close

Вход

Забыли?

вход по аккаунту

?

A comparative study of two groups of juvenile delinquents to evaluate the influence of a boys' club

код для вставкиСкачать
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TOO GROUPS OF JUVENILE
DELINQUENTS TO EVALUATE THE INFLUENCE
OF A BOYS* CLUB
A Thesis
Presented to
the Faculty of the School of Education
University of Southern California
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Science in Education
by
Frederick Newbury Betts
June
' 1941
UMI Number: EP53973
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Dissertation Pubi shing
UMI EP53973
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
£<£ H I
ftSU'S
a
T h is thesis, w r i t t e n u n d e r the d ir e c t io n o f the
C h a ir m a n o f the c a n d id a te ’ s G u id a n c e C o m m itte e
a n d a p p r o v e d by a l l m em bers o f the C o m m itte e ,
has been p re se n te d to a n d a ccep ted by the F a c u lt y
o f the S c h o o l o f E d u c a t io n o f T h e U n iv e r s it y o f
S o u th e rn C a l i f o r n i a in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f the
re q u ire m e n ts f o r the degree o f M a s t e r o f Science
in E d u c a tio n .
i.9S . ..........
Guideuice C om m ittee
D. Welty Le fever
C hairm an
Louis P . Thorpe
E. E. Wagner
TABLE OP CONTENTS
CHAPTER
PAGE
I. THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED . .
The p ro bl em ...............................
Statement of the problem
Importance of the study
2
................
3
. . . . . . .
5
..........
6
Definitions of terms used
Boys* clubs
2
........
Purpose of the investigation
Juvenile delinquency
1
..........
.....
.........
6
11
Organization of remainder of the study
...
14
II. RELATED L I T E R A T U R E ..........................
16
Review of related investigations
. . . . . .
Development of the boys* c l u b ..............
..............
27
History of the boysT clubs
. . ..........
28
........
30
....
31
................
32
Aims and objectives of— boysT clubs
Programs of boys* clubs
Summary
IV.
.26
Purpose of the boysT club
Major trends in the boys* clubs
III.
16
CASE HISTORIES OF THE ONE HUNDRED PROBLEM BOYS
33
36
EXTENT AND FORM OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY IN
LONG B E A C H ...............................
136
Background of delinquency and c o s t ........
137
iii
CHAPTER
PAGE
Causative factors of delinquency in
Long Beach
.................
Distribution of cases byage
.
138
..............
139
Grade placement . . •......................
Type of offense
144
.............................
146
Age and type of offense.......................
149
Number of o f f e n s e s ......... ...............
Order of occurrence
153
.......................
Later o f f e n s e s ......... ....................
Summary
V.
155
155
.....................................
174
THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE PERSONAL FACTORS TO
JUVENILE D E L I N Q U E N C Y .........................
177
Home e n v i r o n m e n t .............................
178
Marital status of parents
179
...................
Types of offenses from normal and
broken homes
...............................
Occupation and economic status
...............
Types of offenses from relief and non-relief
.
183
186
190
Size of f a m i l i e s ......................
Intelligence quotients..........................
B i r t h p l a c e ............................. .. .
Summary
.....................................
19
197
199
199
iv
CHAPTER
VI.
PAGE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . .
204
Su mmary.............
Conclusions
.................
Recommendations.............................
BIBLIOGRAPHY
‘203
.......................................
216
220
222
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
I*
PAGE
Distribution of Chronological Ages for the
Club and Selected Groups of Problem Boys and
for all Delinquent Boys in Long Beach
II.
....
141
Distribution of Grades for the Club and
Selected Groups of ICO.Problem Boys and for
all Delinquent-Boys in Long B e a c h ........ 145
III.
Frequency of Occurrence for Twenty-five Types
of Offenses Committed by 100 ProblemBoys
IV.
. .
148
Frequency of Occurrence for Offenses Committed
by 100 Problem Boys at Each Age Level 10 to
17 Years of A g e ...........
V.
The Number of Offenses Committed by Each of
the 100 Problem Boys
VI.
................ 154
Rank for Each Offense in the Order of its
Sequence
VII.
150
...........
Repetition of First Offense Committed at a
Later Date by the Same Delinquent Boy. . . .
VIII.
156
158
A Comparison of First Offense and Date with
Later Offenses and Their Dates for 81
Problem Boys . * .........
159
vi
TABLE
PAGE
IX. A Comparison of Eirst Offense with Later
Offenses Which Were of a Different Type
Than the First Offense for.13 Juvenile
D e l i n q u e n t s .................................
171
-X. Marital Status of Parents of 100 B o y s ..........
180.
XI. A Comparison Based on 25 Types of Offenses
Committed by 100 Delinquent Boys from Normal
and Broken H o m e s .............................
184
XII. Occupational and Economic Status for Parents
of 100 Juvenile Delinquents with Percentage
and Total for Long Beach
...................
189
XIII. Comparison of 25 Types of Offenses for 100
Delinquent Boys from Homes on Relief and
Those from Homes not on R e l i e f ...............
191
XIV. Classification of the Economic Status of the
Parents of 100 Problem B o y s .................
194
XV. Size of Families of 100 Problem B o y s ............
196
XVI. Intelligence Quotient Distribution of 100
Problem B o y s ..............................
XVII.
198
Birthplace of 100 Juvenile Delinquents now
Living in Long B e a c h .........................
200
vii
PAGE
TABLE
XVIII.
A Comparison of the Number of Offenses for
Eaoh Boy and the Number of Later Offenses
Committed by Each Boy on the Basis of the
Date of Affiliation with the Boys’ Club . .
214
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED
For many years Long Beach, like other comparable
cities, has been facing a very serious problem of juvenile
delinquency.
During the past year many boys and girls have
passed through the juvenile bureau of that city.
The chil­
dren appearing in the juvenile courts throughout the country
every year are there partly because the community has neg­
lected to provide an environment which promotes stable,
natural growth into adult life.
It is impossible to separate
the specific misconduct of the child from his life problem as
a whole, as it is impossible to separate it from the family
situation.
It Is equally impossible to detach the problems
of the family from their community environment.
Due to the
lack of employment for many and the reduction in the hours
of labor for those who are employed, the matter of leisure
time emerges as a social problem of real significance.
The
training of the youth for a constructive use of their lei­
sure time is surely one of the major objectives of every
community. .
In recent years there has been an increasing emphasis
upon the prevention of juvenile delinquency.
of thought has been given to this problem.
A great deal
There have been
many positive and constructive influences responsible for
the development of the program for the prevention of juven­
ile delinquency.
According to the present theory, adjust­
ments are made through the understanding of the individual
differences; the child is not to be considered as a criminal,
but
rather as a subject for study and guidance.It is gen­
erally recognized that the study of delinquency is the first
step in the eradication of crime.
Anything which can add to
the
inadequate store of knowledge in this field is of value.
Any
organization which can add to the sum total is also of
value.
One such organization is the Boys’ Club, the result
of many forces, of changing attitudes toward children with
problems.
I.
THE PROBLEM
Statement of the problem.
The purpose of this study
was to make a comparative investigation of two groups of
juvenile delinquents in Long Beach, attempting to ascertain
the influence of the Long Beach Boys’ Club on juvenile de­
linquents.
The first group consisted of those affiliated
with the Long Beach Boys’ Club, while the second group was
selected to.parallel exactly the first in every respect, ex­
cept that they were not connected with the Long Beach Boys1
Club.
An effort was made to determine whether a constructive
program can be substituted for the crime and delinquency now
common in most of the communities.
The determining factors
in evaluating the program as it is sponsored by the Long
Beach Boys1 Club are: (l) Does this, program prevent further
delinquency by enriching the life of the underprivileged boy
by providing him with an intelligent and sympathetic friend?
(2) Does this .program provide and maintain conditions such
that boys may further their own wholesome self-activity and
experience out of which citizenship and character values ac­
crue?
(3)
Does this program offer boys an opportunity to
participate in enjoyable activities which broaden their in­
terest, cultivate their skills, develop habits and attitudes
consistent with good character, and help them make a happy
adjustment to life?
(4)
Does this program prepare boys for
their places in a self-governing society through the foster­
ing of a sense of responsibility for others that will make
them good citizens?
Importance of the study. The problem of juvenile de­
linquency in this country is of immense importance because
of its size, because of its implications that in it lie the
earlier manifestations of all the problems of crime.
The .
mere fact that probably about one per cent of the children
of juvenile court age actually appear each year in a juvenile
court represents in itself an unhealthy condition.
This rep­
resents but a fraction of the total amount of maladjustment
which, together with the evidence of a spirit of lawlessness
running throughout the entire population, carries the prob­
lem even deeper.!
The best way to help boys is to understand them.
Ad­
justments are made through the understanding of individuals.
This problem was selected because of the apparent growing
attitude on the part of a large number of individuals to
punish the problem boy, rather than to attempt to understand
the boy.
Crime statistics^ reveal that most juvenile delin­
quents are repeated offenders, that their careers began at
comparatively early ages, and that they repeated and com­
mitted new offenses of increased severity and with greater
frequency.
The training of youth for a constructive use of
their leisure time is one of the objectives of every commun­
ity.
Any program for the prevention of crime must begin with
the proper treatment of the child offender.
The lawless ca­
reers of most professional criminals began in childhood.
As pointed out by J . W. Scudder,3 United States has
the highest crime rate of any civilized nation on earth, more
^ White House Conference on Child Health and Protec­
tion, Report of the committee on Socially Handicapped Delin­
quency, The Delinquent Child (New York: The Century Company,
1932), Section lV, C-A, p. 230.
2 Fa°ts About Juvenile Delinquency, Children’s Bureau
Publication No. 229 (Washingt on, £). C .: Uni ted States Depart­
ment of Labor, 1936), p. 20.
3
J. W. Scudder, "Guidance vs. Delinquency,” Educa­
tional Method, 15:97, November, 1935.
5•
than twice that of Italy and more than nine times that of
England.
The United States supports 11,000 jails and 3,000
penal institutions, housing hundreds of thousands of prison­
ers and inmates.
Statistics show that over seventy-five per
cent of these criminals started their crime career in youth.
The greatest number of offenses today occur with individuals
sixteen to twenty-one years of age.
It is impossible for the school, no matter how well
it is planned, to provide all the education for youth and to
completely organize the leisure time of children.
Many lead­
ing educators believe that learning to live with people and
learning the ways of life are socially more important than
learning to master subject matter.
It is, therefore, valu­
able to make a study of an institution dealing with a boy
and his problems.
Purpose of the investigation.
In the analysis of the
comparative investigation of the juvenile delinquents par­
ticipating in the activities of the Long Beach Boys* Club and
a similar selected group of juvenile delinquents, it was the
plan to ascertain and determine the following: (l). to evalu­
ate the effect of the Boys’ Club by promoting understanding
of boys and to train boys for citizenship through actual
practice and experience in group problems; (2) to evaluate
the influence of leisure-time activities; (3) to compare
favorably or unfavorably the number of juvenile delinquents
affected by the Long Beach Boys1 Club with a selected group;
(4) to study the recorded conditions causing juvenile delin­
quency;* (5) to determine the changes, if any, of the cases
in relation to the Boys* Club; (6) to determine whether or
not the Boys* Club has been a factor in minimizing juvenile
delinquency among the boys of Long Beach; and (7) to summar­
ize the findings of the study in such a manner as to indicate
the weakness and the strength of the Long Beach Boys’ Club
program.
II.
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED
Juvenile delinquency.
Someone once said that if there
were no law there would be no crime.
This is not to say that
if there were no law, there would be no unusual behavior.
The implication is that behavior cannot be considered crim­
inal until it is proscribed by law.
Both delinquency and
criminality depend upon the legal definition.
A little more
than a century ago a twelve year old boy was sentenced to
death in England.
Justice of that age took account of the
law and the crime and ignored the age and the circumstances
of the offender.
Public opinion has gradually changed
against a system which made little or no distinction in the
treatment of children and adults when guilty of the same of­
fenses, and sought a more constructive method of dealing with
young delinquents.
Who is a delinquent?
Generally speaking, the delin-.
quent is the child'apprehended for the violation of some law,
for which offense he is certified to a juvenile court.
is the legal definition of delinquency.
This
The White House
Conference discarded the narrow definition in favor of the
following: "Delinquency is any such juvenile misconduct as
might be dealt with under the law.
This broader definition
increases the number of delinquents and carries its consid­
erations to the limits of a fair share of all juvenile
life.
The California Code defines the delinquent child as
follows:
The jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court extends to
any person under the age of twenty-one years who
comes within any of the following descriptions:
(a) Who is found begging, receiving or gathering
alms, or who is found in any street, road,-or public
place for the purpose of so doing, whether actually
begging or offering for sale any article, or of sing­
ing or playing on any musical instrument, or of giv­
ing any public entertainment or accompanying or being
used in aid of any person so doing;
(b) Who has no parent or guardian; or who has no
.parent or guardian willing to exercise or capable of
exercising proper control, and who is in need of such
control;
4
White House Conference,
0 £.
cit. , p. 23.
(c)
Who is destitute, or who is not provided
with the necessities of life by his parents, and who
has no other means of obtaining such necessities;
Id) Whose home is an unfit place for him, by
reason of neglect, cruelty, or depravity of either
of his parents, or of his guardian or other persons
in whose custody or care he is;
(e) Who is found wandering and either has no
home, no settled place of abode, no visible means of
subsistence or no proper guardianship;
(f) Who habitually visits, without parent or .
guardian, public billiard room or public poolroom,
or a saloon or a place where any spirituous, vinous,
or malt liquors are sold, bartered, exchanged, or
given away;
(g) Who habitually uses intoxicating liquors,
habitually smokes cigarettes, or habitually uses
opium, cocaine, morphine or other similar drugs with
out the direction of a competent physician;
(h) Who persistently or habitually refuses to
obey the reasonable and proper orders or directions
of his parents, guardian, or custodian, or who is be
yond the control of such persons;
(i)
Who is an habitual truant from school within
the meaning of any law of this State;
(j)
Who is led, or from a cause is in danger of
leading an idle, dissolute, lewd, or immoral life;
(k)
Who is insane, feeble-minded, or so far men­
tally deficient that his parents or guardian are un­
able to exercise proper parental control over him,
or whose mind is so far deranged or impaired as to
endanger the health of the person or property of
himself or others;
(l)
Who violates any law of this State or any
ordinance of any town, city, or county of this
State defining crime;
(m) Who is affiliated with, syphilis, gonorrhea,
or chancroid and is in need of medical and custodial
care, or both.5
The California State law is very similar to the law
of the State of New York.
The California law is more spe­
cific and more detailed than the New York State law and
stresses the responsibility of the home to a greater degree.
In New York the transgressor under the age of sixteen, except
.one apprehended for an offense punishable by death or life
imprisonment, is known as delinquent and is subject to the
chancery proceedings of the juvenile court, rather than the
judicial proceedings of the magistrates1 or criminal courts.6
Most, of the literature and studies pertaining to juv­
eniles are concerned with delinquents, using that term to
include only those children who have been arrested and who
have made one or more appearances in the juvenile courts.
