Idaho County free press. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho Territory) 1886-current, 1913-12-25
THE PROBLEM OF THE CRIMINAL.

Sine Lombroso enuncated the physognomy
criminals he has gained adherents with views mod
fled extended There has developed naturally enough
opposing army of thinkers who be divided into those who
place blame criminal offense entirely the social
of the offender and those who regard him wiful
vicious though morally defective and therefore response
BILE for his actions More and champions of the Lombro
dea that the criminal inherently abnormal have
to the front with evidence or less worthy and cmnoogy
time fast becoming medical science rather
than legal But this phase Of the subject is not foot
ing sure enough to public the legal pro-
ession of the justification for its point of has it
ceived that respectful hearing the courts which would
vent injustice being done only the prisoner but also to
society Nevertheless complete justice to both offender and
society slowly the way and those who oppose
take thought of the doctrines unconscousy fall
ing line with them by their attempts to ameorae the
dton Of the convict by atang for prison REFORM ndeter
prison into institution for correction and custody rather
than punishment True enough more of sentiment than of
science is back of these methods and therefore in many in
divdua instances harmful nustces to society and ultimate
harm the offender against society wrought This nev
table in period of transition from
correct method Of dealing with social problems AS har
of opinion to exist among those who have
forced to take the problem because of contact gradually
growing intimate justice to all will And it
is the psychatr with his collaboration psychologist on
whom the responsibility must rest most heavily if the
ideas of the nature of disease of the criminal as
sick man, are to prevail.
There is no longer any credited opposition to the view
that criminal oenses petty otherwise the products
individual and social disease While influence of environ
ment for those most chartaby Inclined the offender
from responsibility for his condition. does excuse him
from responsibility for his acts But if every offender
diseased in the psyche phyoogc his RESPONSE
bty must come into question before the bar of justice
Many medcoegal battle has been fought this ques
ton The issue has been confused usually the legal
mnd mas ever thought OF with
SANITY Because knew what he doing the LAWYER
has held him responsible. But mans mental
very complex ng it is bundle of psychic forces habits
which be summed three divisions: intellect con
sciousness emotion that is impulse will that is
action itself No two alike in the strength or
weakness of the other these To take the view
that consciousness of the wrongfuness egaty of an act
at the time of its commttal makes the offender
for It and legally is inconsistent with the welfounded
knowledge of mental functions which now possess Con
duct is not dependent chiefly knowledge more
impulse emotion and will capable incapable of CONTROL
ing and directing impulse in way harmonic with know
ledge, that is consciousness.
1t IS Just because of this compexty of function that
many different kinds of crimes committed many diff
efent types OF criminals exist In spite of all the that
has been given to these questions is impossible for
these abnormaes of conduct by theoretical consideration
Their nature far brain structure concerned Too little
KNOWN too little be known, of what constitutes compex
brain function But be confidently asserted saws Dir
Harold W. Wright in issue Journal of the
American Medical Association, that in criminal are deal
ing with mentally abnormal not sane per-
son. but diseased sick person. as an offender