Vol. XXIV. No. i.] 
POPULAR SCIENCE ]S"EWS. 
13 
IQediciije aijd PliariQacy. 
IS CRIME A DISEASE ? 
Ix recent times the idea has become very 
prevalent among a certain class of senti- 
mentalists that crime is not an indication of 
innate depravity, but a symptom of mental 
and physical disease, or an inheritance from 
some criminal ancestor, and, therefore, the 
much-a])used murderer or robber is not a bad 
man, but only an unfortunate one, deserving 
of pity and care rather than punishment. A 
sick man, tiiey say, ought not to be impris- 
oned, and one who is staggering under a load 
of homicidal tendencies bequeathed to him 
by his grandfather, is not worthy of death, 
even if he does occasionally send some of his 
less unfortunate fellow-beings into the next 
world. This idea is carried out to its logi- 
cal conclusion in a somewhat noted book, 
Looking Back-ivard, written by Edward 
Bellamy, where, in his assumed ideal state 
of society a thousand years hence, the few 
criminals that are left are considered as vic- 
tims of atavism, or a reversion to previous 
types of humanity, and treated in hospitals 
instead of jails — an idea scarcely more absurd 
than the other ultra-socialistic theories of that 
most preposterous work. We doubt verv 
nnich that if a man should assault and rob 
Mr. Bellamy some dark night, he would turn 
and offer him a prescription for the cure of 
his '"atavism." 
To a certain extent, the above ideas are 
correct ; a man physically and mentally sound 
is less likely to commit criminal acts than one 
with a diseased body or abnormal mental 
action, and the history of the notorious Jukes 
family proves beyond question that from a 
single criminal ancestor may spring a long 
line of descendants, a majority of whom will 
be enemies to the welfare of societv. But 
granting that a tendency to crime may be 
inherited, it must originate somewhere, and 
if a man's ancestor may have been a sponta- 
neous criminal as it were, another man of 
the present day may also be laying up, on 
his own responsibility, a heritage of crime 
for his unborn descendants. 
It has been suggested — and the plan has 
met with general approval — that criminals 
should not be allowed to marry and repro- 
duce their kind to the injury of posterity. 
This would be a most excellent method of 
reducing the criminal population, if the pro- 
hibition of a legal marriage to such persons 
would ensure their leaving no descendants. 
Unfortunately, the victims of " atavism " have 
inherited a tendency to look upon the mar- 
riage laws of modern society as distinctly 
, superfluous, and we fear that the total number 
of children born among them would not be 
very greatly reduced by any such enactment. 
Practically, it is of very little consequence 
whether crime is a disease, an inheritance, or 
an original manifestation of "pure cussedness." j sufficient to keep the average worker in good 
The criminal is an enemy to society under j health. One part of nitrogenous to seven or 
any circumstances, and society has a right to | eight parts of non-nitrogenous food is found 
protect itself from him. A rabid dog is not to be a fair combination. A very small 
to blame for his condition, but we shoot him addition of stimulants appears to increase the 
just the same, as a matter of protection ; and, amount of possible work; but moderately 
for the same reason, it is right that a mur- i free drinking diminishes it. Women eat less 
derer should be put out of a world in which i than men, after making allowances for differ- 
he is not fit to live. If a man is not able to 
live among his fellows without robbing them 
or otherwise injuring their property or per- 
sons, let him be remo\ed from among them 
and permanently confined where he can do 
them no harm. It is not a question of pun- 
ishment or revenge, but of self-protection. 
If the abnormal tendencies can be eradicated, 
and the criminal made a useful member of 
society, every effort sliould be made to that 
end ; but, if crime is a disease, it seems — at 
least in its more serious manifestations — to be 
an incurable one. The percentage of re- 
formed criminals is discouragingly small, and 
that of those convicted for subsequent offences 
disproportionately large. The best treatment 
of such persons is a perplexing question, but 
the right of self-preservation is paramount to 
every other consideration, and the morbid, 
unwholesome sympathy shown by an increas- 
ing class of people towards those who are so 
much out of harmony with their social envi- 
ronment, will only result in great injury to 
the orderly and law-abiding classes of societv, 
without causing any decrease of crime or 
conferring any permanent benefit upon the 
criminals themselves. 