On the basis of the best statistics available, it is fair to
say that in 1928 about 200,000 different delinquent children
of juvenile court age were dealt with by the courts.7
In the
areas for which statistics are available about one per cent
^ Statutes and Amendments to the Code of California,
1959, Fifty-third Session, Chapter 1099, p. 3027.
6 Sophia M. Robison, Can Delinquency Be Measured?
(New York: Columbia University Press, 1936), p. 23.
7
White House Conference, 0 £. cit. , p.. 19.
10
of the children of juvenile court age came before the courts
as delinquents in one year*
This figure takes no cognizance
of an undoubtedly much larger group dealt with by the police
without recourse to the court.
Concerning the definition of juvenile delinquency, it
is suggested that:
The present confusion of terms would be clarified
if we confined the use of the term delinquent to the
acts of children who are technically delinquent
through contact with the court, and the use of the
term behavior-problem to refer to children who differ
from others because of the manifestation of undesir­
able traits, habits, or behavior, whether in the home,
school or community, without regard to the presence
or absence of a court record.8
Owens suggests further that practically every school
system is confronted with the problem of the so-called de­
linquent boy— the boy who either cannot or will not conform;
the boy who stands out prominently in his class because of
his failure to identify himself with the group to which he,
as a pupil belongs.
The laws of more than twenty states reach a protecting
arm around the juvenile not to let him go scot free, but
rather to give him appropriate, and often remedial treatment.
The laws of the State of New Jersey hold: (l) that children
under sixteen are deemed incapable of committing crime; and
8 Albert Owens, The Behavlor-Problem Boy: A SocioEducational Survey (Philadelphia: The University of Pennsyl­
vania Press, 1929), p. 12.
11
(2) if they do anything which is a crime at common law or
under statute law, it shall he called juvenile delinquency
and the offenders treated and held solely by the juvenile
courts, thus placing the child offenders in a class apart
from adult criminals.9*
BoysT clubs. Men group themselves together chiefly
for companionship; they have their clubs, social and frater­
nal orders, and churches.
Boys likewise, have the same in­
born desires; they enjoy the companionship and fellowship of
other boys.
This desire for a pal or one boy for a chum de­
velops at an early age.
of boys.
Later he wants to be with a group
Gangs seem to be spontaneous; they happen and are
not planned.
The first of the boys’ clubs were organized almost one
hundred years ago, where a number of committees set them­
selves the task of providing leisure-time leadership for the
gangs of boys on the streets of the mill town of the New Eng­
land States.
These committees saw the restless energy of
boyhood and recognized that undirected activity often leads
to mischief and criminality.
9 Elizabeth Ruth Pendry and Hugh Hartshorne, Organi­
zation for Youth (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1935),
p. 97.
12
In general, a boys’ club is described as a social
service institution for boys of a neighborhood or of an en­
tire community, with a broad and interesting program and'
sympathetic leadership, housed in a building with adequate
space and equipment for its task, carrying on its work upon *
an all inclusive, nonsectarian basis- and measuring success
in terms of service to boys.10
Atkinson^ defines a boys’ club as an institution to
help give opportunities to those who would otherwise lack
them.
Boys’ work is character education through leisure time
recreational and social activities.
Boys* work is guidance
of individuals, groups and organizations of boys in creative
living.
Fundamentally, boys’ work
may be summarized as so­
cial engineering in the field of motivation of boyhood.
Quoting from Owen D. Young, the distinguished engineer,
W. L. StonelS states that improved engineering and courage
are needed now more in the social than in the physical sci­
ences.
Boys* work at its best is just that improved social
engineering with boy life.
In a more recent book the same
10 Ibid., p. 75
■*■1 R. K. Atkinson, The Boys’ Club (New York: Associa­
tion Press, 1939), p. 132.
^ W. L. Stone, What is Boys’ Work? (New York: Asso­
ciation Press, 1931), p. 5.
13
authorl3 points out that boys1 work is a movement for child
care, protection, and training that seeks to supervise the
leisure time of boys.
The best definition obtainable comes from the Boys1
Club of America.
From time to time the question is asked,
"What is the mission of a boys1 club in the community?"
answer can be given in definite and positive terms.
boys’ club is a place.
An
(l) The
It is a solid, tangible, permanent
structure or building devoted to the cause of boys, open and
ready to receive them; (2) The boys’ club appeals primarily
to the underprivileged boy; however, the boy who has never
committed the slightest peccadillo, if any there be, is wel­
come in a boys* club.
But the needs of the underprivileged
boys for an organization, to which they can belong, are so
infinitely greater than the needs of more fortunate youths,
that it has become an accepted function of a boys’ club to
cater to those who need it most; (3) The boys1 clubs are
unique, because the idea of a club is the predominant one
and presupposes the existence of members who voluntarily be­
long to that place and to that organization in which they
have a sustaining interest, where they derive satisfaction
'W. L. Stone, The Development of Boys’ Work in the
United States (Nashville: Press of Cullom and Ghertner Com­
pany, 1935), p. 12.
and comfort from the fact that, because they belong, they
are welcome at any time; (4) The boys’ club is becoming rec­
ognized as a substitute for the gang,
Gangs are formed
naturally by boys who have a common set of interests.
The
boys1 club offers a design for living which has a natural
basis; and (5) The boys1 club is primarily, entirely, and
completely non-sectarian.
From the time the first boys’
club was established, this has been a cardinal principle of
operation.
No organization but the boys’ club is at one and
the same time non-sectarian, appealing to the underprivileged
boy on a participation basis, with full-time activities, in a
building devoted to that purpose, under self-motivated demo­
cratic processes.
III.
ORGANIZATION OF REMAINDER OF THE STUDY
The second chapter will contain the related materials
with a review of the similar investigations and the develop­
ment of the boys’ clubs.
The history of their growth will
be traced and the contributions of the various agencies to
the growth and development of the boys’ clubs.
A typical
program of the Boys’ Club of America will be presented along
with the aims and objectives of the club.
To obtain an entirely accurate picture it would be
necessary to have a complete background of delinquency in
Long Beach.
Such a picture will include the extent and form
15
of delinquency as it exists in Long Beach, with a presenta­
tion of the causative factors of delinquency as compared with
such recognized factors elsewhere.
The final portion of the
third chapter will give the characteristics of delinquency in
Long Beach, considering the ages of the delinquents, types of
offenses, frequency of occurrence, and various other charac­
teristics.
There can be nothing as effective as a good home in
all of the present-day social institutions or agencies.
The
fourth chapter is a presentation of the personal factors of
this study.
Most important of all are the existing home in­
fluences, its surrounding locations and the marital status
of the parents, the size of the family, its economic condi­
tions and religious inclinations.
Delinquency is a symptom of some maladjustment.
In
the fifth chapter the more significant facts related to de­
linquency are discussed and analyzed.
This will include a
summary of the findings for both groups, dispositions of the
cases by the juvenile bureau authorities, and the delinquency
areas in relation to the Long Beach Boys* Club and municipal
recreational centers.
CHAPTER II
RELATED LITERATURE
Considerable library research was necessary in this
thesis for the purpose of reviewing previous similar studies
and attempting to learn just what is meant by the two terms,
juvenile delinquency and boys1 clubs, both in their common
acceptance and their legal interpretations.
These terms, as
used in this thesis, have been defined in Chapter One.
This chapter will contain a summary of the related
literature, with a review of similar investigations and the
development of the boys* clubs.
The history of this growth
will be traced and the contributions of the various agencies
to the growth and development of boys* clubs.
A typical pro
gram of the Boys* Club of America will be presented along
with the aims and objectives of the club.
Thus, the inves­
tigation is factual, through access to local records, and
historical through library research.
I.
REVIEW OF RELATED INVESTIGATIONS
One of the first studies in Long Beach dealing with
juvenile delinquency was made in 1927.
This was an investi­
gation of 454 delinquent boys, the findings of which are im­
portant to the writer, because they will be used, in part,
for comparison.
A study showing that 59.9 per cent of the
17
boys are first offenders and 39.1 per cent recidivists was
made by D. A, Newcomb.1
The junior high school has more de­
linquency per one hundred pupils than any other school seg­
ment.
The study reveals that 38.9 per cent of the boys are
from broken homes.
Most of the parents and guardians of de­
linquents are engaged in the skilled, semi-skilled , and
allied laboring occupations.
fense committed by boys.
Larceny is the predominant of­
Other leading offenses in order of
frequency are: burglary, incorrigibility, and immorality.
A study of junior high school problem boys in 1931,
by J. P. Dyke,2 shows that every problem is merely a manifes­
tation of some disorder.
It should be determined whether
this disorder has a physical, environmental, or emotional
basis, and then to seek ways and means to guide and correct
this derangement.
Only between thirty and forty per cent of
the homes presented normal conditions; over fifty per cent of
the problem cases presented physical difficulties; and over
forty per cent of the boys showed evidence of nervous insta­
bility, causes of which are not always clear.
D.
A. Newcomb, ”Juvenile Delinquency in the Public
Schools,” (unpublished Master’s, thesis, Stanford University,
Palo Alto, California, 1927), 87 pp.
^ John Paul' Dyke, ”A Study of Normal Junior High
School Problem Boys,” (unpublished Master’s thesis, Univer­
sity of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1931), 224 pp.
18
School generally occupies the boys* time from approx­
imately eight in the morning until three in the afternoon.
From the close of school until four-thirty or five o ’clock
school and recreation;playgrounds are open with excellent
programs and splendid leadership provided, but they just
scratched the surface.
Unfortunately, the public cannot see
the urgent need for added recreation and physical education
facilities.
Tarious;organizations have offered activity
programs, which tend to show that a constructive program can
be substituted for the crime and delinquency now common in
most of our large cities.
A study made by Otto Buss^ of the All Nations Boys1
Club proved its worth to the community and city by partly
doing away with the leisure time problem of the boys in its
district.
By giving them an interesting, wholesome, char­
acter-building program, it has very materially decreased
crime in the district, which is a register of the work the
boys’ club is doing.
Discovering and pointing out the causes of delinquency
and crime in individual cases is complicated, because it is
often difficult to ascertain precisely what influences made
3
Otto Buss, "Recreation and Physical Education as a
Preventative of Crime and Juvenile Delinquency in the Dis­
trict Affected by the All-Nations Boys1 Club," (unpublished
Master’s thesis, University of Southern California, Los
Angeles, 1931), 89 pp.
19
the individual what he is and also because there are gener­
ally many causes for the delinquency, frequently intertwined
and interrelated.
Richardson,4 in 1932, made a follow-up study of 440
behavior-problem boys enrolled in the Fort Hill Welfare
Center School*
Since this was one of the first studies made
in thesis form of the post-school records of these problem
boys, it is, therefore, of special interest to the investi­
gation at hand, as it will provide a further basis of com­
parison.
This study was a consideration of one hundred
cases for which he was able to secure complete and valid
data.
From his study Richardson concluded that: (l) Fiftyeight per cent of the problem cases studied made a satisfac­
tory adjustment; (2) There was insufficient evidence to say
that intelligence is an important factor in successful social
adjustment; (3) The behavior-problem boy does not commit an
isolated act but rather a series of offenses; and (4) The
problem of juvenile maladjustment can be more effectively
dealt with by the .local community agencies than by those of
the state or national government.
These conclusions are
^ Allen T. Richardson, "Follow-up of 440 BehaviorProblem Boys Enrolled in Fort Hill School," (unpublished
Master’s thesis, University of Southern California, Los
Angeles, 1932), 33 pp.
20
pertinent to the subject of this investigation, as they in­
dicate general trends.
The extent and nature of boy delinquency in Long
Beach from 1929 until 1934 is shown by W. C. MaxwellS in an
excellent study made in 1935.
His investigation of juvenile
delinquency based on 1,201 case records shows: (l) Delin­
quency like crime is a product of many causes; (2) The in­
crease of delinquency was due to the increase in minor cases
which were neglected; (3) The recidivist was a serious prob­
lem; (4) The average age of the delinquents was 13.6 years;
(5) The economic status of the home was a factor in delin­
quency; and (6) The real work in delinquency is prevention.
There are many factore which characterize a behaviorproblem boy, chief among them being those pointed out in an
investigation made by E. D. Gordon,6 in 1936, of the behaviorproblem boy in Los Angeles.
The composite picture presented
in this study showed that the median age was fifteen years
one month, and the median grade of this group, the lower
eighth.
The most important contributing conditions were lack
5
Wm. C. Maxwell, "An Investigation of Boy Delinquency
in Long Beach, California, and its Implication for the Public
Schools,” (unpublished Master’s thesis, University of South­
ern California, Los Angeles, 1935), 346 pp.
E.
D. Gordon, "Problem Boys in the Special Schools
of Los Angeles," (unpublished Master’s thesis, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, 1936), 123 pp.
21
of parental control, broken homes, and bad companions.
Less
than one boy in four was in normal physical condition.
Large families contributed more school problems in propor­
tion than smaller ones.'
There is no single source of crime, but there are
many causal factors.
Outstanding among them are incompetent
parental control, broken homes, poor housing, lack of recre- .
ational facilities, and social maladjustment.
In 1937 Perry? conducted a study of juvenile delin­
quency in the junior and senior high schools of Los Angeles,
regarding its prevalence, manifestations, and causes.
The
findings briefly stated were that delinquency is the result
of a multiplicity of causes and that it is practically im­
possible in a given case to disentangle these causes and
thus attribute to them percentages of causation.
He recom­
mended that more should be done toward preventing delin­
quency than is now being done, rather than toward handling
it when it has become an established mode of living.
The
age showing the highest incidence of delinquency was fifteen
years, and the grade from which the largest number of boys
was transferred to welfare centers was the ninth.
The
? G. E. Perry, ”Juvenile Delinquency in the Junior
and Senior High School of Los Angeles; its Prevalence, Mani­
festation and Causes,” (unpublished Master*s thesis, Univer­
sity of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1937), 75 pp.
22
investigation showed that ninety-one per oent of all acts
which led up to those final anti-social acts for which the
boys were adjudged delinquent were not of an essentially
criminal nature, but were, on the contrary, such as ..might
have arisen from the unadjusted emotionalism of adolescence.
One of the answers to the problem of juvenile delin­
quency may be found in the activity program for the boys.
Providing a boy with the activities he enjoys doing and
which will help him in.his growth spiritually, as well as
physically, is one of the ways of applying a cure.
A sympa­
thetic understanding of the juvenile delinquent is the great
need of today.
H. W. Walther,8 in 1937, pointed out that in the ma­
jority of cases the problem boys were found to have come from
normal home situations, particularly insofar as the marital
status of the parents was concerned.
A large portion of the
group studied, seventy per cent, were found to be living un­
der satisfactory home conditions from five to ten years after
being in the welfare center.
This fact would justify the
conclusion that these young men are capable of adjustment to
8 Henry W. Walther, tfA Survey of Employment and Subse­
quent History Records of Behavior Problem Boys Who Have
Passed Through the Welfare Centers of the Los Angeles City
Schools,n (unpublished Master*s thesis, University of South­
ern California, Los Angeles, 1937), 111 pp.
23
society.
The findings of this study indicated a pressing
need for a more comprehensive program to handle problems of
juveniles during their incipient stages.
