Criminal Sociology

l anthropology school.'' And though this title no longer corresponds with the development of the school, which also takes into account and investigates the data of p

ry observations upon criminals, added fresh life to them by a collection of inquiries which were not only

1> of the brutes, or even to Aristotle, who still earlier observed the physical and psychological correspondence between the passions of men and their facial expression. And after the medival gropings in chiromancy, metoscopy, podomancy and so forth, one comes to the seventeenth century studies in physiognomy by the Jesuit Niquetius, by Cortes, Car

on of convicts; and their works, in spite of certain exaggerations of phrenology, are still a valuable treasury of observations in anthropology. In Italy, De Rolandis (1835) had published his observations on a deceased criminal; in America, Sampson (184

Thomson (1870), Wilson (1870), Nicolson (1872), Maudsley (1873), and with the very notable work of Despine (1868), which indeed gave rise to the inquiries of Thomson, and which, in spite of its lac

self as an independent science, distinct from the main trunk of general anthropology, itself quite recent in its o

all criminals in a single class. In later editions these defects were eliminated, Lombroso having adopted the observation which I made in the first instance, as to the various anthropological categories of criminals. This does not prevent certain critics of criminal anthro

tic and idiotic criminal (referred to alcoholism, hysteria, mattoidism) whether occasional or subjec

nal'' there were published, in Italy and elsewhere, a whole library of studies in criminal anthropology, and that a new school has been est

nature are its fundamental data, which lead us u

ry of man, as zoology is the natural history of animals, criminal anthropology is but the study

ers of crime study

various offences in their abstract character, on the assumption that the criminal, apart from particular cases which are evident and appreciable, is a man of the ordinary type, under normal conditions of intelligence and feeling, the anthropological observers of crime, on

ary to lay particular stress upon a remark which I made in the original e

alue of anthropological data concerning the criminal m

or a physiological, or a psychological value in itself, apart from the sociological conclusions which it may be possible to draw from

, from which he has to reach his legal and social conclusions. Criminal anthropology is to

criminal sociology, i

o doubt the direct observation of criminals is a very serviceable study, even for the criminal sociologist; but the only duty of the latter is to base his legal and social inferences upon the positive data o

f criminal anthropology. So that it is but a clumsy way of propounding the question to ask, as it is too frequently asked: ``What connection can there be between the cephalic index, or the transverse measurement of a murderer's jaw, and his responsibility for the crime which he has committed?'' The scientific function of the anthropologica

sitive conclusions concerning the measures which society can take in order to defend

detailed information to the works of specialists, we may repeat that this new science studies the criminal in

ise to a host of misconceptions and one- sided criticisms, which have not yet ceased; for criminal anthropology has been charged, by such as consider only the most conspicuous data with narrowing crime down to the mere resu

f hereditary and pathological departures from the normal type. Similarly an examination of the brains of criminals, whilst it reveals in them an inferiority of form and histological type, gives also, in a great majority of cases, indications of disease which wer

chological Society of Paris; ``Procee

, as well as other physical inquiries, external and internal, have shown the existence of remarkable types, from the greater frequency of the t

to reflex action under external agencies, conducted with the aid of instruments which record the results, have shown abnormal conditions, all tending to physical inse

e can for the undeniable fact of the hereditary transmission of tendencies to crime, as

gical study of the criminal. This recognition of its greater importance does not prevent our critics from concentrating their attack upon the organic c

st volume, which is devoted to criminal anthropology, out of four hundred pages of argumentative criticism (which does not prevent the author from taking our most fundamental conclusi

re and art of the criminal; and on the other hand it makes known to us the characteristics which, in combination with organic abnormality, account for the development o

as much as in others, with a variety of symptoms which I have recorded elsewhere, and which are eventually reduced to these conditions of the moral sense in a l

of selfishness or even of unselfishness, are not wanting in the majority of criminals. Hence arise many illusions for superficial observers of criminal life. But these latter sentiments are either excessive, as hate, cupid

t exclude certain forms of craftiness, though it tends to inability to foresee the consequences of crime, far in exc

esistance to criminal tendencies and temptations, due to that ill

I

that the data of criminal anthropology are not entirely applicable, in their complete and essential form, to all who commit crimes. They are to be confined to a certain number, who may be called congenital, incorrigible, and habitual criminals. But a

sitive demonstration, which can be attested under two distinct forms-(1) by the results of anthropological observation of crimi

micide a summary of results for a single category of these anomalies, which a methodical observation of every class of crimina

des se

Imprisonme

vit

m I detected (

skull 11.9 p. c. 8

malies 47.2 ''

nomalies 30.9 '

nomalies 6.7

anomalies .3

men with a noteworthy number of anomalies occurring together (three or four), there were three times as many amongst cri

and psychological anomalies) amongst criminals, but also that amongst these criminals between fifty and sixty per cent. show very few

nals are especially conspicuous. Though relapses, like first offences, are partly due to social conditions, they also have a manifest bi

