Spire

Available at alibris.com
( 4.6/5.0 ★ | 185 downloads )
-- Click the link to download --

https://click.linksynergy.com/link?id=*C/UgjGtUZ8&offerid=1494105.26
539780312946395&type=15&murl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alibris.com%2Fsearch%2
Fbooks%2Fisbn%2F9780312946395
Spire

ISBN: 9780312946395
Category: Media > Books
File Fomat: PDF, EPUB, DOC...
File Details: 16.4 MB
Language: English
Website: alibris.com
Short description: Good Size: wb36097; General paperback wear, bends
in spine, possible bends from reading on the cover, and may have a
bookstore stamp inside cover. Quick response!

DOWNLOAD: https://click.linksynergy.com/link?id=*C/UgjGtUZ8&
offerid=1494105.26539780312946395&type=15&murl=http%3A%2F%2F
www.alibris.com%2Fsearch%2Fbooks%2Fisbn%2F9780312946395
 Spire

• Click the link: https://click.linksynergy.com/link?id=*C/UgjGtUZ8&offerid=1494105.2653978031294639

• Don’t miss the chance to explore our extensive collection of high-quality resources, books, and guides on
our website. Visit us regularly to stay updated with new titles and gain access to even more valuable
materials.
.
“It was found necessary to put 360 prisoners under mental
observation, either on reception, or after location, in the general
prison. The following are the details of 210 of the more marked and
decided of these cases of mental defect—
Reported weak-minded 66
Certified as lunatics and removed to an asylum 9
Epilepsy and allied conditions 53
Prisoners with a past history of threatened or attempted suicide 15
Temporary alcoholic excitement 67
“Last year the number of weak-minded was sixty, and of certified
lunatics seven. It is interesting to observe how closely the figures
now given approximate to those of last year.”

Wormwood Scrubbs
“Twenty-six prisoners of markedly feeble mind were received (four of
them were each committed twice and one of the number three times
during the year), and the cases of thirty-five prisoners of this class
were brought to the notice of the police prior to their discharge from
prison.
“The chief defects noted were as follows—
(a)Physical deficiency and deformities 126 per 1000
(b)Mental deficiency 25 " "
(c) Affections of heart, lung, and principal organs 129 " "
(d)Visual defects 49 " "
(e)Auditory defects 14 " "
“They were regularly inspected at work, and their training and
general well-being were closely supervised.”
 Feltham
“The very poor physique of the inmates on admission impresses one
very much more than is shown by the figures of comparison with
any so-called normal standards, as we do not separate our town and
country inmates. Our country inmates, as a rule, have better
physique, and though not so mentally quick are more hopeful cases
when once a hold can be obtained of them. Among the town
inmates one finds two classes, one showing signs of degeneration,
as poor physique, narrow chest, short stature, light weight
associated with a low cunning and a peculiar restlessness of their
eyes, watching for every movement; and among these a high arched
palate is often noticed.”

Borstal
“Although evil environment must of course take first place among
the causes of most of these youths’ downfall, I am becoming more
and more struck with the importance of physical unfitness as a
determining factor.
“From observations actually made among a large number of our
older receptions, I find that some 60 per cent. had tried (some many
times) to join either the Army or Navy. Only 15 per cent. of these
had passed ‘fit.’ Many of the remaining 40 per cent., knowing that
their physical defects would unfit them, had not been to a recruiting-
office, so that presumably, but for physical inferiority we might have
saved about one-half of those sentenced to the Borstal system.”
Note.—The above remarks become the more striking when
it is borne in mind that Borstal receives the best and
healthiest young prisoners.

Parkhurst
“A new feature has been the formation of ‘An Aged Convicts’ Party’
consisting of old men of sixty-seven years of age and upwards; they
are located together, with special diet and privileges. A day room has
been provided, also a garden with a yard adjoining; they are
expected to do any light work they can undertake, without being
tasked, and they are allowed to read and converse together. They
appear to appreciate the relaxation of the ordinary prison discipline,
and so far their behaviour has been excellent.
“The number classified as weak-minded at the end of the year was
120, but in addition there were twenty-seven convicts attached to
the parties of weak-minded for further mental observation.