It has been known for years that bad housing condi­
tions go hand in hand with crime, juvenile delinquency, pov­
erty, and disease.
Another very outstanding factor in this
connection is that of home environment.
In 1937 a compara­
tive investigation of problem boys from normal and broken
homes
was made by L. F. Pagliassotti.9
He concluded that
both home environment and the influence of friends were im­
portant factors in the lives of the delinquent boys.
The
ages of the boys in the study averaged 14.6 years, which is
a period of adjustment in the lives of young people.
Famil­
ies with two children contributed the„highest number of prob­
lem boys studied.
Any investigation of juvenile delinquency would, of
necessity, contain a description of the type of offenses.
One of the more recent studies in this field has been made
by R. Eng,l° in 1938.
From a study of 319 juveniles in San
9 L. F. Pagliassotti, ”A Comparative Study of Problem
Boys From Hormal and From Broken Homes,” (unpublished Mas­
ter’s thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
1937), 76 pp.
^ R. Eng, "A. Study of 319 Juvenile Delinquents From
the Files of the Sail Diego County Probation Office,” (un­
published Master’s thesis, University of Southern California,
Los Angeles, 1938), 118 pp.
Diego County the investigator concluded that boys were found
guilty of every type of offense, but the largest numbers
were in the categories of automobile stealing, burglary,
truancy, sex offenses, and being ungovernable.
The age
group which was found to contain the largest number of cases
was the thirteen to fourteen year group.
The findings indi­
cated that fifty per cent of the boys came from broken homes.
There seemed to be a general tendency to repeat the same of­
fenses, since later offenses were committed by twenty-eight
per cent of those included in the study.
The preponderance
of boys, eighty-two per cent, or four times as many as girls,
is a condition which is characteristic of studies of this
type.
The causes of delinquency are being approached more
earnestly and scientifically than ever before, as shown by
the increase in the number of child talks in the daily
papers and over the radio; in the child study clubs; in the
number of periodicals devoted to childhood; and the parentteacher groups.
A great many of those interested in preven­
tion of delinquency, are approaching the problem through the
avenue of recreation and the wise use of leisure time.
It has been shown that the Sheriffs Boys' Camp has
made an unique contribution to the program of delinquency
prevention among juvenile boys.
This contention was made
from facts based upon later studies.
Prior to the camp
25
periods of 1937 and 1938, a greater number of oases were re­
ported than after the camp periods, which was not true during
the year of 1936, when an appreciable number of additional
cases was reported following the camp periods.
Skinner,H
the investigator, indicates the fact that underprivileged
boys are to be found in comparatively large families, since
slightly less than seventy-one per cent came from homes in
which there were three or more children.
It was shown that
the average-sized family of these underprivileged boys was
one of a little more than fpur (4.02) children.
In every city there are various community agencies
which in some way or other are brought into contact with de­
linquent youth.
For an intelligent handling of delinquents,
it is highly desirable that these agencies understand to the
fullest extent the delinquent boy.
the non-sectarian boysT club.
One such organization is
The All Nations Boys* Club in
Los Angeles enjoys an enviable record in the reduction of de­
linquency- in its area.
A.
recent survey made in 1939 shows that the activities
of the club were effective in meeting the needs of the youth
of that area.
The narrative account of this survey made by
^ K. R. Skinner, "A Survey of the Prevention of Crime
Through Juvenile Summer Camps for Underprivileged Boys,” (un­
published Master's thesis, University of Southern California,
Los Angeles, 1939), 137 pp.
86
Thompson^8 describes: (l) securing a sponsor; (2) the organ­
izational set-up in relation to the origin and direction of
plans and programs; (3) activities; (4) content of weekly
meeting program; and (5) methods of handling group and indi­
vidual problems.
The success of the club, which has been
functioning since 1929, is largely due to the ability of its
program to cause constant interaction between the individuals
and the group.
II*
DEVELOPMENT OF THE BOYS* CLUB
The boys* work development in America has taken on
the aspects of a social movement somewhat similar to the
youth movements of Europe.
In America, however, the boys’
work movement has been more in the hands of adults, who have
planned it for youth, rather than having come into being in
response to a clearly articulated demand from youth.
It has
been a movement primarily for boys imposed by adults, because
an increasing amount of leisure time and delinquency on the
part of boys and a growing body of underprivileged and ne­
glected youth created a crisis seen by adults,* who formulated
programs, perfected organizations, and sought in various ways
to educate society.
^■8 C. S. Thompson, "A Natural History of a Boys’ Club
Group," (unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, 1939), 95 pp.
, 27
Purpose of the boys* club.
The purpose of the boys’
work movement, as explained by Stone, 13 is for child care,
protection and training, supervision of the leisure time of
boys, and the prevention of delinquency.
The urge to join a boys* club is just as closely re­
lated to a boy’s social development as any of his changing
physical characteristics are to his increase in weight and
stature.
All boys naturally fall into groups.
The first
group of which a boy is conscious is the home group, then
the play group, the school group, gang or dub, the athletic
team, the fraternity, and the community groups in everwidening circles.
Boys* clubs capitalize upon this urge to
join, to be a member of a group, to receive recognition from
others.
The real purpose of the boys* club is to build upon
the basis of the boy’s interests, to create the wants that
will challenge him to measure up to his own progressive best.
The boys’ clubs are trying to cultivate in boys a
loyalty to the standards of integrity, honor, team play, and
good will, which translated into the larger life of the com­
munity as these boys grow older, will further the development
of those things that are fundamental in a strong democracy.
Specifically, boys* work is confined to the ages from nine
13 w. L. Stone, The Development of Boys’ Work in the
United States (Nashville: Press of Cullom and G-hertner Com­
pany , 1935),p . 2.
28
to eighteen years.
It deals with the whole hoy as a person.
Programs, processes, institutions, and methods are tools to
serve hoys; they are ends in themselves.
Boys1 work, then,
is character education through leisure-time, recreational,
and social activities, which develop the hest in hoys.
Boys*
work is guidance of individuals, groups, and organizations of
hoys, and of adults working with hoys in creative living.
History of the hoys ’ cluhs.
Prior to the Industrial
Revolution the provision for the hoys hy the usual devices
of community living seemed adequate for ordinary purposes.
There was very little consciousness that boys represented a
special problem which could not he dealt with traditionally,
and there were practically no special, hoys’ work agencies
which took over the task of providing recreational and social
education for youth.
By the time the Industrial Revolution
had registered its effects, society had reached the point
where it not merely had to do something about its social
problems generally, hut also about its youth problem in par­
ticular.
Boys’ cluhs were hy no means isolated phenomena.
The
impulse from which they originated was hut one manifestation
of the trends of that period, marking the transition from a
predominantly rural population in America to a rapidly in­
creasing urbanization hy crowding together great numbers of
people into what soon became city slums.
Boys* clubs first
became established institutions at this time and however un­
related to one another they may have been, they had a common
origin in the new social thinking and action of their day.
Newsboys, bootblacks, and street waifs gathered into
ragged schools or newsboys’ homes made up the first class.
They were given shelter, food, and clothing where they were
prayed for, amused, and generally kept out of trouble.
The first club for boys that left a formal record of
its work was established in Hartford in 1860 by three young
women, who for several years supervised a self-governing
group of boys known as the Dashaway Glub.
The name Boys’
Club was first used by a group in New York in 1876, known as
the Boys’ Club of New York.
What is known as modern boys’ work, however, in Amer­
ica began in the nineties.
People became conscious of boy­
hood at the time' when the westward expansion was over and
the free land was exhausted and industrialization began to
bring free time for the youth of the nation.
Boys’ clubs have always had a definite interest in
all aspects of a boy’s life, the responsibility of the club
being for the boy’s leisure time.
It deals with him almost
entirely in his group relations, using his social interests
as a means of setting up normal relationships with other
boys and withthe community at large.
The
true objective of
30
the club is character training, which results in fetter con­
duct and less delinquent behavior*
Thus, it is fair to
state that the prevention of delinquency is one of the impor­
tant and valuable by-products of the boys* club program.
Major trends in the boys* clubs.
The growth and de­
velopment of the boys* clubs in the United States has been
traced by W. 1. Stone.14
One of the first important trends
in the boys* work movement was the nationalization and stan­
dardization -of programs for boys.
Early boys’ work started
as activities for boys initiated in local communities by men
as individuals.
At the same time that the standardization
of programs and strong national organizations were developing
in boys* work, there were changes going on in the kind of
ideas and purposes that were being spread.. From soul saving
to guidance may be said to summarize the shift in ideas and
purposes.
There was no change in the stated purpose of boys*
work, but there was a shift in the interpretation of the pur­
poses and methods used in achieving them.
The present day
purpose of boys* work is guidance of boys in all the activi­
ties of actual living.
Accompanying the trend toward counseling and guidance,
there was a change being made by the sponsoring institutions.
14 Ibid., pp. 18S.
The Church, which was the first home of boys* organizations,
was closely followed by the public schools and playgrounds,
as important centers and sponsoring institutions for boys1
organizations and programs.
The early boys* work programs
were all designed to be used by the Church as a supplement
to their programs.
This expansion of boys1 work programs
into schools and playgrounds, in addition to the Church,
brought also a growing use of the facilities and equipment
of other agencies in the community.
The integration of rec­
reational facilities in the community has been an important
aid in boys* work.
The entrance of civic clubs into boys* work after the
World War showed the trend in the growing popularity of the
belief in boys’ work as good business in the prevention of
delinquency.
Much credit should be given to the business
men’s clubs for popularizing the idea that boys’ work is a
good business investment for the community. -These trends in
boys’ work have brought about a new attitude toward the de­
velopment and behavior of boys in the community.
Aims and objectives of boys’ clubs.
The common ele­
ments in the boys’ club program which were found in the ear­
liest clubs and are still among its most vital character­
istics may be enumerated to include these features:
(l) The
club is centrally located and brings its attractions to the
32
boys; (2) Its equipment is practical and relatively inexpen­
sive, as the emphasis is upon light, warmth, and an atmos­
phere of cheerfulness and genial friendship;
(s)
The whole
undertaking is flexible, marked by the experimental attitude
of its supporters, the leaders learning as they go along;
(4)
The organization is non-sectarian; (5) The task is dis­
tinctly a personality job, dependent for its success upon
the attitudes and the characteristics of its workers; and
finally, (6) The organization is devoted entirely and exclu­
sively to boys.
These are the principles which the clubs
still hold in common, although variations in
programs and in
technique have grown out of adaptation to local situations*
Programs of boys1 clubs*
One of the impressive things
about the boys1 club movement today is the volume of environ­
mental influences which are offered to the youth of the com­
munity.
A very large range of activities is provided, so
that almost any interest or desire expressed
found in the program.
by a boy can be
Novel activities are constantly under­
taken in boys* clubs, being made possible by a flexible pro­
gram.
The game room is the common meeting place where boys
come whenever they wish for free play.
Here friends are
greeted, new associations formed, and further activities
planned.
Play is a serious business to the boy and when
33
carried on under wise leadership where good conduct and
sportsmanship prevail, it not only keeps him busy and out of
mischief, but it is also a means for the firmation of.good
character.
Activities in the gymnasium of a boys* club are as
varied as the interests of the boys and are planned so that
the largest possible number will participate.
a chance to belong to a team.
Every boy has
Since the average boy wants .
to use tools and make things, he is fascinated by the possi­
bilities found in the shop with its materials, equipment, and
leadership.
Here he may experience the thrill and the pride
of possession that comes from satisfying the creative urge
which is so strong in every boy.
In craft activities he may
engage in vocational exploration, giving him the opportunity
to test his skill at many tasks.
III.
SUMMARY
A review of investigations similar to the one being
made in this study showed that approximately sixty per cent
of the delinquent boys are first offenders and that 39.1 per
cent are recidivists.
The junior high school age has more
delinquency per one hundred pupils than any other school seg­
ment.
Every problem is a manifestation of some disorder;
over fifty per cent of the problem cases present physical
difficulties, and over forty per cent of the boys showed
evidence of nervous instability.
Various organizations have offered activity programs,
which have materially 'decreased crime -in a given district,
A follow-up study of behavior-problem boys showed that fiftyeight per cent of the cases studied made a- satisfactory ad­
justment; also that the behavior-problem boy does not commit
an isolated act, but rather a series of offenses.
The in­
crease of delinquency was due to the increase in minor cases
which were for the most part neglected.
The most important conditions contributing to delin­
quency are lack of parental control, broken homes, and the
influence of undesirable companions.
A very large percentage
of the boys studied had never belonged to any suitable boys’
organization.
A great many of those interested in the pre­
vention of delinquency are approaching the problem through
the avenue of the wise use of leisure time.
The Los Angeles
Sheriffs Boys’ Camp aided materially in the prevention of
delinquency among the underprivileged boys.
The curve of development in boys’ work can be seen by
a recording of the principal periods of its growth.
Prior
to 1890 should be called the time of exploration; from 1890
until 1910, the pioneering period; and since 1910, the ex­
pansion of the work.
Beginning as an appendage to social
welfare and religious agencies in the latter half of the
nineteenth century, boys’ work has emerged with agencies and
35
resources of its own.
It has achieved a recognized status
in child.welfare programs and community organization work.
BoysT work is one of the newer vocations which cannot as yet
be rigidly defined, but may be summarized as motivation ofboyhood.
It is something that is seeking to understand and
meet the needs of youth continuously in a-changing situation.
CHAPTER III
CASE HISTORIES OF THE ONE HUNDRED PROBLEM BOYS
The case histories of the pairs of boys who were
studied in this investigation are presented in this chapter.
The brief case histories of the two groups of offenders are
divided into: (1) the selected and (2) the club group.
The
purpose of presenting this case material was to show: the
nature of the boys’ offenses, the number of offenses, and
the background of each of the one hundred juvenile delinquent
boys of this investigation.
CASE NUMBER 1
C. B. Selected
1/5/37
Unfit home
5/4/37
Petty theft
9/2/38
Nuisance
C. D. Club
8/10/36 Nuisance
10/19/36 Burglary
C. B., the selected boy, was born in Alabama and has
resided in California for five years.
is a native of California.
C. D., the club boy,
Both boys are in the same grade,
but there are six points difference in their intelligence,
quotients and thirteen months difference in their mental
ages.
grade.
C. B. is below standard in both reading and arithmetic
C. D. is below the standard in reading, but up to
normal in arithmetic.
Neither boy belonged to a church or a
37
CASE NUMBER 1
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Alabama
California
Differ
Date of birth
4/6/24
8/8/24
4 months
Intelligence quotient
90
84
6 points
Mental age
9-4
10-1
13 months
Test age
10-4
12-0
20 months
Reading grade
<J.P. 5.6
S.
7.5
G.P. 5.6
S.
6.2
Differ
G.P. 6.2
S.
7.5
G.P. 7.6
S.
7.5
Differ
School grade
7A
7A
Same
Church preference
None
None
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Divorced
Normal
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Parents
Differ
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Good
Poor
Differ
Siblings
10
5
5
Eirst offense
5/4/37
8/10/36
9 months
Offense age
13-1
12-0
13 months
Later offenses
3
2
1
Arithmetic grade
club.
