
To conclude, here are some figures with regard to
The Netherlands, 1901. [1012]
==============+======================+================== | Assaults to | Illiteracy among Provinces. | 100,000 Inhabitants. | the Conscripts. | | % --------------+----------------------+------------------ Drenthe | 15.9 | 7.2 Limburg | 13.7 | 3.6 North Brabant | 12.9 | 4.1 Groningen | 12.6 | 2.8 Zeeland | 8.3 | 2.3 Overijssel | 8.2 | 3.3 Gelderland | 8.2 | 1.7 Netherlands | 7.6 | 2.3 Friesland | 7.3 | 2.3 Utrecht | 6.9 | 1.1 South Holland | 4.2 | 1.1 North Holland | 3.8 | 1.2 ==============+======================+==================
We have here then a confirmation in a general way of the rule proved for other countries.
In view of all the preceding data we must conclude that it is the less civilized persons who commit crimes of this class. How is this to be explained? This is what we shall proceed to examine.
The first reason is that the more civilized a person is the less revengeful feelings arise when some one injures him. The more the motives of actions are appreciated, the less the desire for revenge springs up. A child wants to revenge himself even upon an inanimate object that has hurt him; it is almost the same with uncivilized peoples, who so rarely take account of the motives of human action. It is not so long ago that men took vengeance upon maniacs, a thing which could not happen today.
In the second place, when the idea of revenge arises in a civilized man he is more in a position to restrain himself than the uncivilized; he is less impulsive; he knows that later he will repent of his act, and that it may have disagreeable consequences for him.
In the third place civilization inspires a great aversion to acts of violence.
Thus we come to the correlation between these crimes and the education of the poor. The child is often moved to revenge, there is no inner check to restrain his passions. When his education has been neglected he runs, as his age advances, more danger than others of being guilty of these crimes. And then children are very imitative. If we had good statistics with regard to violent criminals we should see that they almost always spring from surroundings in which violence is common. All authors who are especially concerned with this matter are in agreement on this point. [1013] The fact that parents among the lower classes use blows as a means of instruction has for its national consequence that when the children are grown they themselves have no fear of making use of violence. [1014]
One further observation must be made here. Many persons think it quite natural that one should not have the right to avenge himself for an injury. Sociology, however, teaches us quite otherwise. Among primitive peoples revenge, instead of being a thing prohibited, is a sacred duty. Little by little vengeance, at first unlimited, became confined to “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”; this in turn was replaced by the so called “compensation”; and this in its turn yielded to penalties inflicted by an authority superior to both parties. [1015]
If we enquire which are the countries where homicides and assaults are committed most frequently we find that they are the most backward, and thus give a picture of time past. Here we have in mind especially Sicily (see the table with regard to Italy some pages higher) and Corsica (while between 1880 and 1884 there was an annual average of 6.4 homicides to the million inhabitants, the figure for homicides in Corsica was 110.2). Nothing is more mistaken than to believe that we have here a question of race. As Professor Tarde remarks (see the quotation on pp. 109–110), there have been times when the people of these countries were much less violent than the northern peoples, now so little given to this kind of crime. These two islands have so high a figure because the “vendetta” is still universal there, and because it is considered as a duty. [1016]
Although in less degree, the case is almost the same with the lower classes of other countries as regards this type of crime. There are those who from their manner of life most resemble our distant ancestors. They are not, at least so much as other classes of society, instilled with the idea that they have no right to avenge themselves personally. On the contrary it is often considered an act of cowardice to allow an insult or an injury to pass without taking revenge. This is why the police are often resisted and their interference considered as an intrusive meddling with matters with which they have no concern.
Such, in my opinion, are the principal reasons why the less civilized classes are guilty of these crimes, and thus we are given an idea of their etiology.
In the first table upon the relation between illiteracy and serious assaults (Germany) we added also the percentage of votes given to the socialists. As the table shows the percentage of these votes is in general smaller in the localities where the kind of crime of which we have been treating is most frequent; and vice versa. It is, then, evident that there is a correlation between the two phenomena, and this is easily explained. In the working circles in which socialism is beginning to make its way, there is growing little by little, an interest in things other than those which formerly occupied the working-men in their leisure hours. They begin to become civilized and to have an aversion to the coarser amusements. At the same time the feeling of solidarity is awakened in them, and thus a powerful moral check is created.
It was especially the figures for the crimes of vengeance that we placed beside those for the votes given to the socialists, since the relation between the two phenomena stands out very distinctly. This correlation, however, holds for criminality in general, for almost all the countries with a large number of socialist voters show also fairly low figures for criminality, and vice versa. Nevertheless this correlation is not as great for other crimes as for those which we are at present considering, which is explained by the fact that most of the criminals who are guilty of them are not much like other criminals, especially those who have no respect for property (criminals from poverty excepted). These last, greedy of pleasure, and always looking out for their own interests, are those who, as regards the intensity of their social instincts, occupy the last place. All this is inapplicable to criminals by violence; they are not always really wicked, and after their crime they often show a sincere repentance. Socialism exercises no influence upon the category of individuals from whom the economic criminals (from cupidity) are recruited, persons, that is to say, who think only of their own interest, and show themselves insensible to a movement for the well-being of the whole working class.
We have still to speak of one question which is sometimes put in treating of this subject. If it is true, says some one, that it is principally in consequence of their ignorance and their lack of civilization that the lower classes commit the crimes in question, these crimes must little by little present themselves less often, for the development of these classes is improving, even if only gradually. Now criminal statistics do show a gradual diminution in these crimes. Homicide, the gravest form, has continually decreased in England, Switzerland, France, and Sweden (where it has been reduced to a very small figure), and in Italy (where a considerable diminution has been shown). [1017] If we had criminal statistics much more ancient than the existing ones it would be shown that this crime has decreased enormously compared with remote epochs. The progress of civilization in the lower strata of society is very slow, and criminal statistics are all of relatively recent date.