, rarely succeed in preventing the use of fresh names by professional criminals. So that we may still say, in the words of one who is a very good judge in this matter, M. Yverns, not only that ``the Prisons Congress of London (1872) was compelled to

on to prison. It

would be impossible to state accurately what proportion the numbers given bear to the actual number; but I am justified in saying, from all the materials which I have collected and compared in the aforesaid essay, that the number of relapses in Europe is generally between 50 and 60 per cent., and certainly rather above than below this limit. Whilst the Italian statistics, for instance, give 14 per cent. of relapses amongst prisoners

e rule rather than the exception,'' we can proceed to set down the special proportions of relapse for each particular

etty larceny, forgery, rape, manslaughter, conspiracy, and, at the correctional courts, vagrancy and mendicity.

llowing table of statistics from the lists of persons convicted at the assize courts and correctional tribuna

e is very frequent in these cases, still display a less abnormal and more occasional character by their lower position in the table, as shown in the cases of infanticide, concealment of birth, and abandonment of infants. As for the very frequent occurrence of relapse in special crimes, such as assaults on officials and resistance to authority, whic

der as poisoning is noteworthy. But this is only an effect of the s

``landscape'' mo

S OF RELAPS

1

with criminal psychology). The same thing is observed in regard to forgers of commercial documents and to fraudulent bankrupts, who are partly drawn into crime under the stress of personal or general crises. And the infrequency of relapse amongst

which is a consequence of social environment, as well as of the feeble organisation of the individuals. Other relapses above the average, included amongst these offences, constitute a sort of accessory

minor offences, in their general forms, there is a greater number of occasional offences, as is also the case with bankruptci

anthropological type; and that the bio-psychical types and anomalies belong more especially to the category of habitual cri

ortion of habitual criminals to t

e, a study of the works on criminal anthropology supplies us with an approximate figure, since the biological characteristics uni

be confirmed by other da

imes and offences committed by born and habitual criminals, science

1859 enumerates about 180, the new code about 200, and the French penal code about 150. Thus the kind of crimes of

aking false attestations or false reports; nor adultery, incest, or abduction of minors; nor infanticide, abortion, or palming of children; nor betrayal of professional secrets; nor bankruptcy offences, nor damage to property, nor violation of domicile, nor illegal arrests, nor

respect of the classification of crime, which I tak

FRANCE.

C* A* B* C* A* B* C* p.c. p.c. p.c. p.c p.c. p.c. p.c. p.c. p.c. Proportion of the persons convict

bunals,' and `Totals,' respectively. These a

2

and by somewhat less in France and Belgium. This would be accounted for in Belgium by the exclusion of vagrancy; but the difference i

ual criminality, with the exception of thefts and vagrancy, are in gre

simple theft, swindling, vagrancy, &c.) are the more numerous. Thus, out of the total of 38 per cent. in Italy, 32 belong to the tribunals and 6 to the assizes; out of 35 per cent in France, 33 belong to the tribunals

merous types in Italy (20 per cent.), in France (24 per cent.), in Belgium (

und Verbrecher in Preusse

2

des (4 per cent.), swindling (3 per cent.), forgery (.9 per cent.), rape (

indling; but homicide, incendiarism, and conspiracy are less frequent, whils

to contrast the more frequent forms of occasional criminality. For Italy the only judicial statistics which are valuable for det

ly and in France is very variable, though assaults and wounding, resistance to au

ness, frauds on refreshment-house keepers, and so forth, but also by reason of the different condition of individuals and of society in the two countries. Thus assaults a

GE or CONDEM

3-72. FRAN

OFFENCES

QUE

those of Habi

.c. p.

aulf and W

ying Arms ....

o Authority,

ublic Functionarie

ty ... ... ... -

use ... ... ... -

Threats ... ...

