Читать книгу The Infant System - Samuel Wilderspin - Страница 31

Teachers of theft—Children the dupes of the profligate—An effort at detection—Affecting cases of early depravity—Progress of a young delinquent—Children employed in theft by their parents—Ingenuity of juvenile thieves—Results of an early tuition in crime—The juvenile thief incorrigible—Facility of disposing of stolen property—A hardened child—Parents robbed by their children—A youthful suicide—A youthful murderer.

* * * * *

"An uneducated, unemployed poor, not only must be liable to fall into a variety of temptations, but they will, at times, unavoidably prove restless, dissatisfied, perverse, and seditious: nor is this all, even their most useful and valuable qualities, for want of regular and good habits, and a proper bias and direction from early religious instruction, frequently became dangerous and hurtful to society; their patience degenerates into sullenness, their perseverance into obstinacy, their strength and courage into brutal ferocity."—The Bishop of Norwich.

* * * * *

It has long been a subject of regret as well as of astonishment to the reflecting and benevolent, that notwithstanding the numerous institutions which exist in this country for the education and improvement of the poor, and in defiance of the endeavours of our magistracy and police establishment, crime should rather increase than diminish. Many persons have been induced to conclude from this fact that our Sunday, parochial, and national schools, as well as our Bible Societies, and institutions of a similar nature, are of little or no use. Absurd as the inference is, I have known more than one or two persons draw it; not considering, that although these means may be insufficient to counteract the cause of crime, or to prevent all its evil effects, yet, nevertheless, they must certainly check its progress;—that if there be many offenders, despite of these institutions, there would, doubtless, be many more were they not in existence; and hence to revile or neglect them is unworthy of good sense or good feeling.

It is not my purpose in the present chapter to dwell on the commission of crime generally, but on juvenile delinquency in particular; and on this only so far as regards the case of young children. I will, therefore, make public a collection of facts, some of which were obtained at considerable personal hazard and inconvenience, which will place it in a clear yet painful light.

It is said, that in the year 1819, the number of boys, in London alone, who procured a considerable part of their subsistence by pocket-picking and thieving in every possible form, was estimated at from eleven to fifteen hundred. One man who lived in Wentworth-Street, near Spitalfields, had forty boys in training to steal and pick pockets, who were paid for their exertions with a part of the plunder; fortunately, however, for the public, this notable tutor of thieves was himself convicted of theft, and transported. This system of tutorage is by no means uncommon, nor is it confined to the male sex. I remember reading some time back, in the police reports, of a woman who had entrapped eight or ten children from their parents, had trained them up, and sent them out thieving; nor was it until one of these infantile depredators was taken in the act of stealing, that this was made known, and the children restored to their homes. Here we see eight or ten children, probably from the neglect of their parents, enticed away, no doubt by the promise of a few cakes, or of some other trifling reward, and in imminent danger of becoming confirmed thieves, from which they were rescued by this providential discovery of their situation; and we know not how many children may have been led to evil practices in like manner.

I will give another instance which occurred at the office at Queen

Square.—A female, apparently no more than nineteen years of age,

named Jane Smith, and a child just turned of five years old, named

Mary Ann Ranniford, were put to the bar, before Edward Markland,

Esq., the magistrate, charged with circulating counterfeit coin in

Westminster and the county of Surrey, to a vast extent.

It appeared that the elder prisoner had long been known to be a common utterer of base coin, in which she dealt very largely with those individuals who are agents in London to the manufacturers of the spurious commodity in Birmingham. She had been once or twice before charged with the offence, and therefore she became so notorious that she was necessitated to leave off putting the bad money away herself; but so determined was she to keep up the traffic, that she was in the habit of employing children of tender years to pass the counterfeit money. On one occasion two Bow Street officers observed her at her old trade, in company with the child Ranniford. The officers kept a strict eye upon her movements, and saw her several times pass something to the little girl; and she, by the direction of her instructor, went into different shops (such as hosiers, where she purchased balls of worsted, pastry-cooks, tobacconists, and fruiterers), where she passed the bad money, and received in return goods and change. On the other side of the bridge, the patroles saw the prisoner Smith deliver something to the child, and point out the shop of Mr. Isaacs, a fruiterer, in Bridge Street, Westminster. The child went in, and asked for a juicy lemon, and gave a counterfeit shilling in payment. Mrs. Isaacs had no suspicion from the tender age of the utterer, and its respectable appearance, that the money was bad, and was about to give change, when one of the officers entered, and took the deluded child into custody, whilst his companion secured the elder prisoner (Smith), and on searching her pockets he found twelve bad shillings, some parcels of snuff, several balls of cotton and worsted, and other trifling articles, which the child had purchased in the course of the day. The officers who had secured them, learned from the child that her parents lived in Cross Street, East Lane, Walworth, and that Smith had taken her out for a walk. The patrol instantly communicated the circumstance to the child's parents, who were hard-working honest people, and their feelings on hearing that their infant had been seduced into the commission of such a crime, can be more easily conceived than described. They stated that the woman Smith had formerly lived in the same street, and was frequently giving half-pence and cakes to the child, who would, in consequence, follow her anywhere. Some time since, she removed to Lock's Square, Lock's Fields, and they (the parents) had not seen her for some time. On the day referred to the child was playing in the street, and not finding her come home they became alarmed, and went everywhere, broken hearted, in quest of her, but they could hear no tidings of her till the sad news was brought them by the officers. The poor mother was now in attendance, and her feelings were dreadfully affected, and excited the commiseration of all present.

