The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1913-10-23
DOES NOT DIFFER FROM
UNIVERSITY GRADUATE.

UVIvEnOIII UnHUUAIL
There is no Such Thing as Physical
Criminal Type Insofaras Characteris-
tics go. Caa not Tell a Criminal BY
the Lobe of Fe,Ear.
Scarcely enough Justice says
the Westminster Gazette. has been
done to the admirable work Of DR..
Charles Goring in his study of the
English crimi' which has just
been issued as lue- book. This is
even less an imp ortant addition to
our knowledge of the criminal than
a challenge to the whole world of
criminalogists. For the investiga-
tions of DR.. Goring shake the elabo-
rate fabric built up by Lomoroso
and those who have followed in his
| footsteps. Our inevitable conclu-
sion,' the report states, must be that
there is no such thing as physical
criminal type The head of the
criminal differs in nomarked degree
from that of the university graduate,
and specialized crime is discovered
to be not due to selection on the
part of the criminal, but to the op-
portunities which present them
selves to him. The criminal who is
in favorable position for thievlng.
thieves; the man who has no oppor-
tunlty of taking what is not his, fig
ures among the statistics of criminal
violence.
The one marked characteristic of
the criminal classes is low order
of physique, frequently associated
with poor intelligence. Such de-
fects as these, however, are too COM
mon outside the ranks of the crimi-
nails to afford any guide to the Grim
inal before he commits crime. And
with that broad fact the entire struc-
ture of pseudo science comes top
pling to the ground
Sir Robert Anderson, long head of
the Criminal Investigation Depart
ment of the London police, will not
admit that there is a low order of
physique. or that there is poor in
telligence among criminals, but in
sists that many criminals are of good
health and figure and handsome of
face; and their intelligence, if not
above the average of the community,
is at least higher than that of the
slums.
According togDr. Lombroso, GRIM
inals are born, .pt made. A man
with a certain peculiarity about the
lobe of his ear, the shape of his nose,
the curve of his eyebrows, and the
conformation of his head, asa whole,
was absolute proof that he was a
criminal. There was no hope for
him; and as fastF,s these marks were
recognized there was nothing else to
do but lock him up, thereby pre-
venting crime. There must have
been some doubt as to the truth Of
this theory in the minds of those
charged with restraining crime and
locking up criminals, as we have
not heard of the wholesale arrest
and locking up of entire communi-
ties. The subject, though, has been
investigated by many, and on one
occasion the pictures of Kant and a
notorious criminal were submit
ted to a celebrated French physi-
ognomist, who promptly picked out
Kant's picture as that of the crimi
nal. Sir Robert Anderson made a
similar test. He says:
When l was at Scotland Yard.
DR.. Max Nordau came to see me. |
knew he was coming and laid a trap
for him. / had in my desk two
photographs in which all but the
head and features were concealed
from view. | placed them before
DR.. Nordau and asked him to tell
me which was the criminal. He
hesitated for a long time, and finally
shirked the decision. One of the
photographs was that of Woerth Ray
mond. who stole the Agnew Gains
borough; the othher was DR.. Temple,
Archbishop of Canterbury" "-Ex.