.. ... ... ...

nd Offences ......

Offences ... ..

, Corruption

nctionaries

Detention -1

.. ... ... ...

icile ... ... ..

.. -. -1

lming or ``S

s - -12 1

nces ... ... ..

nst Religion

on - 1 -1

.. ... ... ...

.. ... ... ...

t the Game Laws

ss - - -

t Public Decenc

... ... ... .

st Morality, w

ty ... ...

Homicide -

ing - -

iarism -

ctising of

.. ... ... ..

Keepers of

... ... ... -

... ... ... .

________________________

rage of Co

43,584 49,857 3,3

secret lotteries. [3] An exceptional figure, owing to 528 convictions in 1863, wh

negligible figures, are more frequent in France. Whilst the illegal carrying of arms, threats, false witness, escape from detention, violations of domicile, calumny, are of greater frequency in Italy than in France, the contrary is tru

undamental distinction between habitual and occasional criminals, which had been pointed out by

oint of departure for other distinctions more precise and complete, which I set forth in my previous studies o

criminals, those who present a conspicuous and clinical form of men

orn tendencies, which are manifest from their birth, and accompanied by symptoms of extreme moral insensibility. Side by side with these, another class challenges attention, of individuals who have also been criminals from childhood, and who continue to be so, but who are in a special

occasional criminals, the crime is brought about rather by the effects of environment than by the active tendencies of the individual; but whilst in most of these individuals t

hich as early as 1880 I described as criminal madmen, born criminals,

c

he same characteristics for a large aggregate of criminals, classifying them according to the form of their crime rather than according to their bio-social type. In Lombroso's work, for instance, or in that of Marro (and to some extent even in my work on homicide), the characteristics are stated for a total, or for legal categories of criminals, such as

characteristics of the five classes of criminals, in accordance with my personal experience in the observation of criminals. It is to be h

vely biological, if it is to form the anthropological basis of crimina

- contradictory, since a madman is not morally responsible, and therefore cannot be a criminal, is not conclusive. We maintai

psychiatry is concerned with mad criminals in a psycho-pathological sense, this does not prevent criminal anthropology and sociology from also concern

the persons tainted with a form of insanity which is known under various names, from the ``moral insanity'' of Pritchard to the ``reasoning madness'' of Verga. Moral insanity, illustrated by the works of Mendel, Legrand du Saulle, Maudsley, Krafft-

t, they are found more frequently in prisons than in mad-houses-there is the unhappily large body of pe

descriptive analysis of the chief forms of mental alienation. As a matter of fact, not only are the organic, and especially the psychological, characteristics of criminal madmen sometimes identical with and

remain in what Maudsley has called the ``middle zone.'' The most frequent varieties in the criminality of these partially insane persons, or ``mattodes,'' are the perpetrat

ve, and who nevertheless, according to the complacent psychology of th

nted with hereditary madness, and especially the epileptics and epileptoids, who may also be assigned to the class of born criminals, according to the plausible hypothesis of Lombroso as to the fundamental identity of congenital

and honest industry. ``They are criminals just as others are good workingmen,'' says Frgier; and, as Romagnosi put it, actual

punishment affects them much less than the menace of punishment, or does not affect them at all, since they regard imprisonment as a natural risk of

la petite et grande Roque

ison governors call them ``gaol-birds.'' They pass on from the police to the judge and to the prison, and from the prison to the police a

the Journal of Mental Science, 1888.

lace, even public opinion, when not prejudiced in favour of the so-called consequences of irresponsibility, recognises in many familiar and everyday cases that there are criminals who, without being mad, are still not as ordinary men; and the reporters call them

, induced by circumstances and a corrupting environment, than through inborn and active tendencies. After this, as M. Joly observes, either they are led on by the impunity of their first offences, or, more decisively, prison associations debilitate and corrupt them, morally and physically, the cell degrades them, alcoholism renders them stupid and subject to impulse, and they continually fall b

nt en devient Crimi

e born criminals, Thomas More said, ``What is this but to make thieves for the

pleasure of hanging them?'' And it is just this

seem to me to be common, though for distinct reasons, to born criminals and habitual criminals. I mean precocity and relapse

ing precocity, derived from in

20 YEARS OF AG

______________________

. p

.. ... ... ... .