The selected boy C. B. comes from a broken home of
good economic rating.
There are five more children in,his,
family than in the family of C*. D. . The first offense was
committed by C. B. thirteen months earlier- than by C. D. and
he also was charged with one more offense than G. D.
Both
boys committed one offense of nuisance and one somewhat sim­
ilar offense--petty theft for C. B. and burglary for C. D.
The principal contributing cause of the delinquency of C. B.
was home conditions and for C. D. was lack of supervision.
The latter did not commit any further offenses after joining
the Boys’ Club.
CASS MJMBER 2
B. L. Selected
C. B. Club
1/28/39
Intoxication
6/24/37
5/7 /39
Burglary
1/25/38
9/20/39
Petty theft
B.
Petty theft
Sex delinquency
L., the selected boy, was born in South Dakota and
has resided in California for five years, while C. B., the
club boy is a native of the state of California.
C. B.’s
intelligence quotient is twenty points higher than the se­
lected boy’s.
They are separated by half a grade in school
and there is eleven months difference in their mental ages.
B. L. is retarded in his arithmetic grade and almost normal
in his reading grade.
C. B. is well advanced in the reading
39
Characteristics
Selected
Birthplace
S. Dakota
Date of birth
3/9/22
4/30/22
1 month
Intelligence quotient
95
115
20 points
Mental age
13-6
H
1
U1
CASE NUMBER 2
11 months
Test age
13-9
13-1
7 months
Reading grade
G.P. 6.2
S.
6.7
G.P. 16.3
S.
10*
G.P. 5.6
S.
‘6.3
G.P. None
School grade
9A
10B
Differ
Church preference
None
None
Same ■
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
F.deceased
Normal
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Parents
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
1
4
3
First offense
8/20/38
6/24/37
1 yr.2mos.
Offense age
16-5
14-9
1 yr.8mos.
Later offenses
3
2 ■
1
Arithmetic grade
Club
.California
Difference
Differ
Differ
Differ
40
test, with no records available for the arithmetic test.
Both boys come from non-relief homes, B. L.fs being rated as
fair, and C. B.*s as poor economically.
There are three
more children in the family of C. B., the club boy.
Neither
boy had a church preference or any club activities.
C. B.
was one year and eight months younger than the selected boy
at the time of the first .offense.
He committed one less of­
fense than B. L., the selected boy.
with petty theft.
Both boys were charged
C. B., the club boy, did not commit any
further juvenile delinquencies after his club program was
started.
The juvenile bureau listed lack of home supervision
as the principal contributing cause for B. L., the selected
boy, and sex curiosity for C. B., the club boy.
CASE NUMBER 3
G. B. Selected
C. D. Club
4/3 /39
Property destruction
7/23/35
Malicious mischief
4/22/39
Nuisance
4/22/36
Malicious mischief
7/22/39
Intoxication .
4/27/36
Petty theft
-11/19/36
G.
Lewd conduct
B., the selected boy, was born in Oklahoma and has
resided in California for five years.
is a native of California.
C. D., the club boy,
G. B. has a higher intelligence
quotient by twenty-two points than C. D. of the club.
Both
of them are in the 7A grade and there is two years between
41
CASE'NUMBER 3
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Oklahoma
California
Differ
Date of birth
1/21/27
3/23/27
2 months
Intelligence quotient
97
75
22 points
Mental age
14-9
CD
0
1
6 yrs.9mos
Test age
15-5
10-8
4 yrs.9mos
Reading grade
G.P. 6.6
S.
6.6
G.P. 4.3
S.
6.2
Differ
G.P. 5.4
S.
7.5
G.P. 5.1
S.
7.5
Same
School grade
7A
7A
Same
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents’ occupation
Relief
Relief
Same
Economic status
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
8
4
4
Eirst offense
5/3/39
7/13/35
3yrs.lOmos
Offense age
12-4
8-4
4 years
Later offenses
3
4
1
Arithmetic grade
42
their mental ages.
G. B,fs reading grade is standard, while
C. D. is retarded twoyears.
arithmetic test.
Both boys are deficient in the
Their homes are on relief, have a normal
marital status, and poor economic rating.
G. B. has four
more brothers and sisters than C. D., the club boy.
The
latter became a delinquent three years and ten months earlier
than G. B. and four years younger than the selected boy.
The
club boy committed one offense more than the selected boy.
C. D. stopped his delinquencies after his connection with the
club program.
The principal contributing cause for the se­
lected boy was given as home conditions and for the club boy
as "irresponsible.”
CASE NUMBER 4
J. B. Selected
J. C. Club
5/14/40
4/22/36
Petty theft
Malicious mischief
8/10/36
Burglary
2/23/39
Nuisance
J. B., the selected boy, was born in Arkansas and has
resided in California for five years, while J. C., the club
boy is a native of California.
They were separated by three
school grades at the time of their first offense.
There is a
three-point difference in their intelligence quotients and
six months in their mental ages.
Both boys are retarded in
the arithmetic and reading tests.
J. B., the selected boy,
43
CASE NUMBER 4
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Arkansas
California
Differ
Date of birth
7/5/26
8/15/26
1 month
Intelligence quotient
82
79
3 points
Mental age
9-2'
8-8
6 months
Test age
11-1
10-11
2 months
Reading grade
G.P. 5.6
S.
6.6
G.P• 4.6
S.
6.2
Same
G.P. 6.1
S.
7.5
G.P. 5.3
S.
7.5
Same
School grade
8B
5B
3 grades
Church preference
None
Protestant
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Remarried
Normal
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Parents
Same
Parents1 occupation
Non-relief
He lief
Differ
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
1
4
3
First offense
5/14/40
4/22/36
4yrs.lmo
Offense age
13-10
9-8
4yrs.2moj
Later offenses
0
2
2
Arithmetic grade
is from a home where a divorce and remarriage have occurred,
his home being classified as fair economically.
from a normal home on relief, rated as poor.
J. C. is
There are also
three more children in J. G.rs family than in the family of
the selected boy.
J. C. committed his first offense at a
much earlier age-, being four years and two months younger
than J. B., the selected boy.
The former committed two more
offenses than the latter, however, he committed only one
after joining the Boysr Club.
The principal contributing
cause was given by the juvenile bureau for the delinquencies
of both of the boys; for the selected boy it was an irre­
sponsible home and for the club boy it was the lack of home
supervision.
CASE NUMBER 5
H. B. Selected
L. C. Club
7/17/39
7/23/35
Assault
H.
Malicious mischief
4/22/36
Sex delinquency
4/27/36
Burglary
B., the selected boy was born in Oklahoma and has
lived three years in California.
lived all his life in California.
L. C., the club boy has
L.C. has a higher intel­
ligence quotient by four points than H. B.
in the IB grade and the latter in the 3A.
The former was
Both boys came
from normal homes on relief, rated poor economically.
45
GASS NUMBER 5
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Oklahoma
California
Differ
Date of birth
8/6/30
6/29/30
2 months
Intelligence quotient
78
82
4 points
Mental age
10-10
8-9
2yrs.lmo.
Test age
13-11
10-9
3yrs.2mos.
Reading grade
G.P. 5.0
S.
6.0
G.P. 4.7
S.
6.3
Same
G.P. 7.5
S.
7.5
G.P. 5.0
S.
7.5
Differ
School grade
3A
IB
2s grades
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents* occupation
Relief
Relief .
Same
Economic status
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
2
3
1
First offense
7/17/39
7/23/35
4 years
Offense age
8-8
5-1
3yrs.7mos.
Later offenses
0
2
2
Arithmetic grade
46
Neither boy had any club activities and only H. B. had a
church preference.
by one.
L. C.’s family was larger than H. B.’s
Both boys were retarded in their reading test.
.The
latter was standard for arithmetic while the former was below
normal.
L. C. committed his first delinquencies three years
and seven months earlier, than H. B., also committing two more
offenses.
The desire for adventure was the assigned cause
for the delinquencies of L. 0.; and home conditions, parents’
carelessness and drunkenness were the contributing factors
for H. B., the selected boy.
L. G. had no further offenses
after his Civitan Club activities.
CASE NUMBER 6
J. B. Selected
G. D. Club
4/6/40. Petty theft
7/24/38
Malicious mischief
5/7/40
8/15/38
Petty theft
Runaway
Both boys are natives of California.
The principal
cause contributing to the delinquency of 1. B. was a desire
for adventure, and for G. D*, a broken home.
The latter
lives with his mother who is divorced and remarried.
The
home is now oil relief and is rated as poor economically.
J. B. lives with his parents; however, their home is not on
relief and is classed as having a fair economic rating.
Neither boy had any club activities.
J. B. belonged to the
Catholic church and G. D. was a Protestant, but inactive.
47
CASE NUMBER 6
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
5/15/26
7/6/26
2 months
Intelligence quotient
91
86
5 points
Mental age
11-8
9-5
2yrs.3mos.
Test age
12-11
10-11
2 years
Reading grade
C •P • 6.2
S.
6.7
G.P. 3.1
S.
5.6
Differ
G.P. 5.6
S.
6.3
G.P. 5.2
S.
6.6
Same
School grade
9B
7A
lg grades
Church preference
Catholic
Protestant
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
Remarried
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
5
4
1
First offense
7/18/40
8/24/38
lyr.llmos.
Offense age
14-2
12-1
2yrs.lmo.
Later offenses
2
2
Same
Arithmetic grade
48
Both families were large, there being five other children in
J. B.fs and four in G. D.’s.
There is a five-point differ­
ence in their intelligence quotients.
J. B. is almost stand­
ard in his reading test, while G. B. is over two years re­
tarded.
Both boys have approximately the same placement for
the arithmetic test.
G. B. was over two years younger at the
time of his first offense than J. B. ■Both of them were
charged with petty theft.
CASE NUMBER 7
R. H. Selected
L. W.
6/29/39
10/17/35
Malicious mischief
Club
10/25/35
Petty theft
Petty theft
2/18/37
Burglary
2/19/37
Sex delinquency
2/20/37
Property destruction
L. W . , the club boy, is a native of California, while
the selected boy, R. H., was born in Virginia and has resided
in California for nine years.' R. H. has a higher intelli­
gence quotient than L. W. by sixteen points.
At the time of
their first offense they were separated in school by two
grades.
There was a difference in their ages of three years
and nine months, L. W. being the younger of the two boys.
Neither had a church preference, nor any club activities.
R.
was from a normal home, not on relief, and rated as
49
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Virginia
California
Differ
Date of birth
5/1/25
6/17/25
16 days .
Intelligence quotient
101
85
16 points
Mental age
8-1
8-8
7 months
Test age
iO
i
00
CASE NUMBER 7
10-3
7 months
Reading grade
G.P. —
S.
—
G.P. 5.3
S.
6.5
Arithmetic grade
G.P. —
S.
G.P. 4.5
S.
7.0
School grade
9B
7B
2 grades
Church preference
None
None
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents! marital status
Normal
Divorced
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
1
4
3
First offense
6/19/39
10/17/35
3yrs.8mos.
Offense age
14-1
10-4
3yrs.9mos.
Later offenses
0
5
5
50
fair economically.
L. W. was from a broken home, not on re­
lief, and given a poor rating.
There were four more chil­
dren in the family of the club boy than in the family of
R. H.
The principal contributing cause for the delinquency
of R. H. was a careless home, while for L. W. it was an un­
satisfactory environment.
The latter has not committed any
offense since joining the club.
CASE NUMBER 8
J. H. Selected
C. W. Club
5/16/40
2/18/37
Petty theft
1.
1/26/38
Petty theft
6/15/38
Petty theft
2/20/39
Burglary
2/20/39
Sex delinquency
2/21/39
Burglary
3/27/39
Purse snatching
H . , the selected boy,was born in South Dakota and
has lived inCalifornia
boy,
Runaway
for
three years.
is a native ofCalifornia.
C. W., the club
At the time
of their first
offense C. W. was in the 9A grade and 1. H. in the 11A.
The .
former was three years and five months younger than the lat­
ter at the time of their first offense.
Both boys had a very
low intelligence quotient, that of J. H. being ten points
higher than the sixty-nine of C. W.
Neither boy had a church
51
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
■Birthplace
S.Dakota
California
Differ
Date of birth
6/29/22
8/31/22
2 months
Intelligence quotient
79
69
10 points
Mental age
11-10
9-7
2yrs.3mos.
Test age
H
1
CASE NUMBER 8
13-10
3yrs.6mos.
Reading grade
G.P. —
S.
Arithmetic grade
G.P. —
S.
P4
O CO
School grade
11A
9A
2 grades
Church preference
None
None
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Marital status ^
■V ;
'
Lives' with
Normal
Remarried
Differ
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents1 occupation •
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Good
Poor
Differ
Siblings
0
4
4
First offense
5/16/40
2/18/37
3yrs.3mos.
Offense age
17-11
14-6
3yrs.5mos.
Later offenses
0
6
6
G.P. —
' S.
ii
ii
■
52
preference, nor belonged to a club.
J. H. came from a home
not on relief, given a good economic rating, where both par­
ents were living together.
C. W . ’s home was very different,
as he lived with his mother who was divorced and remarried.
C. W . Ts father and his stepfather were both in the navy,
leaving the five children without supervision.
The principal
contributing cause, as given by the juvenile bureau,, for the
delinquency of J. H., the selected boy, was a desire for ad­
venture.
In the case of C.W . ,
of understanding on thepart of
the club boy, it was a lack
his mother.
Before joining
the Civitan Boys’ Club he ran away from home once, and was
charged with two offenses each of petty theft and burglary.
He has not committed any juvenile offense since his club ac­
tivities have started.
CASE NUMBER 9
T. H. Selected
W. A. Club
5/12/37
Petty theft
10/17/35
Petty theft
5/26/38
Peeping Tom
10/25/35
Sex delinquency
6/3 /38
Peeping Tom
9/6 /37 Petty theft
1/9 /39
Petty theft
4/5 /38 Nuisance
1/29/39
Nuisance
4/17/39
Sex delinquency
T. H ., the selected boy, was born in Minnesota and has
lived in California for six years.
W. A., the club boy, is a
CASE NUMBER 9
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Minnesota
California
Differ
Date of birth
6/26/21
6/29/21
3 days
Intelligence quotient
93
79
14 points
Mental age
9-2
8-8
6 months
Test age
9-10
10-11
lyr.lmo.
Reading grade
G.P. 4.1 '
S.
'6.2
G.P. 4.6
S.
6.2
Same
G.P. 5.6
S.
7.5
G.P. 5.3
S.
7.5
Same
School grade
8A
7B
1-J- grades
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same •
Parents’ marital status
Normal
Remarried
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Father
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Good
Fair
Differ
Siblings
4
4
Same
First offense
5/12/37
10/17/35
lyr.7mos.
Offense age
15-11
14-4
7 months
Later offenses
5
3
2
Arithmetic grade
native of California.
T. H.’s intelligence quotient of
ninety-three is fourteen points higher than the seventy-nine
of W. A.
Both boys are two years retarded in their reading,
and arithmetic tests.
At the time of their first offense
T. H. was in the 8A and W. B. in the 7B grade, there being
only,seven months difference in their ages.
