THE great majority of those who enter prison for the
first time are young persons, and in many cases they do not show any
great degree of moral turpitude. “As the twig is bent the tree is
inclined,” and what might have been merely a phase of recklessness
or a passing mood of lawlessness is sometimes made a fixed habit as
a result of the way it has been treated. The younger the person the
narrower is his experience, other things being equal. In making the
experiments which give experience we may hurt ourselves and others.
There are some who are content to accept the
statements of others and to yield an easy obedience to those over
them, but in early life the number is not great; and where the
elders are too busy to pay much attention to the young there is a
greater need for the boy to find out things for himself. Rules of
life as they are presented to many boys consist of a series of
prohibitions, and it is not always the worst boys who kick against
them. Wild and intractable boys do not always grow up into bad
citizens ; but if they are taken in hand by the penal machinery of
the State there is not much chance for them. They may imitate the
showy vices of their elders not because they are vices, but because
they are showy. They do not admire the wrong things more frequently
than grownup people, but they show their admiration in a way that is
sometimes awkward both for them and for us. They are misunderstood
and condemned when they persist in going their own way, although the
cause of their vagaries may be simple enough if an attempt were made
to find it. X 20 was a boy of ten, the son of a man in a comfortable
position who had lost all control over him. The boy had run away
from school, and had left his home more than once and gone wandering
in the country. His father had coaxed and beaten him alternately
without any beneficial result. His schoolmaster informed me that the
boy was usually quiet and tractable, but did not take much interest
in most of his work. He was not of defective intellect and he would
not apply himself to some parts of the school course. He was fond of
animals. I found him suspicious and reserved; but as he had been
told that he was to be seen by the prison doctor, and as he
evidently had expected to be confronted with an animated bogey-man,
there was nothing surprising in that. He answered questions in
monosyllables or not at all, but he promised that he would come
himself to my house and see some things which I thought might
interest him. I would not allow him to be brought to me, though he
lived some three miles off, and he kept his promise and came. With
the aid of some other juveniles he was made to feel at ease, and I
found he could tell a good deal about animals, such as tadpoles and
frogs, and that he had a real interest in such things. He came back
several times, and in an indirect way he was advised of the danger
of doing what his father had objected to; but it was perfectly
evident that his conduct had been the result of the way in which he
had been treated, and fear had caused him to commit at least some of
the actions that had given cause for complaint. Those who had charge
of him were more in need of direction than he was; for they had
acted on the assumption that they understood what was best for him,
whereas the fact was that they had not the faintest idea of the
disposition of the boy, and were simply driving him to extremities
in their efforts to keep him right. They were repressing instead of
directing his tendencies, with disastrous consequences. His
schoolmaster understood; and he was permitted to act on his
knowledge with satisfactory results, the parents never having
thought that he was as likely to be able to instruct them as to
teach their boy. In this case the boy was fortunate beyond many
others in respect that his parents were able to seek and obtain
advice when they became alarmed because of his behaviour. They were
in a position which enabled them to give him the necessary attention
when they learned what was required.
X 21 was a boy who had developed the habit of playing
truant from school and had come under the observation of the
attendance officer. He was in danger of becoming an associate of
city undesirables. His mother was a decent widow who had to support
him and herself by casual labour. She was obliged to go out in the
mornings to clean offices and he was left to himself. She was loth
to have him sent to an Industrial School, but she preferred that
that should be done to running the risk of having him get into the
hands of vicious persons. There was no question as to her rectitude,
and as little of her ability to look after him when she had the
power; but she could not be out working and at the same time be
discharging her maternal duties in guiding him. So he had to be sent
to the institution. In a case like this—and they are not uncommon—it
would be far better to free the woman from the need of leaving her
child and see that she looked after him. She has a greater personal
interest in him than any official person can have and it need cost
no more; while the gain in character cannot be measured in terms of
cash. The mother’s burden is greater than she can bear, and that is
a reason for relieving it; but it is no reason for breaking up the
family and loosening the tie between parent and child, and the
practice cannot even be justified on the score of expense.
Boys get the name of being bad when they are
intractable, but bad boys are fewer than bad men. There are too many
people who are driven to assume that they know what is best for the
boy—or the man— and that without making any attempt to understand
those for whom they prescribe. When a boy rebels against the line of
action laid down for him it is taken as evidence of his wickedness,
though it may only show his good sense. He may be doing the wrong
thing with a purpose more reasonable than that of his mentor, but he
is likely to find that his intention will meet with no sympathetic
consideration even if he reveals it, and his action will meet with
punishment if he owns it. He is encouraged to lie in the hope of
pleasing his master, and when he is found out his iniquity is
magnified.