.. ... ... ... .

t over 19 years)

.. ... ... ... ..

... ... ... ...

ot over 24) ... ..

... ... ... ... .

... ... ... ...

.. ... ... ... ..

.. ... ... ... ..

.. ... ... ... .

... ... ... ...

.. ... ... ... ..

----------

wenty-one;

whilst in 1886 the same percentages were .60 and 14. Out of 146,217 accused before the tribunals there were 4 per cent. under sixteen, and 14 per cent. between sixteen and twent

crimes and offences in 1860-70, 4

tween twelve and fifteen, 6 per cent. between fifteen and eig

als, 1.2 per cent. were under fourteen, 5 per cent. were between fourteen and eighteen, and 13 per cent. between eighteen and twenty-one. There is a continual increase of precocious criminals in Italy

owing that precocity is most frequent in respect of the natural crimes and o

rs in 1882 had been sentenced

8 '' 2 '' '' indecent assault ... ... ... 3.5 '' 11.8 '' '' specified thefts, forgery, uttering false coin ... ... ... ... 5.2 '' 2.4 '' '' simple theft, swi

nst the person, and amongst males against property, are approximately repeated in Sw

... ... ... ... ... ... 4.3 '' '' theft ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 65.5 '' '' swindling ... ... ... ... .

s of France and Italy

FIX THIS

866. FR

ZE C

8. 28-21.

... ... p.c. p.

ry with homicide

... ... ... .

... ... ...

t ... ... .

(followed by dea

... ... ...

ent assault on

dren} - lo

to and atta

es ... ...

ism - - -

.. .. .. . 1

public and

... ... ...

highway r

... ... ...

imple theft ...

l wounding .

----------

ned and accused

unals-no complete Italian statisti

CORRECTIONA

ces. Underl6. I6-

cenc. per ce

uthorities ...

blic functiona

... .- 4 4

. ... ... 4

g ... ... ...

nal woundi

public decency

and abuse -

... ... ... 57

shment-house ke

g 5 1 2

fidence ... .

ps and plants

ces .. ... .-

----------

of a

3

criminality, in respect of inborn tendencies (murder and homicide, rape, incendiarism, specifi

gly we have seen to be more frequent in the same forms of natural criminality, and whic

who has once tasted prison life is sure to return to it.[8] And again, there are very few cases in which a man or a woman who has turned thief ceases to be one. Whatever the

lice.'' [9] Thomson, ``The Psychology of Cr

e criminals, who are so from their birth, and such as are made incorrigible by the effect of their prison and social environment. The former cou

ics of relapse are qu

ve en Europe''

26-74. IT

1871. SWEDEN-1871

eves. and brou

al. to

ent. 54 per cent. 45

8 '' 28 ''

.. 44 '' 18

nt. twice, 16 per cent. three times, 13 per cent. four times, 1

chen und Verbrecher,'

ners, 16 per cent. had relapsed once, 13 per cent. twice or three times, 6 per cent. four or five times, 6 per cent. from six t

wards of 4,107 women had relapsed four times or oftener, and that many of them were classed as incor

of Italy for 1887 give

3

nvicted,

aps

f Tribunal

ac

... ... .

e times ..

five times

---------

f relapses 27,0

ned to penal servitude and 353 prisoners from the

... ... - ... ... ... 5.2 7 '' ... ... 1.6 ... ... ... 7.1 8 '' ... ... - ... ... ... 2.8 9 '' ... ... - ... ... ... 2.8 10 '' ... ... - ... ... ... 2.3 11 '' ... ... - ... ... ... .9 12 '' ... ... -

ed to long terms; but it is a conspicuous symptom of individual and soc

is only a question of terms. He considers that born and habitual criminals confine themselves almost exclusively to serious crime, and occasional criminals to minor offences. And as the

as theft, assault and battery as well as forgery, may be committed, though in different psychological and so

ommon practices of born and habitual criminals, such as murder, homicide, robbery, rape, &c., whilst they are far more uncommon, even if they can be said to be o

the occasional criminals, and t

readily distinguished. In fact Lombroso, in his second edition, supplementing the observations of Despine and Bittinger, s

very rare, and their crimes are almost invariably against the person. Thus, out of 71 criminals of passion inquire

number about 5 per cent. o

cessive sensibility, unlike born or habitual criminals, and they are often of a neurotic or epil