Classification of Weak-minded Convicts
(a)Congenital deficiency—
1. With epilepsy 10
2. Without epilepsy 36
(b)Imperfectly developed stage of insanity 26
(c) Mental debility after attack of insanity 13
(d)Senility 3
(e)Alcoholic 9
(f) Undefined 23
Total 120
“The following is a list of crimes of the classified weak-minded, for
which they are undergoing their present sentences of penal
servitude, and the number convicted for each type of crime—
False pretences 1
Receiving stolen property 2
Larceny 24
Burglary 13
Shopbreaking, housebreaking, etc. 19
Blackmailing 1
Manslaughter 5
 Inflicting grievous bodily harm 2
Wounding with intent 7
Shooting with intent 3
Wilful murder 10
Rape 2
Carnal knowledge of little girls 8
Arson 17
Horse-stealing 3
Killing sheep 1
Unnatural offence 1
Placing obstruction on railway 1
“A study of the criminal history of these 120 weak-minded convicts
shows that sixty-two committed their first crime before the age of
twenty years, and the total number of previous convictions standing
against these 120 convicts amounted, in the aggregate, to 91 penal
and 1,306 others. Forty convicts were certified insane: of these
twenty-four were removed to the Criminal Asylum at Parkhurst, five
to Broadmoor Asylum, seven to the County or Borough Asylums, one
recovered, and three detained in the Prison Infirmary. Please notice
how closely these figures approximate to the figures of the previous
year.”

Gloucester
(a)The bona fide working men in search of employment per
17 cent.
The casual labourer unwilling or unfit for continued
(b) work—the first to lose employment and the last to
regain it as trade falls or rises 31 "
(c) The habitual vagrant and mendicant 41 "
(d)Old and infirm persons “wandering to their own hurt,” 11 "
crawling from ward to ward, entering the workhouse
infirmary only when compelled to do so, living by
 begging, and constant trouble to the police and
magistrates
100
“Altogether 207 tramps were received during the above-stated
period.”

Pentonville
“As in former years the number, especially of youths, imprisoned for
minor—I will not say trivial—offences has been considerable. What
to do with these lads is a problem of much difficulty, many are
homeless and friendless. Their parents are dead, or have forsaken
their offspring; living just anywhere or anyhow, one can only have
for such a feeling of profound pity.”

Wakefield
“The steadily increasing number of the vagrant and feeble-minded is
a subject urgently demanding special legislation. It is hopeless for
any Discharged Prisoners’ Aid Society to attempt to do anything for
these cases.”

Wandsworth
“The weak-minded have been collected and reported in each case
according to Standing Order. Sixteen cases of insanity were also
dealt with.”
Can any words of mine add force to these terrible statements and
convincing figures? I think not! Can any master of the English
language add potency to them? I think not! so I let them stand in
their bald simplicity as a proof of my contention, and as an
indictment of our present methods for dealing with smitten and
afflicted prisoners.
 CHAPTER III
IS THERE A CRIMINAL TYPE?
Is there a criminal type? After years of close observation, during
which I have formed many friendships with criminals, I can only
answer this question in the words that I have answered it before,
and say that, physically, I have not found any evidence to show that
a criminal type exists. In saying this I know that I shall run counter
to the teaching of a good many people, and probably run counter to
public opinion. For the criminal class and the criminal type have been
written about so largely, and talked about so frequently, that the
majority of people have come to the conclusion that our criminals
come from a particular order of society, and that the poorest; or that
there exists a type of people whose physical appearance gives
outward and visible signs that proclaim the inward criminal mind.
I believe both these ideas to be entirely wrong. I was confirmed in
my opinion last year when I visited many of the largest prisons in
the United States; for I found there, as I have found in England, a
complete absence among the prisoners of those physical and facial
peculiarities that we are taught to believe differentiate criminals from
ordinary citizens.
Speaking on this subject to the American Congress at Washington on
October 4, 1910, Sir Evelyn Ruggles-Brise, K.C.B., the esteemed
chairman of our Prison Commissioners, made the following
statement—
“There is no criminal type. Nothing in the past has so retarded
progress as the conviction, deeply rooted and widespread, that the
criminal is a class by himself, different from all others, with a
tendency to crime, of which certain peculiarities of body are the
outward and visible signs.
“This superstition, for such I think it must be called, was, you know,
strengthened and encouraged by the findings of the Italian school.
“It is not based upon disinterested and exact investigation, and not
only has the progress of the science of criminal anthropology been
retarded by this conception, but it accounts for the unfavourable and
sceptical attitude which we still find in many places towards any
attempt to reform the criminal.
“It is my own belief that the assumed co-relation between the
mental and physical characteristics of a man is a superstition and
fallacy. I do not believe that a murderer can be revealed by his
frontal curve, or a thief by his bulging forehead or the shape of his
nose. In England, we have been at great pains during the last two or
three years to disprove, by scientific and exact investigations, this
popular conception of a criminal. We have personally examined three
thousand of our worst convicts, men sentenced to penal servitude
and guilty of every form of crime. With regard to each we have
collected and tabulated no less than ninety-six statements, that is,
measurements, family history, mental and bodily characteristics, etc.