Germany is, as far as I know, the only country where there has been any considerable increase in these crimes (except those against life) in the last twenty years. This exception does not, in my opinion, invalidate the rule. The lack of civilization among the lower orders is not the sole cause of these crimes; the innumerable conflicts engendered by the present social system are also a cause. Besides, the impulse given by the economic development in Germany during this period has hardly been equalled in other countries; it has seen its population grow and become congested, and conflicts increase in like proportion, [1018] a cause sufficient to neutralize the civilization which brings it about. Further there is the possibility that the police and the courts have been more efficient during this period, so as to make the increase of crime seem greater than it really is. [1019] Finally, alcoholism is increasing, and may also neutralize the effect of civilization. [1020]
We come, then, to one of the most important causes of this kind of crime, namely alcoholism. Not only is chronic alcoholism demoralizing (as we have seen on pp. 509 ff.), but drunkenness at the acute stage makes a person more disposed to commit acts of violence, and at the same time less able to control his instincts and passions. Further, the degree of civilization reached by the individual has a great influence upon his conduct when he is intoxicated; the civilized man is then much less dangerous than the man without education. Dr. Grotjahn puts it as follows: “The development of the moral consciousness is not without influence upon the harmlessness or danger of intoxication. Persons in whom the sense of responsibility for the consequences of their actions has been sharpened by education, whether they owe this to their teachers or their parents or to their own experience, in case they become intoxicated to the point of having their minds clouded, will still always keep a remnant of their power of judgment, which will hold them back from violent and disastrous actions. On the other hand, in the case of persons who lack all moral training, the scanty moral restraints which check their native impulses most quickly disappear.” [1021]
An examination of the physiological process caused by large doses of alcohol not coming properly within the scope of a sociological work like this, it is sufficient to show that great quantities of alcohol undoubtedly do have this effect. [1022] We shall accordingly pass on to the question of the correlation between violent crime and the acute stage of alcoholism.
There are different ways of attempting to settle this question. In Part One we have seen that some authors have tried the dynamic method, Fornasari di Verce, for example, showing that in Italy, Great Britain, Ireland, and New South Wales, these crimes increase and diminish with the consumption of alcohol. Professor Ferri shows that during the years 1849–1880 the increase and diminution of cases of assault in France coincide with the success and failure of the vintage. [1023]
Another method consists in inquiring what day of the week assaults are most frequent. If the abuse of alcohol is really an important factor in the etiology of these crimes more of them must be committed upon Sunday, Saturday, and Monday, for the abuse of alcohol is greatest on these days. The following table throws some light on the matter. [1024]
Number of Assaults Committed on Different Days.
=========+==========+==========+=========+===========+========== | | |Canton of| | | Vienna |Korneuburg| Zürich |Düsseldorf.| Worms |(1896-97).|(1896-97).| (1890). | |(1896-98). ---------+----------+----------+---------+-----------+---------- Sunday | 68 | 72 | 60 | 121 | 142 Monday | 49 | 12 | 22 | 32 | 57 Tuesday | 27 | 11 | } | 9 | 34 Wednesday| 19 | 14 | }41 | 9 | 34 Thursday | 19 | 15 | } | 5 | 35 Friday | 18 | 4 | } | 4 | 27 Saturday | 28 | 11 | 18 | 35 | 37 =========+==========+==========+=========+===========+==========
The figures and the thesis agree, then, perfectly. It is plain, to be sure, that we cannot charge all the cases falling on Sunday to alcohol, since people come together more on that day, and hence the danger of a conflict is greater, but most of the Sunday cases are certainly due to alcohol.
Other authors compare the geography of these crimes with the consumption of alcohol. Professor Aschaffenburg, for example, in the study already quoted, points out the fact that in Germany the countries with the greatest number of assaults are also those where there is the largest consumption of alcohol. [1025]
However, although these indirect methods are not without value, it seems to me that since they contain so many elements of uncertainty they yield to the direct method. [1026] It is for this reason that I shall follow here especially the direct method and shall indicate the percentage of those who have committed these crimes when they were in a state of intoxication. Though making use of this direct method I do not think it infallible, but it is less liable to error than the others. The especial weakness of it is that the persons who are accused pretend in extenuation that they committed their crimes in a state of drunkenness. Good statistics do not rely solely upon the statements of the prisoners, but also upon the facts brought out at the trial. And then, as Professor Löffler remarks, all those arraigned are not acute enough to simulate a state of drunkenness, and there are even those who, although addicted to overindulgence in alcohol, will deny that they were intoxicated, either from shame, or for fear of a more severe punishment.
Most criminal statistics do not concern themselves with this subject, and even those that do are less detailed than we might wish. Nevertheless they are sufficient, I believe, to prove the correlation in question.
Austria, 1896–1897. [1027]
==================+==================================== |Percentage of Convicts who Committed | their Crimes in a State Crimes. | of Drunkenness. +------------------+----------------- | Vienna. | Korneuburg. ------------------+------------------+----------------- Rebellion | 77.7 | 70.0 Malicious mischief| 63.4 | 43.5 Threats | 56.8 | 46.7 Serious assaults | 54.1 | 56.4 ==================+==================+=================
Baden (Grand Duchy), 1895.
In 1895 64% of the cases of rebellion and 46% of the assaults were committed in a state of inebriety. [1028]
Belgium, 1872–1895.
Out of the 2,045 convicts who entered the central prison at Louvain from 1874 to 1895, 344 or 16.8% were drunk at the time of committing the crime; of the 130 sentenced to hard labor for life 53, or 40.7%; of the 88 condemned to death 38, or 43.1%. [1029] If we consider that a very great number of these criminals were guilty of economic crimes, and doubtless did not commit these in a state of intoxication, the percentage of those who must have committed crimes of vengeance in such a condition becomes very large.
France.
At the penitentiary congress at Brussels Marambat reported that out of a total of 787 convicted of homicide, assault, etc., studied by him, there were 260 or 33% who committed their crimes in a state of drunkenness. [1030]
Hungary, 1897.
At the same congress Dr. J. Fekete stated that in 1897, 75% of the 25,000 street brawls, 66% of the 1,574 cases of resistance to the authorities, 50% of the 13,564 serious assaults, and most of the homicides were committed in a state of intoxication. [1031]
Massachusetts, 1894–1895. [1032]
Crimes. Percentage of Crimes Committed in a State of Intoxication. Malicious mischief 70.0 Homicide 64.7 Threats and violence 59.6 Murder 25.0 Resistance to officers 19.0
Norway, 1886–1889. [1033]
Crimes. Percentage of Prisoners who had Committed their Crimes in a State of Intoxication. Resistance to officers 81.8 Homicide 66.6 Assault 55.0 Threats 40.0
Netherlands, 1901.
