After a man has shown, by a second conviction of a crime by violence, that he is one of those whose moral sense can not be restored by punishment to a realisation of his action, then an indeterminate sentence, somewhat as in the case of the mentally unstable, who are allowed to leave the asylum but are kept under observation, is the only proper method.
Men like Sir Robert Anderson are sure that this procedure could be adopted with regard to quite a liberal number of leading criminals whose influence induces others to crime. There would be much less need for all machinery of the criminal law than at the present time, and the community would be better protected. This is certainly true as regards the large cities, where crimes against property are almost without exception committed by those who have been previously convicted for such crimes, or who at least have been in intimate association with such convicted criminals.
This view of the criminal, as one against whom society must protect itself just as it does against the insane, is comparatively modern. It must be borne in mind, however, that insane asylums are by no means an old institution, and that the present restraint of very large numbers of the insane is something unknown before in history. It seems not unlikely that if this newer aspect of criminology could be made popular great benefit would follow, not only to the peace of the community and the freedom of its members from fear as to such crimes, but also a number of the weaker individuals, who are now influenced and led astray by clever criminals, would be saved from commission of crime and the necessity of punishment, with the degradation and lifelong stigma that this involves.
This is an aspect of criminology with which the Christian clergyman can be in sympathy, and that does not smack of the utter materialism which was at the foundation of much of the discussion of the so-called criminal type. The [{281}] recognition of moral perversion as a form of insanity requiring treatment and then constant observation for many years, just as in the case of mental disequilibration would be a distinct advance over our present crude methods of dealing with criminals.
JAMES J. WALSH.
XXVI
PARANOIA, A STUDY IN CRANKS
Of late years the crank, in the various forms in which he or she may occur, has became a subject of great popular as well as scientific interest. As a matter of fact, the queernesses of people are a more absorbing study to the neurologists and psychologists than are any forms of insanity. It not infrequently happens that individuals of peculiar tendencies are prone to have special affinity for religious ideas, and strange applications of Christian formulae of thought. Even when they do not become absolutely insane in their religiosity, they may often go to extremes. It must be remembered, too, that some cranks are mentally affected in but mild form, and it may be difficult to determine whether their oddity is really the result of a certain amount of mental torsion, or merely intellectual tension.
Such persons are more likely to be brought in close contact with their pastors and other clergymen and with religious Superiors of various kinds than even normal individuals. They often put their confessors, particularly, in serious quandaries in the matter of spiritual advice. A review, then, of the accepted ideas of experts with regard to such people is likely to be of special service to those who would understand these cases as well as possible, though the present state of medical knowledge, here as elsewhere, leaves much to be desired.
A distinguished authority in mental diseases once said, half in jest though he meant it to be taken at least half in earnest, that a great many more of us are cracked than are usually thought to be, only that most of us succeed in concealing the crack quite well. The frequency of the crank adds to the [{283}] interest of his study, which is by no means a department of medical science of recent growth. While interest in this class of persons has become much more intense in recent years, eccentric individuals have been an object of close observation and of serious study almost as far back as history goes. When Quintilian said that genius was not far separated from insanity, he meant to record the conclusion of his time, that men of genius are apt to seem inexplicable in their ways to those who come closely in contact with them. Eccentric persons, however, are by no means always undesirable members of a generation. It has been noted by historians in all ages that to the refusal of eccentric individuals,—often thought at the beginning, particularly, to be little better than insane—to accept the traditions of the past, we owe many of the privileges which we enjoy at the present time. Their refusal to think along old lines of thought often makes them valuable pioneers in progress.