The tabulation is now proceeding at the Biometric Laboratory,
University College, London, under the direction of Dr. Karl Pearson.
The results will be published shortly, and we are only able at present
to say that so far no evidence whatever has emerged from this
investigation confirming the existence of criminal types such as
Lombroso and his disciples have asserted.
“And, in fact, both with regard to measurements and the presence of
physical anomalies in criminals, these statistics present a startling
conformity with similar statistics of the law-abiding. I thought it
might interest this assembly to know that this investigation has been
undertaken.
“Its results will be what most of us would have anticipated, but it will
be a scientific result, and will serve to break down the vulgar
superstition that criminals are a special type, and as such, in many
cases beyond the reach of reform.”
We await with some interest the declaration of results, but, too, I
feel confident that no evidence will be forthcoming to prove that
criminals can be detected by certain peculiarities of the head and
face. Low foreheads, square jaws, scowling eyes, big, wide ears, and
stubby beards do not denote criminality; receding foreheads, almost
absence of chin and weak eyes do not indicate it either.
Emphatically I say that all these peculiarities may be quite consistent
with honour and honesty, with industry and self-respect. Yet I am
persuaded that all these things would tell against the unhappy
prisoner, if he, although innocent, stood charged with serious crime.
And I am equally sure that if he were guilty, and the evidence
proved him guilty, that his peculiarities would add very considerably
to the length of his sentence. Sometimes a judge or magistrate will
so far forget his dignity and say, alluding to the prisoner’s
appearance, “I can see the sort of man you are.” And his sentence is
measured accordingly.
On the other hand, the basest criminality is quite consistent with a
well-shaped head, a well-developed body, a handsome face and a
clear skin. Some of the most persistent, dangerous and
unscrupulous criminals I have ever met have been fine, handsome
men, accompanied either in the dock or out of it with fine-looking
women.
Indeed, dangerous criminals are all the more dangerous when
possessed of health and good looks. Yet I venture to say that health
and beauty, when charged with serious and repeated crime, gets off
with a much lighter sentence than affliction and ugliness! I have
frequently known stupid, half-witted and repulsive-looking criminals
far more severely dealt with than clever, dangerous rogues of more
prepossessing appearance.
For the thick head does not interest us; the possessor does not
excite our sympathy in the least. Nevertheless “thick head” may be
far less guilty, far more worthy of compassion, and a much better
fellow than the good-looking but complete scoundrel who does
interest us. But his thick-headedness is against him; he is estimated
and punished accordingly.
When standing in front of some hundreds of prisoners, all clothed in
the depressing prison uniform, all exhibiting in their faces the well-
known and easily recognised prison pallor, they all look pretty much
alike, excepting those who suffer from deformities or physical
deprivations. But closer observation and personal contact very
quickly shows that the prisoners differ as much and as widely as
ordinary citizens differ.
Could we remove their prison clothing, dress them as ordinary
citizens dress, and mingle them with a mass of ordinary citizens, I
venture to say that no scientist would be able to detect the criminals
by the formation of their heads or the size of their ears. I do not
maintain that men who possess queer-shaped heads do not commit
crime. This is far from being the case. Unfortunately they do, and
very serious crime too; but I do maintain that the perpetration of
crime was caused not by the shape of their heads, but by causes
that exist independently of it. We have, of course, a very large
number of degenerates, but every degenerate does not possess an
ill-formed head. Neither is every degenerate a criminal. Many of
them are happy enough, and innocent enough when they can get
enough to eat and places wherein to sleep. But when deprived of
these things they may steal, beg, sleep out, or commit some other
offence that brings them within the meshes of the law, and become
criminals. They become criminals not because they possess criminal
minds, but because there is no place for them in our social and
industrial life; because their necessities cannot be supplied in any
other way.
To classify such people as criminals is about as wise and just as
classifying babes as criminals! Though they form a considerable
proportion of our prison population, they are not to be detected by
their ill-shaped heads, for some that are declared to be feeble-
minded are quite up to the ordinary standard of beauty.
But there is another kind of degeneracy that cannot be mistaken,
because it can be easily ascertained and established. I now refer to
the physical measurements of prisoners. For many years it has been
noted both in Europe and America that juvenile prisoners are much
inferior in height, weight, muscular strength and capacity to the
average height, weight and strength of the industrial population of
similar age. Our own Prison Commissioners have for ten years
conducted an examination in Pentonville prison of all prisoners
between the ages of 16 years and 21 years. They have given us the
results in words and figures that compel thought. Once more I give
their words: “They are as a class two inches shorter and fourteen
pounds lighter than the average industrial population of similar ages,
and 28 per cent. of them suffer from some disease, affliction, or
deprivation,” and the Commissioners add that the highest proportion
of reconvictions comes from among them, being no less than 40 per
cent.