The criminal statistics of the Netherlands being among the few that give any information upon this point, the following table is of real importance: [1034]
Crimes. Percentage of Convicts who Committed their Crimes in a State of Intoxication. Serious assaults 51.88 Resistance to officers 58.04 Malicious mischief 41.69 Threats 39.77 Assaults 31.27
Sweden, 1887–1897.
During this period, out of 2,020 convicted of crimes against the authorities, 1,648, or 81.5%, had committed their crimes in a state of intoxication, and 4,358, or 67.4% out of 6,464 convicted of murder, homicide, and other crimes of violence. [1035]
Switzerland, 1892–1896.
The official statistics for these years tell us that 34.8% of the assaults and homicides were caused by alcohol. [1036]
It cannot be claimed, of course, that none of these crimes would have been committed if their authors had not been drunk, but everyone will agree with me that these high percentages show that acute alcoholism is a very important cause.
We have now reached the end of our remarks upon the etiology of these crimes, and have shown that the principal causes are, first, the present structure of society, which brings about innumerable conflicts; second, the lack of civilization and education among the poorer classes; and third, alcoholism, which is in turn a consequence of the social environment. [1037]
What part is played in these crimes by the so-called individual factors? It seems to me that it is like that which the individual factors play in other crimes—they explain in part which are the individuals that commit the crimes, but they do not explain why the crimes are committed.
This is totally contrary to what many criminologists claim, namely that it is especially the effect of individual factors that is seen in these crimes. Statistics prove the inaccuracy of this. If it were true these crimes ought to appear equally in all classes of society, which, as we have seen, is not the case. A choleric person naturally runs more danger of committing such a crime than one who is phlegmatic; but no one will deny that in all classes the proportion of the persons born with a choleric disposition is the same. However, the influence of environment brings it about that in the well-to-do classes even the choleric run little danger of such a crime. Superficial civilization (for a veneer is all that a great part of the bourgeoisie possesses) is sufficient to limit these crimes to an insignificant minimum.
The obviousness of the reasons which have caused these acts to be classed as crimes is such that it is needless to speak of them. In a society like ours, with its numerous conflicts and its dense population, life would be impossible if the individual were not forbidden to avenge himself personally. Sociology teaches us that vengeance, at first permitted, and even obligatory, has become a prohibited act, because of the great harm it does to society. [1038]
B. Infanticide.
There are two chief motives for infanticide, which operate separately or together, namely, fear of dishonor, and poverty. We shall speak first of the former and put the question to begin with, what sort of persons are guilty of this crime? Criminal statistics answer that—
First, they are, almost without exception, women.
Second, they are unmarried women much oftener than married.
Third, the guilty are almost exclusively very poor. According to Italian statistics 88.1% of them are indigent; in Austria, 90.8%; and there are no rich or well-to-do women among them.
Fourth, the women of the working class are much more often guilty than those of the independent class, and the class of domestics furnishes especially a very high figure (Germany). These results are confirmed by the data of other countries. In Austria 80% of those convicted between 1880 and 1882 were domestics, [1039] and in France the same was true of 35% of those convicted between 1876 and 1880. [1040]
Fifth, the women working in the fields are especially likely to fall into this crime (Germany); the data of other countries also show that it is especially in the country that infanticide is committed. Dr. Socquet shows that in France between 1871 and 1875 there were, to the million inhabitants, 35 persons arraigned out of the rural population, and 22 to the urban. [1041]
Sixth, illiteracy is very frequent among those convicted of infanticide. We have seen that in Austria 39.5%, in France 20.0%, and in Italy 92.9% were illiterate. Women knowing more than how to read and write were not found among these criminals.
Most of the cases of infanticide are identical; it generally is, as Fournier says, “a girl who has allowed herself to have a child without the permission of the municipality”, and who has been abandoned by her lover.
The ruling moral ideas place before her a frightful dilemma; if her pregnancy is known by those about her and the child remains alive, she is covered with ignominy, and a painful life awaits her. On the other hand if she makes the child disappear, the others ignore everything, and she avoids dishonor and its consequences. She therefore attempts to conceal her pregnancy as long as possible, in the hope of a miscarriage. But when she finds herself disappointed, when not only terrible physical pains, but also mental tortures are making her almost mad [1042]—then it happens that she kills her child.
Statistics show that most of these crimes are committed by women of the lower classes. The number of unmarried mothers is here relatively great; infanticide is quite rare (though a little more frequent than one would suppose from the criminal statistics). There must be special circumstances, therefore, to lead some of these women to this crime. As we have seen in treating of marriage, the ideas of intimate relations between persons who are not married are much less severe in the proletariat, than in the bourgeoisie (a consequence of the fact that the social causes of marriage are much less strong in the latter than in the former), so that among the proletariat these relations are pretty common. If they have consequences, the father and mother generally marry. In this case the idea of killing the child does not come to the woman. The unmarried mothers (very often domestics), who are guilty of this crime are especially those who, seduced and then abandoned by men of a higher class, have no family that can receive them.
Besides women of the working class, there are also among the infanticides some of the petty bourgeoisie, where the moral disapproval of extra-matrimonial sexual commerce is very severe.
Not all women who find themselves in the situation described commit the crime in question, of course. One will reason more than another, and will prefer dishonor to the danger of a criminal trial; one woman has the maternal instinct more fully developed than another, etc. In relation to the social sentiments we see here a situation contrary to what occurs in the case of most crimes. Crime is an egoistic act, that is to say an act which injures the interests of others. This is true of infanticide, but this differs from most of the other crimes in being committed to escape moral disapproval, while they are committed only to obtain a personal profit or to satisfy the passions. This is why those guilty of infanticide are not generally those whose social sentiments have little intensity, as is mostly the case with those who are guilty of economic or sexual crimes. Infanticides are persons sensitive to the opinion of others, while those who have little social feeling easily bear shame. [1043]
These individual differences explain in part which are the individuals who become guilty of the crime in question, but not the cause of its existence. There are only a few crimes whose social origin is as clear as that of infanticide. If the present structure of society did not make the present form of marriage necessary, and thus bring about moral disapprobation of extra-matrimonial sexual relations, there would be no infanticide caused by fear of dishonor. [1044]
The repression of some of the strongest natural desires, required by our present society, is so great that these requirements are bound to be violated by some individuals in whom these desires are very pronounced. This is true not only in the sphere of the economic life, but also in that of the sexual life. As long as cupidity is awakened in many, while only a few can satisfy it, theft will exist; as long as the satisfaction of the sexual desires is permitted only after certain economic conditions have been complied with, the prohibition will be violated, and some persons will try to destroy the evidence of their acts. [1045]
Besides the fear of shame, poverty also plays a part in the etiology of infanticide. Again, it is the two motives combined that are responsible. The great number of infanticides among domestics are not committed simply from fear of shame, but also because the mother, abandoned by everyone (especially in a country where inquiry into paternity is prohibited) does not know how to support her child. Besides these cases there are some committed from poverty alone, for example when married women commit this crime (something, it should be added, which happens very rarely).