Neither boy be­
longed to a club of
any
kind and only T.
H. expressed a
church preference.
The
selected boy was
from a normal home,
not on relief, and given a good economic rating.
club boy lived with
married.
his
W. A.,
the
father, who was divorced and re­
The home was not on relief and had a fair rating
economically.
They committed similar types of offenses.
Both boys were charged with two offenses each of petty theft,
one sex delinquency, and one nuisance.
W. A. did not commit
any further delinquencies after he had joined the Civitan
Boys* Club.
The contributing factor assigned by the juvenile
bureau for T. H. was.irresponsible parents and for W. A. was
gang activity and lack of understanding on the part of his
parents.
CASE NUMBER 10
D. I. Selected
M. D. Club
4/8 /38
Assault
9/23/38
Petty theft
7/20/38
Petty theft
.9/24/38
Malicious mischief
55
CASE NUMBER 10
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Mass.
California
Differ
Date of birth
6/11/25
7/25/25
1 month
Intelligence quotient
124
107
17 points
Mental age
16-7
10-10
5yrs.9mos.
Test age
13-4
10-2
3yrs.2mos.
Reading grade
G.P. —
S.
G.P. 5.7
Arithmetic grade
G.P. —
S.
G.P. 5.0
S.
7.5
School grade
8B
7A
§ grade
Church preference
None
Catholic
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Separated
Normal
Differ
Lives with
Father
Parents
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
1
6
5
First offense
4/8/38
9/23/38
5 months
Offense age
10-10
13-2
2yrs.4mos.
Later offenses
1
1
Same
S.
6.6
56
D.
I., the selected boy, was born in Massachusetts
and has resided in California a little over a year.
the club boy, is a native of California.
M. D.,
The intelligence
quotient of D.-I. was seventeen points higher than the 107
of M. D. , the club boy.
They were separated in school by
half a grade at the time of their first offense.
Both boys
were from non-relief homes, with a poor economic classifica­
tion.
There were five more children in the family of the
club boy.
D. I.' lives with his father and M. D. is from a
normal home.
Neither boy had any club activities and only
M. D. expressed a church preference.
D. I. was two years
and four months younger than M. D. at the time of their first
offense.
Both boys were charged with petty theft.
M.. D. did
hot commit any offenses after he joined the Civitan Boys'
Club.
The principal contributing cause for both boys was the
influence of the home; the parents of the selected boy were
separated and he was subject to gang influence; and the par­
ents of the club boy did not understand him.
CASS NUMBER 11
H. C. Selected
F. G. Club
1/6/38
4/28/37
Petty theft
5/27/39
Intoxication
Petty theft
H. C., the selected boy, was born in California and
F. G., the club boy, is also a native of California.
There
57
CASE MJMBER 11
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
4/14/23
7/15/23
3 months
Intelligence quotient
79
109
30 points
Mental age
8-8
10-4
lyr.8mos.
Test age
10-11
9-6
lyr.5mos.
Reading grade
G.P. 4.6
S.
6.2
G.P. 7.0
S.
6.7
Differ
G.P. 5.3
S.
7.5
G.P. 7.9
S.
7.5
Same
School grade
8B
10B
2 grades
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
-None
None
Same
ParentsT marital status
Divorced
Separated
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Father
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Relief
Relief
Same
Economic status
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
1
0
1
First offense
1/6/38
4/28/37
9 months
Offense age
14-11
13-9
lyr.2mos.
Later offenses
0
1
1
Arithmetic grade
58
are two years difference in their grades, H. C. being in the
eighth and F. G. in the tenth grade.
H. C. is below stand­
ard in both his arithmetic and reading grade, while F. G. is'
a little above standard in both reading and arithmetic.
The
selected'boy was an inactive Protestant, while F. G. didnTt
belong to any church.
Neither boy belonged to any club.
H. G. is from a broken home on relief with a poor economic
status.
There is one other child in the family.
The club
boy is also from a broken home on relief with a poor economic '
status.
He is an only child.
Both boys committed petty
theft and club boy, F. G. , is also charged with intoxication.
In the case of the selected boy, the contributing factor to
his delinquency is considered to be drinking in the home and
poor adult influence.
The delinquency of the club boy was
caused by gang activity and poor home conditions.
F. G.Ts
second crime was committed after he became a member of the
boys* club.
CASE NUMBER 12
P. K. Selected
W. S. Club
12/8/37
Petty theft
5/27/36
Petty theft
1 /6/38
Petty theft
5/12/37
Sex delinquent
5 /7/38
Incorrigible
5/25/37
Nuisance
P. K . , the selected boy, was born in California and
W. S., the club boy, is also a native of California.
These
59
CASE NUMBER 12
Characteristics
Selected
Club '
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same ■
Date of birth
1/10/24
6/4/24
5 months
Intelligence quotient
108
70
38 points
Mental age
10-8
5-6
5yrs.2mos
Test age
9-11
8-5
lyr.6mos.
Reading grade
G.P. 8.5
S.
8.7
G.P. —
S. • —
Arithmetic grade
G.P. 9.7
S.
7.5
G.P. —
S.
School grade
7A
5B
2-|- grades
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Divorced
Separated
Differ
Lives with
^ather
Father
Same
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status'
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
0
5
5
First offense
12/8/37
5/27/36
lyr.7mos.
Offense age
13-11
11-11
2 years
Later offenses
2
2
Same
60
boys are separated by two years in their school grade, P. K.
being in the seventh grade, while W. S. was a fifth-grader at
the time of his first offense.
There is a difference of
thirty-eight points in their intelligence quotients and five
months in their mental ages.
The selected boy is a-Protes­
tant while the club boy has no church preference.
boy had any club activities.
with poor economic status.
Neither
Both boys are from broken homes
The parents of P. K. are not on
relief while those of W. S. are.
The former is an only child
but the latter is from a family of five brothers and sisters.
The offenses of the two boys were similar.
Unfit homes were
the contributing factor of delinquency for both boys.
W. S.
did not commit any further crimes after joining the BoysT
Club.
CASE NUMBER 13
C. 0. Selected
S. W. Club
12/15/36
Petty theft
4/1 /35 Petty theft
3 /15/39
Truancy
4/2 /35 Burglary
10/24/39
Incorrigible
.
9/7 /35 Petty theft
9/10/35
Burglary
Selected boy, C. 0., was born in Utah, but has lived
in California four years.
Club boy, S. W . , is a native son.
There is a difference of thirteen points in their intelli­
gence quotients and a four-year difference in their mental
61
CASE NUMBER 13
Characteristics
Selected;
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Utah
California
Differ
Date of birth
6/4/19
7/1/19
1 month
Intelligence quotient
82
69
13 points
Mental age
9-10
5-7
4yrs.3mos
Test age
12-0
8-6
3yrs. 6mos
Reading grade
G.P. 5.8
S.
6.0
G.P. —
S.
G.P. 4.8
S.
7.5
G.P. —
S.
School grade
10A
8A
2 grades
Church preference
Protestant
Protestant
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents1 occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
7
5
2
First offense
12/15/36
4/1/35
lyr. 8mos
Offense age
17-6
15-9
lyr. 9mos
Later offenses
2
3
1
Arithmetic grade
—
—
----------
ages.
The selected boy is in the tenth grade and the club
boy in the eighth.
Both boys are Protestants.
Neither boy
has any club activities and they are both from normal homes.
G. 0. comes from non-relief parents, while S. W. has parents
on relief.
The former is from a family of seven children
and the latter has five brothers and sisters.
He was also a
year and nine months younger than the selected boy when he
committed his first offense.
C. 0. was cited for petty theft,
truancy, and for being incorrigible, while S. W. has four of­
fenses: petty theft and burglary twice each.
The factors
contributing to the delinquency of the selected boy were gang
activity and lack of parental understanding, while the delin­
quency of the club boy is laid to an unfit home and drunken
parents.
S. W. did not commit any further crimes after join­
ing the Boys' Club.
CASE NUMBER 14
R. C.
Selected
12/22/36
Undesirable
associates
ll/l /37
Disturbing peace
10/21/39
Burglary
B. C. Club
8/27/36
Burglary
The selected boy and the club boy are both natives of
California.
R. C.Ts intelligence quotient of 107 is twenty-
five points higher than the 82 of B. C.
The selected boy was
63
CASE NUMBER 14
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
2/9/24
4/22/24
2 months
Intelligence quotient
107
82
25 points
Mental age
12-8
8-9
3yrs. llmos
Test age
11-10
10-9
1 yr.
Reading grade
G.P. 6.8
S.
6.9
G.P. 4.7.
S.
6.3
Differ
G.P. 7.5
S.
7.5
G.P. 4.3
S.
6.8
Differ
School grade
7A
8A
1 grade
Church preference
None
Protestant
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Good
Differ
Siblings
0
2
2
First offense
12/22/36
8/27/36
4 months
Offense age
12-10
12-4
6 months
Later offenses
2
0
2
Arithmetic grade
1 mo
64
normal in both his reading and arithmetic grade, while the
club boy was retarded two years in both the reading and
arithmetic work.
At the time of their first offense, the
boys were separated by one grade in school and there was six.
months difference in their.ages.
homes, not on relief.
Both boys come from normal
R. C. was from a home with a fair econ­
omic rating and B. C. from one with a good rating.
The lat­
ter had a church preference but neither boy belonged to a
club.
R. G. committed two more offenses than B. C., each boy
having been cited once for burglary.
B. C. did not commit
any further offenses after joining the Givitan Boyst Glub.
The principal contributing cause for R. G. was a desire for
adventure and for B. G. was the lack of home supervision.
CASE NUMBER 15
G. C. Selected
I. B. Club
1 /16/35
Malicious mischief
6/30/36
Petty theft
IB/8 /37
Illegal entry
5/10/37
Petty theft
10/15/38
Grand theft
3/20/38
Illegal entry
Selected boy, G. C., was born in Nebraska and has re­
sided, in California three years.
Club boy, J. B., was born
in Oklahoma and has lived in California four years.
There is
a difference of twelve points in their intelligence quotients.
Both boys are above standard in reading and arithmetic.
The
selected boy is in the seventh grade and the club boy in the
65
CASE NUMBER 15
Characteristics
-
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Nebraska
Oklahoma
Differ
Date of birth
6/15/22
3/13/22
3 months
Intelligence quotient
105
115
12 points
Mental age
12-6
12-11
5 months
Test age
12-2
11-3
11 months
Reading grade
G.P. 7.5
S•
6.8
G.P. 7.8
S.
,7.6
Same
G.P. 7.5
S.
7.5
G.P. 104.
S.
7.5
Differ
School grade
7B
10A
3~! grades
Church preference
Protestant
Protestant
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
Divorced
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Non-relief
Same
Arithmetic grade
Parents* occupation
‘Non-relief
Economic status
Good
Fair
Differ
Siblings
0
3
3
Eirst offense
1/16/35
6/30/36
1 yr.5mos
Offense age
12-7
14-3
1 yr.8mos
Later offenses
2
2
Same
66
tenth.
Both boys are Protestants with neither boy having any
club activities.
C. C. is from a normal home, with parents
not on relief, and with a good economic status.
1. B. is
from a broken home, not on relief, and with fair economic
status.
The selected boy is an only child and the club boy
is from a family of three children.
C. Ci was one year
younger than J. B. at the time of his first offense.
boys have three offenses each.
Both
The principal contributing
cause of the delinquency of J. B. is lack of adult influence,
while in the case of C. C. it is his desire for adventure.
The former was not cited for any further.offenses after join­
ing the Boys1 Club.
CASE MJMBER 16
F. C. Selected
G. C. Club
11/21/38
Petty theft
10/21/34
Sex delinquent
5 /9 /39
Petty theft
4 /30/36
Malicious mischief
11/30/39
Loitering
1 /28/37
Grand theft
12/31/39
Intoxication
9 /14/37
Sex delinquent
3 /8 /40
Traffic
10/14/40
Burglary
F.
C., the selected boy, is from Oklahoma and has
lived in California one year.
G, C., the club boy, is from
Canada and has resided in Long Beach three years.
There is a
difference of twenty-five points in their intelligence
67
CASE NUMBER 16
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Oklahoma
Canada
Differ
Date of birth
4/6/22
2/10/22
2 months
Intelligence quotient
108
84
25 points
Mental age
10-4
10-1
3 months
Test age
9-6
12-0
2 yrs.6mos
Reading grade
G.P. 7.0
S.
6.7
G.P. 5.6
S.
6*2
Differ
G.P. 7.9
S.
7.5
' G.P. 7.6
S.
7.5
Arithmetic grade
Same
School grade
10B
10B
Same
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Fair
Same
Siblings
6
2
4
First offense
11/21/38
10/21/34
4 yrs. lmo,
Offense age
16-7
12-8
3 yrs.1lmoj
Later offenses
5
3
2
quotients, F. C.?s being 109 as compared with the 84 of G. C.
Both boys are advanced in their arithmetic grade; F. C. is
also advanced in reading'while G. C. is retarded.
At the
time of their first offense they were in the same grade,10B,
but G. C. was three years and eleven months younger than the
selected boy.
F. C. expressed a church preference and G. C.
did not, while neither of them had a club connection.
Both
were from normal homes, not on relief, and each home was
rated as fair economically.
four more children.
F. G. was from a family with
G. C. committed four offenses, two of
which were sex delinquency.
He was not charged with any fur­
ther offenses after joining the Civitan BoysT Club.
F. C.
committed six offenses, two of which were petty theft.
The
principal contributing cause for the delinquency of the club
boy was a desire for adventure.
In the ease of the selected
boy, it was lack of parental understanding and also the fact
that the parents were irresponsible.
CASE NUMBER ±7
W. R. Selected
J. “D. Club
8/6/35
1/9 /35
Burglary
1/12/35
Petty theft
6/6 /37
Petty theft
2/7/38
Burglary
Petty theft
5/16/38 , Runaway
69
CASE NUMBER 17
Characteristies
Selected
Club
Differenc
Birthplace
Missouri
Oregon
Differ
Date of birth
1/8/22
4/7/22
3 months
Intelligence quotient
94
85
9 points
Mental age
0
1
to
rH
12-5
7 months
Test age
15-5
14-8
9 Months
Reading grade
G.P. 6.0
S.
8.8
G.P. 6.6
S.
8.8
Same
G.P. 4.7
S.
8.5
G.P. 5.6
S.
8.5
Same
School grade
7B
8A
li grades
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
F.deceased
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
2
2
Same
First offense
8/6/35
1/9/35.
7 months
Offense age
13-7
12-9
10 months
Later offenses
0
7
7
Arithmetic grade
70
8/20/38
Intoxication
■>
9/15/38
Malicious mischief
12/3 /39
Intoxication
Selected boy, W. R . , was born in Missouri and has
lived in California eleven years.
Club boy, J . D. , was born
in Oregon and has resided in California for five years.
There is a difference of nine points in their intelligence
quotients.
arithmetic.
Both boys are retarded in reading and also in
There is a difference of a year and one-half in
their school grades.
church preference.
ties.
W. R. is a Protestant and J. D. has no
Neither boy participates in club activi­
The selected boy is from a normal, non-relief home of
fair economic status.