As nearly 1400 of such prisoners pass through Pentonville every
year, and as, moreover, the examination extended over a series of
years, it will be admitted that the results may be taken as not only
correct with regard to Pentonville, but taken also as an accurate
description of our youthful prisoners generally, so far as large towns
are concerned.
I am permitted to visit Pentonville and other prisons frequently for
the purpose of addressing the prisoners, so that I see prisoners in
the bulk, and I see many of them separately too.
I am persuaded that the findings of the medical authorities of that
particular prison give a pretty accurate description of prisoners
generally. Retarded growth, ill-nourished bodies and general
weakness have a thousand times more to do with crime than ill-
shaped heads. Over the causes of the latter we have no control, but
over the causes that lead to stunted and ill-nourished bodies we may
have, and ought to have, complete control.
But the great bulk of them have not criminal minds, and though a
very limited number of them show a tendency to deeds of passion or
cruelty, the vast majority find their way into prison simply because
they are helpless outside prison. They must eat, drink and sleep, and
to procure these things they follow the line of least resistance, and
beg or steal.
Their lack of stature, wisdom and muscle renders them incapable of
contending with their more robust fellows, for industrial life demands
either technical skill or robust health; having neither, they are
crowded out of every occupation.
Such men form a great proportion of our prisoners, but they present
a problem that the sociologist rather than the Psychologist is called
upon to solve, for they are the direct product of defective social,
economic, industrial, educational and domestic conditions. To
sociologists, then, I point out these things in the hope that more
attention will be given to them, for it will be an ill day for us if the
serious interest and attention of England is diverted from causes,
and concentrated on effects.
It does not of course follow that because a man is below the normal
height and weight that he is necessarily a weakling, for many little
men are marvels of virility and physique, possessing great brain
power and convincing personality. Of such men I have nothing to
say excepting that when one does become a criminal, he is likely to
be a clever and determined criminal. As I search my mind, and bring
to my memory the numerous criminals that I have associated with, I
am conscious of the fact that nearly all the clever, determined and
successful were small-sized men, light of step, quick of action,
upright in carriage, of good appearance. But they possessed plenty
of vitality, their eyes did not betray them, neither did their heads,
ears or chins “give them away.”
Four of the most complete burglars I ever knew were men of this
stamp. Three of them are now in prison, and though the fourth
sometimes comes to see me and produces evidence to show that he
is getting a decent living, I shall not be surprised if he too suddenly
disappears. One of the cleverest, coolest and most perfect criminals
I ever knew was of very small size, straight in body if crooked in
mind. While I am persuaded that physically there exists no such
thing as a criminal type, I am still more persuaded that socially there
exists no such thing as a “criminal class.”
Real crime exists altogether apart from bodily conformation or from
social standing. It may be said, and with truth, that the prison
population is largely recruited from the ranks of the poor. But it must
be borne in mind that the great mass of the people are poor, many
of them being very poor. The number of the rich or well-to-do is but
small compared with the number of poor.
It is quite natural, then, that the bulk of prisoners should come from
the class that overwhelmingly predominates. If the numbers of
affluent and the poor could be exactly ascertained, I believe that it
would be found that the poor do not contribute more than a
proportionate share of the country’s criminals.
Poverty itself is but rarely a decisive factor in the perpetration of
crime, though environment is. In poor countries crime is not
rampant, for Ireland, the poorest of the British Isles, shows a much
lower ratio of crime than England, Scotland or Wales. Even in the
terrible slums of London, where the poverty is intense, where misery
and suffering abound, where thousands of men and women are but
a single day in advance of starvation, where absolute destitution is
always in evidence, the number of real and confirmed criminals does
not exceed a fair proportion when the number of the inhabitants are
taken into consideration. I feel bound to say this much for the very
poor in our London slums. During many years’ close acquaintance, I
have found them to be as law-abiding and honest as any portion of
the community in proportion to numbers. When their environment
and temptations are considered, their rectitude, to me, is a matter of
great wonder.
There are criminals amongst them, but after all they are the
exceptions, and the worst criminals that are amongst them are those
who have descended from higher social stations.
Man for man and woman for woman, my experience has taught me
that slum-dwellers are not below the average population in honesty
and industry.
I say this appears marvellous at first thought, but in reality it is not
so, for wealth and leisure are not unmixed blessings. Probably they
are as likely to produce criminals, or even more so, than poverty and
care. The criminal ranks, then, are by no means recruited from the
poor alone, for all classes and every station contribute their
proportion.