Boys are far more given to the attempt to find the
point of view of those who are in authority over them than grown-up
people are to find the standpoint of the boy; and children will
often show a deeper knowledge of their parents than the parents have
of them. If instead of assuming knowledge and showing ignorance
parents would try to understand, there would be less disposition to
rule the young by general prohibitions and a freer hand given to
them in the choice of their pursuits. Left alone, the child will
show its bent; it is not for the parent to thwart its aptitudes, but
to direct them into useful channels. Many are made miserable by
being set to books, and others are made equally wretched by physical
drill. Every year brings forth its own fad. The adult may keep free
from its tyranny to some extent, but let it find a place in some
code or other and every juvenile runs a grave risk of being
subjected to it, because someone in authority who knows nothing
about him or his needs has so ordered it.
The boy is kept at school for nearly as many hours in
the week as many men work, and when he is set free from its
restraint he runs wild—if he is not too tired, or if he has not been
set tasks which cause him to work overtime at home. He gets into
mischief, and is denounced for his misdeeds and the trouble and
annoyance he causes; but boys are not more mischievous than they
were. There are few adults who have not been a great nuisance to
others in their own early days, but too many of them seem to have
forgotten all about that. By all means let the boy who has played
some mischievous prank be restrained and corrected, but in choosing
the method it might not be a bad plan to remember the exploits of a
boy who was no better in his day than the culprit is, if no worse.
When we show that we recognise a clear distinction between cramming
juveniles with knowledge and educating them, they will learn at the
school how to amuse themselves without annoying others. At present
they are in this respect left mainly to their own devices, and in
very few cases is there any serious ground of complaint against
them. Considering their imitative tendencies and the incitements
many of them have towards wrongdoing, it is wonderful how few go far
astray.
When a boy is sent to a reformatory he has
opportunities given him for play, and the importance of providing
different forms of recreation for him is not ignored. This is by
some called “putting a premium on wrongdoing,” and yet in spite of
the reward there are few boys who deliberately adopt a course of
law-breaking in order to have the advantages of life in that
institution. Either they are too stupid or there is not such a bias
on their part towards evil as some would have us suppose. The
recreation which forms part of the means adopted to reform the boy
who has transgressed might conceivably prevent transgressions if it
were placed within the reach of others, especially as the
association of boys whose common interest is that they have all been
before the courts is not likely to make for their improvement.
Whatever its defects as an educational institution,
the school has this to its credit, that a better standard of conduct
is maintained than could be acquired by many of the scholars if they
were left to grow up under tho conditions that obtain in their
homes. Now and then someone does a particularly shocking thing, and
until quite lately when this occurred the offender was liable to be
brought to the police court. Now there is a special court for
dealing with children, but as there is no change in the judge or in
the officials before whom the child appears, all that has been
gained is his separation from older offenders. This is something to
be thankful for, but it is a minor mercy compared with what ought to
be done. He is more a subject for treatment by those whose
experience enables them to understand children than a “case” to be
tried by a magistrate whose traditions are those of the criminal
courts.
Most of the charges are acts of malicious mischief or
petty thefts. The offenders have got out of parental control or have
eluded the supervision of their parents. In some cases the parents
are culpably careless or negligent, taking little interest in their
children and making their home worse than it need be. They spoil the
child without sparing the rod, for the boy is often hammered without
mercy when he annoys them. He keeps out of their way and may fall
into bad company and bad habits. Most of these boys show evidences
of neglect in their appearance ; but they are not, though they may
become, desperadoes. Others go astray not so much from the culpable
neglect of their parents as because, with the best will in the world
to guide the boy, the parent is either incompetent to to do so from
sheer stupidity, or, more frequently, from being too busily engaged
in trying to make a livelihood to have the necessary time to give to
his care. A smaller number are the children of parents who are quite
competent to look after them, but who have failed to keep themselves
in sufficiently close touch with them —which is a more difficult
thing to do than it seems.
At school the boy may be under good guardianship, but
he is away from his mother during the greater part of the day, and
he may pick up companions who will not exercise the most favourable
effect on him. They need not be bad, but they may be bad for him.
