Jukes-Edwards: A Study in Education and HeredityWinship, Albert E. (Albert Edward)
History
Jukes-Edwards: A Study in Education and Heredity
Winship, Albert E. (Albert Edward)
Edwards family; Heredity; Juke family
In 1874 Richard L. Dugdale was employed by the New York Prison
Commission to visit the prisons of the state. In this visit he was
surprised to find criminals in six different prisons whose relatives
were mostly criminals or paupers, and the more surprised to discover
that these six criminals, under four different names, were all descended
from the same family. This led Mr. Dugdale to study their relatives,
living and dead. He gave himself up to this work with great zeal,
studying the court and prison records, reports of town poorhouses, and
the testimony of old neighbors and employers. He learned the details of
540 descendants of Max in five generations. He learned the exact facts
about 169 who married into the family. It is customary to count as of
a family the men who marry into it. He traced in part others, which
carried the number up to 1,200 persons of the family of the Jukes.
The Jukes rarely married foreign-born men or women, so that it may be
styled a distinctively American family. The almost universal traits of
the family were idleness, ignorance, and vulgarity. They would not work,
they could not be made to study, and they loved vulgarity. These
characteristics led to disease and disgrace, to pauperism and crime.
They were a disgustingly diseased family as a whole. There were many
imbeciles and many insane. Those of "the Jukes" who tended to pauperism
were rarely criminal, and those who were criminal were rarely paupers.
The sick, the weak, and goody-goody ones were almost all paupers; the
healthy, strong ones were criminals.
It is a well-known fact in sociology that criminals are of three
classes: First, those who direct crime, the capitalists in crime, who
are rarely arrested, who seldom commit any crime, but inspire men to
crime in various ways. These are intelligent and have to be educated to
some extent. They profit by crime and take slight risks.
Second, those who commit heroic crimes and find some satisfaction in the
skill and daring required. Safe-breaking, train robbery, and some types
of burglary require men of ability and pluck, and those who do these
things have a species of pride in it.
Third, those who commit weak and imbecile crimes, which mark the doer as
a sneak and a coward. These men rob hen roosts, waylay helpless women
and old men, steal clothing in hallways, and burn buildings. They are
always cowardly about everything they do, and never have the pluck to
steal chickens even until they are half drunk. They often commit murder,
but only when they are detected in some sneaking crime and shoot because
they are too cowardly to face their discoverer.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account