criminal psychology-第97章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


st　assume　that　an　inclination　evinced　by　idea　A　makes　possible　ideas　a'；　a''；　a'''。　Habits　may　develop　according　to　these　dispositions；　but　the　knowledge　of　the　conditions　of　this　development　we　do　not　yet　possess。　Nevertheless；　we　tend　to　assume　that　the　famous　historian　X　and　the　famous　Countess　Y　will　not　get　the　habit　of　drinking　or　opium…smoking　but　in　this　case　our　assumption　is　deduced　from　their　circumstances；　and　not　from　their　personality。　Hence；　it　is　difficult　to　say　with　certainty　that　a　person　is　incapable　of　acquiring　this　or　that　habit。　So　that　it　is　of　importance；　when　the　question　arises；　to　discover　the　existence　of　implied　habits　whenever　these　are　asserted　in　the　face　of　apparently　contradictory　conditions。　There　is　a　certain　presumption　for　the　correctness　of　the　implication；　when；　e。　g。；　the　practiced　physician　asserts　that　he　counted　the　pulse　for　a　minute　without　a　watch；　or　when　the　merchant　accurately　estimates　the　weight　of　goods　within　a　few　grams；　etc。　But　it　will　be　just　as　well　to　test　the　assertion；　since；　without　this　test；　the　possibility　of　error　is　still　great。

Somebody　asserts；　e。　g。；　that　he　had　been　distracted　and　had　paid　no　attention　to　what　two　persons　close　to　him　had　said。　Suddenly　he　began　to　take　notice　and　found　himself　able　to　recapitulate　all　their　remarks。　Or　again；　a　musician；　who　is　almost　altogether　deaf；　says　that　he　is　so　accustomed　to　music　that　in　spite　of　his　deafness　he　is　able　to　hear　the　smallest　discord　in　the　orchestra。　Yet　again；　we　hear　of　insignificant；　hardly　controllable　habits　that　become　accidentally　significant　in　a　criminal　case。　Thus　the　crime　of　arson　was　observed　by　the　firebrand's　neighbor；　who　could　have　seen　the　action　through　the　window；　only　if　he　had　leaned　far　out　　of　it。　When　he　was　asked　what　he　wanted　to　see　in　the　cold　winter　night；　he　replied；　that　he　had　the　habit　daily　of　spitting　out　of　the　window　just　before　going　to　bed。　Another；　who　was　surprised　in　his　sleep　by　an　entering　thief；　had　heavily　wounded　the　latter　with　a　great　brush；　‘‘because　he　happened　to　have　had　it　in　his　hand。''　The　happening　was　due　to　his　habit　of　being　unable　to　fall　asleep　without　a　brush　in　his　hand。　If　such　habits　are　demonstrable　facts　they　serve　to　explain　otherwise　unexplainable　events。

They　are；　however；　the　more　difficult　to　establish；　because　they　occur　mainly　in　isolated　peopleold　bachelors　and　old　maids　so　that　their　confirmation　by　others　is　rare。　On　the　other　hand；　every　one　of　us　knows　habits　of　his　own　or　of　his　friends　which　would　not　be　believed　when　cited；　and　which　would　be　very　difficult　to　prove　when　the　need　arose。　The　influence　of　habit　on　indifferent　matters　can　be　shown　by　numerous　examples。　There　is　Kant's　citation；　that　if　anybody　happened　to　send　his　doctor　nine　ducats　the　latter　would　have　to　believe　that　the　messenger　had　stolen　the　tenth。　If　you　give　a　bride　most　beautiful　linen；　but　only　eleven　pieces；　she　will　weep。　Give　her　thirteen　pieces；　and　she　will　certainly　throw　one　of　them　away。　If　you　keep　these　deep…rooted　habits　in　mind；　you　may　possibly　say　that　they　must　have　had　a　definite；　determinative；　and　alternative　influence　on　body　and　mind。　For　example；　from　time　immemorial　mankind　has　taken　medications　at　definite　intervals；　e。　g。；　every　hour；　every　two　hours；　etc。；　hence；　a　powder　ordered　every　seventy…seven　minutes　will　cause　us　complete　surprise。　But　by　what　authority　does　the　body　require　exactly　these　quantities　of　time　or　weight？　Or　again；　our　lectures；　private　or　public；　so　and　so　much　time？　Of　course　it　would　be　inconvenient　if　professors　lectured　only　52　minutes；　yet　how　much　difficulty　must　not　the　mind　have　met　in　becoming　habituated　to　exactly　60　minutes　of　instruction！　This　habituation　has　been　going　on　for　a　long　time；　and　now　children；　like　nations；　regard　the　new　in　the　light　of　the　old；　so　that　the　old；　especially　when　it　is　fixed　by　language；　becomes　the　mind's　instrument　for　the　control　of　the　new。　Indeed　we　often　stick　linguistically　to　old　things；　although　they　have　been　long　superannuated。