The club boy is from a broken home, on
relief with poor economic status.
ily with two children.
Both boys come from a fam­
J. D. was ten months younger at the .
time of his first offense.
The contributing cause in the de­
linquency of the selected boy was gang influence and in the
case of the club boy, with seven offenses, the contributing
delinquent factors were lack of understanding, gang activity,
and parental irresponsibility.
J. D. was cited for one crime
after becoming affiliated with the Givitan Boys1 Club.
CASE NUMBER 18
J. S. Selected
R. M. Club
6/12/37
10/16/38
Petty theft
Petty theft
71
CASE NUMBER 18
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
6/19/26
5/12/26
1 month
Intelligence quotient
84
115
31 points
Mental age
11-9
14-11
3yrs. 2mos.
Test age
14-0
13-0
1 year
Reading grade
G.P. 4.1
S.
8.0
G.P. 10.0
S.
8.8
Differ
G.P. 7.6
S.
8.5
G.P. 6.4
S.
8.5
Same
School grade
5A
8B
2-| grades
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Normal
Divorced
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Father
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Good
Poor
Differ
Siblings
1
1
Same
First offense
6/12/37
10/16/38
lyr. 4mos.
Offense age
11-0
12-5
lyr. 5mos.
Later offenses
2
0
2
Arithmetic grade
72
8/20/37
Malicious mischief
2/15/38
Property destruction
Selected boy, 1. S., and club boy, R. M ., are both
natives of California.
There is a difference of thirty-one
points in their intelligence quotients.
The selected boy is
quite retarded in both reading and arithmetic.
The club boy
is retarded in arithmetic but is above standard in reading.
There is a difference of two and one-half years in their
school grades.
J. S. is a Protestant while R. M. has no
church preference.
fairs.
Neither boy has been active in club af­
The selected boy is from a normal home, living with
his parents, who are not on relief, with a good economic
status.
The club boy is from a broken home, with father on
relief, and a poor economic status.
in the family of both boys.
There is one other child
J. S. was one year younger at
the time of his first offense than R. M.
Two more offenses
were committed by selected boy J. S., whose contributing
cause of delinquency is listed as desire for money.
The con­
tributing causes to the delinquency of club boy R. M. were a
broken home and a drunken parent.
The latter committed no
further crimes after belonging to the Civitan Boys1 Club.
CASE NUMBER 19
R. M. Selected
W. M. Club
73
CASE NUMBER 19
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
1/20/24
1/5/24
15 days
Intelligence quotient
108
80
28 points
Mental age
15-0
10-0
5 years
Test age
13-11
12-5
lyr. 6mos
Reading grade
G.P. 9.7
S.
8.8
G.P. 4.5
S.
8.8
Same
G.P. 5.7
S.
8.5
G.P. 3.5
S.
8.5
Same
School grade
8B
7B
1 grade
Church preference
Protestant
Protestant
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Normal
Divorced
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
1
0
1
First offense
4/26/37
10/16/38
lyr. 6mos
Offense age
13-3
14-5
lyr. 2mos
Later offenses
1
0
1
Arithmetic grade
74
4/26/37
Nuisance
10/16/38
4/29/37
Property destruction
Burglary
Both boys are natives of Long Beach,
The intelligence
quotient of R. M. is 108, or twenty-eight points higher than
that of W. M . , the club boy.
They differ in their reading
grade, in that R. M. is almost a year advanced and W. M. is
over four years retarded.
The arithmetic grade finds both
boys retarded, R. M. two years and W. M. five years.
are separated in school by only one grade.
They
Neither boy had
any club experience, but both expressed a church preference,
the club boy being inactive, however.
R. M. was from a normal
home, not on relief, with a fair economic rating.
W. M. lives
with his divorced mother, who is on public relief.
At the
time of their first offense R. M. was one year and two months
younger than W. M.
The principal contributing factor in their
delinquencies was for R. M. a desire for adventure, and for
W. M . , the club boy, a broken home and irresponsible parents.
The latter did not commit any delinquencies after joining the
Civitan Boys* Club. '
CASE NUMBER 20
H. M. Selected
J. M. Club
9/14/35
Property destruction
10/28/37
9/26/39
Burglary
4/9 /38
Petty theft
Sex delinquent
75
CASE NUMBER 20
Characteristics
Selected
Birthplace
California
Tennessee
Differ
Date of birth
6/20/25
6/29/25
9 days
Intelligence quotient
70
104
34 points
Mental age
10-7
14-3
3yrs. 8mos.
Test age
15-3
13-8
lyr.
Reading grade
G.P. 2.9
S.
6.5
G.P. 8.4
S.
8.8
Differ
Arithmetic grade
G.P. ---
G.P. 6.7
S.
8.5
School grade -
8B
8A
i grade
Church preference
None
Protestant
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents' occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Good
Fair
Differ
Siblings
0
3
3
First offense
9/14/35
10/28/37
2yrs. lmo.
Offense age
10-3
12-4
2yrs. lmo.
Later offenses
1
1
Same
' Club
-
Differences
7mos.
76
Selected boy, H. M . , was born in California.
Club
boy, J. M . , was born in Tennessee and has lived in California
eight years.
There is a difference of but nine days in the
ages of the two boys.
There is a thirty-four point differ­
ence in their intelligence quotients.
in reading.
grades.
Both boys are retarded
There is half a year’s difference in their school
There is a difference in their church preferences,
club boy, 1. M . , being a Protestant.
Both boys are from nor­
mal homes with parents not on relief.
The economic status of
the home of the selected boy is good and that of the club boy
is fair.
H. M. is an only child and J. M. is from a family
with three other children.
Both boys are listed with two of­
fenses, but the selected boy was two years younger than the
club boy at the time of his first citation.
The principal
contributing cause of delinquency in the case of the selected
boy was a desire for adventure.
However, with the club boy
the contributing factors were a drunken home and carelessness.
The latter had no further delinquent offenses after becoming
a club boy.
CASE NUMBER SI
E. M. Selected
9/3 /37
Malicious mischief
5/27/38
Sex delinquency
1. S. Club
9/16/37 Runaway
10/15/37 Runaway
77
CASE NUMBER 21
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Wyoming
Kansas
Differ
Date of birth
5/26/23
2/14/23
3 mos.
Intelligence quotient
111
80
31 points
Mental age
15-1
11-6
3yrs. 7mos
Test age
13-7
14-5
10 mos.
Reading grade
G.P. 9.7
S.
8.8
G.P. 6.4
S.
8.8
Differ
G.P. 8.7
S.
8.5
G. P.4.8
S.
8.5
Differ
School grade
9A
8A
1 grade
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Remarried
Separated
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Father
Differ
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
1
4
3
First offense
9/2/37
9/16/37
14 days
Offense age
14-4
14-7
3 mos.
Later offenses
2
3
1
Arithmetic grade
78
8/15/39
Grand theft
12/21/37
Petty theft
3/25/38
Grand theft
E. M . , the selected boy, was born in Wyoming and has
resided in California for nine years.
J. S ., the club boy,
was born in Kansas and came to California four years ago.
The selected boy is considerably above standard in both read­
ing and arithmetic, while the club boy is retarded.in both
subjects.
There is a thirty-one point difference in their
intelligence quotients.
There is also one year’s difference
in their school grades.
E. M. is a Protestant but J. S. does
not have a church preference.
homes.
Both boys are from broken
The families of both boys are non-relief.
The club
boy is from a family with five children, while the selected
boy has one other child in the family.
Both boys were cited
for several offenses, E. M„ having three citations and J. S.
four.
The selected boy was three months younger than the
club boy at the time of his first offense.
The"principal
contributing factor in the delinquency of E. M, was his de­
sire for adventure.
On the other hand a criminal, irrespon­
sible home was a contributing factor in the case of J. S.,
the club boy, who did hot commit any further offenses after
becoming a club boy.,
CASE NUMBER 22
G. M. Selected
J. S. Club
79
CASE NUMBER 22
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
Texas
Differ
12/11/24
1 month
"11/21/24
Intelligence quotient
99
83
16 points
Mental age
10-6
11-5
11 months
Test age
10-7
13-10
3yrs. 3mos
Reading grade
G.P.
S.
I
D 1
•1
C
D 1
G.P. —
Arithmetic grade
G.P. 7.9
S.
8.8
G.P. —
School grade
8B
7A
£ grade
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
Divorced
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents* Occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
1
4
3
First offense *
8/3/38
12/24/36
lyr. 8mos.
Offense age
13-9
H
ro
i
o
Date of birth
lyr. 9mos.
Later offenses
0
10
10
——
~
—
80
8/3/38
Betty theft
12/24/36
Petty theft
7/28/37
Petty theft
9/16/37
Lewd conduct
10/16/37
Property destruction
2/11/38
Lewd conduct
4/25/38
Property destruction
5/5 /38
Petty theft
11/25/38
Illegal entry
1/4 /39
Illegal entry
2/15/39
Property destruction
7/1 /40
Burglary
G. M. , the selected boy, is a native of California.
I. S., the club boy, was born in Texas and has lived in the
state of California five years.
There is a sixteen point
difference in the intelligence quotients of the two boys and
a difference of one semester in their school grades.
G. M.
is of Protestant faith while J. S. has no religious prefer­
ence.
Neither boy has any club activities.
The selected boy
is from a normal home with parents of a fair economic status
and they are not on relief.
The club boy is from a broken
home and his parents are on relief.
The latter was one year
and eight months younger than the former at the time of his
first offense.
J. S. committed ten later offenses, four of
them after his club affiliation.
The one offense committed
by the selected boy was attributed to lack of understanding.
The club boy became a delinquent principally because of a de­
sire for adventure.
CASE NUMBER 23
E. N. Selected
E. B. Club
11/27/35
Petty theft
10/30/36
Runaway
2 /24/36
Burglary
11/29/38
Petty theft
10/7 /36
Sex delinquency
10/15/36
Incorrigible
2 /Q /37
Property destruction
6 /l3/38
Burglary
Selected boy, E. N . , was born in Washington and has
resided in California five years.
tive of California.
Club boy, E. B., is a na­
There is a difference of thirty-one
points in the intelligence quotients of the two boys.
Both
of them are below standard in arithmetic and above standard
in reading.
grades.
tivities.
There is a semester^s difference in their school
Both boys are Catholic and neither has any club ac­
The selected boy is from a broken home and lives
with his father, who is not on relief but has a very poor
economic status.
There is one other child in the family.
The club boy is from a normal home, living with parents on.
relief, and also with poor economic status.
other children in his family.
There are six
E. B. did not commit any fur­
ther offenses after his club affiliation.
The principal
CASE NUMBER 23
Characteristics
Selected
Birthplace
Washington .California
Differ
Date of birth
11/9/24
12/12/24
I month
Intelligence quotient
125
94
31 points
Mental age
15-11
13-1
2yrs. lOmos
Test age
12-8
13-11
lyr. 3mos.
Reading grade
G.P. 104S.
8.8
G.P. 7.1
S.
6.9
Same
G.P. 6.4
S.
8.5
G.P. 8.3
S.
8.8
Differ
School grade
7B
7A
§ grade
Church preference
Catholic
Catholic
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Divorced
Normal
Differ
Lives with
Father
Parents
Differ
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
1
6
5
First offense
11/27/35
10/30/36
II mbs.
Offense age
11-0
11-10
10 mos.
Later offenses
5
1
4
Arithmetic grade
Club
Differences
83 .
contributing causes of delinquency in the case of the se­
lected boy, E. N. , were sex curiosity and adventure, while in
the case of club boy, E. B. , the contributing cause was gang
activity.
CASE NUMBER 24
T. K. Selected
I. N. Club
9/10/38
Nuisance
9 /29/m
Grand theft
3/25/39
Intoxication
11/25/38
Grand theft
3 /15/39
Petty theft
Selected boy, T. K . , was born in Indiana and has lived
in California seven years.
Club boy, J. N . , was born in
Oklahoma and has lived in California three years.
There is a
difference of two and one-half years in their school grades.
The selected boy is a Protestant and has not been active in
any club.
J. N. did not belong to any church or club.
T. K.
is from a broken home, living with his mother, who is not on
relief and has fair economic status.
The club boy is from a
normal non-relief home with fair economic status.
one other child in both families.
There is
T. K. committed his first
offense nineteen days earlier than J. N.
has two offenses and the club boy, three.
The selected boy
One of the offenses
of J. N. was committed after he joined the Civitan Boys’ Club.
The contributing causes of the delinquency of the selected boy
were lack of understanding, carelessness, and drunkenness.
84
CASE NUMBER 24
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Indiana
Oklahoma
Differ
Date of birth
10/28/24
7/3/24
3 months
Intelligence quotient
108
88
20 points
Mental age
14-4
7-6 .
6yrs.lOmos.
Test age
13-4
8-6
4yrs.l0mos.
Reading grade
G.P. —
G.P. —
----
G.P. 5.7
S.
8.5
----
9A
7B
2>>- grades
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Divorced
Normal
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Parents
Differ
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Fair
Same
Siblings
1
1
Same
First offense
9/10/38
9/29/38
19 days
Offense age
13-11
Later offenses
1
2
w
1
School grade
H
Arithmetic grade
. G.P. 5.5
S.
8.8
3 months
1
85
Club boy, J. N . , became a delinquent because of home condi­
tions and drunken parents.
CASE NUMBER 25
G. L. Selected
J . R . Club
7/28/38
Petty theft and
I/II/ 4 0
Burglary
prowling
3/20/40
Sex delinquent
7/1 /40
Prowling
G. L. , the selected boy, was born in Iowa and has re­
sided in California seven years.
J. R . , the club boy, was
born in Florida and has resided in California four years.
G. !. is above standard in reading and retarded in arithmetic,
while I. R. is retarded in both reading and arithmetic.
There
is a difference of one semester in their school grades.
The
selected boy is a Protestant and a former Boy Scout.
boy did not belong to either a church or a club.
The club
G. L. is
from a normal home, living with parents not on relief and of
fair economic status.
family.
There are two other children in the
J. R. is from a broken home, living with his mother.
They are not on relief, although there are six other children
in the family.
G. L. was one year and six months younger
than I • R. at the time of his first offense.
The contributing
causes in the delinquency of G. L. were home conditions and
irresponsibility.
In the case of J. R. the causes of delin­
quency were a broken home and lack of control.
He did not
86
CASE NUMBER 25
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Iowa
Florida
Differ
Date of birth
1/29/24
5/23/24
.4 months
Intelligence quotient
104
84
20 points
Mental age
15-0
11-9
3yrs.3mos
Test age
13-11
14-0
1 month
Reading grade
G.P. 9.7
S.
8.8
G.P. 4.4
S.
6.9
Differ
G.P. 5.7
S.
8.5
G.P. 7.6
S.
8.5
Differ
8A
igrade
Arithmetic grade
School grade
.9B
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
Boy Scout
None
Differ
ParentsT marital status
Normal
Separated
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents r occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
2
6
4
First offense
7/28/38
1/11/40
lyr. 6mos
15-8
lyr. 2mos
2
2
Offense age
Later offenses
•14-6
0
87
commit any further offenses after becoming a club boy.
