222 SECTIONAL ADDRESSES. 



pain and suSering on human beings became objectionable to the general 

 sense of society. 



The phase or stage of evolution at which we have now arrived is 

 characterised, on the one hand, by the discontinuance, or the radical 

 limitation, of what v/as virtually the primitive vindictive punishment in 

 disguise, and, on the other hand, by the recognition of social punishments 

 as possibly possessing a reformatory or curative function. We may speak, 

 therefore, of the present phase or stage as the reformatory phase or stage 

 in the evolution of social punishment. The actual situation, however, is 

 somewhat complex. Practically punishment still rests, in law and in 

 popular thought, on the retributive basis — the lex talionis. Theoretically 

 it is recognised that from the point of view of society punishment is pro- 

 tective, and this is its primary function, and also, I believe, that society 

 is not directly concerned with the retributive aspect of punishment as 

 such, but only indirectly because of the deterrent effect of retributive 

 punishment. Moreover — and this is the mark of the phase of evolution 

 at which we have arrived — it is realised that, as far as the individual is 

 concerned, social punishment may be made reformatory, and that the 

 reformatory function of punishment is worth keeping in view, if only 

 because reformation of the individual means protection of society against 

 the repetition of the injury as far as that individual is concerned, always 

 provided that the attempt to reform the criminal does not involve the 

 sacrifice of the primary aim. 



Though there is thus some conflict between the popular and practical 

 view of punishment as protective and retributive and the theoretical view 

 of punishment as protective and reformatory, practice is tending gradually 

 towards conformity with theory. This is as it should be, since the theo- 

 retical view represents the view of the vast majority of those who have 

 given serious consideration to the problems of social punishment. In 

 what follows I am going to assume that there is general agreement with 

 respect to three points : (1) that the punishments inflicted by society 

 ought to be based on the protective and reformatory functions of punish- 

 ment, but of these the protective is primary and fundamental ; (2) that 

 the retributive view of punishment is really a relic of an older theory of 

 punishment that has rightly been set aside, though as a secondary 

 determinant of the kind and degree of punishment the old lex talionis may 

 still have to be reckoned with ; and (3) that the reformatory view of 

 punishment represents an ideal which a civilised community should 

 always keep in mind, provided the true relation of the reformatory function 

 to the protective is not forgotten. 



The psychological problems of social punishment fall into two groups : 

 on the one hand those involved in the effects of punishment on the indi- 

 vidual who is punished, and on the other hand those connected with the 

 effects of punishment on the community itself. Of course there is a 

 repercussion on society of the effects on the individual, so that the problems 

 of punishment are ultimately in every case social problems. Nevertheless 

 we shall find it convenient to consider the two groups of problems separately 

 in the meantime. 



Consider, first, the problems arising in connection with the effects of 

 punishment on the individual who is punished. So long as the retributive 