There　is　the　characteristic　state　of　mind　which　might　be　called　the　refraction　of　an　idea　by　the　presence　of　another　idea。　An　example　is　the　habit　of　saying；　‘‘Unprepared；　as　I　have''　before　beginning　a　speech。　The　speaker　means　to　say　that　he　has　not　prepared　himself；　but；　as　he　really　has　prepared　himself；　both　expressions　come　out　　together。　This　habitual　concurrence　of　the　real　thought　is　of　importance；　and　offers；　frequently；　the　opportunity　of　correcting　what　is　said　by　what　is　thought。　This　process　is　similar　to　that　in　which　a　gesture　contradicts　a　statement。　We　often　hear：　‘‘I　had　to　take　it　because　it　was　right　there。''　This　assertion　indicates　theft　through　need；　and　at　the　same　time；　theft　through　opportunity。　Or　again；　we　hear：　‘‘We　had　not　agreed；　before''this　assertion　denies　agreement　and　can　indicate　merely；　because　of　the　added　‘‘before；''　that　the　agreement　was　not　of　already　_*long_　standing。　Still　again；　we　hear；　‘‘When　we　fell　to　the　floor；　I　defended　myself；　and　struck　down　at　him。''　Here　what　is　asserted　is　self…defense；　and　what　is　admitted　is　that　the　enemy　was　underneath　the　speaker。　Such　refractions　of　thought　occur　frequently　and　are　very　important；　particularly　in　witnesses　who　exaggerate　or　do　not　tell　the　whole　truth。　They　are；　however；　rarely　noticed　because　they　require　accurate　observation　of　each　word　and　that　requires　time；　and　our　time　has　no　time。


Section　92。　（b）　Heredity。＇1＇


＇1＇　Benedict：　Heredity。　Med　Times；　1902；　XXX；　289。　　Richardson：　Theories　of　Heredity。　Nature；　1902；　LXVI；　630。　　Petruskewisch：　Gedanken　zur　Vererbung。　Freiburg　1904。


However　important　the　question　of　heredity　may　be　to　lawyers　psychologically；　its　application　to　legal　needs　is　impossible。　It　would　require；　on　the　one　hand；　the　study　of　all　the　literature　concerning　it；　together　with　the　particular　teachings　of　Darwin　and　his　disciples；　and　of　Lombroso　and　his。　The　criminal…psychological　study　of　it　has　not　yet　been　established。　The　unfounded；　adventurous；　and　arbitrary　assertions　of　the　Lombrosists　have　been　contradicted；　especially　through　the　efforts　of　German　investigators。　But　others；　like　Debierre　in　Lille；　Sernoff　in　Moscow；　Taine；　Drill；　Marchand　have　also　had　occasion　to　controvert　the　Italian　positivists。　At　the　same　time；　the　problem　of　heredity　is　not　dead；　and　will　not　die。　This　is　being　shown　particularly　in　the　retort　of　Marchand　concerning　the　examinations　he　made　with　M。　E。　Koslow；　in　the　asylum　for　juvenile　offenders　founded　by　the　St。　Petersburg　Anthropological　Society。　Between　Buckle；　who　absolutely　denies　heredity；　and　the　latest　of　the　modern　doctrines；　there　are　a　number　of　intermediate　views；　one　of　which　may　possibly　be　true。　There　is　an　enormous　literature　which　every　criminalist　should　study。＇2＇


＇2＇　Calton：　Hereditary　Genius　2d　Ed。　London　1892。　　Martinak：　Einige　Ansichten　ber　Vererbung　moralischer　Eigenschaften。　Transactions；　Viennese　Philological　society。　Leipzig　1893。　　Haacke：　Gestaltung　u　Vererbunsr　Leipzig　1893。　　Tarde：　Les　Lois　de　l'Imitation。　Paris　1904。　Etc。；　etc。