The prisoner Smith made no defence, and held her head down during the examination. The child stood by her, and took no notice of the proceedings, and they were both fully committed for trial. The mother, on seeing her infant consigned to prison, became quite frantic, and wept hysterically, and had it it not been for the gaoler, she would have inflicted some violence upon the woman Smith, for seducing her infant.

Facts of this kind are sufficient to shew the utility, indeed I may say, the most absolute necessity of providing some means, far, very far more efficient than those at present in existence, for the protection and improvement of the infant poor; that they may not thus fall into the hands of evil and designing wretches, who make a living by encouraging the children of the poor to commit crimes, of the produce of which they themselves take the greatest part.

The younger the children are, the better they suit the purposes of such miscreants; because, if children are detected in any dishonest act, they know well, that few persons will do more than give the child or children a tap on the head, and send them about their business. The tenth part of the crimes committed by these juvenile offenders never comes under public view, because should any person be robbed by a child, and detect him in the act, he is silenced by the by-standers with this remark—Oh! he is but a child, let him go this time, perhaps the poor thing has done it from necessity, being in want of bread. Thus the delinquent is almost sure to escape, and, instead of being punished, is not unfrequently rewarded for the adventure, as was the case in the following instance.

Having had occasion to walk through Shoreditch some time since, I saw a number of persons collected together round a little boy, who, it appeared, had stolen a brass weight from the shop of a grocer. The shopman stated that three boys came into the shop for half-an-ounce of candied horehound, and that while he was getting down the glass which contained it, one of them contrived to purloin the weight in question. Having some suspicion of the boys, from the circumstance of having recently lost a number of brass weights, he kept his eyes on them, when he saw one put his hand into a box that was on the counter, take out the largest weight, and then run out of the shop, followed by the other two. The boy who stole it, slipped the weight into the hand of one of the others; but the shopman, having observed this manoeuvre, followed the boy who had the weight, who, being the youngest of the three, could not run very fast; he, finding himself closely pursued, threw the weight into the road, and when he was taken, declared that it was not he who took it. The man wished to take the child back to the shop, in order that his master might do with him as he thought proper, but the by-standers, with a charitable zeal which evinced little knowledge, prevented him; one man in particular seemed to interest himself much in the boy's behalf, stating that he knew the child very well, and that he had neither father nor mother. The child immediately took up this plea, and added that he had had no victuals all day. The individual before mentioned then gave him a penny, and his example was followed by many more, till I think the boy had obtained nearly a shilling. I put several questions to him, but was checked by this fellow, who told me, that as I had given the child nothing, I had no right to ask so much? and, after a great deal of abuse, he ended by telling me, that if I did not "take myself off" he would "give me something for myself."

Feeling, however, a great desire to sift further into the matter, I feigned to withdraw, but kept my eye upon the boy, and followed him for nearly two hours, until I saw him join two other boys, one of whom I had not seen before, and who had a bag with something very heavy in it, which, I have every reason to believe, were weights, or something which they had obtained in a similar manner. Wishing to ascertain the fact, I approached them, but they no sooner perceived me, than the little fellow who had been the principal actor in the affair, called out "Nose, Nose,"—a signal-word, no doubt, agreed upon amongst them—when they all ran down some obscure alleys. I followed, but was knocked down, as if by accident, by two ill-looking fellows, who continued to detain me with apologies till the boys had got safely away. I have little doubt that this was an instance of that organized system of depredation of which I have before spoken, and that the man who took so active a part at the first, was at the bottom of the business; and, in fact, the tutor and employer of the predatory urchins. His activity in preventing the boy from being taken back to the shop—his anxiety to promote a subscription for the boy—and, lastly, his threat of personal violence if I interfered in the matter, by continuing to question the child—all these circumstances confirm me in the opinion.

It is only by the knowledge of this fact—the association of infant offenders with those of maturer and hardened habits—that we can account for such cases as the following.—On the 17th of July, 1823, a child only seven years old, was brought before the magistrate at Lambeth Street office, charged with frequently robbing his mother, and was ordered to be locked up all night in the gaol-room. In the evening, however, when his mother returned, he forced his way out of the room, and behaved with such violence that the attendants were obliged to iron both his hands and legs! There can be no doubt that this child had been for a long time under the instruction and evil influence of some old and hardened offender; he must, indeed, have undergone much training before he could have arrived at such a pitch of hardihood, as to make it necessary to handcuff and fetter a child of so tender an age; and to enable him to hold even the magistrates, officers, and his own parent, at defiance.