To speak of the very poor as the “criminal classes” is wrong and
misleading. The term can only be applicable to the blighted, helpless
weaklings constantly in prison, who have neither wit, courage, nor
strength to conceive and carry out anything approaching organised
crime. These, it must be admitted, come largely from the poor, for
they are the product of poverty. The term might also be used with
regard to men and women who live by organised crime, and who
mean to live by crime: who, despising and refusing every
respectable mode of life, apply their talents, energy, courage,
presence of mind, knowledge of business, society and social custom
to the one purpose of their lives.
To such men and women no other life has the slightest attraction.
Comfortable ease to them is monotonous, and to them honest
persevering endeavour, though successful, has no charms. Of this
class the poor furnish but few, but every station of life, not excluding
the Church and the universities, contributes more or less, for
concerted crime demands more knowledge than the poor possess.
Swindling, to be successful, must be done on a large scale, and
requires exact knowledge. Forgery demands skill and education.
Long firms, bogus company promoting and blackmailing require
characteristics and knowledge that the poor do not possess. Jewel-
thieves and pickpockets that operate at high-class functions have not
graduated in the slums, but in more respectable life. But these men
are real criminals, dangerous and persistent criminals; they plan and
scheme, pursue and wait for the accomplishment of a criminal
object. Decidedly they form a criminal class, yet, singular to say,
they do not largely come from what are termed the “criminal
classes.”
I would like to pursue what I believe would prove a very interesting
inquiry, so I ask: In what way do the crimes of the poor and ignorant
differ from the crimes committed by those who have been educated
and once possessed social standing?
Briefly, leaving out murder, the crimes of the poor and ignorant are
burglaries, larcenies, assaults, felonies, wilful damage, vagabondage;
while to the educated swindling, conspiracy, long firms, bogus
companies, forgeries, and blackmailing may be attributed. If we
compare the two lists for one moment only, we see that the crimes
of the educated classes reveal malice aforethought, and betray
criminal mind and intention.
Impulsive or instinctive crimes, and crimes of passion, are more
numerous amongst the ignorant than the educated. But such crimes
do not betray a long-drawn-out criminal intention. The exigencies of
the moment, sudden passion or temptation, momentary folly and
the influence of drink account for most of the crimes committed by
the ignorant. But these things do not conduce in any marked degree
to the commission of crime by educated people; as I have said, their
crime is generally pre-planned, not instinctive! Probably the
proportion of criminals per number of men and women who
comprise the different stations of life is about the same for every
rank, though I am sure that the statement will be considered
absolute heresy.
But it must be remembered that rich criminals are more likely to
escape detection, arrest and punishment than the criminals of the
poor. They are still more likely to plan numerous transactions that
technically do not come within the meshes of criminal law, but which
morally are as dishonest and rascally as any crime against property
can possibly be. The ethics of commercial life are more than strange,
for a bogus company promoter would probably be appalled should
his son be charged with forgery or burglary, or his daughter with
obtaining goods by false pretences. It is not, then, to be wondered
at, that considering how many educated men are engaged in
ventures that are financially unsound and morally bankrupt, that a
number of them step over the line that divides the domain of civil
jurisdiction from the province of criminal law.
The real wonder is that a great many more do not take that step.
After all, it seems a wise arrangement for the sorrows, difficulties
and temptations of life to be evenly distributed amongst the rich and
the poor, the educated and the ignorant, though, to be sure, the
ignorant are more likely to get within the meshes of the law, not
because of their inherent criminality, but because of their ignorance
which does not enable them to be dishonest without suffering the
penalty. It is, I am sure, good for us that socially there exists no
criminal class. I am glad that probity and honesty of life are not the
monopoly of education and wealth, and I am also glad that if
criminals we must have, that the rich and educated should furnish a
proportionate share. The very poor have enough to bear and to
suffer without having exclusive right to the shame and suffering that
always attend discovered criminality. And it is well that no one
section of the community can lift up its hands and proclaim its
innocence. But all this leads me to say that there is no criminal class.
 CHAPTER IV
EPILEPSY AND CRIME
In the extracts that I have given from prison officials’ reports we
learn that a considerable number of epileptics are detained in prison
as criminals. During 1910-11 the figures for three prisons were as
follows: Liverpool 92; Wakefield 53; and Parkhurst 10. In three
prisons only we had, then, during one year 155 proved epileptics
undergoing imprisonment, ten of whom were sentenced to penal
servitude. I call particular attention to this matter, for it demands
attention; 155 unfortunates, for whom out of sheer pity we ought to
provide loving care, were thrust into prison, tabulated as criminals,
and compelled to undergo the wearying monotony of prison life.