Nevertheless；　this　literature　can　tell　us　nothing　about　the　legitimacy　of　the　premise　of　heredity。　Every　educated　man　still　believes　Darwin's　doctrines；　and　the　new　theories　that　seek　to　emancipate　themselves　from　it　do　so　only　by　pushing　them　out　of　the　big　front　door；　and　insinuating　them　through　the　little　back　door。　But　according　to　Bois…Reymond　Darwinism　is　only　the　principle　of　the　hereditary　maintenance　of　the　child's　variation　from　its　parents。　Everybody　knows　of　real　inherited　characters；　and　many　examples　of　it　are　cited。　According　to　Ribot；　suicide　is　hereditary；　according　to　Despine；　kleptomania；　according　to　Lucas；　vigorous　sexuality；　according　to　Darwin；　hand…writing；　etc。　Our　personal　acquaintances　show　the　inheritance　of　features；　figure；　habits；　intellectual　properties；　particularly　cleverness；　such　as；　sense　of　space　and　time；　capacity　for　orientation；　interests；　diseases；　etc。　Even　ideas　have　their　ancestors　like　men；　and　we　learn　from　the　study　of　animals　how　instincts；　capacities；　even　acquired　ones；　are　progressively　inherited。　And　yet　we　refuse　to　believe　in　the　congenital　criminal！　But　the　contradiction　is　only　apparent。

A　study　of　the　works　of　Darwin；　Weismann；　DeVries；　etc。；　shows　us　indubitably　that　no　authority　asserts　the　inheritance　of　great　alterations　appearing　for　the　first　time　in　an　individual。　And　as　to　the　inheritance　of　acquired　characteristics；　some　authorities　assert　this　to　be　impossible。

Until　Darwin　the　old　law　of　species　demanded　that　definite　traits　of　a　species　should　not　change　through　however　long　a　period。　The　Darwinian　principle　indicates　the　inheritance　of　minute　variations；　intensified　by　sexual　selection；　and；　in　the　course　of　time；　developed　into　great　variations。　Now　nobody　will　deny　that　the　real　criminal　is　different　from　the　majority　of　other　people。　That　this　difference　is　great　and　essential；　is　inferred　from　the　circumstance　that　a　habit　a　single　characteristic；　an　unhappy　inclination；　etc。；　does　not　constitute　a　criminal。　If　a　man　is　a　thief　it　will　not　be　asserted　that　he　is　otherwise　like　decent　people；　varying　only　in　the　accidental　inclination　to　theft。　We　know　that；　besides　the　inclination　to　theft；　we　may　assign　him　a　dislike　for　honest　work；　lack　of　moral　power；　indifference　to　the　laws　of　honor　when　caught；　the　lack　of　real　religion；in　short；　the　inclination　to　theft　must　be　combined　with　a　large　number　of　very　characteristic　qualities　in　order　to　make　a　thief　of　a　man。　There　must；　in　a　word；　be　a　complete　and　profound　change　in　his　whole　nature。　Such　great　changes　in　the　individual　are　never　directly　inherited；　only　particular　properties　can　be　　inherited；　but　these　do　not　constitute　a　criminal。　Hence；　the　son　of　a　criminal　need　not　in　his　turn　be　a　criminal。

This　does　not　imply　that　in　the　course　of　generations　characters　might　not　compound　themselves　until　a　criminal　type　is　developed；　but　this　is　as　rare　as　the　development　of　new　species　among　the　animals。　Races　are　frequently　selected；　species　develop　rarely。


Section　93。　（c）　Prepossession。

Prepossession；　prejudice；　and　anticipatory　opinion　are；　perhaps；　the　most　dangerous　foes　of　the　criminalist。　It　is　believed　that　the　danger　from　them　is　not　great；　since；　in　most　cases；　prepossession　controls　only　one　individual；　and　a　criminal　case　is　dealt　with　by　several；　but　this　proves　nothing。　When　the　elegant　teacher　of　horseback　riding　has　performed　his　subtlest　tricks；　he　gracefully　removes　his　hat　and　bows　to　the　public；　and　only　at　that　moment　does　the　public　observe　that　it　has　been　seeing　something　remarkable　and　applauds　heartily；　not　because　it　has　understood　the　difficulty　of　the　performance；　but　because　the　rider　has　bowed。　This　happens　to　us　however　good　our　will。　One　man　has　a　case　in　hand；　he　develops　it；　and　if；　at　the　proper　time；　he　says　‘‘Voila；''　the　others　say；　‘‘Oh；　yes；''　and　‘‘Amen。''　He　may　have　been　led　by　a　prepossession；　but　its　presence　is　now　no　longer　to　be　perceived。　Thus；　though　our　assumptions　may　be　most　excellently　meant；　we　still　must　grant　that　a　conviction　on　false　grounds；　even　when　unconsciously