The Hawaiian gazette., 1885-05-20
Thief Trade Reports.

Returns OF thievery do not often appear
among trade reports, yet it is well organ
lied business. OF course, there is much
petty, retail pocket picking, corner fitch
ing, shop-lifting, etc, which is never
brought to the notice OF the police, and
consequently makes no part of the official
reports. but what is tabulated is decidedly
representative. One would think that
stealing is so perilous risk that it could
hardly thrive, and that its pursuit must
imply an irresistible predatory instinct,
impelling men to that course in spite of
every hazard. But the London police re
turns disclose fairly prosperous business,
and on the doctrine of averages one COM
paratiyely safe. In 1880 every two-hund-
redth person in the district covered by the
operations of the Metropolitan Police re-
ported himself victim of thievery in some
form. There were in the same territory
1855 known thieves, although the actual
number must be much greater than are
known at Scotland Yard. The losses re-
gistered by the police amounted to nearly
S650000 OF this S19O,00O or little more
than 20 per cent, were recovered, leaving
the handsome amount of S460,000 to be
divided among the depredators. How
many good dollars were sent after the bad
ones the returns furnish no definite means
of determining, and one Is as liberty to
conjecture the purposes for which the
S195,000 received for special services out
side the tax rates were spent. Probably
no small part was paid for detective duty
to obtain some return of the goods snatched
away by dexterous fingers. Notwithstand
ing all expenditures on police, the gains
of this profession allowed to each known
thief in the district were S332.13, or con
siderable more than an unsldlled labOring
man could earn in London. There are
fluctuations III this line of industry, for in
1878 it was especially profitable, and there
were 1896 of uncovered spoil to each
professional on the Scotland Yard books.
But this statement makes no allowance for
those of the corps who were apprehended,
had to disgorge, and afterward enjoyed
the hospitality of the state 1t would not
be much amiss to estimate that the losses
in London by stealing average $500 a
year for each habitual thief, an income
enjoyed practically without molestation,
and sufficient to recruit the professional
hands while wages are as low as they are.
The number of larcenies and burglaries
largely exceed that of the thieves, but
obviously each operator must commit
several crimes in order to realize his full
income. But the ineficiency of police
protection in London is exhibited in the
Statement that for the decade from 1870 to
1880 the losses by the spoliation of the
predatory class in excess of recoveries was
S4,166,0O0, the recoveries being a little
more than fifth of the losses. Nearly
half of the felonies coming under the cog
nizance of the police pass without any
arrest.
But the crime of London is less burden
some than its pauperism. 1t is estimated
that the endowed charities of the metro
polls produce an annual income Of $4,000,
900. of which three-fourths are expended
in London. Add to this the G1,S17,421
arising from the poorrate, exclusive of the
police and administrative moieties thereof,
and divide it by the $4,000 out and indoor
paupers and an income of S245 per head
is obtained Here no account is made OF
the private benevolence of London, which
since the days of Denison has been est
mated at S10,0O0,000 annually. Ii that is
taken into consideration it is doubtful
which is more profitable, begging or
stealing.