Some statistical data will show that poverty is a fairly important factor in the etiology of infanticide. Dr. Weiss shows that in Belgium infanticide increased greatly in the years that were bad economically (see p. 63 of Pt. I), and Dr. Starke does the same for Prussia (see p. 66). [1046]
As we have pointed out above, infanticide for the cause of poverty was quite general among primitive peoples, since they were not in a position to support a large population. It was for this reason that the act was not considered immoral, and that it was even required in some cases. In consequence of the continually increasing productivity of labor, infanticide fell more and more into desuetude, and at the same time was considered more and more reprehensible. [1047]
V. POLITICAL CRIMES
Finally we have still to treat of political offenses, offenses which, in comparison with others, occur very rarely, and which by their nature are totally different. [1048]
The origin of the state, and the possibility of political crimes, are bound up with a certain phase of the development of the economic life, that is to say with the origin of marked contrasts of fortune. Those who had monopolized the power in the state defended their position by laws whose infraction was threatened with severe penalties. Economic conditions, however, undergo considerable changes, and when these have reached a certain degree, the oppressed class, having become the more powerful, breaks the political power of the ruling class and seizes it for itself. If the dominant class does all that it can to maintain its position unimpaired to the last moment, it will necessarily happen that this development will lead to political crimes. This kind of political crime may be called great political criminality. In western Europe the last great struggle of this nature was that of the feudal classes and the bourgeoisie. The former, once necessary, had become superfluous and harmful; the bourgeoisie on the other hand, from an insignificant class had become the most important. It overturned the whole political system which embarrassed it, seized the power, and transformed the state according to the exigencies of the economic system. A repetition of the same process in eastern Europe we are now witnessing in the changes going on in Russia. The economic development no longer corresponds to the political system, which sooner or later will inevitably be replaced by the modern system.
It would be a waste of time to insist upon the fact that those who commit these acts have nothing in common with ordinary criminals but the name. Most criminals are individuals whose social sentiments are reduced to a minimum, and who injure others purely for the satisfaction of their own desires. The political criminals of whom we are speaking, on the other hand, are the direct opposite; they risk their most sacred interests, their liberty and their life, for the benefit of society; they injure the ruling class only to aid the oppressed classes, and consequently all humanity. While the ordinary criminal is generally “l’homme canaille” (as van Benedikt phrases it in his “Biologie und Kriminalstatistik”) the political criminal is “homo nobilis.” History rights the matter, for the name of the ordinary great criminal is pronounced only with horror, and ends by falling into oblivion, while the political criminal survives in the memory of posterity as a hero. [1049]
We must put in the same class the political criminals who aim to deliver a subjugated people from their oppressors. The authors of these crimes also have nothing in common with ordinary criminals.
Besides these two kinds of political crimes, which are plainly collective in their nature, there are cases of crimes committed by individuals which for the most part are attempts upon the life of the monarch or of one of his representatives. The more absolute a government, the more liberty is restricted, and the less chance there is, consequently, of seeing the situation changed by legal means, the greater will become the danger that one of those oppressed will kill the autocrat, either to better the situation or to take revenge for what he and his have suffered. Anyone who wants to follow the genesis of this kind of crime has only to turn to Russia. There all the factors meet which lead to political homicide; the repression of all freedom, a corrupt bureaucracy, and the impossibility of obtaining the least change by legal means.
These circumstances naturally excite the revengeful feelings which sooner or later show themselves in acts. Though we may have the conviction that these acts are almost always useless, though we may have a deep aversion to violence—this does not justify us in ranking those who do these things with ordinary criminals. It matters not how we may abhor violence as such; every reasonable man will justify it when it serves to defend oneself, and most of the acts of political criminals in Russia are only acts of defense against the unheard-of cruelty and violence of the government. [1050]
Finally there remains a third kind of political crimes, analogous to ordinary crime, the assassination of the monarch by individuals who thus attempt to place themselves in power. These are actuated by the same vile motives that inspire the robber-murderer—cupidity, desire to dominate, etc.
Now what are the political crimes committed in our days? Leaving aside the case of Russia, which is still living in an epoch that western Europe has left behind, there are only the political crimes of socialists and anarchists. There is little to be said about those committed by socialists. The international social democracy attempts to reach its end by legal means. Since the fall of absolutism it has been possible to exercise an influence on the state in this way, an influence which varies with the country. It is this possibility that the social democracy makes use of. In conformity with its fundamental principles it rejects all violence against the head of the state. Accordingly its partisans have never committed such acts. The more democratic the constitution of a country, the less justification the social democracy will have for political crimes, as in Switzerland, for example, a country where the penal code, moreover, mentions but few political crimes. In other countries, where the democratic institutions are weak, where the constitutional monarchy has still an absolutist character, and where social democracy has become powerful, as in Germany, political crimes are inevitable. Their number, however, is insignificant in comparison with ordinary crimes. From a criminological point of view they have little importance, though often punished severely, and they are generally limited to the crime of leze majesty. Social democrats are, then, sometimes guilty of minor political offenses, and in some countries only. Whether this party will not in the future be guilty of crime of the great political type, or, in other words, whether it will not come to political revolution, is another question and one that no one can answer with certainty. Like all the bourgeoisie when the contest with the feudal classes was still going on, the social democrats are a revolutionary class; they wish to place society upon a basis different from the present one. It is possible that in democratic countries they will attain this by legal means, and consequently without there being any reason for political crime. However, it may also happen that at a given moment when the proletariat forms the majority of the legislative body, the ruling class may have recourse to a “coup d’état”, to a political crime, in order to prevent the proletariat from governing. This possibility is even a probability in some countries, where the opposition of classes is very marked. In Germany, for example, where the social democracy is very powerful, it is very likely that the government will attempt some day to suppress universal suffrage by a “coup d’état.” It is only in such a case that the social democracy will in its turn abandon the legal way and be forced to have recourse to other methods.