Out of school hours he seeks for recreation, and in the effort to
obtain amusement of a special kind he may take what does not belong
to him, and be found out and complained of; or not be found out and
continue the practice. It is all very simple and not at all
uncommon—except in the result. Honesty has to be learned, and some
people never learn it; though they never commit crimes. There is a
difference between being honest and being dishonest within the law.
There are few women or men who have not at some time or other
“dishonestly appropriated property,” though they did not express it
that way when they abstracted sweets well knowing the penalty if
caught. Some boys do not steal sweets, but they steal money to buy
sweets; and in the same way others steal money to pay the price of
admission to a place of entertainment. Sometimes they break into
shops to steal, and they are then young criminals; but this rarely
happens when the necessary money can be picked up at home.
In a young person the desire for pleasure is
naturally too strong to be at first repressed by a sense of the
rights of property. He does not need to be taught that sweets please
the palate or shows delight the eye; but he requires to learn that
in the long run honesty is the best policy. Children are not likely
to steal if they can get what they want without stealing, but they
may help themselves when they can if they are subjected to
unreasonable prohibitions. Even men and women have been driven far
out of the right path through attempts to repress their desires for
harmless amusement and to make them take life solemnly.
The dishonesty of children arises not so much from a
perverted nature as from an inability to appreciate the importance
of honesty. It is a phase that passes as their experience of the
world grows. They can be trained out of it, but attempts to knock it
out of them are as likely to knock it into them.
There ought to be provision made whereby parents
could be advised, admonished, and assisted in dealing with children
whom they have been unable to control. Our Children Courts are not
designed with this end in view, and I doubt whether it makes much
difference to the child who is sent to one of our institutions that
he was sent from one room in the courthouse rather than from
another. Our money would be- better spent in assisting parents who
have the will to do well by their children, but who have not the
power, than in taking the children away from them. As for those who
are careless of their children, they should be dealt with for their
carelessness. In many cases the apathy they show is a consequence of
our methods. If, instead of taking the children away from those who
neglect them, we trained and assisted them, we should have better
parents and better children. If carelessness and callousness were
then shown by the parents we could proceed with justice to deal with
them for culpable misconduct. At present we are not in a position to
do so, since we are not prepared to help them to discharge their
responsibilities. We make it easier for them to neglect than to care
for their offspring, and if they lose control of them to a
sufficient extent we free them from the burden altogether.
The spirit of enquiry and experiment leads many boys
into mischief, and some of their malicious acts are the result of
it. Men too readily forget that the boy sees things in a quite
different light and relationship from them. Some of the
housebreaking adventures that look so bad on a charge-sheet appear
quite different when the story is told from the boy’s standpoint,
and they do not always show such depravity as one would expect. Some
boys are always seeking adventures and becoming absorbed in them;
others are content to read about deeds of daring, and the works they
favour are often crude enough. Occasionally one is taken with a mask
and pistol in his possession attempting to rob in the highway, and
then we have homilies on the evils of pernicious literature of the
“Dick Turpin” sort, which might be more convincing if the homilists
were themselves free from connection with stuff that is worse.
The adventurous boys are not those who read much of
any kind of book; they are too busy living. The “Blood” is devoured
more by the boy who dreams rather than acts; but of the thousands of
men who as boys read prohibited books and enjoyed them, few are
likely to spend much time on the equally sensational publications
that circulate in millions among adults. On the whole, the boy will
not get a more distorted view of life from the highly coloured
papers he reads than he would obtain from some of the newspapers;
and when he is being condemned for his preference for “Bloods,” it
would not be amiss to remember that these productions have never set
themselves to foment in his mind feelings of ill-will against people
of other lands. It is not the boys but the adults who are raised by
the papers they read into hysterical outbursts of senseless rage or
equally senseless fear now of one and now of another continental
power; and if “literature” is to be judged by its apparent effect,
then these papers are more pernicious than the “Bloods,” which the
boy prefers to the books which are designed for his moral
instruction. There is no comparison between his highwayman—a boy’s
highwayman who robbed the rich and gave to the poor, to the
inversion of all social order—and the industrious apprentice who
married his master’s daughter, poor girl. The hero is a hero to him
because he dares all risks, is true to his friend, is gallant and
generous, and faces death with a brave heart. If he does the wrong
thing he does it in the right way, and it is not the thief but the
man who gains the boy’s admiration. As for the industrious one, even
a boy knows that there are not enough masters’ daughters to go
round; and if he revolts at the selfishness of the gospel of getting
on, he is right in rejecting such a false basis of morals. We know
that the boy’s Robin Hood or Dick Turpin never existed in fact; but
if they exist in his fancy?
