eBook - ePub
White-Collar Crime in Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth-Century Britain
John Benson
This is a test
Share book
- 142 pages
- English
- ePUB (mobile friendly)
- Available on iOS & Android
eBook - ePub
White-Collar Crime in Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth-Century Britain
John Benson
Book details
Book preview
Table of contents
Citations
About This Book
This book throws new light on white-collar crime, criminals and criminality in late nineteenth and early twentieth-century Britain. It does so by considering the life of one man, Jesse Varley (1869â1929), who embezzled more than ÂŁ80, 000 from Wolverhampton Corporation, and for a decade and more enjoyed an ostentatiously extravagant lifestyle. He was discovered, and despite serving a period of penal servitude, he turned again to white-collar crime (this time in Sheffield). Sentenced again to penal servitude, he died a few years later in Liverpool in what were said to be 'very poor circumstances'.
Frequently asked questions
How do I cancel my subscription?
Can/how do I download books?
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
What is the difference between the pricing plans?
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlegoâs features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan youâll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
What is Perlego?
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, weâve got you covered! Learn more here.
Do you support text-to-speech?
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Is White-Collar Crime in Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth-Century Britain an online PDF/ePUB?
Yes, you can access White-Collar Crime in Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth-Century Britain by John Benson in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in History & World History. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.
Part I
Motives
1 Predisposition
Personality and predictability
It is easy â and tempting â to think that some people are predisposed towards crime, violence and other forms of anti-social behaviour. And although such versions of the doctrine of original sin are less popular than they once were, they retain a powerful place in popular attitudes towards crime, policing and punishment. Some people, it is believed, are irredeemably evil. Sentencing Neville Hord to a minimum of thirty years in prison for the murder of his former partnerâs daughter in 2017, Judge Jonathan Durham Hall told him that he was âtruly and horribly rotten to the coreâ.1 Child murderers, in particular, are commonly thought to be wicked beyond belief. Ian Huntley, the killer of two schoolgirls in Soham in 2002, âhas never shown any real remorseâ, a source told the Sun newspaper fifteen years or so into his forty-year sentence. âHe is a very evil, manipulative killer and always beâ.2 The bereaved, not surprisingly, often share such views. âYou canât rewire evilâ, protested James Bulgerâs father when he learned in 2017 that one of his sonâs killers was back in prison twenty-five years after the murder that had shocked the nation. âLet him out againâ, he insisted, âand he will strike againâ.3
Child murder and white-collar crime, one might think, sit at the opposite ends of the criminal spectrum. But there is a tendency to attribute financial wrongdoing too to the vagaries of individual personality, to the predilections of a minority of ârotten apples in the barrelâ.4 It is an approach that enjoys a certain amount of academic underpinning. In a review of the literature on the psychology of fraud published in 2001, Grace Duffield and Peter Grabosky suggested, in what seems like a statement of the obvious, that âthe risk of fraud is a product of both personality and environmental or situational variablesâ, which âmeans that individuals will vary in their propensity to commit fraud even when they are subject to similar environmental pressuresâ.5 Others put it more bluntly. Robert L. Kardellâs conclusion is unequivocal: âSome people just donât have the morals or conscience to refrain from fraud. Apparently, these individuals have character flaws that compel them to commit crime when they donât need toâ.6
This then raises the possibility of predicting who will â and who will not â turn to fraud. Most scholars, understandably, fight shy of such generalisation, let alone any attempt at prediction. Recognising that personality and predisposition are less static, less one-dimensional than some commentators suggest, they adopt a broader, more nuanced perspective. âTo fully understand what motivates some people to engage in acts of fraudâ, argues Matthew Hollow,
it is necessary to adopt a more expansive approach that takes into account the personality and character traits of the individual involved, the pressure and strains affecting them in their personal and working lives, and the mental frameworks within which they attribute meanings to different causes and actions.7
Insofar as those seeking to understand the causes of fraud persist with the idea that some people possess an innate predisposition to criminality in general, and white-collar crime in particular, they couch their explanations in terms of specific, identifiable personality characteristics. As Hollow points out, this has resulted in a sustained effort to discover whether it is possible to distinguish â and perhaps isolate â those with criminal tendencies from those who would never think of breaking the law. âAmongst the tentative deductions that have been made in this respect has been the suggestion that those who commit fraud at work tend to be more reckless, more prone to risk-taking, and more egocentric than most other workersâ.8
If this is true, it would be easy, one might think, to predict â and prevent â fraudulent activity in all its many guises. Some seem to think it might be possible. Tom Bower has forged a successful career out of his warts-and-all biographies about â some would say hatchet jobs on â a series of late twentieth and early twenty-first century tycoons such as Richard Branson, Robert Maxwell and Tiny Rowland.9 All three of them, according to Bower,
plotted ruses to speedily enrich themselves. Branson by evading taxes on the sale of records for over a year â âTaxes are a waste of money,â he would say; Maxwell by continuous deception and fraud; Rowland by black marketeering, tax evasion and a massive fraud against a Swiss bank.10
For Bower, recklessness, risk-taking and egotism just about sums it up.
