Criminal Sociology | Page 3

provisions of this "Small
Print!" statement.
[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Project of 20% of the net profits
you derive calculated using the method you already use to calculate
your applicable taxes. If you don't derive profits, no royalty is due.
Royalties are payable to "Project Gutenberg Association / Illinois
Benedictine College" within the 60 days following each date you

prepare (or were legally required to prepare) your annual (or equivalent
periodic) tax return.
WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU
DON'T HAVE TO?
The Project gratefully accepts contributions in money, time, scanning
machines, OCR software, public domain etexts, royalty free copyright
licenses, and every other sort of contribution you can think of. Money
should be paid to "Project Gutenberg Association / Illinois Benedictine
College".
*END*THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN
ETEXTS*Ver.04.29.93*END*
Scanned with OmniPage Professional OCR software donated by Caere
Corporation, 1-800-535-7226. Contact Mike Lough

CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY
BY ENRICO FERRI PROFESSOR OF CRIMINAL LAW DEPUTY
IN THE ITALIAN PARLIAMENT, ETC.
PREFACE.
The following pages are a translation of that portion of Professor Ferri's
volume on Criminal Sociology which is immediately concerned with
the practical problems of criminality. The Report of the Government
committee appointed to inquire into the treatment of habitual drunkards,
the Report of the committee of inquiry into the best means of
identifying habitual criminals, the revision of the English criminal
returns, the Reports of committees appointed to inquire into the
administration of prisons and the best methods of dealing with habitual
offenders, vagrants, beggars, inebriate and juvenile delinquents, are all
evidence of the fact that the formidable problem of crime is again
pressing its way to the front and demanding re-examination at the
hands of the present generation. The real dimensions of the question, as

Professor Ferri points out, are partially hidden by the superficial
interpretations which are so often placed upon the returns relating to
crime. If the population of prisons or penitentiaries should happen to be
declining, this is immediately interpreted to mean that crime is on the
decrease. And yet a cursory examination of the facts is sufficient to
show that a decrease in the prison population is merely the result of
shorter sentences and the substitution of fines or other similar penalties
for imprisonment. If the list of offences for trial before a judge and jury
should exhibit any symptoms of diminution, this circumstance is
immediately seized upon as a proof that the criminal population is
declining, and yet the diminution may merely arise from the fact that
large numbers of cases which used to be tried before a jury are now
dealt with summarily by a magistrate. In other words, what we witness
is a change of judicial procedure, but not necessarily a decrease of
crime. Again, when it is pointed out that the number of persons for trial
for indictable offences in England and Wales amounted to 53,044 in
1874-8 and 56,472 in 1889-93, we are at a loss to see what colour these
figures give to the statement that there has been a real and substantial
decrease of crime. The increase, it is true, may not be keeping pace
with the growth of the general population, but, as an eminent judge
recently stated from the bench, this is to be accounted for by the fact
that the public is every year becoming more lenient and more unwilling
to prosecute. But an increase of leniency, however excellent in itself, is
not to be confounded with a decrease of crime. In the study of social
phenomena our paramount duty is to look at facts and not appearances.
But whether criminality is keeping pace with the growth of population
or not it is a problem of great magnitude all the same, and it will not be
solved, as Professor Ferri points out, by a mere resort to punishments of
greater rigour and severity. On this matter he is at one with the Scotch
departmental committee appointed to inquire into the best means of
dealing with habitual offenders, vagrants, and juveniles. As far as the
suppression of vagrancy is concerned the members of the committee
are unanimously of opinion that ``the severest enactments of the
general law are futile, and that the best results have been obtained by
the milder provisions of more recent statutes.'' They also speak of the
``utter inadequacy of the present system in all the variety of detail

which it offers to deter the habitual offender from a course of life which
devolves the cost of his maintenance on the prison and the poorhouse
when he is not preying directly on the public.'' The committee state that
they have had testimony from a large number of witnesses supporting
the view that ``long sentences of imprisonment effect no good result,''
and they arrive at the conclusion