CASE NUMBER 26
R. K. Selected
J. L. Club
3/14/38
11/29/38
Runaway
' 6/20/38
Petty theft
Petty theft
7/4 /39
Malicious mischief
Selected boy, R. K . , was born in Minnesota and has re­
sided in California for three years.
Club boy, J. I*. , was
born in Pennsylvania and has resided in California five
years.
There is a difference of only two points in their in­
telligence quotients.
Catholic.
R. K.
is a Protestant and J. L. is a
Neither boy hadbeen
active in any club activities.
Both boys are from normal homes with parents not on relief.
The selected boy has one other child in the family and his
parents are of good economic status.
The club boy has nine
other children in the family and the economic status is poor.
The principal contributing factor of delinquency,in the case
of selected boy, R. K. , was his desire for adventure, while
<T. L was a member of a gang.
The latter did not have any
further offenses after becoming a club boy.
CASE NUMBER 27
F. S. Selected
W. C. Club
4/29/39
4/4/38
Petty theft
Malicious mischief
88
CASE NUMBER 26
Character!,sties
Selected
Birthplace
Minnesota
Date of birth
4/17/25
5/2/25
1 month
Intelligence quotient
102
100
2 points
Mental age
8-10
13-10
5 years
Test age
8-8
13-10
5yrs. 2mos.
Reading grade
G.P/ 7.9
S.
8.8
G.P. 5.4
S.
6.5
Same
G.P. 8.5
S.
8.5
G.P. 8.9
S.
8.5
Same
School grade
7A
8A
1 grade
Church preference
Protestant
Catholic
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents * occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Good
Siblings
1
9
8
First offense
3/14/38
11/29/38
8 months -
Offense age
12-9
13-6
9 months
Later offenses
2
0
2
Arithmetic grade
Club
Differences
Pennsylvania Differ
. Poor
Differ
89
CASE NUMBER 27
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Arizona
California
Differ
Date of birth
9/28/23
8/13/23
1 month
Intelligence quotient
105
78
27 points
Mental age
14-2
11-11
2yrs. 3mos.
Test age
13-6
15-4
lyr. lOmos.
Reading grade
G.P. —
G.P. 5.5
S*
8.8
Arithmetic grade
G.P. —
G.P. 5.7
S>
8.5
School grade
8A
7A
1 grade
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
Lives with
Parents
Father
Differ
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Good
Poor
Differ
Siblings
2
5
3
First offense
4/29/39
4/4/38
I year
Offense age
15-7
14-8
II mos.
Later offenses
3
3
0
M.Deceased
Differ
90
5/30/59
Prowling
4/16/38
Malicious mischief
6/1 /39
Petty theft
4/18/38
Incorrigible
6/3 :/39
Illegal entry
8/6 /38
Petty theft
F.
S., the selected boy, was born in Arizona and has
resided, in California five years.
tive of California.
Club boy, W. C., is a na­
There is a difference of twenty-seven
points in their intelligence quotients.
difference in their school grades.
There is one year’s
F. S. is an inactive
Protestant and W. C. has no church affiliation.
had been active in any club.
Neither boy
The selected boy is from a nor­
mal home, living with his parents, not on relief.
There are
two other children in the family and their economic status is
good.
Club boy, W. C., is from a broken home, living with
his father, not on relief.
There are five other children in
the family and their economic status is poor.
The principal
contributing cause for the delinquency of F. S. was parental
irresponsibility and for W. C. was the lack of supervision.
The latter did not commit any further delinquencies after
joining the Civitan Boys’ Club.
CASE NUMBER 28
L. S. Selected
9/15/38
Runaway
I. M. Club
6/30/38
10/31/38
Malicious mischief
Fighting
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Birthplace
Nebrasks
Alaska
Differ
Date of birth
5/3/27
9/2/27
4 months
Intelligence quotient
107 .
89
18 points
Mental age
10-8
10-2
6 months
Test age
H
0
1
o
CASE NUMBER 28
11-4
lyr. 4mos
Reading grade
G.P* 3.6
S.
'4.5
G.P. 5.5
S.
5.6
Differ
Arithmetic grade
G.P. — '
G.P. 5.4
S.
6.2
— —
School grade
6B
6A ,
i grade
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Normal
Divorced
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents' occupation
Relief
Relief
Same
Economic status
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
1 ■*
0
1
First offense
9/15/38
6/30/38
3 months
Offense age
11-4
00
1
o
H
8 months
Later offenses
0
1
1
1
•Differences
92
L. S. was born in Nebraska and has resided in Califor­
nia nine years.
J. M. , the club boy, was born in Alaska and
has lived in Long Beach four years.
The selected boy has a
higher intelligence quotient by eighteen points than the club
boy.
The reading grade shows that J. M. is almost standard,
while L. S. is retarded almost a year.
At the time of their
first offense, they were separated in school by one semester
and there was eight months difference in their ages, J. M.
being the younger of the two boys.
The homes of both boys
are on public relief and have a poor economic rating.
L. S.
lives with his parents, while J. M.fs parents are divorced
and he lives with his mother.
Neither boy belonged to any
club and only L. S. expressed a church preference.
The prin­
cipal contributing cause for their delinquency was in the case
of the selected boy, lack of understanding and in the case of
the club boy, a broken home with a mother not interested in
him.
J. M. did not have any further trouble after joining the
Civitan Boys* Club.
CASE NUMBER 29
C. S. Selected
A. M. Club
1/19/39
Runaway
7/7/38
4/6 /39
Runaway
Malicious mischief
C. S. was born in Texas and has lived in Long Beach
for eight years.
A. M. is a native of California.
C. S.'s
93
CASE MJMBER 29
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Texas
California
Differ
Date of birth
1/29/23
3/22/23
2 months
Intelligence quotient
115
78
37 points
Mental age
13-9
12-1
lyr. 8 mos
Test age
12-0
15-6
3yrs.6mos.
Reading grade
G.P. 7.0
S.
6.5
G.P. 7.6
S.
8.8
Differ
G.P. 5.7
S*
6.5
G.P. 4.9
S.
8.5/
Same
School grade
8A
8A
Same
Church preference
None
None
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Normal
Separated
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents1 occupation
Relief
Economic status
Arithmetic grade
■.Relief
Same
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
4
6
2
First offense
1/19/39
7/7/38
5 months
Offense age
16-0
15-4
8 months
Later offenses
1
0
1
intelligence quotient of 115 is thirty-seven points higher
.than the 78 of A* M.
The reading grade of C. S. is more ad­
vanced than that of A. -M . , whose reading grade is retarded.
Both hoys are retarded in arithmetic, A. M. being more so
than C. S.
Neither boy had any church preference, or any club
connections.
Both homes are on relief.
C.S. lives with his.
parents and A. M. with his mother, who is separated from her
husband.
At the time of their first offense, they were in
the same grade at school, although the club boy was eight
months younger than the selected boy.
dissimilar.
Their offenses were
C. S. ran away from home twice and A. M* was
charged with malicious mischief.
The latter did not commit
any further delinquencies after joining the Civitan Boys*
Club.
Home conditions were assigned as the factor leading to
the delinquencies of the two boys.
CASE NUMBER 30
I. M. Selected
L. E. Club
10/25/37
Burglary
10/16/36 Petty theft
11/2 /37
Intoxication and
10/30/37 Burglary
burglary
4/16/38 Burglary
J. B. was born in Indiana and has lived in California
for five years.
L. E. is a native of Oklahoma and has re­
sided in California for three years.
The selected boy has a
higher intelligence quotient than the club boy.
Both boys
95
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Indiana
Oklahoma
Differ
Date of birth
3/10/25
5/6/25
2 months
Intelligence quotient
113
106
7 points
Mental age
15-7
10-8
4yrs.llmos
Test age
13-9
H
0
1
H
CASE NUMBER 30
3yrs. 8mos
Heading grade
G.P. 7.1
S.
6.6
G.P* 6.1
S.
5.6
Same
G.P. 10+
S.
8.5
G.P. —
School grade
7B
6B
1 grade
Church preference
Protestant
Protestant
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Normal
Separated
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Father
Differ
Parents1 occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Fair
Same
Siblings
7
1
6
First offense
10/25/37.
10/16/36
1 year
Offense age
12-7
11-5
lyr. 2mos.
Later offenses
1
2
1
Arithmetic grade
----
are one year advanced in their reading grade.
At the time of
their first offense they were separated in school by one
grade, J. M. being in the,7B and L. E. in the 6B‘grade.
There was also a difference of one year and two months in
their ages, J.B. being the older.
Both boys were active in
church but neither had any club activities.
J. M* came from
a normal home and was living with his parents.
Neither home
was on relief and both were rated as fair economically.
The
parents of L. E. were separated and he lived with his father.
There were six more children in the family of the selected
boy than in L. E.'s family.
The club boy committed one of­
fense of petty theft and both were charged with two offenses
of burglary.
tion.
In addition, J. M. had one charge of intoxica­
The principal contributing cause for the delinquency
of L. E # was a desire for adventure and for J. M. was lack of
home supervision.
The former was not cited for any further
delinquencies after he joined the Civitan BoysT Club.
CASE NUMBER 31
C. M. Selected
W. P. Club
9/1 /38
Petty theft
5/34/36
Petty theft
11/3 /38
Petty theft
5/6 /37
Disturbing peace
6/9 /38 Sex delinquent
C. Mi was born in Nebraska and has lived in Long Beach
for ten years.
W. P. is a native of California.
C. M. has
97
CASE NUMBER 31
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplaee
Nebraska
California
Differ
Date of birth
3/13/22
7/13/22
4 months
Intelligence quotient
97
87
Mental age
14-6
10-0
4yrs. 6mos.
Test age
16-8
11-6
5yrs. 2mos.
Reading grade
G.P. —
G.P. 4.3
S.
6.0
----
G.P. 5.2
S.
5.7
----
Arithmetic grade
G.P. —
.10 points
School grade
11B
7A
3-^ grades
Church preference
None
Protestant
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Fair
Same
Siblings
2
4
2.
First offense
9/1/38
4/24/36
2yrs. 5mos.
Offense age
16-6
13-9
2yrs. 9mos.
Later offenses
1
2
1
an intelligence quotient of 97 and W. P., the club boy, has
one ten points lower.
Their homes are very similar, since
they are normal, non-relief homes classed as fair economi­
cally.
There are two more children in the family of the club
boy than in the family of the selected boy.
Neither belonged
to any club and only W. P. expressed a church preference.
At
the time of their first offense, which was the same for both
boys, they were separated by three and one-half school
grades, C. M. being in 11B and W. P. in 7A.
Also there was a
difference of two years and nine months when they both were
cited for petty theft.
Adult influence led to the delin­
quency of C. M. , the selected boy, and irresponsible home
conditions was the factor contributing to the delinquency of
the club boy.
W. P. did not have any further juvenile record
after he joined the Civitan Boys’ Olub.
CASE NUMBER 52
C. M. Selected
R. P. Club
6/15/37
Petty theft
2/14/35
Petty theft
7/22/37
Sex delinquent
2/20/40
Malicious mischief
8/3 /37
Malicious mischief
8/10/37
Carrying gun
Both C. M . , the selected boy, and R. P., the club boy,
are natives of California.
C. M. fs intelligence quotient of
113 is seventeen points higher than that of R. P.
Both boys
99
CASE NUMBER 32
Characteristics
Selected
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
9/3/23
4/19/23
5 months
Intelligence quotient
113
96
17 points
Mental age
15-7
10-10
4yrs. 9mos
Test age
13-9
11-4
2yrs. 5mos
Reading grade
G.P. 7.1
S.
6.6
G.P. —
S.
G.P. 104S.
8.5
G.P. —
S.
School grade
7A
8A
1 grade
Church preference
Protestant
Catholic
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Remarried
Normal
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Parents
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Relief
Non-relief
Differ
Economic status
Poof
Fair
Differ
Siblings
7
6
1
First offense
6/15/37
2/14/35
2yrs. 4mos
Offense age
13-9
11-10
lyr. llmos
Later offenses
3
2
1
Arithmetic grade
* Club
Differences
-------- —
—
--------
100
are active in church but do not belong to any club.
C. M.
lives with his mother, who is divorced and has remarried.
The family is on relief and rated as poor economically.
The•
club boy comes from a normal home, not on relief, and rated
as fair.
Both are from large families, there being (seven
children in C. M . fs family and six in the family of the club
boy.
At the time of their first offense, which was petty
theft for both boys, they were separated in school by one
grade and by one year and eleven months in age.
also had one citation for malicious mischief.
Each of them
Poverty was
given as the contributing cause for the delinquency of the
selected boy and lack of parental understanding for the club
boy.
R. Pi committed one offense, which was malicious mis­
chief, after joining the Civitan Boys’ Club.
CASE HUMBER 33
H. M. Selected
W. P. Club
1/22/38
Unfit home
9/22/36
Petty theft
1/27/39
Petty theft
3/27/37
Burglary
7/17/40
Illegal entry
8/26/37
Intoxication
H.
for six years..
M. was born in Virginia and has lived in Long Beach
W. P. was born in Michigan and has resided in
Long Beach five years.
The club boy has an intelligence quo­
tient of 111, or twenty-three points higher than that of the
selected boy.
Both boys are retarded in the arithmetic grade.
101
CASE NUMBER 33
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Birthplace
Virginia
Michigan
Differ
Date of birth
11/1/21
9/10/20
lyr. 2mos.
Intelligence quotient
88
111
23 points
Mental age
10-5
15-10
5yrs. 5mos
Test age
11-11
14-4
2yrs. 5mos
Reading grade
G.P. 6.4
S.
6.9
G.P. 10*
S.
8.8
Differ
G.P. 6.4
S.
8.0
G.P. 7.1
.S.
8.5
Arithmetic grade
.Difference
Same
School grade
10A
Io b
i grade
Church preference
Catholic
None
Differ
Club activities
None'
•None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Good
Differ
Siblings
3
4
1
First offense
1/22/38
9/22/36
lyr. 4mos.
Offense age
16-2
16-0
2 months
Later offenses
2
2
Same
102
H. M. is also retarded in reading while W. P. is well ad­
vanced.
The two boys are from normal homes, not on.relief,
that of H. M. being rated as fair and W. P . ’s as good econom­
ically.
The selected boy had a church preference while the
club boy did not;
Neither of them had any club connection.
At the time of their first offense, which for H. M. was an
unfit home and for W. P. petty theft, they were separated in
school by a semester and in age by two months.
The Juvenile
Bureau assigned gang activity as the principal contributing
cause for the delinquency of H. M . , the selected boy; and
home conditions and parental influence as the factors for the.
club boy.
W. P. did not have any additional charges against
him after he joined the Civitan Boysr Club.
CASE NUMBER 34
H. M. Selected
B. M. Club
5/31/38
Malicious mischief
8/2 /38
Runaway
6/11/38
Malicious mischief
8/30/38
Petty theft
7/17/39
Malicious mischief
California was the birthplace of both H. M . , the se­
lected boy, and B. M ., the club boy.
The latter had an intel­
ligence quotient of 110, which was six points higher than that
of H. M.
The reading age of the selected boy was retarded,
while that of B. M. was advanced.
mothers who had been divorced.