the crime, which they do not commit treacherously, but openly, and often by ill- chosen methods, the first that present themselves. Now and then, however, one encounters criminals of passion who premeditate a crime, and

carry it o

between the born criminal and the criminal of passion; for premeditation depends especially on the

so the precise motive which leads to a crime complete in itsel

e by a jury-they are always repentant prisoners, and amend their lives, or do not become degraded, so that in this way they encourage superficial observers to affirm as a general fact, a

cteristics are much slighter in countries where certain crimes of

passion are endemic, almost ranking amongst the customs of the communit

se into crime at an early age through the temptation of their personal condition, and of their physical

se crimes and offences against person or property, but under personal and social conditions

spositions. For instance, during a scarcity or a hard winter, not all of those who experience privation have recourse to theft, but some prefer to endure want, however undeserved, without ceasing to be h

he internal tendency, because this tendency possesses, as it were, a centrifugal force, driving the individual to commit crime, whilst, for the

ng, and far more of a pretext than an occasion of crime. With the occasional criminal, on the other hand, it is the cas

ecisely that they have a distinctly abnormal constitution, though in a less degree than the b

such thing as an occasional criminal, in the sense of a *normal individual casually launched into crime. But I have not, any more than Garofalo, drawn such a picture of the occasional criminal, for as a matter of fact I have said preci

lly due to the latter, and inborn and habitual crime to the former. With the born criminal it is, above all, the lack or the weakness of moral sense which fails to withstand crime

is notion of crime, which simultaneously summons up the idea of its grievous consequences, glances off the surface of the normal conscience, and is a mere flash without the thunder. With the man who is less normal

at he had to hurry away, for fear of yielding to the temptation to throw the man into the water. Again, there is the case of Humboldt's nurse, who was attacked one day by the temptation to kill her charge, and ran with him

4

of no exceptional force, to which the occasional criminal would yield, but who do

by age, sex, poverty, worldly influences, influences of moral environment, alcoholism, personal surroundings,

ormal human beings who commit involuntary offences, or offences which do not spring from perversity, and do not hurt society, though the

objections raised by our syllogistic critics. The difference existing amongst the five categories is only one of degr

es are never anything but relative. This deprives them of none of their theoretical and

orn criminal, through the links of moral madmen and epileptics; and from the born criminal to the occasional, through the link of the habitual criminal, who begins by being an occasional criminal, and ends by acquiring and transmitting to his children the characteri

tors and judges, in their complacent psychology, exact and establish marked lines of cleavage between the sane and the insane criminal, experts in psychiatry an

a sociological point of view. There is consequently no weight in the objection of those who, basing their argument on an abstract and nebulous idea of the criminal in general, and judging him merely according

ny difficulty in classifying all persons detained or condemned for crimes and

rime, the criminal, and the means best calculated for social self- defence. And it may be concluded that up to this time, science, legislation, and, in a minor degree, but without any scien

ortions. But as there is no absolute separation between one

and another, and as the frequency of the several criminal types varies according

at the classes of mad criminals and criminals of passion are the least

riminals are about 40 or 50 per cent.; so that the occas

r observation, and which cannot be more accurately determined without a series of special studies in criminal anth

I have maintained for some ten years past, all who have been devoting themselves to the subject of crime as regarded from a biological and social standpoint have recognised the n

tely with the facts of the case. This classification, originating in observations made within the prison walls, I have extended in the domain of criminal sociology, wherein

resolves itself into the simple and primitive distinction between occasional and instinctive criminals. The category of criminals by contracted habit would not be accepted by all observers, but it corresponds too closely to our daily experience to stand in need of further proof. And on the other hand I must frankly decline to a

rvers. For instance, the classification of Lacassagne, Joly, Krauss, Badik, and Marro rest upon a purely descriptive criterion of the organic or psychological characteristics of criminals. The classifications of Liszt, Medem, and Minzlof

ology. If the curative art of society, like that of individuals, expects from positive knowledge an indication of remedies, it is clear that a classification based on the fundamental causes of crime is best fitted to indicate a social cure for this manifestation of disease, which is

we have a manifest proof that this classification actually represents the common and permanent basis of all the chief anthropological categories of criminals, whether in regard to their natural causality an

xiom of criminal anthropology, this variety in the types of criminals, which must hence