theory which would get round the prohibition. It is forbidden to make a picture of any living thing, but not of a dead body. All you have to do, therefore, if you draw a picture of a man or of a horse, is to draw a line-it does not matter how fine a line-across the neck, and the man or horse may be regarded as in effect decapitated. The picture may represent them taking an active part in hunting or in a battle; so long however as a line has been drawn across their necks the law has been satisfied.

We have made a rapid survey of this ancient controversy, which extends through so many ages and has gone on over so great a part of the earth. It is a controversy connected, as will be obvious, with the larger problem of the relations of the spiritual and the material, as a whole, in worship. Man being, in this stage of his existence at any rate, both spirit and body, cannot, however much he tries, eliminate the material altogether from his acts of devotion. If he has not holy images, he has holy objects or holy places or holy days or holy gestures. Yet while the material cannot be eliminated, it is plain that a danger always attends it; its wrong use may always degrade religion. That a great deal of image-worship issues in such degradation cannot be disputed. The question is whether image-worship is always and necessarily a wrong use of the material. One thing seems plain. The attempt of Catholic theologians to distinguish their own imageworship on principle from the ancient image-worship, stamping the latter as idolatry and claiming that their own is not idolatry, will not hold. They are driven to make such attempts by the estimate of ancient idolatry to which Catholicism seems committed by the Old Testament and by the original attitude of the Christian Church. The efforts made in popular instruction to get rid of the Second Commandment have been traced by Dr. Charles in his Warburton Lectures, and show how real an embarrassment that Commandment has sometimes been to the authorities of the Roman communion.

EDWYN BEVAN

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT

1. Criminal Statistics, 1923.

2. Annual Reports of the Commissioners of Prisons and Directors of Convict Prisons.

AT

T the International Prison Congress held in August at the Imperial Institute, the statements made by various speakers regarding the great fall in the prison population in this country, since the first congress met in 1872, have received wide attention; but these statements have led to some confusion in the public mind, and on all sides have been taken as denoting a fall in crime. It is the fact that, whereas there were some 20,000 persons in prison fifty years ago, there are now only about 11,000, including those in Borstal institutions. This may be a matter for congratulation; but it does not follow, from this bare fact, that offences against the criminal law are less numerous than they were. Even supposing that there had been no alteration in the law under which sentences of penal servitude and imprisonment can be imposed, there are two important factors to be borne in mind which affect the daily average number in our prisons. One is the efficiency of the police force in apprehending offenders and bringing them before a Court of Justice, the other is the length of sentence imposed.

An examination of tables A, B and D of the criminal statistics published by the Home Office for 1923 shows that the number of indictable offences known to the police and the number of persons tried in respect of them were as follows:

These figures show that whereas the average percentage of persons brought to trial for indictable offences in the period 1899-1903 was 68, in the period 1919-1923 the average percentage was 57, and in the year 1923 only 51. It will readily be seen that for this reason alone the number of persons in prison would be lower.

The other factor, the length of sentence, has a more marked effect. One person sentenced to a year's imprisonment counts as one in the daily average, but one sentenced to a month counts only as one-twelfth. It is well known, and figures conclusively prove, that there has been a great shortening in the lengths of sentences imposed in recent years. In 1872 no less than 10,072 persons were in custody, sentenced to penal servitude for terms of over three years. In 1923 the number had fallen to 706. Even in 1891-2 the number under sentence of more than three years was 4,021. An analysis of the minor sentences reveals a similar shortening of the sentences imposed. The effect these changes must have had on the average prison population is fairly obvious. This diminution in the length of sentence is largely due to the practice of the judicial authorities in imposing shorter sentences. There have also been important changes in the law, e.g., the minimum sentence of penal servitude has been reduced from five years to three years. In addition there is the Probation Act; release on recognizance; and the Children's Act, whereby children under 16 years of age are no longer sent to prison unless under very special circumstances. In 1873, 9,359 children under 16 years of age were convicted, as against only two in 1924. There is also the Mental Deficiency Act, under which many persons, who would otherwise have been in prison, are in mental homes; release on part-payment of fine; the grant of time for payment of fine before committal to prison; a greater remission of sentences, now amounting for persons sentenced to penal servitude to one-fourth of the whole sentence, and for persons sentenced to imprisonment to one-sixth of any sentence over a month. Other minor changes have all contributed to a reduction in the prison population.

From the foregoing, it will be apparent that the average prison population is no guide to the rise or fall of crime in the country. In considering whether there has been any diminution of crime,

R

Many

we must first of all decide what we mean by crime. recent statutes give the courts power to deal with the commission of new offences against the well-being of the community, but these for the most part, do not denote any criminal habit. The coming of the motor-car has resulted in thousands of convictions of persons in all ranks of life. Many of them hold responsible positions and almost boast of their actions; but we cannot include them among the criminal classes. Very many of the offences disposed of by the Courts of Summary Jurisdiction are of a similar nature and, in measuring the movement of real crime, can quite well be left out of consideration altogether. Graver offences must be tried on indictment, i.e., before a judge (or recorder or chairman of quarter sessions acting as one) and jury. The less heinous of these indictable crimes may, with the consent of the prisoner, be disposed of by a Court of Summary Jurisdiction. It is among these indictable offences that we should search for evidence as to the movement of real crime, for among the offenders who commit them are to be found those whose criminality is a habit and not a solitary incident.

Further, in considering what amount of crime has been and is being committed, we must not rely on the number of apprehensions or the number of convictions, as these are dependent on the activity and efficiency, or at all events the success, of the police and the action taken by the courts. The safest available guide is the number of crimes known to or reported to the police.

The total number of indictable crimes known or reported to the police in the quinquennial period 1868-1872, before the Education Act had any effect, was an annual average of 91,107, being a ratio of 405 per 100,000 of the general population, and for these crimes 56,951 persons were proceeded against, a ratio of 253 per 100,000. In the period 1898-1902, the figures were 80,121 crimes, being a ratio of 248 per 100,000, and the persons proceeded against were 53,833, a ratio of 167 per 100,000. In the year 1923, the number of crimes had reached 110,206, and the ratio was 287 per 100,000 of the population. The number of persons proceeded against was 56,764, a ratio of only 148 per 100,000. The fall in the ratio of persons proceeded against can only be explained by one of two things, viz., either more crimes are committed by the same number of persons, or the police

methods are less effective in bringing the criminals to trial. Even if more crimes are being committed by the same number of persons, the inference would be that there is delay in apprehending them. It is true that the ratio of crimes committed is only 287 for 1923 as against 405 for 1868-1872; but the ratio in the period 1898-1902 was 248. Moreover, the ratio of 287 needs some consideration. Unfortunately all the published statistics do not show men and women separately. It is well known that there has been a most remarkable falling off of crime among women in recent years, and this in spite of the increased proportion of women in the general population. In 1923 only 8,192 females were proceeded against for indictable offences compared with 51,064 males. If the statistics were confined to males and to those over 16 years of age, there can be no doubt that the ratio in 1923 would be very considerably increased, so much so that there would not be a decrease at all as compared with the period of 1868-72. This can easily be proved by reference to the figures of certain classes of offences mainly committed by men :

In all these crimes the ratio per 100,000 of the general population has doubled since fifty years ago.

It is from the figures of such crimes as these that we must look for the movement of crime, for they denote the work of the regular criminal who has adopted crime as his regular method of living. They show a remarkable and progressive increase which does not accord with optimistic statements as to the falling off of crime and the beneficent results of education in its relation to crime. A further disquieting feature is the increasing proportion of these crimes for which no persons are brought to trial.

Even in more modern times this disquieting feature appears,

t