In the second place there are the political crimes of anarchists. Their number is not great enough for us to learn their etiology from statistics. [1051] We must therefore analyze individual cases. What are the individuals that are guilty of these? The anarchists of the propaganda are most exclusively young men. Leauthier and Langs were 20 years old, Angelillo also, Henry 21, Caserio 21, Schwabe 23, Pallas 24, Lucheni 25, Vaillant and Bresci 31, and Salvador 33, at the time they committed their crimes, and as far as I know there were none of them who were over 33. In disposition they were very excitable. As soon as an idea took hold of them they thought of nothing else. Chance brought them into contact with anarchism which immediately made a conquest of them. Brought up in another environment they would have become, for example, religious devotees; in fact Caserio, Salvador, Vaillant, Cyvoct, and Henry were such before becoming anarchists. [1052]
Extreme individualism is also a characteristic of theirs. [1053] They abhor discipline, from which it follows that they nourish a fierce hatred of militarism. Even a mild form of discipline, such as that of a party of which one voluntarily becomes a member, is insupportable to them. Some of them have been socialists, but have soon left the party. Among these was Henry, who says in his defense: “For an instant I was attracted by socialism, but I did not delay in separating myself from this party. I had too much love for liberty, too much respect for individual initiative, too much repugnance to incorporation, to take a number in the enlisted army of the fourth estate.” [1054]
Another characteristic of nearly all active anarchists, and one intimately connected with the preceding, is great vanity. Lucheni, for instance, in speaking of his crime said, “I wanted to kill a person of note, because that would get into print.” Vaillant had himself photographed before making his attack, distributed his portraits right and left, and when arrested asked whether the journals had printed his picture, etc.
These traits of character, observed in the case of these individuals, are not rare; vain and excitable individualists are fairly numerous, yet almost none become active anarchists. We must therefore seek the explanation elsewhere, and ask ourselves the question, in what environment have they lived? When the president of the tribunal before which Lucheni appeared, asked him what was the motive that led him to commit his act, he replied, “It was poverty.” This is applicable to almost all the active anarchists. See, for example, the life of Vaillant. An illegitimate child without any education, he had to earn his living at the age of 12; having escaped from his employer, with whom he was living, he implored his mother to take him in. Rebuffed he had himself arrested by the police, but when he was once more brought back to his parents they refused anew to receive him. He tried to make his own way, but failed in all that he undertook. It was when embittered by all the miseries he had experienced that he became acquainted with socialism, but finding this too theoretical he ranked himself on the side of the anarchists, and the last link in this chain of misery was his well-known crime. [1055]
There are authors who claim that poverty is not to be considered as one of the principal causes of anarchy, and in support of their assertion cite the case of Henry and some others, who while not living in easy circumstances, yet did not know the blackest poverty. Those who reason thus have a false notion of the motives that impel anarchists. It is not only the poverty that they have themselves experienced that moves them, but also, and chiefly, the poverty of others. Those who remain insensible to the sufferings of their neighbors never become anarchists; for not being able to draw any personal profit from anarchism, they consider it madness. Placed in unfavorable conditions such persons become ordinary criminals, or commit suicide. They never sacrifice themselves for an ideal.
Thus we come to another psychological trait of the anarchists, namely that they are born with pronounced altruistic tendencies. [1056] It is their altruism which separates them from the ordinary great criminal, whose social instincts are very weak. [1057]
It seems paradoxical to say that persons who commit such acts are of an altruistic nature, but the paradox is only apparent. When two persons, an egoist and an altruist, see a child being maltreated, the former goes on his way saying that he would only get himself into trouble if he interfered; the latter, on the other hand, delivers the child from his tormentor, to whom he may give a good thrashing in addition. Here the violent person is the altruist, the other the egoist. Every comparison is imperfect, and this is the case with the one before us, but there is some analogy between the act cited and those of the anarchists. The crimes which they commit are egoistic towards certain persons, but altruistic with reference to others. As a consequence of their own poverty and of the irritation they feel when they see that of their fellows, they have been seized with a hatred of society and wish to avenge themselves. These sentiments are not tempered by much intellectual development. This is a very important factor in the development of active anarchism. Almost all these persons are either very ignorant or have only an elementary education, some know a little more, and persons of thorough education are not found at all among them. Further, most of them lack pronounced intellectual aptitudes, but are rather especially impulsive. [1058]
These individuals, excitable, vain, with little intellectual capacity, and ignorant in addition, but oppressed by their own poverty and that of others, and filled with a hatred of society, come into contact with anarchism. It is unnecessary to give an exposition of this doctrine; [1059] the active anarchists in their ignorance get no clear idea of any theory whatever, and certainly not of anything as vague and confused as anarchism. They have heard it said that it looks to the formation of a society of altruists where there will be no more poverty, and this appeals to their altruistic instincts; at the same time anarchism gives a preponderating part to the individual, and this draws their vanity. Thus their hate increases, and at the same time attaches itself to certain individuals, whom anarchism holds responsible for existing conditions. Further, the absurd opinion has been instilled into them that it is possible for society to be reorganized at a single stroke, and that to attain this end it will be necessary to use violence.
Is it astonishing that such individuals come to attempt homicide? No; to be sure all persons of this kind do not go so far; for that it would be necessary that other conditions should be complied with. It is plain that persons with a great aversion to violence would run little risk of attempting an assassination; with others it is courage that is lacking; others still attach too high a price to life and liberty to be willing to risk them; etc. We must note this last point especially. Generally active anarchists are persons who care nothing for a life in which they have nothing further to lose. Their conduct in court and their indifference in the face of death are proof of this; knowing beforehand that they will almost certainly not go unpunished their act is often an indirect suicide.
