V.
E. Fornasari di Verce.[47]
In the first chapter (on poverty and criminality in Italy) the author calls attention to the following facts. According to the statistics [[139]]of 1881 there were in Italy to the thousand (of both sexes over nine years of age) 390.66 persons who were rich, well-to-do, moderately well-off, or with enough to live on, and 609.34 who had scarcely the necessities of life. Out of 100 persons convicted there were:
| 1887 | 1888 | 1889 | |
| 56.34 | 57.45 | 56.00 | Necessitous |
| 22.99 | 30.77 | 32.15 | Having only the bare necessities |
| 11.54 | 9.98 | 10.13 | Moderately well-off |
| 2.13 | 1.80 | 1.72 | Well-to-do or rich |
Here the favorable influence of means comes out distinctly. For 40% of the population had some means and 60% were in need; but among those convicted there were 13% with means and nearly 87% who were poor.
Then the author gives a sketch of the influence of poverty in causing degeneracy among the proletariat and predisposing them to crime, for poverty is very destructive to men’s mental faculties. He cites in support of this many authors of weight.
By comparing the different Italian districts, grouped about the average figure for wealth per capita, with the number of prisoners to the 100,000 of the population, grouped according to the place from which they came, the following result is obtained.
| Wealth. | Prisoners according to the Place from which they Came. | ||||
| (3.333) | Latium. | VII | — | ||
| — | VI | — | |||
| — | V | — | |||
| (2.746) | Piedmont-Liguria. | IV | — | ||
| (2.400) | Lombardy. | III |  | Lombardy (43) | |
| Piedmont-Liguria (51) | |||||
| Venice (53) | |||||
| — | II | Tuscany (76) | |||
| (2.164) | Tuscany. | I | Emilia (95) | ||
| (1.935) | Venice, |  | Average. | | Kingdom (118) |
| (1.876) | Kingdom. | ||||
| (1.762) | Emilia. | ||||
| — | 1st | Marches-Umbria (137) | |||
| (1.471) | Sicily. |  | 2d |  | Sardinia (167) |
| (1.333) | Naples | ||||
| (1.227) | Marches-Umbria | 3d | Naples (173) | ||
| (?) | Sardinia | 4th | — | ||
| 5th | Sicily (212) | ||||
| 6th | — | ||||
| 7th | Latium (250) | ||||
According to the author this table shows that wealth and criminality present a certain symmetry, to this extent, that the wealthy [[140]]regions have in general a lower criminality than the poor ones. It is only Latium that forms an exception, which is explained, according to Dr. Fornasari di Verce, first, by the circumstance that the capital is situated in that district, second, by the climate, and third, chiefly by the fact that the absolute wealth of a country gives no indication of the distribution of wealth. We can properly expect to find that where great wealth is heaped up there will also be considerable pauperism.
Not only does poverty predispose to crime, but it also furnishes the motives for it. Leading to alcoholism it is the cause of violent crimes; it drives persons who cannot find work to vagrancy and mendicity, which in their turn are the preparatory school for greater crimes; it puts the great number of those who cannot provide honestly for their needs to the necessity of stealing. And when these factors act upon a man already predisposed, they even lead as far as homicide.