WE EAT TOO MUCH. 
A RECENT writer in an English medical 
journal shows conclusively that, while certain 
classes, owing to the stress of poverty, cannot 
obtain the nutriment they really need, the 
majority of people eat too much. Fortun- 
ately a moderate - degree oi over-eating does 
not appear to be markedly injurious. The 
digestive apparatus, thougli compelled to do 
more work than is really necessary, proves 
equal to the demands made upon it and does 
not break down or get seriously out of order. 
This is but one illustration out of many that 
might be given, showing how the marvellous 
mechanism of the human body adopts itself 
to conditions more or less abnonnal. It 
is lucky for the average man that physiologi- 
cal laws are not of Medo-Persic inflexibility. 
He can violate them to a limited extent with- 
out incurring the penalty, though he finds 
that, if he goes beyond that point, the punish- 
ment is swift and sure. 
Careful investigations prove that the daily 
"destructive metabolism," or, in plain Eng- 
lish, the inevitable waste and wear of the 
body, which is the measure of the work it 
does, varies but little for different occupations. 
A diet of from twelve to fourteen ounces of 
chemically dry Ibod, if the ingredients are 
in proper portion and readily digestible, is 
ences in weight and work. Where a man 
eats nineteen ounces, a women of the same 
weight and equally active habits eats only 
fourteen or fifteen ounces. This latter allow- 
ance, as will be seen from the figures given 
above, is more than enough for a hard-work- 
ing man, even when all meat is excluded 
from the diet. It is no' uncommon thing, 
however, for a man of average size and 
activity to eat double this amount, or from 
twenty-five to twenty-seven ounces of chemi- 
cally dry food in a day. In fact the writer to 
whom we are indebted for these statistics 
does not hesitate to assert that the majority of 
people in England eat literally twice as much 
as they need. 
We are inclined to think that excess in eat- 
ing is at least no less common in this country 
than in England. The abundance, variety 
and cheapness of food are naturally favorable 
to this over-indulgence. If we do not "live 
to eat," we are very far from making it the 
law of our diet to "eat to live." The palate 
is tempted to intemperance by appetizing- 
dishes when it would be fully satisfied with a 
normal amount of plain and wholesome food. 
Probably there are few of our readers who 
will not have to confess that often the 
appearance of the puddings or pies revives 
the appetite which had been completely 
appeased by the meat and its concomitants in 
the preceding course at dinner. We feel 
that we have had enough, but the new and 
savory appeal to our love for the good things 
of the table is too much for us. We have 
been eating because we were hungry ; we 
now go on eating because we enjoy doing it. 
It is not necessary, but it is "nice." Let us 
congratulate ourselves that, though gluttonv 
and intemperance are bestial sins and cannot 
escape their punishment, moderate over-in- 
dulgence in eating is, as we have said, 
apparently a venial offense against the laws of 
health ; but let us beware of presuming tco 
much upon the mercy with which Nature 
tempers justice in the enforcement of these laws. 
A Case of Glanders.— Much interest was felt 
alike by native and foreign physicians in Vienna, in 
the recent case of Dr. G. HofTmann, assistant in the 
Hygienic Institute at Vienna, who fell a victim to 
glanders whilst conducting experiments with the 
virus, and who was said to have contracted the dis- 
ease by using upon himself a hypodermic syringe 
with which he had made the inoculation of animals 
with the cultures of the bacteria. It is now author- 
itatively stated that this method of infection has 
been disproved by the post-mortem examination, 
which showed the respiratory mucous membrane to 
be the starting point of the infection. 