To those who denounce them these papers are only a
glorification of theft of a particular kind, but there is no
likelihood of its ever coming into vogue again. Dick Turpin is now a
company-promoter and his cheques are in demand by Churches and
political parties. He does not risk his life now, and we are very
glad to be taken into his confidence ; but the boy has not found
that out yet. His books may be ill-chosen, but wholesale
condemnation will not mend the matter; and in books, as in other
things, it is impossible to tell what is good for the boy till
something more is known about him than that he is a boy. When he
reads it is safe to assume that he does so because he feels some
need is supplied thereby. When its nature is discovered a step will
be made towards its better supply, but not before. To take the boy
away from the book he likes to a standard author on the ground that
it is better for him, is to run the risk of creating in him a
permanent dislike for the books chosen.
In the city most of the boys leave school when they
are fourteen years of age, and entering on new pursuits are subject
to fresh temptations. The employment they obtain is largely a matter
of chance, but whatever it may be, they are less likely to go wrong
when engaged at it than when free from it. Their playground is the
street, and there is no adequate provision made for their
recreation. On payment of a small sum they may obtain admission to
the music-halls or the picture-shows, and these latter are largely
patronised by boys. That they serve a useful purpose is undeniable,
and if the entertainment they offer may not be all that is
desirable, it is practically all that is to be had by many. Since it
cannot be had freely there are temptations to find the means, and
the boy amongst his neighbours who is worst off in respect of money
is hardest pressed. It is deplorable that some should yield to the
temptation to obtain money dishonestly, but it is idle to ignore the
condition of things and neglect to provide reasonable opportunities
for the recreation which is required after work done. There are
private organisations taking the matter in hand, but their appeal,
though wide, is, and must be, sectional. Boys’ Brigades in
connection with the Churches can only reach a minority of the
juvenile population, and the same statement applies to Boy Scouts.
There are those who object on principle to both organisations on the
ground that they foster the military spirit, but the militarists
themselves do not appear to share this view. Boys like to play
soldiers, but when they get sense they drop that; and meantime they
play, greatly to their advantage. As for the Scouts, they seem to
represent an improved edition of “follow my leader,” and their
uniform prevents their being interfered with while they play. It
does none of them any harm to believe that they are saving their
country so long as they are really saving themselves, and no greater
number of them develop a taste for a soldier’s career later in life
than enlist from among those who have never belonged to one or other
of the organisations. It may be that the intention of some of the
promoters is to feed the army, but that is to leave out of account
the boys themselves and the development of their minds. Whatever the
intention, the result is good in so far as the interest of the game
keeps the boys in healthy exercise.
The most popular of all the forms of public
recreation is the football match. Week after week the grounds are
filled by tens of thousands of spectators who find in the game they
witness not only amusement for the time, but matter of conversation
and interest which outlasts the day. Young and old they are mostly
partisans, and though their conduct may leave much to be desired,
that should not distract the observer’s attention from the main
fact, which is that they are enabled to find a real interest in
something which is at least harmless. There are those who lament the
fact that the spectators are not players, and who condemn them for
being merely vicarious partakers in the game. As a matter of fact, a
good many of them have played, and some of them have got into
trouble for playing. A very little acquaintance with the facts would
make the Jeremiahs aware that there is no public provision made for
allowing very many to play; that a great many who enjoy seeing
others play have no time when free from labour to practise much
themselves, even if a field were near ; and that if any large number
began to play football in the only spaces open to them—the
streets—there would be no room to get about. It is not a bad plan to
consider men’s limitations before condemning their pursuits, but it
is too little practised.
The football match is a strong counter-attraction to
the public-house or the aimless wander through the streets, and the
football field would be an admirable playground for many of the
young, as they would readily admit; but those who want them to play
rather than to look on are never very prominent when an attempt is
made to find them the means. Some of them use the public streets for
a practice ground, greatly to the annoyance of the passengers and
sometimes to their danger. The nuisance has to be stopped and the
usual method is adopted; the universal panacea for all evils is
applied, and the culprits are taken in charge by the police. A small
fine is inflicted, with the alternative of imprisonment if the lads
are over sixteen. I have seen a batch of them brought to jail
because their fines had not been paid. All that had been done was to
ensure that these boys would not play football in the streets for
several days; yet the cost of their escort and board during that
time, if expended on the hire of ground, would have provided them
and others with opportunities of play for six months; and they do
not play in the streets for choice —at least it has not been
demonstrated that they do.