Undoubtedly epilepsy produces many serious crimes. This dread
affliction, half physical and half mental, can induce a state of mind
from which not only crimes of violence and of homicidal tendency
may be the result, but crimes of almost any character.
Mental stupor, and sometimes complete aberration, follows or
precedes epileptic seizures. Assaults, wilful damage, attempted
murder, attempted suicide, thefts, indecency and criminal assaults,
as well as murder itself, are quite likely to be committed. I have, in
fact, personally known such crimes committed, some of them
repeatedly, by well-known epileptics. I have been a frequent visitor
in houses where some member of the family was an epileptic. I had,
perhaps, met the sufferer in the cells, or the friends had been to
consult the magistrate, and I had called upon them in consequence.
The public generally have no idea of the extent to which epilepsy
prevails. I have no figures or statistics to give; I do not know
whether or not it is on the increase, though, if I had to give an
opinion, I should say it was.
I know it is very common. I know an epileptic is one of the most
woeful objects on earth; I know the anxiety and sorrow of families
who have one such in their homes. I know that many, very many
serious crimes and a world of suffering might be saved if we had
registration of, and proper provision for epileptics.
The provision made for these unfortunates is miserably insufficient.
Their neglect by the State is a national scandal, but it is also a public
danger. People who can pay may have their epileptics cared for. But
the epileptics of the poor are cared for by short periods of
confinement in prison, workhouse or asylum. We have a right to ask
for some large, considerate and humane method of treating
epileptics, for a wise nation would protect them against themselves,
and would protect society against them; and would remove that
dreadful anxiety that depresses so many people who have an
epileptic among them: the fear of “something happening.”
One would think it impossible in these days for a man to be
continually sentenced to imprisonment because he suffers from
epilepsy, yet such is undoubtedly the case. I have no personal
knowledge of the 155 epileptics detained in the three prisons I have
quoted; but I have personal knowledge and prolonged experience of
many sufferers whom I have seen sent to prison for offences
committed in the throes of their frightful affliction.
One of the finest fellows, physically, I have ever known was a
hopeless epileptic. He had served with distinction in a famous
cavalry regiment in India; he suffered from sunstroke, and as the
affects were serious and prolonged he was invalided from the Army.
He recovered somewhat, and married, but when children were born
to him epilepsy developed. I have seen the horror that ensued in his
home: the fears of his wife, the terror of his children, but I realised
most of all the pitiful condition of the man himself. Many times I
have in his own home taken part, at some risk to myself, in
restraining him from violence, and when sometimes our efforts have
been unavailing, the police have been called in, and I have seen him
conveyed to the police station, and from there to the police court.
When in the dock, standing charged with violence and assaults, I
have seen a fit come upon him, when half a dozen policemen would
be required to straighten him out upon the floor and to hold him till
stupor supervened, when his spell of violence would give way to
insensibility and heavy, stertorous breathing.
I have seen his wife and children standing weeping in the court. Out
of sheer pity I have known a kind and wise magistrate sentence him
to six months’ imprisonment without hard labour: for he felt that for
six months at any rate the man, the wife and children would be
protected.
None the less the poor fellow felt the indignity and cruelty of his
position, and whenever committed to prison he never failed to
communicate with the Home Secretary, and petition for release. In
the pigeon-holes of the Home Office I have no doubt many of this
man’s letters and appeals are carefully stored.
But unfortunately when epileptics marry the evil and suffering does
not end with them, for when children are born, they often prove
very strange beings.
I have watched the growth of such children; I have seen their
strange whims and their oft-times irresponsibility. I have known the
girls become hopelessly immoral and cleverly dishonest even at their
school age. One of the cleverest thieves I ever knew was a girl of
fourteen, whose father was an epileptic. She looked the picture of
confiding innocence, but she robbed and cheated all sorts of people:
doctors and clergymen were her special prey.
She was charged repeatedly; no reformatory would receive her, for
she was flagrantly immoral. At sixteen she was a drab and a sleeper-
out; at eighteen she became an inmate of a lunatic asylum, but at
twenty her life came mercifully to an end.
I have watched the progress of boys born to an epileptic mother or
father, and again, they are strange beings. I have not found them to
be the equal of girls in lying or dishonesty, but I have found them to
be idle and shiftless; incapable of giving sustained attention to study
or work; sometimes becoming drunkards and vagrants before the
days of full manhood were reached.