If we ask what the active anarchists wish to attain by their crimes the answer is principally that they wish to avenge upon society the misery experienced by others and by themselves, [1060] they wish to terrorize the ruling classes, in order to force upon them social reforms; they wish to set an example to the working classes and finally, they wish to satisfy their vanity, by making themselves talked of. Once committed, the crime is often the commencement of a vicious circle, since society avenges itself upon the author, who, in turn, is avenged by his friends; imitation thus leading to new crimes.
As in the case of all other crimes, I find for anarchism only social causes, and in the last analysis, only economic causes. To be sure, the individuals who commit these crimes are already predisposed in that direction, but this is true of other crimes also. Only the predisposition in these latter is simple, while that which leads to anarchistic crimes is much more complex. However, this predisposition alone explains nothing. I would ask those who think that only individual factors play any part, whether fanatical persons with all the characteristics of the anarchists of our time have not been found in all ages and countries. Everyone, I think, will answer in the affirmative. Well then, anarchistic crimes have occurred only during a certain period and in certain countries. No one can deny that there are as many persons predisposed to anarchistic crimes in a country like Germany, as there are in Italy, for example. Yet anarchistic crimes do not occur in Germany, for the good reason that the material conditions of the proletariat there are so much better than in Italy, and the degree of intellectual development in the working people is so much higher; the German working-man derides the “naïveté” of the anarchists, and detests their futile crimes. It is in the environment alone then that we find the causes of active anarchism, the poverty and ignorance in which the lower classes live.
VI. PATHOLOGICAL CRIMES
So far we have been examining crime in its relation to the economic and social environment. We have not been able to discover the existence of individual factors; the celebrated formula, “crime = individual factor + social factor,” has been shown to be incorrect if we are seeking for the causes of crime instead of asking why a certain individual has become a criminal. The conclusion obtained by sociology is the same as that arrived at in anthropology by authors like Manouvrier, Baer, and Näcke.
However, when one is trying to determine the cause of crime by sociology, certain cases are at times met with that cannot be explained in this way. For example, one person will steal useless objects which he is perfectly well able to buy; another will assault or kill without provocation, etc. These cases, it is true, are the exception, but they do exist and must not be neglected. [1061] We have here, then, real individual factors, factors which are found in certain individuals only. Other crimes, forming the great majority, are committed from motives which form the basis of all human acts, but are stronger with some few than they are with the general body of mankind. It is these individuals who run more danger than most of committing a crime when they live in a certain environment. The great mass of criminals differ only quantitatively from persons who never get into the courts; the criminals we are about to consider on the other hand differ qualitatively also.
One thing more before we ask ourselves what this individual factor is. As many authors have remarked, it very often happens that, even in the cases we are about to treat, there is a social factor. [1062] The proof of this is that individuals thus disposed to crime, but belonging to the well-to-do classes, seldom get to the point of committing them; because their education being better, the tendency is sooner noticed, they are better watched, and thus their committing a crime is often avoided. Born-criminals, in the sense of those who become criminals whatever the circumstances may be (the only meaning that can properly be given to the word “born” here), are doubtless very rare. [1063]
What, then, is the nature of this individual factor? It is especially the Italian school that has busied itself with this problem, and in doing so has rendered a service to science, although it has given an undue importance to this individual factor, attempting to discover it in all crimes. The first hypothesis given by Professor Lombroso was that of atavism, according to which the criminal was an individual in whom reappeared the characteristics of his remote ancestors, the desire to steal, kill, etc. It will not be far from the truth if we assert that almost no reputable scientist now accepts this hypothesis as correct. It has been attacked both from the side of sociology and from that of anthropology. Sociologists have proved that the facts contradict Professor Lombroso’s thesis, for primitive peoples are neither thieves nor murderers, and our ancestors, consequently, may be regarded as cleared of the same charge. [1064]
Anthropologists also are strongly opposed to this hypothesis. In his article, “De geboren misdadiger” (the born-criminal) Professor Jelgersma says that most of the anomalies observed in certain criminals have no atavistic character, such as unsymmetrical eyes and ears, abnormal growth of hair, etc. [1065] Dr. A. Baer makes the same remark in his “Der Verbrecher in anthropologischer Beziehung”, and goes on as follows: “The number of such abnormalities, which betray a disordered and an apparently genuine atavistic condition, is ... so small and so accidental, that no force can be recognized in them that might serve for the explanation of criminality, or establish a causal connection with the criminal nature of an individual. Out of this mixture of stigmata of the most various origin and importance, to attempt to find the sole basis in their atavistic character is to do more than permissible violence to the facts. [1066]
After this beginning the Italian school put forth another explanation, to which it attached the more importance as the hypothesis of atavism fell into discredit: the criminal is either an epileptic or morally insane. Although the correctness of this hypothesis has not been proved any more than the other, [1067] the Italian school here found itself in a field recognized by criminal-anthropologists as its true one. At present one has even the right to say that the opinion in this regard is almost unanimous. [1068] The origin of the tendencies of part of the criminals is to be found in the pathological nature of the individuals themselves. [1069] These are disordered or degenerate, not, as some authors would have us believe, individuals differing more or less from the average, but persons who suffer from mental diseases, or whose nervous system is affected. [1070]
Among those disordered and degenerate, some individuals [1071] have tendencies not found in others (such as the desire to kill for the sake of killing), or their moral sentiments are excessively weak. It is to be noticed that we have met with degeneracy above, as it is to be named among the causes of alcoholism and prostitution also. In treating of economic crimes we saw that degenerates also run more danger than others of succumbing in the struggle for existence, and hence become criminals more easily. Thus we meet degeneracy both as a direct and as an indirect cause of crime.
We might leave the matter here, for we have come to a field other than that of sociology. However, one more question presents itself. To what extent are the economic system and its consequences the cause of these maladies? It is plain that this important question belongs in a work on sociology. We shall accordingly attempt to answer it briefly with the aid of competent authorities.
First of all, we note that heredity plays a great part in these maladies. The authors who have taken up the subject agree. It has been remarked that:
First, the inheritance of defects is not inevitable; degenerate parents may have sound children, though the chances are not very great.
Second, the disease of the parents is not always transmitted as such to the child, but the child may be predisposed to this same disease or one analogous. Dr. Féré expresses this as follows: “The diseases of the nervous system ... make up a single family, indissolubly united by the laws of heredity ... everyone (of those who have these diseases), if he is still fertile, can reproduce them all.” [1072]
In speaking of heredity we come to the first relation between the diseases in question and the social environment, since, in our present society, human reproduction is intimately bound up with the economic life. A person who is diseased but rich is often in a position to marry and procreate, while he would have had a smaller chance if sexual selection alone had been effective. On the other hand many well and strong individuals are prevented at present from establishing a family, since they lack the means to support it.
