CHAPTER IX. JUVENILE CRIMINALITY IN GERMANY, @ [By EDGAR LOENING, in Jahrbüher für National-Oekonomie und Statistik, Jena, 1901.] Since the year 1882 the statistical bureau of the Empire has published successive statements and reports on the criminality of juvenile persons over 12 but under 18 years of age. These do not give information on all important conditions necessary for forming an opinion, but they are sufficiently complete to show the increase of crime among youth. They contain a serious warning to the State and to society. It must be remembered that according to the German criminal code (par. 55) persons who commit a punishable act before the completion of their twelfth year of age can not be legally prosecuted for it, and that according to paragraph 56 persons who commit a punishable act before the completion of their eighteenth but after their twelfth year of age can be sentenced to punishment only if the court decides that upon commission of the act they possessed a full knowledge of their culpability. The imperial criminal statistics take into account only the sentencing of juvenile persons on account of crimes and transgressions against imperial laws. All violations of and punishable offenses against local laws are omitted in the summaries. Furthermore, the following statements, taken from the imperial criminal statistics, do not include sentences pronounced for violation of military duty and transgressions against industrial laws which are not taken into question in the judging of juvenile criminals. Statistics show that since 1882 the number of juvenile persons convicted has increased not only very considerably, but even in greater proportion than the number of convicted adults. It has also increased in greater proportion than the number of children 12 to 18 years has increased. The following table for the years 1882 to 1896, inclusive, furnishes the proof for this assertion: "Articles on similar subjects published in previous Reports of the Commissioner of Education: Education of neglected and depraved children. An. Rep. of 1889-90, p. 295. Children's claim upon childhood, An. Rep. of 1899-1900, p. 810. Up to the year 1889 the fluctuations of these figures are not very great, but from that year on crime has been on the increase among the young as well as among adults, to a much greater extent with the former, however, than with the latter. With the former, indeed, the increase is not steady. During the whole period the highest figure was reached in 1892, in which year the number of those sentenced among 100,000 of the same age was 25 per cent more than in the year 1882. In the following years the number decreased, but did not fall below that of 1891. In the year 1896 the proportion of increase over 1882 was 22.7 per cent. The number of adults sentenced has also increased considerably since 1891. The highest figure was reached in 1894; the two following years show a slight decrease. Still the increase is not so large as with juveniles. Compared with the year 1882, the number of those sentenced among 100,000 adults in the year 1894 increased 17.2 per cent, in the year 1896 the increase amounted to 16 per cent. For the succeeding years the absolute numbers can be obtained only from the statements for the year 1897 (Imperial Statistical Bureau, vol. 120) and from the quarterly statistical reports of the same bureau for 1899 and 1900, as the complete reports on crime for those years have not yet appeared. The following statement refers to those sentenced for violations of the criminal code and other imperial laws. During all these years theft ranks first among the punishable acts for which juvenile persons have been sentenced. Though the different years show great variations, still the number of cases of theft is about the same for 1896 as for 1882. Whereas in the latter-named year 344 among 100,000 juveniles were sentenced for theft, the number in 1896 amounted to 340. In 1888 the proportion decreased to 309; it rose to 397 in 1892. The considerable increase in the number of convictions of juvenile persons is, in the first place, due to the fact that sentences for assault have been pronounced in a great many more cases than formerly. In 1882 the number convicted among 100,000 amounted to 63; in 1896 to 130. The number of convictions for willful damage to property is also noticeably larger, having increased from 31 to 46 in every 100,000. If we sum up these punishable acts, proceeding mostly from brutal and violent disposition, as unlawful acts of violence, they form 64 per cent of the increase of criminality among juveniles. With respect to other violations and trangressions of which juvenile persons are guilty there is also an increase, but not enough for far-reaching conclusions to be drawn. It must not be forgotten, moreover, that in condemning juveniles a weighty factor is taken into consideration. As we have said, paragraph 56 of the criminal code says that juveniles can be sentenced only if the judge has determined that, while committing the act, they possessed a full knowledge of their culpability. With children, especially those under 14 years of age, such a decision is made with great difficulty. The psychical condition of children whose moral judgment is not yet matured must be investigated, and the judge's subjective opinion has a wide scope in forming this decision. This is shown in the reports for the years 1894 and 1896, in the number of cases in which juvenile defendants were acquitted in the different provincial court districts on the plea of insufficient knowledge of their culpability according to paragraph 56 of the criminal code. A comparison between the increase of criminality among juveniles and the extraordinary growth of the population in large cities is pertinent. Naturally the proportion of crime among children growing up in large cities and exposed to all kinds of temptation is