It Tolls for Thee

Whenever an individual commits a crime, there must be some reaction within society. Ideally, this reaction would channel itself into an attempt to discover the causes of the crime, and finally to rehabilitate the criminal. Most of the time, however, the reaction manifests itself in a desire to see the offender punished; it rarely goes any further. And when the situation becomes too desperate--when no remedy is immediately apparent--society applies the easiest solution: capital punishment.

This is precisely what New York City has decided to do in dealing with two Puerto Rican youths who committed a murder in a playground two summers ago. In doing so, the City erased most of the progress that social work groups and City agencies had made in the preceding few years.

The crime occurred in the midst of a widespread epidemic of juvenile delinquency. No one in the city was sure how to control it, and a confused series of remedies were proposed. Governor Rockefeller and Mayor Wagner suggested an extension of the states facilities for "delinquent youth work camps" while assuring the public that the police would never "coddle" youthful offenders.

Among the most violent statements was one issued by Msgr. Joseph A. McCafferey, speaking at the funeral of a 16-year-old girl who had been stabbed to death by another youngster: "What we should do is pass a law by which all known (gang) members be arrested and sent to jail," he said. "I know that there is a cry that there is no room in the jails. . . . Then build more jails. Divert the money from other things, but build them. We cage wild animals. . . . Shall not these boys and girls be caged?"

Some temperate men spoke out, though less persistently, Robert Maclver, a sociologist and director of the City's project to evaluate juvenile delinquency reminded men such as Msgr. McCafferey that youth crimes will always flourish while "the disgruntled, discouraged, and the retarded congregate on the city streets. They have nowhere else to go, they have nothing else to do."

This autumn, Judge Gerald D. Culkin handed down this verdict on the two Puerto Rican youths, which, unfortunately echoed the attitudes of men like Msgr. McCafferey. Before pronouncing the sentence, he issued a brief statement the gist of which was that society "must pursue the basic primary reasons for youthful outbreaks of violence." He then sentenced the youths to death in the electric chair. After the decision had been issued, a Times reporter learned that there was no previous record of a 17-year-old boy being sent to the electric chair.

Society "must pursue the basic primary reasons for youthful violence," Judge Culkin maintained. But how does the execution of two teenage boys provide society with any insight into the basic primary reasons for their crime? Judge Culkin, it seems, hardly comprehends the reason behind the murder. His argument seems to hinge on the premise that the act was premediatated, that these youths have intentions comparable to those of gangsters of the 20's.

The truth seems to be that these youths crave violence simply for its own sake. Living in incredibly squalid conditions, unable to gain any positive recognition from society, unable to find affection and companionship at home, they conceive of violence as their only alternative to nothingness.

There are other reasons, too, which do not find their cure in capital punishment. In the case of immigrants, the youths in question are dislocated from one society and placed flush in the middle of another. Given the impoverished community in which they live, given the economic insecurity confronting their parents, it becomes easier to see why the process of readjustment often manifests itself in socially unacceptable forms.

These youths are also susceptible to the forms of violence that society condones. Many of them gain "inspiration" from the crime programs and Westerns they watch. All of them know about war; and their gangs are frequently organized in terms of "battalions" or "troops" headed by "generals" (or "presidents").

Finally--and this point cannot be overstressed--these youths cannot visualize their futures in any terms other than those dictated by their immediate neighborhood. Most young people who live in slums regard the world beyond as enemy territory. They cannot conceive of themselves in any jobs other than the ones their parents hold down. These feelings breed a stricter loyalty to the gang; the pent-up emotions they imply can only express themselves in violence.

For the past few years, social work groups throughout the country have tried to cope with these problems. They have created camps to remove youths from the city during the summer. They have established acting groups and informal classes to show that energies can be re-channeled in learning or in working together. In Spanish Harlem, the American Friends Service Committee has persuaded a large group of gang leaders to abolish their organizations and to set up a Youth Council where they discuss their mutual problems.

Much more than this must be done, of course. It would be tremendously valuable if young living in slum areas were relocated, through housing projects, in other parts of the city--and there have been some gestures in this direction. Still better would be a move to establish work programs which would allow the youths to move away from the city for long periods of time.

The point is that social work agencies have done a great deal to convince these youths that society is not necessarily their mortal enemy. Judge Culkin's decision to execute the two Puerto Rican boys is a literal contradiction of this progressive policy.