CORRESP ONDENCE. 



697 



ALCOHOL AND CRIME. 



Editor Popular Science Monthly: 



SIR: Writing of Scientific Temperance 

 and President Jordan's thoughtful ar- 

 ticle in your January issue, you say, " There 

 is no denying that much the greater part of 

 the crime and misery with which society is 

 afflicted is caused by the use of alcohol in 

 one form or another." May I be pardoned if I 

 say that the proposition may well be denied ; 

 and may, even without much trouble or skill, 

 be proved totally fallacious? And to pre- 

 vent misunderstanding, permit me to say that 

 I do not in this communication either advo- 

 cate or condemn the use of alcoholic drinks : 

 the question may well be left for a separate 

 discussion. 



Consider that, if much the greater part of 

 crime and misery ... is caused by the use 

 of alcohol, it must follow as a corollary that, 

 where alcohol is most used, there we shall 

 find most crime and misery. But experience 

 teaches that this is not true. Here in Cali- 

 fornia, at least, and, I think, perhaps through- 

 out the United States and elsewhere, the rep- 

 resentative business and professional men, as 

 a rule, use alcoholic beverages regularly, and 

 in much greater quantity than can possibly 

 be obtained by the poor those most ac- 

 quainted with misery and crime. 1 keep 

 well within the bounds of truth in saying 

 that a majority of merchants, lawyers, judges, 

 and men of affairs, " politicians," legislators, 

 and perhaps physicians, drink daily from two 

 to four glasses of spirits; that many, and 

 these not the least reputable and prosperous, 

 drink double this quantity; and not a few, 

 three or four times as much. Beer, in sum- 

 mer time especially, is drunk by great num- 

 bers of the active, efficient, well-behaved, and 

 prosperous business and professional men, 

 both American and German, from two to 

 twenty and even more times a day; and 

 these do not seem on an average to be dis- 

 posed to crime, or to suffer what is called 

 misery. Brewers, as a class of workingmen, 

 are not more disposed to commit misdemean- 

 ors, not to say crimes, than others : and they 

 appear to be far enough from misery ; yet I 

 am informed by credible people, who know 

 whereof they affirm, that many, indeed most, 

 of them drink daily from twenty to thirty 

 and forty glasses of beer. I have not much 

 personal acquaintance with Wall Street spec- 

 ulators and millionaires, or with their ways ; 

 but I conclude, from information and such 

 glimpses into their lives as one occasionally 

 catches, that few of them are abstainers 

 from wine or the stuff called champagne, or 

 from brandy, whisky, etc. If these as a class 

 VOL. XLVIII. 50 



are criminals (and I for one do not say nay), 

 at least theirs is not the crime, nor is such 

 misery as they may perhaps suffer, the crime 

 and misery of which you speak. I know 

 personally some workingmen, reputable, even 

 respectable, who drink at home from two to 

 four gallons of whisky per month ; of course, 

 they are not brilliant members of society. 



It is true, doubtless, that the money spent 

 by such well-to-do people as I have mentioned 

 does not bear so large a ratio to their incomes 

 as does that spent by many mechanics and 

 clerks and laborers ; and therefore it does not 

 impoverish the former as much as it does the 

 latter. But the same is true of other ex- 

 penses of " living," viz., those for dwellings, 

 butcher meat, bread, clothing, and amuse- 

 ments ; yet none of these things are con- 

 sidered to be causes of crime and misery. 

 If it be true that the use of alcohol has any 

 genetic connection with crime, then those who 

 have served terms in the penitentiary, where 

 alcohol is excluded from their diet, should 

 after liberation be less disposed to crime 

 than before; but experience traverses this 

 conclusion. 



The truth appears to be that, excluding 

 from consideration people having organic 

 proclivities crimeward, as Sir Thomas More 

 hath it, there is no " punishment so horrible 

 that it can keep them from stealing, which 

 have no other craft [or opportunity] whereby 

 to get their living " ; and further, as he saith, 

 " great and horriblepunishments be appointed 

 for thieves ; whereas, much rather provision 

 should have been made of some means where- 

 by they might get their living, so that no man 

 should be driven to this extreme necessity to 

 steal ; . . . for they that be thus destitute of 

 service [opportunity to work] either starve 

 for hunger or manfully (sic) play the thieves. 

 For what would you have them to do V ... 

 what can they do but steal, ... or else go 

 about begging ? " Evidently the author of 

 Utopia saw no reason for blaming any par- 

 ticular article of diet or pleasure with the 

 making of thieves or the causing of misery ! 

 It is a good rule, in scientific investigations, 

 when you have discovered a sufficient cause 

 for a particular phenomenon, there to rest 

 your case. GEORGE PYBURN. 



SACRAMENTO, CAL., January 21, 1896. 



[Not having space for the whole of our 

 correspondent's letter, we print only that 

 part of it which bears more or less directly 

 on the point in dispute. 



His contention, if we rightly interpret it, 

 seems to come to this : Since a great many 

 people drink who are neither criminals nor 