larger than among those in the country and is small towns. Besides, punishable acts committed by juvenile persons are much more frequently brought into notice and legally prosecuted in large cities than in rural districts. The growth of population in large cities, therefore, alone explains an increase of juvenile criminality. This, however, can not be proved by statistics, as in the reports on criminality in the Empire the figures refer to provincial court districts, governmental districts, etc., but not to large cities separately considered. Even though the districts of Hamburg, Berlin, Nuremberg, and Munich are distinguished by a large percentage of juvenile criminality, they are outdistanced by the district of Zweibrücken, which contains no large city. Others, particularly rural districts, as Marienwerder, Posen, Bamberg, etc., nearly or quite surpass them. The provincial court districts of Cologne, Frankfort-on-the-Main, Stuttgart, and Colmar are among those which present the lowest proportion of juvenile criminality. Among every 100,000 inhabitants who had completed their twelfth but not their fourteenth year, and who had completed their fourteenth but not their eighteenth year, the following numbers were sentenced in the provincial court districts in 1896: The great variations in the numbers relative to those who are between 12 and 14 years of age are partly explained by the fact that in the different districts the regulation of the criminal code that juvenile persons are to be acquitted if they do not possess a full knowledge of their culpability is administered in an entirely different manner for the class of children not yet 14 years old. In the whole Empire, during the years 1894 to 1896, 10.8 per cent of the children between 12 and 14 years of age brought before the court were ED 1904 M- -45 acquitted on the ground of paragraph 56 of the criminal code. The figures relative to the separate provincial court districts depart widely from this average. Whereas in Brunswick the number of discharges or acquittals formed only 0.5 per cent, in Colmar it was 57.1 per cent; Cologne, 37.2 per cent; Hamm, 27.1 per cent, etc. In twenty-one of the twenty-eight judicial districts (see Table II) the number was below the average calculated for the Empire. There is no question that these great variations are attributable not alone to the differences in intellectual development of the defendants, but also, and chiefly, to the different manner in which the courts administer the legal provision of paragraph 56. The general opinion of those well informed on the subject is that the criminal code has set the age for punishment by law too low-that the close of the fourteenth instead of the twelfth year of age should be decided upon. The criminal code assumes that responsibility is dependent upon the degree of mental development. Anyone whose intellect is so far developed that he understands the culpability of his actions is accountable or responsible to the law. "The perpetrator must be able to understand that his duty requires the omission of the special act, and that by its committal he exposes himself to punishment by the criminal law." (Motives to the proposed criminal code of the North German Confederation, p. 73.) Proceeding upon this assumption, the criminal code admits that, as a rule, children have not attained this degree of mental development before the completion of their twelfth year. Those under 12 have been declared absolutely free from the responsibilty for criminal action. If this fundamental idea were correct, the question might be raised whether this age limit be not too high, and whether, in Germany, the country of general compulsory education, children do not attain maturity of judgment sufficiently at about 10 years. Most children who have completed their tenth year understand that theft, assault, injury to property, etc., are criminal acts and entail punishment by law. But the thought of making the degree of mental development alone the standard is not right. The law makes adults responsible for their acts, not only because it presupposes their knowledge of the culpability of their actions, but also because it presupposes with them a maturity of moral character which enables them to resist the impulse to perform an act contrary to law. Generally, however, children attain maturity of character later than the degree of understanding required to recognize culpability of action. So long as this does not exist punishment of children by law is as unjust and injudicious as the punishment of a person of unsound mind who may be capable of considering the consequences of his acts, and recognizing their culpability, but who is unable to exercise free will because of the diseased condition of his mind. (Criminal code, paragraph 51.) If a child has not attained the degree of intellectual judgment or moral development required by law of adults, and if he shows criminal inclinations, he stands in need of education rather than legal punishment. Experience has proved that this degree of moral maturity is not attained by children in Germany, as a rule, before the close of the fourteenth year. The nature of the case does not permit exhaustive proof. However, upon the ground of general experience, nearly all German States have decided upon the completion of the fourteenth year for the close of the term of school age, and evangelical parochial churches, as a rule, admit children to confirmation only after they have completed their fourteenth year. It is well known that the knowledge to be gained in elementary schools and required for confirmation in the churches can be obtained by most children in less time. But the term of school attendance must not be shortened, because the schools are not only institutions of learning, but also, and chiefly, of education or training; and because the church requires a certain degree of moral |