Alike in work and in play the boy’s pursuits are
largely matter of chance. He has to seek employment and is generally
ready to take anything that presents itself. Some of the situations
that offer most attractions to him are of such a character as to
prevent him from applying himself to work at which in his manhood he
could earn a living. In the beginning he may earn more money at
these occupations than he would if apprenticed to some skilled
handicraft, but before many years he is cast off by his employers,
unsettled by his work, and less fit and less inclined to spend time
in qualifying either for a trade or a profession. There are far too
many blind-alley occupations open to boys, and they should be closed
to those entering on industrial life. There are many men who by
advancing years are shut out from the work they have been accustomed
to do; they are leaving the ranks of the skilled workers, and they
could do the work at present done by lads with advantage to the
community, since there would not then be numbers of young persons
spending the most receptive years of their life in occupations by
which they cannot hope to earn their living when they reach manhood.
As the boy grows to adolescence he tends to get
further from the control of his parents. His growth implies change
in him, and he may develop new needs and new desires without the
power necessary to control them. It is well recognised that in
adolescence there is a special liability to physical or mental
breakdown, and short of this it is no uncommon tiling for young
people to show a degree of instability that alarms their friends for
their safety. Yet in youth there are very many employed at
occupations that are in a marked degree physically exhausting. They
are permitted to take far too much out of their body, and though
they may thereby develop their muscles, they are almost certain to
hinder the healthy development of their minds. The State has
interfered with some trades and prohibited certain processes of
manufacture on the ground that the chemicals employed affect the
health of the workers in an injurious way; and it has laid down
regulations for the proper sanitation of workshops. It will yet have
to consider the advisability of limiting the amount of physical
energy that a man may be allowed regularly to expend in work, and
the sooner it begins with lads the better for everybody. At present
we hear of the large wage earned by workmen in certain trades and
their notorious improvidence. To anyone with eyes to see their
improvidence is not more evident in the way they spend their wages
than in the way they earn them; for their lives, industrially, are
short, and they are too often physical wrecks in middle life, partly
from the undue fatigue to which they have been subjected and partly
from vices they have contracted in the attempt to stimulate
themselves when fatigued. We only hear of the vices, but their
industry is equally foolish if it implies excessive expenditure of
vitality; and no income in money would justify the cost at which it
is obtained.
Time and again there come before the courts young men
who are neither insane nor weak-minded, but whose mental powers have
been stunted and twisted by the conditions to which they have been
subjected. They are not there for committing offences against
property, but for startling the district by some atrocious assault;
and there is this point of similarity about them all, that they have
been engaged at work which was too heavy for them, and when set free
from it have used the strength of a man incited by a man’s passions
to do things that only a boy would conceive.
Equal mental and physical development is rare in
youth, and in practice everybody recognises the fact. There are some
big lads who are young for their years and little ones who are
pretematurally old-fashioned; but time mends the matter, and a
balance is established if something does not occur to mar the youth
meanwhile. Placed under conditions that favour the development of
muscle and prevent the development of the mental powers, young men
cannot be wholly blamed if now and then they shock us by showing the
natural result of such a course of training.
About the streets of the city there are lads who take
care not to work too hard. Many of them are the children of parents
who have never exercised much care over them, and in some cases they
have been sent out with a few coppers to purchase papers and sell
them; or to beg. They have learnt to like the life and have
deliberately adopted it themselves in preference to other
employment. They come to prison sooner or later if they escape the
reformatory; and sometimes after they have been there. There is only
one opinion possible among those who know the facts about the
street-trading they carry on—that it should be abolished; and the
only real difficulty is that its abolition ought in justice to be
accompanied by some provision for the employment of those young
persons who have been engaged in it. The newsboy is a great
convenience to the public and the newspaper owners. He sometimes is
an important aid to his family, for in a proportion of cases the
parent is as respectable and as anxious to take care of the boy as
anyone could wish. It is her poverty that compels her to use his
services. But the risks to the boys outweigh all advantages. The
poverty that compels a mother to subject her child to such risks
ought to be relieved; the public and the newspaper proprietors would
find other means of obtaining and delivering the news if they
realised the cost of the present condition of things; and a nursery
of criminals would be removed.