A second harmful kind of selection in our present society is found in the effect of militarism, which takes the strongest individuals, decimates them in time of war, or returns them to society weakened and diseased, while the weak have the greater chance to procreate.
In the third place, the ignorance of the harmful effects for humanity of the reproduction of degenerates is one of the principal reasons why degeneracy is so frequently present. This ignorance is great in the well-to-do classes, and naturally greater still among the poor. It is often repeated, and with truth, that man takes great care to improve his live stock by selection but takes none whatever in the matter of his own race; the weak and the diseased continue to reproduce themselves to the detriment of all society. The lack of all feeling of responsibility, natural to our intensely individualistic society, also contributes its share toward bringing to birth so many unhappy creatures for whom it would have been better if they had never existed.
If we ask how it happens that one individual or another is degenerate, we must answer that very often this degeneracy is due to heredity, either in part or altogether. But if we enquire into the causes of degeneracy in general heredity ceases to be a cause. As Professor Dallemagne says: “Heredity creates nothing; from heredity to heredity we must still go back to the cause.” [1073]
What are at present the principal characteristics of the relation between degeneracy and the present economic system with its consequences? Some authors in treating of the etiology of degeneracy express themselves only in general terms, and point out no other cause than “unfavorable circumstances.” Professor Jelgersma, for example, says: “The simple psychoses, melancholia, mania, etc. are caused by unfavorable circumstances. The cause of the psychoses of degeneracy is deeper; the unfavorable circumstances have exercised their influence from generation to generation, and thus an individual is born who is abnormal from birth.” [1074]
These unfavorable circumstances must be more precisely defined, therefore. We shall divide them into four great groups. [1075]
First. The material condition of the poor classes. “To be well,” says Dr. Toulouse, “one must be sufficiently fed, must clothe himself according to the season, be clean, not work beyond one’s strength, and be more or less exempt from care.” [1076] This is a simple truth of which all the world is convinced when it is a question of themselves or of their families, but which the physicians forget only too often when they are speaking of the social causes of diseases. [1077]
In the first place the poor classes are badly and insufficiently fed, and as a consequence grow weak, and the children born to them are inferior physically and mentally. The insufficient nourishment of the mother during her pregnancy, and the insufficient nourishment of the child during the first years of his life, are especially fatal to him. Then those who are badly fed are predisposed to tuberculosis, scrofula, and rickets, which, in their turn, may be the causes of degeneracy. [1078] Rickety women often have a contraction of the pelvis, which hinders child-birth, and may cause a lesion to the infant’s brain. Note, for example, the opinion of Dr. Näcke, who says: “The social misery, bad hygiene and food ... often enough beget a miserable generation and must already have injured the germ. The same causes, however, on the other hand easily produce feeble women with qualitatively and quantitatively insufficient milk, and most of all with a narrow pelvis, through which births take place with difficulty and to the detriment of the brain of the child. If now the above named factors come in later to affect the child, the derangement of nutrition will be further increased, and it is no wonder if all kinds of rickety and scrofulous symptoms appear in the body, and all kinds of children’s ailments injure both body and mind.” [1079]
In the second place, unsanitary dwellings and insufficient clothing are the cause of all sorts of diseases, especially tuberculosis, which in their turn may lead to degeneracy. [1080] The density of population in the great cities exercises its influence in the same direction.
In the third place, the long duration and intensity of the work forced upon the proletariat also contribute to degeneracy. For each individual there is a fixed measure of labor that he cannot pass without experiencing harmful consequences in body and mind. Dr. Lewy describes them as follows: “The consequences of immoderately long hours of labor are, a certain overexcitement of the nervous system, which later gives place to a permanent debility, with which may be associated a dull headache as well as an inability to think clearly. If the overwork continues for a longer time, soon all the systems of the body are affected, the heart and larger arteries as well are injured in structure and function, disturbances of the regular circulation appear, manifested partly in swellings in various parts of the body, especially in the feet, and partly through hemorrhages. The brain ceases to function regularly, and so-called brain-symptoms appear, such as vertigo, ringing in the ears, deafness, defective vision, paralysis, and apoplexy. In the same way the liver, kidneys, and the digestive tract may be drawn into the general weakening process. The muscles become weak and slack, the body disposed to epidemic diseases, but especially prepared to vocational diseases, to which persons in a run-down condition most easily fall victim. If, then, the end of the worker is not brought about prematurely by some intercurrent disease like typhus, under the immoderate strain he uses up his existing forces faster than he is in a position to replace them, and wastes away with tuberculosis of the lungs, so much the quicker, of course, the weaker he is constitutionally, and the younger he was when he had to submit to excessive labor.” [1081]
The harmful consequences of long working hours make themselves felt especially in the trades which are already dangerous to health, like those where there is a great deal of dust produced, or those which use poisons like lead, mercury, etc. [1082] Monotony of work joined with long hours is also a cause of physical and intellectual deterioration. Professor Vogt says: “The less variety work presents, the more fatiguing is it, since it is only the same part of the muscles that are continually called upon, while the rest of the muscular system, in accordance with a well-known physiological law, degenerates from misuse and wastes away. To a still higher degree the uniformity of work has a deteriorating effect upon the mental powers; these become weakened much more quickly in the case of long continued fatigue than the muscles, while the unexercised mental faculties at the same time become stunted.” [1083]
The present economic system has also led to the work of women and children, and consequently to an important cause of the degeneration of the race. The number of women forced to take part in trades for which they are ill-fitted by nature is very great. The fear of being discharged, and the impossibility of doing without their wages make women with child continue to work up to the last moment of their pregnancy, and recommence shortly after childbirth, leading to very harmful results both for them and for their children. [1084] Then child labor prevents the normal development of the children and ages them prematurely. [1085]
Further, the cares and restlessness consequent upon the uncertainty of life may be causes of the weakening of the nervous system and the origin of a neurosis.
