Book Reviews
| Date | 01 September 1955 |
| Published date | 01 September 1955 |
| DOI | 10.1177/026455055500701108 |
| Subject Matter | Book Reviews |
Growing-Up in
the
City,
by
John Barron Mays,
M.A.
(University Press of Liverpciol,
1954,
17s.
6d.).
There have been many books in recent years on the
causes of juvenile delinquency, and Mr. Mays’ book
must stand very
high
in the scale of those which analyse
environmental background.
I
recommend
it
to magis-
trates, probation omcers and other social workers
specialising in family case-work.
Mr.
Mays has made
a detailed study of a particular neighbourhood in a
dockside area and
has
skilfully balanced the many
facets of family and social influence.
His
wide practical
exDerience
is
well blended
with
the social stuales and
researches of eminent writers. He gives due importance
to the religious, economic, social and educational
influences and underlines the signiflcance of childhood
‘‘
atmosphere
’’
in new and telling ways.
Magistrates in particular will be interested in Mr.
Mays’ views on the police liaison omcers and probation
officers will flnd his recommendations challenging.
One point calls for repudiation. That
is
Mr. Mays’
claim that
“
The Probation Service evolved from the
police treatment of young offenders and the enquiries
made at the homes before a decision to prosecute w8s
made.” He rightly acknowledges that the police
atti-
tude to offenders has traditionally been weighed-down
with
other considerations tnan those that influence the
social worker.
This
book does show that there
is
much
in their recent “preventive” approach-and we are all
in favour of
that.
“
Growing-Up in the
City
”
well repays the reader and
broadens the student’s outlook. F.A..H.
Group
Problems in
Crime
and Punishment,
by
Dr.
Hermann Mannheim (Routledge
&
Kegan Paul,
28s.).
In the field of criminology
this
century has seen a
quickening impetus
in
the reaction against the purely
legal analysis of crime and the philosophic approach
to punishment in favour of
a
deeper
study
of the mcial
causes of crime and the effect of punishment on the
criminal and society. This has necessitated an ever-
widening area of work for the crimino-sociologist. Dr.
Mannheim has gained an international reputation in
this latter direction; his depth of learning, his patience
in teaching and
his
incisive evaluation of contemporary
trends of policy and research
still
serve a discipline
which, in
this
country at least, he has done much to
mould
and
guide
to
approaching maturity. He needs
little
lntroduction to most probation omcers and
as
an
associate
is
a
solid murce of inspiration.
This
book contains a collection of commentaries,
papers, reviews and articles (carefully revised and
annotated) that he has composed during the last twenty
years. Although
its
main topic
is
the importance and
signiflcance of group factors in the causation and
treatment of crime, there
is
a broader background
canvas which includes Arm etchings on capital punish-
ment and short-term prison sentences; a scenic sketch,
horrifying in some views, of American prisons and
American criminology, based on a recent flve-month
American tour; and critical views of the sociological
aspects
of
criminal law. The footnotes on sources are
invaluable to anyone wishing to pursue ideas consistently
fomented on each page.
Few probation omcers have adequate sociological
training and few are equipped with the techniques of
group therapy; in spite of an unparalleled fund of
practical experience
with
the delinquent, present trends
indicate a more critical and disciplined approach.
Aspects of
this
need for critique are well illustrated
in
the
flrst
two parts of
this
book. The flrst part embraces
the sociological study of the adult, offender, comments
on the work of the distinguished Dutch judge, Dr.
N.
Muller, and reflects on the place of
Q.
camps in penal
reform and collective responsibility. In the second part,
practical aspects rather than theoretical speculations
in methodology, from Lombroso to the Gluecks, are the
keynotes. Two illustrations may serve
as
points of
emphasis.
Mannheim’s abridged version of articles of Muller
1s
probably well known. Muller has tackled one of the
most urgent criminological problems: petty stealing as
a mass phenomena, committed
by
so-called
“
honest
”
people, and one of
its
particularly disturbing aspects-
pilfering from employers. Probation can be used
if
adapted to the speciflc needs of group education, but
the probation omcer would need training to deal more
intensively with group problems and would have to
participate with group workers in a joint plan of action.
Muller tackled the problem in
a
practical way.
“
. . .
through
the
combined
efforts
of
the
probation
OIIiCer,
factory welfare omcer and a workers’ committee.
The
probation omcer
.
.
.
.
discussed
the
worker’s problems
of
honesty
in
their
various aspects and
as
a
result
a
committee
was
elected
by
the
workers,
which
is now
closely
co-operating
with
the
factory
welfare
omcer
and
probation omcer.”
In
Mannheim’s view, Dr. Witner’s evaluation of the
Cambridge-Somervell
study
‘‘
will rank very
high
in the
literature of the social eciences.” Her most deflnite
impression from her
analysis
‘I..
. .
was
the
conviction
that
Dr. Cabot‘s
hypothesis
(that
the
help
of
an
adult
friend
was
all
that
was
needed
in
preventive
work)
had,
with
few
exceptions,
been
disproved
in cases
of
seriously
maladjusted,
delinquent
or
nemotic
boys..
.
.
it
was
a
very
worth-while
expenditure
of
funds
to
have
demonstrated this
not
universally
recognised truth.”
These examples are but brief excursions into the varied
approaches
to
methodological problems, the pressing
need for further research
(“
more reliable information
rather than more information
’’1
and the importance of
team work.
“One
of
the
real tragedies
of
criminological research
is
the
prevailing
lack
of
co-operation and understanding
between
psychologists.
psychiatrists. sociologists, statisticians
and lawyers.
. .
.
it
will
hardly
be
disputed.”
That probation omcers are not included in
this
group-
ing may be
an
oversight or
an
acceptance of a willing
co-operative spirit!
That
our Service will, and can,
make positive contributions to further research may be
expressed in an emphatic affirmative.
Sociologists are offen accused in their writings of
expressing common ideas in uncommon language. There
(Continued on nett page)
To continue reading
Request your trial