PLATE V. (STARKE)
I cannot show the views of the author better than by quoting the following: “That the number of offenses against property must be related to the prevailing economic conditions, seems to need no proof. For the man who lives in the possession of abundance, the motive for appropriating the property of others is lacking, even though the inclination to commit all possible crimes slumbers within him. It is a favorite expression of the Social-democrats, that the abolition of private property would cause all crimes against property to disappear. They forget, while maintaining this, the probability [[67]]that just as earlier private individuals were robbed, so under the new order the state would be, by people of the same kind—those who today, without living in want, still are not content with their lawful gains, and reach out after unlawful ones. The apostles of state-ownership, in order to make their contention credible, must at least offer proof that the offenses against property which are now punished, are entirely due to hunger and need on the part of those convicted. They cannot however, offer such proof. This is not because the government statistics … give no data with regard to the economic condition of the convicts, but because, as a matter of fact, the worst offenses against property are not committed by the hungry. The merchant who goes into a fraudulent bankruptcy, the banker who embezzles deposits, the worldling who forges drafts, have all taken the step into crime from a life, if not of abundance, at least of a competence. People of this kind will not disappear from the socialistic state. In their case the lack is not in the social system, but in their individual make-up.”[37]
PLATE VI. (STARKE)
—We have given this quotation simply to furnish a typical example of the incorrect way in which many authors represent the socialistic opinion with regard to the genesis of crime. What nonsense, to assert that according to the theory of socialism all crimes against property find their causes in hunger and misery! See the second part of this work, where the reader will find that socialists hold an entirely different opinion, and that they have facts to prove the truth of their theories.—
With regard to the relation between the movement of the price of certain important cereals and a great part of the crime against property, the author gives the following table:
| Years. | Average Price Per 200 Kilogr. in Marks. | Arrests for Theft to 10,000 Persons. | ||
| Wheat. | Grain. | Rye. | ||
| 1882 | 22.57 | 23.63 | 18.81 | 26.0 |
| 1883 | 19.04 | 19.29 | 16.30 | 25.2 |
| 1884 | 18.44 | 18.75 | 17.17 | 22.7 |
| 1885 | 17.92 | 18.11 | 16.17 | 21.5 |
| 1886 | 17.68 | 17.94 | 14.69 | 20.7 |
| 1887 | 18.88 | 18.95 | 15.26 | 20.5 |
| 1888 | 20.23 | 20.64 | 16.19 | 20.3 |
| 1889 | 20.03 | 20.52 | 16.50 | 21.4 |
| 1890 | 21.43 | 21.71 | 17.97 | 21.2 |
| 1891 | 22.48 | 22.92 | 19.26 | 19.3 |
[[68]]
There is at first a certain correlation between the figures in the different columns, but there is none in the later years. It is very probable that the diminution in crimes against property is due, during these years, to a combination of favorable economic circumstances at that time.