So far as my experience goes, I have not found that the children of
an epileptic suffer from “fits” or manifest seizures. They do not bear
on their bodies the cuts, wounds and bruises that are often found on
the bodies of those who do suffer, but I have found, and certainly
my experience does not stand alone, that they are often
irresponsible creatures possessing strange minds, clever in certain
directions and those directions not for good; capable of serious
crime, but never exhibiting any sorrow, fear or remorse when
convicted of any offence. They generally insist upon their absolute
innocence, but go to prison just as unconcernedly as they would go
elsewhere.
Not very long ago a wealthy gentleman wrote to me about his
daughter, a beautiful and accomplished woman of twenty-two. He
told me that she had been in prison and was again in the hands of
the police, charged with fraud. His letter led to an interview; he
candidly told me that his daughter had been untruthful and
dishonest for many years, but now he was ashamed to say that she
was grossly immoral.
He had been compelled to remove her from every educational
establishment in which she had been placed, for her lies and
dishonesty could not be tolerated. He had placed her with more than
one private governess, but while she made excellent progress with
her studies, and especially with music, even for liberal payment no
one could be found to give her a home and supervision beyond a
very short period.
The grief and shame of both father and mother were apparent; their
daughter being in the hands of the police, they knew that I could
not save her; but they wanted some hope and some guidance for
the future. “Can nothing be done?” they repeatedly asked. I could
give them but little comfort; I dared not create hope, for I had
learned during our conversation that the mother herself suffered at
intervals, sometimes longer and sometimes shorter, from epileptic
“fits.” In my heart I felt sure that this was the real cause of the
daughter’s strange behaviour; I did not, however, add to their
sorrow by telling them what I thought.
My experience of epileptics has been much larger than the ordinary
run of my life would lead any one to imagine, for outside my police
court and prison experience I have had frequent opportunities for
gaining knowledge and forming judgment. Probably few men have a
more varied post-bag than myself; rightly or wrongly, large numbers
of people believe that I can give them advice or help in family and
other matters.
So all sorts of difficulties and sorrows are placed before me. But
most of my correspondents consult me about some member of their
family who is at once their despair and shame. Under such
circumstances, I have always been ready to give such guidance and
comfort as was possible. But being of inquiring mind, I always
wanted to know the cause of the evil and sorrow. So I made
inquiries regarding family history, etc., and was often brought face to
face with the fact that father or mother, sometimes grandfather or
grandmother, suffered from “fits.”
Some years ago, after writing in the daily press upon the dangers of
epilepsy, I received a large number of letters from friends of
epileptics. Every post brought me letters which came from various
parts of the country.
Most of my correspondents were in good financial positions, but
their letters formed pitiful reading. A more dolorous collection it
would be impossible to imagine. But they taught me a great deal, for
I realised that this terrible affliction prevailed to a greater extent
than I had dreamt of. I realised how respectable people cover and
hide the fact of epilepsy as long as possible, and that when the fact
can be no longer hidden they cower with shame, as if their sorrow
was in itself a disgrace and a scandal. I had ample confirmation in
those dolorous letters that not only pain, suffering, injury and
hopelessness dwelt in the home of an epileptic; but also that shame,
crime, imprisonment, strange actions and more than strange minds
were some of the resultant effects. I need not dilate upon the
danger to the public when large numbers of persons suffering from
this malady are at liberty amongst them, for epileptic seizures may
occur at any place and at any time. In a crowded street, or on a
busy railway platform they might easily be attended with disaster. To
any one who thinks upon this matter the danger will be apparent.
But the dangers arising from the many individuals who have
inherited a dread birthright, because they are born of epileptic
parentage, are not so readily seen. None the less, those dangers are
real and tangible, and I verily believe that if the truth could be
ascertained regarding the large number of motiveless crimes for
which the perpetrators have not been brought to justice, it would be
found that very largely they were the outcome of epilepsy.
I take the following from the daily press of November 11, 1911—
“Murderer’s Lost Memory
“Unconscious of Crime for Four Days
“Strange Defence.
“Complete loss of memory was the unavailing defence at
Nottingham yesterday, when Victor Chapman, a smart
young ex-Lancer, was sentenced to death for the murder
of Ralph Hill, whom he had shot in the Market-Place.
“Giving evidence on his own behalf prisoner declared that
from nine o’clock on the morning of the crime, till he
found himself at Divine Service in gaol four days later, he
had not the faintest recollection of what had happened to
him. He denied that he had the slightest desire to harm
Hill, or that he had threatened him. Prisoner further stated
he had a similar seizure last Whitsuntide.
“He left work at Nottingham at midday, and the next thing
he remembered was looking at the Corn Exchange at
Grimsby. He had no money, and walked back to
Nottingham, reaching home three days later, exhausted
and with bleeding feet.