As with all tycoons, it was vanity and insufferable self-confidence that fuelled Robert Maxwellâs rise from shoeless son of an East European horse dealer to international figure feted by statesmen and feared by ordinary mortals, known to the powerful as âthe small peopleâ. And from this self-confidence everything else flows, such as the tycoonâs brazen ability to play outside the rules.11
Historians are not necessarily any more objective than celebrity biographers. But they tend to shy away from fundamentalist explanations. Labour historians are a case in point: reluctant to blame those they are studying for their criminality â fraudulent or otherwise â they stress the financial constraints within which working people lived their lives and made their choices. Their argument is that many, if not most, of those who turned to crime did so, not because of some inherent predisposition to criminality, but, in order to cope with the persistent, nagging poverty of low wages, unemployment and underemployment.12 Every type of local economy sustained, it is suggested, its own form of petty crime. On the coast, for instance, there survived a deep-seated tradition of plundering any wreckage washed up by the sea; in the countryside, children pilfered fruit on their way to and from school; in coal mining districts, it is said, the picking of coal âfrom pit heads and slag heaps was so deeply ingrained ⊠that it formed part of the daily domestic routine for many children, who were expected to salvage coal both before and after schoolâ.13 So it is that working-class crime has been reinterpreted as social crime, as a strategy of poverty â and working people cleared of any inherent predisposition to criminality.14
Those studying the history of white-collar crime have their own version of social crime: they present fraud not as a strategy of poverty but as a strategy of respectability. When studying the late nineteenth and early twentieth-century middle class, outward appearances, they stress, can be extremely misleading. Respectability, they point out, could be precarious and easily undermined.15 Even if those who turned out to be fraudsters seemed to be secure and comfortable, they might well be feeling insecure and uncomfortable as they struggled to sustain the standard of living, the respectability that they, their family, friends and neighbours expected of them. There is some sympathy for â and understanding of â the poorly paid clerk or bookkeeper who âputs his fingers in the till to pay his gambling debtsâ.16 Drawing, explicitly or implicitly, upon the concept of relative poverty, students of white-collar crime stress that the terms âfinancial prosperityâ and âfinancial pressureâ are both highly subjective. âEven those of above-average affluence may feel economically deprived in comparison to what they perceive to be their relevant standard. At times, âkeeping up with the Jonesâsâ may require other than lawful conductâ.17 So it is that we sometimes clear middle-class fraudsters, like working-class criminals, from the taint of supposed inherent disposition to criminality.
Convict capitalists and bank clerks
Late nineteenth and early twentieth-century commentators were less understanding. They felt, many of them, that certain individuals â indeed certain groups and certain races â were weak, morally compromised and inclined towards criminality. Foreigners were always suspect. Ronald Robinson and John Gallagherâs classic description of mid-Victorian Britainâs âofficialâ view of the world still resonated at the end of the century.
Upon the ladder of progress, nations and races seemed to stand higher or lower according to the proven capacity of each for freedom and enterprise: the British at the top, followed a few rungs below by the Americans, and other âstriving, go-aheadâ Anglo-Saxons. The Latin peoples were thought to come next, though far behind.18
When members of these groups left their home countries and came to Britain, they were met with a mixture of disdain and distrust. The prevailing view was that although immigrants were alien and unknowable, it was obvious that their communities were hotbeds of immorality, violence and crime.19 Legislation was needed to restrict immigration, observed the Birmingham Daily Post in 1904, because âthe law as it stands today, has proven powerless to prevent the influx of the alien scum of Europeâ.20 The Jews and the Irish came in for particular opprobrium.21 As William W. Walker has pointed out in his study of late nineteenth and early twentieth-century Dundee, the only way for Irish immigrants to make themselves acceptable was to make themselves invisible.22
It was not just foreigners who were stigmatised in this way. Whether or not they were newcomers to the country, substantial sections of the working class were stereotyped in almost equally derogatory fashion. Prostitution, even some reformers believed, was the consequence of individual moral weakness.23 Slum-dwellers were another target. âI have seen the Polynesian savaging and in his primitive condition, before the missionary or the blackbirder or the beachcomber got at himâ, reported Professor Julian Huxley in 1888. âWith all his savaging, he was not half so savage, so unclean, so irreclaimable, as the tenant of a tenement in an East London slumâ.24 Whether or not they were slum-dwellers, young people too came in for a good deal of criticism. It was easy in an urbanising society, some maintained, for working-class youths to give in to their baser instincts. The ârestraining eye of the village community i...