Page:EB1911 - Volume 26.djvu/617

Rh comparable with*I.ynn in the same state; the respective figures are 240-9 and 561-1. The evidence here, so far as it goes, is in favour of local prohibition. On the other hand there are a number of licensed cities with lower figures, and two of those on the list-Chelsea and Salem-are very high up. State prohibition does not make such a good showing. Portland is one of the most drunken laces in America—a fact confirmed by many observers-and liVichita in Kansas is above the mean. Kansas City is better. This place is peculiarly situated, being continuous with Kansas City in Missouri; the boundary between the two states passes through the town. Consequentl the inhabitants have only to 0 into the Missouri half to obtain riifink Cambridge is very s1mila§ y situated in relation to Boston. Charleston, which is above the mean for the group, was under the state dispensary system. -In sum, these police figures furnish some argument for prohibition and some against; but they clearly demonstrate the limits of compulsion. Altogether the statistical evidence from the United States, whether of consumption, ex nditure or drunkenness, offers no inducement to the United Kliiigdom to adopt any of the American methods of control in place of its own system. Norway and Sweden.-Police statistics for some of -the principal towns in Norway and Sweden, which are the seats of the company system or disinterested management applied to spirit bars, are frequently quoted and we will therefore give them here. When all allowances have been made they show that drunkenness is very Erevalent in these seaport towns, and that it fluctuates as in England ut exhibits no general tendency to improvement. Convictions per IO00 in Gothenburg.

1865    46 1886  31

1866 30 1887  32

1867 29 1888  3I

1868 26 1889  34

1869 28 1890  40

1870 26 1891  44

1871 28 1892  42

1872 28 1893  38

1873 - 32 1894 - 34

1874 38 1895  31

1875 42 4 1896  35

1876 39 1897  44

1877 40 1898  54

1878 32 1899  54

1879  31 1900   SI

1880 31 1901  42

1881 32 1902  45

1882 29 1903  47

1883 30 1904  45

X884  29 1905   52

1885 . . 29

The principal feature of this table is the much higher -level in the second 20 years than in the first, though the police rocedure has been the same. Several times in recent years the figure has exceeded that of 1865, which was practically the year before the company system was introduced, as it did not begin operations until October. Once more the influence of trade oscillations is well marked, particularly in the prosperous period of ISF7-1900. To convert convictions into arrests for comparison with the ollowing tables about 3 per 1000 should be added; this difference is very evenly maintained in Gothenburg.

Arrest.: per 1000 in Bergen.

1877   26 1892    I2

1878   21 1893   I4

1879  19 1894  16

1880 21 1895  22

188I 17 1896  29

1882 13 1897  27

1883 18 1898  27

1884 15 1899  26

1885 17 1900  31

1886 14 1901  29

1887 13 1902  27

1888 14 1903  24

1889 14 1904  20

1890  21 1905  23

1891    IQ

Arrests per 1000 in Christiania.

1890  70 I 1898  94

1891 77 1899  101

1892 74 1900  90

1893 80 1901  75

1894 75 1902  59

1895 77 1903  58

898 105 1904 52

1897 III 1905  43

Use and Abuse of Alcohol.

The evils caused by theiabuse of alcoholic liquors have always been recognized by mankind; they are too obvious to be ignored. Intoxication produces imbecility, bestiality, violence and crime; continued excess produces incapacity, Eovertfy, misery, disease, delirium, insanity and death. But all t ese e ects are produced b other causes and it is very difficult to estimate the precise share of, this particular agent. In modern times scientific investigation has attempted to do this and to give precision to the conclusions d;'al;1n from ordinary observation. We will briefiy summarize some 0 the resu ts.

Crime.-Drink is associated with crimes against the person, but not with crimes against progerty, which form in England mnetenths of the whole (judicial statistics, 1901). Dr W. Sullivan, medical officer in the prison service, calculates that “alcoholic intoxication is answerable for about 60 per cent. of indictable crimes of violence and for a rather higher proportion of minor offences of the same class "; and further that “ it is probably the cause of nearly half the crimes of lust, ” but it “ makes no appreciable contrgution to crimes of acquisitiveness." He gives the following ta ez- -

Annual Average per 100,000'-189I'IQ00. I
 * "°“- D'““"°““”- ..f.ii'2l§ T.'ii. A358329

Agricultural    226-3 116-33 3-46

Minin    1091-2 237-34 2-43

l/lanu§ acturing   479-8 265-73 6-42 Seaports. 990-6 409-73 10-56

This does not show a. regular connexion. The mining areas, which have the most drunkenness, are only second in violence and lowest of all in suicide. Dr Sullivan explains this discrepancy by the theory that chronic alcoholism is less prevalent among miners, and that this form is chiefly responsible for the crimes in question. It is impossible, however, to establish any constant relation between drink and violent crime; the two do not vary together. It was pointed out in the Judicial Statistics for 1901 that whereas in the drunken year 1899 consumption of drink was 8 per cent. higher and the police records of prosecutions for drunkenness 15 per cent. higher than in the previous quinquennial period, crimes of violence were 1-62 per cent. lower. These statistics apply only to England. When other countries are taken it becomes still clearer that other factors are more important. Mr W. D. Morrison gives the following table of homicides in proportion to population in different countries (Crime and its Causes):-

Persons Tried for Homicide per 100, o00. Italy     15-40 France    2-73

Spain  11-91 Scotland. 2-11

Austria  4-01 Germany. I'5I

Ireland. 3-35 ~ En land  I'60

Belgium   3-02. - 1 Hohand   1-10

Except that England, Scotland and Ireland are in the order of relative drunkenness, the table shows no correspondence between drink and homicide. National character and climate are evidently more important determining factors. Some calculations of the proportion of crime associate ii with drink have been made in different countries. In Germany 36-5 per cent. of the prisoners in one gaol were found to be drunkards (Baer); assaults, 51-3 per cent.; resistance to the police, 70-I er cent.; offences against morality, 66 per cent. (Aschaffenburg). in Italy 50, 60, and 75 r cent. of crimes against the person have been attributed to drinl? In Switzerland 40 per cent. of male criminals in 1892 were found to have been under the influence of drink when their offences were committed. In Denmark 43 per cent. of the men convicted in 1903 were drunkards. These estimates, some of which are official, suffice to confirm the connexion between drink and a great deal of crime, but the basis of investigation is too narrow to ermit more than a general conclusion. There is, however, one ficirm of crime for which drink is almost wholly responsible, and this furnishes the blackest of all indictments against: it. The intensity of suffering and injury inflicted on children by the atrocious cruelty and neglect oi drunken parents cannot be overstated. The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children finds that 90 per cent. of the cases which come under its notice are due to drink.

Poverty.-Much poverty is undoubtedly caused by drink, but it is even less possible to establish any constant connexion between the two than in the case of crime. Pauperism and drink stand to a great extent in inverse relation; in good times the first diminishes and the second increases, in bad times the reverse takes place. For instance, pauperism in England, which has had a eneral tendency to fall for many years, rose rapidly in the period of iow consumption after 1860, fell still more rapidly in the great drinking years 1870-77, and rose again when they gave place to depression. With falling consumption after 189I (see the table above) it rose till 1894, when