Finally, when an individual of this class falls sick his restoration to health may be hindered by the lack of care and medical assistance and the necessity of recommencing work too soon. [1086]
Second. The condition of the well-to-do classes. Most of the causes producing degeneracy in the poor classes do not appear among the well-to-do. With the latter there can be no question of insufficient food or clothing, or of bad housing. Yet in the well-to-do classes the idle, from their manner of living and this lack of regular exercise, are led to excesses of all kinds, which may make them too, in another way, subject to degeneracy. [1087]
In the active part of the bourgeoisie, among the manufacturers, merchants, etc., the case is different. They are constantly absorbed in the question of how to increase their wealth, or, if they are unfortunate, they live in fear of losing the position gained. They are in a state of agitation, of permanent overexcitement. So there are numbers in the bourgeois class who overtax their minds, with the resulting chance of neurasthenia, even where the individual is not predisposed to it. All this applies also to the liberal professions, though in a smaller degree; there also the great competition has harmful consequences for the nerves. In “La famille névropathique” Dr. Féré thus describes the consequences of overdriving: “... excessive cerebral labor, intellectual and, still more, moral overwork, the continual preoccupations of the struggle for existence are conditions eminently fit to bring on functional troubles in the nervous system. Neurasthenia, like hysteria, may be considered as a chronic fatigue. The fatigue, to be sure, gives place to a number of troubles peculiar to neurasthenia. And these troubles, even if only temporary, cannot fail to have the most harmful effect upon children conceived under these conditions.” [1088]
The opinion of the celebrated alienist Maudsley is also very interesting; he says: “Perhaps one, and certainly not the least, of the ill effects which spring from some of the conditions of our present civilization, is seen in the general dread and disdain of poverty, in the eager passion to become rich. The practical gospel of the age, testified everywhere by faith and works, is that of money-getting; men are estimated mainly by the amount of their wealth, take social rank accordingly, and consequently bend all their energies to acquire that which gains them esteem and influence. The result is that in the higher departments of trade and commerce speculations of all sorts are eagerly entered on, and that many people are kept in a continued state of excitement and anxiety by the fluctuations of the money market. In the lower branches of trade there is the same eager desire for petty gains; and the continued absorption of the mind in these small acquisitions generates a littleness of mind and meanness of spirit, where it does not lead to actual dishonesty, which are nowhere displayed in a more pitiable form than by certain petty tradesmen. The occupation which a man is entirely engaged in does not fail to modify his character, and the reaction upon the individual’s nature of a life which is being spent with the sole aim of becoming rich, is most baneful. It is not that the fluctuations of excitement unhinge the merchant’s mind and lead to maniacal outbreaks, although that does sometimes happen; it is not that failure in the paroxysm of some crisis prostrates his energies and makes him melancholic, although that also is occasionally witnessed; but it is that exclusiveness of his life-aim and occupation too often saps the moral or altruistic element in his nature, makes him become egoistic, formal, and unsympathetic, and in his person deteriorates the nature of humanity. What is the consequence? If one conviction has been fixed in my mind more distinctly than another by observation of instances, it is that it is extremely unlikely such a man will beget healthy children; on the contrary, it is extremely likely that the deterioration of nature which he has acquired will be transmitted as an evil heritage to his children. In several instances in which the father has toiled upwards from poverty to vast wealth, with the aim and hope of founding a family, I have witnessed the results in a degeneracy, mental and physical, of his offspring, which has sometimes gone as far as extinction of the family in the third or fourth generation. When the evil is not so extreme as madness or ruinous vice, the savour of a mother’s influence having been present, it may still be manifest in an instinctive cunning and duplicity, and an extreme selfishness of nature—a nature not having the capacity of a true moral conception or altruistic feeling. Whatever opinion other more experienced observers may hold, I cannot but think, after what I have seen, that the extreme passion for getting rich, absorbing the whole energies of life, does predispose to mental degeneration in the offspring—either to moral defect, or to moral and intellectual deficiency, or to outbreaks of positive insanity under the conditions of life.” [1089]
We could cite a number of other competent authorities to prove that the present economic system exacts from those who direct production also, intellectual efforts such as the nervous system cannot endure indefinitely. [1090]
Third. Syphilis. Aside from the fact that this malady is very probably the cause of general paralysis, [1091] it takes its place among the important factors of degeneracy to this extent, that the children of syphilitics are often degenerates. This fact being generally recognized we shall not dwell on it. The celebrated German specialist in syphilis, Blaschko, says of it: “Syphilis leads to the birth of children who are mentally and physically stunted, and often crippled and imbecile.” [1092]
This would not be the time to speak of syphilis as a cause of degeneracy, if the extension of this malady were not intimately bound up with prostitution, which is, in its turn, determined by the economic environment. Dr. Blaschko says of it: “The principal source of venereal infection of course is, and remains, sexual intercourse outside of wedlock, especially prostitution.” [1093]
As a social cause of the great extension of syphilis it is well to point out the profound ignorance of the extent and the danger of venereal diseases, [1094] to which less attention is paid than to others (hospitals not receiving patients affected by them, relief funds not aiding those having syphilis, etc.). Like other diseases these have the most harmful consequences for those who live under bad conditions. [1095]
Fourth. Alcoholism. Alcoholism undoubtedly belongs to the very important causes of degeneracy. There are few questions upon which competent authors are as unanimous as they are upon this. There is a wealth of material for quotation but we will limit ourselves to the words of Professor Dallemagne, who, after quoting the opinion of such authorities as Morel, Magnan, and others concludes by saying: “Alcohol is an essential factor of degeneracy. It can by itself create all the degenerate and unbalanced states, and this question appears definitely decided.” [1096] Dr. Legrain gives the following figures upon the consequences of chronic alcoholism of the parents upon the children. [1097] Out of 215 families of alcoholics in four generations (814 individuals) there were found: 42% of alcoholics, 60.9% of degenerates, 13.9% morally insane, 22.7% had had convulsions, 20% were hysterical or epileptic, and 19% were insane. [1098] These are striking figures, and banish all doubt of the harmful influence of alcohol!
It must still further be observed, that the very frequent adulteration of alcohol leads to especially harmful consequences; [1099] and that alcohol exerts an especially harmful effect upon the ill-nourished. [1100]
We have come now to the end of our remarks upon the social and economic causes of degeneracy. Although they are plainly not the only ones, yet it is certain that their part in the etiology of degeneracy is very important, and even preponderating.