In most cases the parents require more attention than
the boys, and especially the female parent. The children are her
peculiar care, and if she takes to drink the results to them are
serious. Whatever differences of opinion there may be as to the
hereditary transmission of intemperance, there is no room for doubt
as to its effect in causing the mother who is subject to it to
become an inefficient guardian of her child.
Her family suffers from neglect, and they are driven
on the street to pick up a living as best they may. When they can
they may take lodgings in a “Model,” and in any case they learn from
others how they may live with most license. They are nearly all
gamblers, and honesty is not a virtue that they find profitable.
The fact is that there could be no worse school for a
boy than the street and no worse companions than those who live
there, not because they are gifted with any additional dose of
original sin; they are no worse mentally, morally, or physically
than many others; but because a tradition has grown up among them
that is anti-social in its character, and like the rest of folks
they conform to the conditions in which they find themselves. When
they loaf or steal they do it because they believe that it is easier
and more profitable than working in a regular way. Show them that
they are wrong and they will modify their opinion and their action;
but that is precisely what is not done. They have heard all you can
tell them, and they adhere to their own standpoint not because they
are more stupid than their' teachers, but because they see another
side to the story. When they are imprisoned they are not generally
intractable, and they do what they are told because it pays better
to obey than to rebel; but outside, though they recognise the
inconvenience and risk of being caught, they have a not
unjustifiable belief in their power to dodge those who are watching
them, and at the worst they prefer to serve a term of imprisonment
once in a while rather than exchange their way of living for
another. It is just as well to recognise the fact that they do not
follow their objectionable courses because it is difficult to do so.
When they are dishonest it is usually because they believe it is
easier for them to pick up a livelihood that way than by any honest
occupation within their reach or experience. Their opinion may be
right or wrong, but it is formed on a knowledge of a different set
of facts from that within the ken of those who judge them; and it
does not help to a better understanding of them that we should
assume that they are greater fools than we are, though we do not
share their follies.
Now and then there are outbreaks of savage violence
on the part of young lads in the streets ; acts which, apparently
purposeless and certainly cruel, shock the citizens and anger them.
Then there is a cry for vengeance; never an attempt to seek the
causes of the trouble; and the matter is forgotten when a few of the
offenders have been given “exemplary punishments.” Exemplary
punishments always repay examination, and sometimes the hapless
individual who is made the whipping-boy for others has been rather
cruelly treated; not that that seems to matter if the offence
complained of ceases, for it is taken as proof that the authorities
have done the right thing in making an example of him. The
assumption is one that never bore examination at any time, but it
seldom is examined.
When a crop of offences of a similar kind startles a
district there may be a common cause found if it is sought for; and
when the offences cease their cessation may be found to have some
relation to that cause; but the arrest and imprisonment of one here
and there as examples have as little relationship to the cessation
of offences as prayer had in the stopping of an epidemic of cholera.
In the one case you have to break up the association of offenders
and destroy their spirit; in the other you have to attend to your
drains and your sanitation. The punishment and the prayer in either
case may assist in so far as they direct attention to the need for
right action. How then do these outbreaks originate, and what causes
them to cease? In the first place, they are not the work of
professional thieves, though these take advantage of them. They
begin in horseplay among the lads at the street comer. None of them
may be abnormally mischievous or wicked, but a crowd has a spirit of
its own which is different from that of its members. Everybody has
seen dignified citizens under the excitement of, say, an election,
when they got the news that the country had been saved in the way
they desired, behaving in a sufficiently ridiculous manner and
inciting others to a like behaviour. If they had received the news
when at home it would at most have caused a smile, but in a crowd
one has stirred the other to do and say things that neither would
ordinarily do or say.
An orator may sway a crowd and utterly fail to move
the members of it if he spoke to them individually. The lads at the
corner will do things when they are together that none of them would
think of doing if he were alone. Not only does each incite the
other, but all incite each one to action. The horseplay is extended
and indulged in by them at the expense of passers-by, and to their
annoyance. If it stops there no noise is heard about “Hooliganism”;
but if the lads, letting themselves loose, go further and injure a
respectable citizen there is complaint. The culprit is at first
frightened, but having done the thing he tries to make the most of
it, especially if he sees his companions rather admire his temerity.