 “Nor could he recollect that two days prior to the crime
(as a witness had sworn) he went to the river side, fired a
shot into the air, and declared that he was going to shoot
Hill and his (prisoner’s) sweetheart.
“Dr. Owen Taylor, police surgeon, said when arrested
prisoner had a strange expression, and appeared utterly
indifferent to everything going on around him. “He
betrayed no excitement, and during the whole of the time
witness questioned him he stared witness straight in the
face with a fixed and vacant expression.”
“Two days later his condition vastly improved, he
answered more quickly and brightly, and knew that he
was accused of murder.
“Witness tested him in every possible way, but he had not
the slightest remembrance of anything that happened on
the fateful day.
“Pressed by the Judge to give an opinion, witness said it
was possible that while suffering from an epileptic seizure,
prisoner did not know what he was doing.
“The jury found prisoner guilty, and sentence of death was
passed.”
Instances similar to the above can easily be multiplied, but I content
myself with one more case of recent date. The following appeared in
the daily press of November 15, 1911—
“In charging the Grand Jury at the Stafford assizes
yesterday, Mr. Justice Pickford referred to the case of Karl
Kramer, who was arraigned for the triple murder at
Kidsgrove. His Lordship pointed out that during the
magisterial inquiry there seemed to be considerable doubt
as to prisoner’s sanity, and the magistrates adjourned the
case sine die. A verdict of “Wilful Murder” was returned
against him by the Coroner’s Jury, and he did not think the
jury would have any hesitation in finding that there was a
 prima facie case against the prisoner. When, later, Kramer
was carried into court, he seemed in a state of collapse.
“Sir Richard Brayn, Home Office expert, in his evidence,
said he examined the prisoner in Stafford Gaol on
September 28. Questions were put to him, but no
response could be elicited. Kramer’s body and head were
bent forward, and the only movement was a twitching of
his right forefinger. He was in a state of rigidity the whole
time.
“He had examined Kramer several times since, and had
applied a test as to his sensibility, but the results were
entirely negative. He formed the opinion that the prisoner
was quite incapable of exercising his mental faculties in
any way.
“Dr. Smith, medical officer at Stafford Prison, confirmed Sir
Richard Brayn’s evidence.
“The Judge: ‘I suppose you both looked carefully to see if
the prisoner was shamming?’ ‘Oh, yes, I am entirely of the
opinion that he was not shamming.’
“Kramer was found to be insane, and was ordered to be
detained during his Majesty’s Pleasure.”
In addition to epileptics and the insane there exists a number of
people, male and female, who present to those who know them a
more pitiful and hopeless problem than the altogether mad, for the
altogether mad are at any rate restrained and protected.
The men and women of whom I now speak suffer from some kind of
mental disease that has not yet been classified, but which prevails to
a much larger extent than the public is aware.
This disease does not prevent them following their ordinary
occupations. Indeed, many of them are regular and indomitable
workers, and it is probable that the great interest they have in their
occupations prevents them becoming certifiably insane. Such men
and women continue for years at their places of business or in their
situations, conducting their affairs in an efficient manner; to their
companions they appear quiet and decent people, though a little
sombre.
But very different is the impression produced on those who
unfortunately know them at home! Released from the engrossing
interest of business, their mental and moral condition becomes
apparent. Of all the sorrow and misery that I have seen in the
sorrowful world in which I have lived and moved, I have seen no
more woeful spectacle than the sight they present—objects at once
pathetic, terrifying and hopeless. While all sorts of imaginings
occupy their minds, some great delusion seems to dominate them
and to destroy every atom of home comfort. Place them under
authority, surround them with medical officers, question them and
cross-question them, examine them and re-examine them, watch
them unceasingly and they defy every member of the faculty to find
traces of insanity.
Under such circumstances they can control their thoughts and
speech; to a certain extent they can make the worst appear the
better reason.
Only at liberty, when free of all control, is their condition made
manifest. Sometimes they appear to have a feeling that mentally all
is not quite right with them, but this feeling is but momentary, and
soon disappears in the overmastering belief in the altogether
imaginary wrongs they suffer at the hands of their friends.
I have known a not inconsiderable number of such men, and I have
been worried for years with the imaginary troubles of such women.
Argument is of no avail, no amount of proof convinces them of their
error. Years go on, during which they hug their delusion and terrify
their families and friends. Sometimes the delusion appears but a
little harmless eccentricity, nevertheless it dominates and damns the
man’s domestic life. At other times the grievance is more serious,
often taking shape in the belief of a faithful and devoted wife’s
infidelity. The horror and suffering in an otherwise good home, when