He boasts of his daring and excites emulation. One tries to outdo
another; other “corners” hear about and imitate the desperadoes; the
newspapers take the matter up; and the place is in a state of
terror. There is reason for the terror, too; for in the process
unoffending and peaceful citizens have suffered serious injury. The
professional criminal, who is quick to take advantage of any chance,
hangs on to the tails of the foolish lads, and under cover of their
depredations helps himself to what he can get. Anything that gathers
a crowd helps him, but he knows better than to commit assaults of
this purposeless kind himself. He has no objection to rob the
assaulted or the threatened and terrorised parties, however,
provided he can conceal himself. If he can get any of the lads who
began the proceedings to assist him, good and well; but in that case
they may find they have started on a new and criminal career. The
loose cohesion between the mischievous and the criminal elements in
the crowd becomes organised; and by this time there is a general
demand on the part of the citizens that somebody should be punished.
Then the examples begin.
But the very fact that the outrages have been
advertised, while it causes their imitation at first, makes parents
and employers enquire into the conduct of their sons and their
workers. The lads are kept in at night, or they are otherwise
separated from each other. When the association begins to break up
the process is not long before it is complete. Everyone who leaves
it is suspected of being a possible informer, and the dread of they
know not what—the most powerful kind of fear—invades their minds.
The conduct that seemed so laudable is now given up and the epidemic
dies out. To send one of the offenders to prison is simply to make
him a martyr in the eyes of his associates, who know that he is no
worse than they were and who sympathise with rather than abhor him.
The real deterrent is the action of the parents and employers who
know the lads. They neither want to get into trouble at home nor to
lose their jobs. Those who are sent to prison have often little to
do with the matter, and their exemplary punishment has less. Real
hooliganism—the existence of young professional thieves who are in
the habit of committing brutal assaults and inflicting injuries
recklessly on their victims—is rare in Glasgow.
The young person is more likely to fall into error
than his elders because of his inexperience. Whatever the law may
hold, no business man expects the kind of service from a youth that
he looks for from a man. The young man may have more knowledge than
his senior and more recent information on many things, but only time
can enable him to co-relate his knowledge. The question whether a
lad knows right from wrong is all that some people will consider ;
which shows how little they know, if they really believe that the
answer will enable anyone to assess a man’s responsibility. We are
taught “right and wrong” from our earliest years by way of
principles to guide us, but they are not always easy of application.
The difference between a young and an old man is one of experience.
Practice has enabled the one to use his knowledge in a way that the
other has yet to learn. Our conceptions of many things on which we
have been given information apparently full and accurate have been
proved time and again to be quite wrong ; experience enables us to
discount our anticipations, but it only comes with years. In judging
young people it is specially necessary to bear in mind the fact that
with all their apparent knowledge they may have totally wrong
conceptions of things, and that thus they have been misled. On many
occasions I have had to note the fact that a young man had committed
an atrocious crime; that he knew perfectly well it was wrong; that
it was not due to imperfect powers of control; that he had brooded
over and visualised it before the act; and that its accomplishment
had left him shocked beyond expression, for it was all so different
from his conception of it.
No punishment could intensify the shuddering horror
with which these lads regarded their own acts, “so different from
what I thought it would be”; and yet in ordinary affairs we are well
acquainted with the phenomenon. Why we should lose sight of it when
a crime has been committed and we are seeking to unravel the causes
is a mystery. Know right from wrong? Yes, and conceive the whole
matter wrongly. This state of mind is not peculiar to the criminal,
and may sometimes be present in those who take upon themselves to
judge and condemn him.
In early life a lad is not only more liable to go
astray, but having fallen it is more difficult for him to recover.
He is more impressionable, and the impression of his crime and of
the way in which he has been treated stands in his way. He has no
record of experience behind it to which his memory can turn and by
which he can be helped to seek the right road when he leaves prison.
“Learn young, learn fair,” is as true of crime as of other things.
At the opposite end of the path of life a special
cause of crime is degeneration of the physical or mental powers. In
the first case the man may become destitute and forced into criminal
courses in order to gain a living. In the latter case he may develop
tendencies and commit certain offences that are quite at variance
with his former conduct.
As a result of senile changes in body and mind some
old men offend against the law. When the condition is marked they
are dealt with for it, but in some cases it is only suspected and is
not capable of proof. It is simply a question of whether they should
be sent to prison or to a lunatic asylum. |