Both boys lived with their
H. M. had a church preference
103
CASE NUMBER 34
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
6/13/24
3/16/24
3 months
Intelligence quotient
104
110
6 points
Mental age
10-10
15-1
4yrs. 3mos.
Test age
10-5
13-10
3yrs. 5mos.
Reading grade
G.P. 5.7
S.
6.8
G.P. 10*
S.
8.8
Differ
G.P. 5.0
S.
8.0
G.P. —
S.
School grade
8A
7A
1 grade
Church preference '
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Divorced
Divorced
Same
Lives with
Mother
Mother
Same
Parents1 occupation
Relief
Non-relief
Differ
Economic status
Poor
Fair
Differ
Siblings
2
0
2
First offense
5/31/38
8/30/38
3 months
Offense age
13-9
14-2
5 months
P
1
1
Arithmetic grade
nf ffin.cjpa.Q
’
-----------
104
and B. M. did not, while neither boy belonged to a club.
The
home of H. M. was on relief while B. M. was from a non-relief
home.
At the time of the first offense for each boy, they
were separated in school by one grade with a difference of
five months in age.
The principal contributing cause for
their delinquencies was a deisre for adventure on the part of
the selected boy, and adventure combined with gang activity
on the part of the club boy.
After B. M. joined the Civitan
Boys’ Club he did not commit any further delinquencies.
CASE NUMBER 35
R. M. Selected
A. D. Club
6 /S3/36
Nuisance
3 /13/36
Petty theft
11/7 /36
Malicious mischief
5 /4 /36
Grand theft
7 /15/38
Property destruction
10/19/36
Nuisance
8 /17/38
Carrying gun
R. M . , the selected boy, and A. D., the club boy, are
both natives of California.
R. M. has a higher intelligence
quotient by fourteen points than A. D.
Both boys are shown
to have been in advance of their reading grade.
The club
boy has the more serious offenses charged against him.
At
the time of their first offense, they were both in the 7A
grade, there being only a difference of two months in age.
Both boys had a church preference, but neither belonged to a
club.
The selected boy was from a normal, non-relief home
105
Characteristics
Selected
Club .
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
10/17/24
11/11/24
Intelligence quotient
104
90
14 points
Mental age
14-3
13-2
lyr. lmo.
Test age
13-10
14-8
10 months
Reading grade
G.P. 10+
S.
8.8
G.P. 9.1
S.
8.8
Same
G.P. 7.2
S.
8.5
G.P. —
S.
----
School grade
7A
7A
Same
Church preference
Protestant
Protestant
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
Separated
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Good
Poor
Differ
Siblings
1
4
3
First offense
6/23/36
3/13/36
3 months
Offense age
11-6
H
H
1
CASE NUMBER 35
2 months
Later offenses
3
2
1
Arithmetic grade
•1 month
106
with a good economic rating.
in R. M . ’s family.
A. D. was living with his mother, as his
parents had separated.
family.
There was only one other child
There were four other children in the
The home was on relief and classified as poor econ­
omically.
The principal contributing cause for the delin­
quency of R. M . , the selected boy, was given as gang activity,
with home conditions for the club boy.
A. D. did not commit
any further delinquencies after joining the Civitan Boys’
Club.
CASE NUMBER 36
R. C. Selected
G. H. Club
3/20/39
Petty theft
7/30/36
5/20/39
Petty theft
11/16/36
Illegal entry
3/15/40
Intoxication
12/19/38
Illegal entry
Burglary
California was the birthplace of both R. C., the se­
lected boy, and C. H . , the club boy.
The latter had an in­
telligence quotient of ninety-four, or fourteen points higher
than that of the selected boy.
Their first offense was com­
mitted when R. C. was in 10A grade and G. H. in the 8A.
There
was also a difference at that time of two years and eleven
months in their ages.
Their home conditions were very satis­
factory, since they lived with their parents who were not on
relief.
R. C.’s home was classified as good economically and
G. H . ’s as fair.
There were two other children in the family
107
CASE NUMBER 36
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
2/15/23
5/16/23
3 months
Intelligence quotient
80
94
14 points
Mental age
12-2
13-8
lyr. 6mos.
Test age
15-4
14-7
9 months
Reading grade
G.P. 5.8
S.
8.8
G.P. --
Arithmetic grade
G.P. 5.1
S.
9.0
G.P. —
School grade
10A
8A
2 grades
Church preference
None
None
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Good
Fair
Differ
Siblings
2
4
2
First offense
3/20/39
7/30/36
2yrs. 8mos.
Offense age
16-1
13-2
2yrs.llmos.
Later offenses
2
2
Same
108
of the selected boy and four others in G. H . ’s family.
Both
boys expressed a church preference but neither belonged to
any club.
The Juvenile Bureau gave irresponsible home as the
principal contributing cause fof the delinquency of R. C. and
sex curiosity and home conditions for G. H.
After the latter
had joined the Givitan Boys’ Club, he was not cited for any
further juvenile offenses.
CASE NUMBER 37
R. C. Selected
J. M. Club
8 /10/37
Petty theft
2/22/38
10/2 /57
Petty theft
9 / 6 /38
Illegal entry
9 /17/38
Illegal entry
Malicious mischief
R. C. was born in Wyoming and has lived in California
four years.
J. M . , the club boy, is a native of Long Beach.
The club boy’s intelligence quotient is twenty points higher
than that of the selected boy.
An age difference of only
five months separated the two boys at the time of their first
offense, and they were in the same grade at school.
them were from broken homes.
mother being deceased.
Both of
R. C. lived with his father, his
The occupation of the father was given
as relief and there were six other children in the family.
J. M. lived with his grandparents, both of his parents being
deceased.
The home was not on relief and rated as fair
109
CASE NUMBER 37
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Ysfyoming
California
Differ
Date of birth
5/18/23
6/26/23
1 month
Intelligence quotient
90
110
20 points
Mental age
11-2-
10-9
5 months
Test age
12-6
9-9
2yrs. 9mos
Reading grade
G.P. —
G.P. 7.1
S.
6.6
Arithmetic grade
G.P. —
G.P. 104S.
8.5
------------
—
—
_
School grade
8B
8B
Same
Church preference
Mormon
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
ParentsT marital status
M.deceased
Deceased
Differ
Lives with
Father
G.parents
Differ
Parents1 occupation
Relief
Non-relief
Differ
Economic status
Poor
Fair
Differ
Siblings
6
0
First offense
8/18/37
2/22/38
6 months
Offense age
14-3
H
5 months
Later offenses
3
0
'6
1
CD
3
110
economically.
dissimilar.
The offenses committed by the two boys were
R. 0. had four citations, two each for petty
theft and illegal entry.
The principal contributing factors
for R. C. were home conditions and a desire for adventure,
while for the club boy, gang activity and a desire for adven­
ture contributed to his delinquency.
J. M. did not have any
further trouble after joining the Givitan Boys* Club.
CASE 'NUMBER 38
C . C . Selected
T. E. Club
3 /29/39
Petty theft
9/24/37
Malicious mischief
4 /2/39
Petty theft
10/6/38
Petty theft
10/30/39
Burglary
6 /Q /40
Petty theft
California is the birthplace for both C. C., the se­
lected boy, and T. E . , the club boy.
The latter had an in­
telligence quotient of ninety-eight and the former one of
eighty-two.
Both of the boys were retarded in the arithmetic
and reading grades, the selected boy showing the greatest
difference.
T.. E. was one year and eight months younger than
C. C. when he committed his first offense, and there was a
difference of two grades in school.
Both boys had a church
preference but neither belonged to a club.
They were from
normal, non-relief homes, the home of C. C. being rated as
good and that of T. E. as fair.
The offenses committed by
111
CASE NUMBER 38
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
7/11/26
9/24/26
2 months
Intelligence quotient
82
98
16 points
Mental age
12-3
10-10
lyr. 5mos.
Test age
15-0 ’
11-1
4yrs. llmos
Reading grade
G.P. 5.9
S.
8.5
G.P. 6.2
S.
6.5
Same
G.P. 7.8
S.
9.0
G.P. 5.7
S.
8.0
Same
School grade
8A
6A
2 grades
Church preference
Protestant
Protestant
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Normal
Normal
Same
Lives with
Parents
Parents
Same
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Good
Fair
Differ
Siblings
0
1
First offense
3/29/39
9/24/37
lyr. 6mos.
Offense age
12-8
11-0
lyr. 8mos.
Later offenses
3
1
2
Arithmetic grade
112
C. C. were of a more serious nature than those committed by
T. E.
The Juvenile Bureau gave the principal contributing
cause for G. C., the selected boy, as.adult influence, and
for T. E. , the club boy, as lack of supervision.
The latter
was assigned to the Givitan Boys'-Club on the date of his
last offense and since that time has not appeared before the
Juvenile Bureau.
CASE NUMBER 39
C. M. Selected
K. G. Club
2/5 /40
Malicious mischief
3 /21/38
Petty theft
2/7 /40
Illegal entry
10/15/39
Property destruction
2/22/40
Petty theft
3/5 /40
Disturbing peace
4/6 /40
Sex delinquent
C.
M. was born in Colorado and has resided in Califor­
nia for five years.
K. G. is a native of Long Beach.
There
is only a three-point difference in their intelligence quo­
tients.
K. G.’s home is on relief and both boys are from
broken homes.
The parents of C.. M. are divorced and he is
living with his'mother, while the parents of K. G. are sepa­
rated and he lives with his father.
economic rating.
Both homes have a poor
The home of C. M. has three other children
and K. G.fs four other children.
Neither boy belonged to a
club and only K. G. expressed a church preference.
At the
113
CASE NUMBER 39
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Colorado
California
Differ
Date of birth
4/8/24
4/4/24
4 months
Intelligence quotient
84
81
3 points
Mental age
12-1
10-10
lyr. 3mos
Test age
14-6
13-4
lyr. 2mos
Reading grade
G.P. —
G.P. 5.1
S.
7.5
Arithmetic grade
G.P. —
-
G.P. 5.5
S.
8.0
------------
------------
School grade
10B
7A '
2-jg- grades
Church preference
None
Protestant
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Divorced
Separated
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Father
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
3
4
1
First offense
2/5/40
3/21/38
lyr. llmos
Offense age
15-10
13-11
lyr. llmos
Later offenses
4
1
3
114
time of their first offense there was a difference of one
year and. eleven months in their ages and two and one-half
grades .in school, K. G. committing his first offense at an
earlier age.
The principal'contributing factor in the delin­
quency of C. M. was lack of parental understanding, while for
the club boy it was an irresponsible home and general home
conditions.
K. G. was charged with one offense, that of
property destruction, after he joined the Givitan Boys* Club.
CASE NUMBER 40
W. D. Selected
E. H. Club
11/26/37
Malicious mischief
1/31/38
Runaway
11/22/38
Illegal entry
5/6* /38
Petty theft
11/10/39
Intoxication
1 /23/40
Runaway
7 /l /40
Runaway
W. D. , the selected boy, was born in Nevada and has
lived in Long Beach three years.
Beach.
E. H. is a native of Long
W. D. has an intelligence quotient of ninety-three,
two points higher than that of E. H.
The reading and arith­
metic tests show that both boys are retarded.
W. D. belonged
to a church and a club, while E. H. had neither affiliation.
The club boy came from a normal home on relief, classified as
poor economically.
The selected boy came from a non-relief
home, broken by divorce, and rated as fair.
The family of
115
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Nevada
California
Differ
Date of birth
8/11/24
11/6/24
3 months
Intelligence quotient
93
91
2 points
Mental age
12-10
2yrs. 2mos.
Test age
Hi
o
H
1
to
11-9
2yrs. lmo.
Reading grade
G.P. 5.9
S.
6.0
G.P. 5.8
S.
6.8
Same
G.P. 5.8
S.
8.0
G.P. 5.3
S.
8.0
Same
School grade
8B
7A
§ grade
Church preference
Catholic
None
Differ
Club activities
Boy Scout
None
Differ
Parents1 marital status
Divorced
Normal
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Parents
Differ
Parents1 occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Fair
Poor '
Differ
Siblings
1
3
2
First offense
11/26/37
1/31/38
2 months
Offense age
13-3
13-2 *
1 month
Later offenses
4
1
3
Arithmetic grade
C
O
Characteristics
H
0
1
CASE NUMBER 40
116
E. H. had four children, two more than were in the family of
W. D.
Their first -offense occurred when they were separated
by a semester in school grade, there being only two months
difference in their ages.
The desire for adventure was the
principal contributing cause for the delinquency of W. D.,
while a careless home contributed to the delinquency of the
club boy.
After E.- H. joined the Civitan Boys* Club he was
not cited for any further offenses.
CASE NUMBER 41
K. C. Selected
J. P. Club
8/10/37
Incorrigible
5/21/38 Fighting
9/20/37
Illegal entry
6/10/38 Malicious mischief
2/8 /39
Purse snatching
6/20/38 Grand theft
K. G„ is a native of California.
J. P. was born in
Texas and has resided in Long Beach for three years.
The
club boyTs.intelligence quotient is thirteen points higher
than the 107 of the selected boy.
J. P. is well advanced in
both his arithmetic and reading grade.
On the other hand
K. C. is retarded in both the reading and arithmetic grades.
At the time of their first offenses, J^. P. was ten months
older than K. C. , and he was also two and one-half grades
ahead of the selected boy.
Both of them come from broken
homes, K. C.fs by divorce and J. P.'s by death.
Both homes
are given a poor economic rating and are on relief.
There
117
CASS NUMBER 41
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
Texas
Differ
Date of birth
5/4/21
4/4/21
1 month
Intelligence quotient
107 .
120
13 points
Mental age
10-0
16-6
6yrs. 6mos.
Test age
9-4
13-9
4yrs. 5mos.
Reading grade
G.P. 5.8
S.
6.8
'G.P. 10*
S.
8.8
Differ
G.P. 5.4
S.
8.0
G.P. 10*
S..
9.0
Differ
School grade
7A
10B
2-jg- grades
Church preference
Protestant
Protestant
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Divorced
F.deceased
Differ
Lives with
Father
Mother
Differ
Parentsf occupation
Relief
Non-relief
Differ
Economic status
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings _
4
2
2
First offense
9/20/37
6/10/38
9 months
Offense age
16-4
17-2
10 months
Later offenses
2
2
0
Arithmetic grade
118
are five children in the home of the selected boy and two in
the home of the club boy.
Both boys belonged to the Protes­
tant church and neither had any club membership.
Home con­
ditions and careless parents were given as the principal
contributing causes for the delinquency of K. G., the selected
boy, while sex curiosity and home conditions were the assigned
causes for the trouble of J. P . , the club boy.
The Ciyitan
Boys* Club was asked to supervise the activities of J. P. and
since that time he has not been before the Juvenile Bureau.
CASE NUMBER 42
J. Gi Selected-
E. S. Club
10/10/38
Malicious mischief
4/4 /39
Malicious mischief
11/10/38
Traffic
4/6 /39
Carrying gun
3 /10/39
Illegal entry
8/24/39
Illegal entry
J. C.1s birthplace was Texas and he has lived in Long
Beach for one year..
E. S. is from Nebraska and he has re­
sided in Long Beach two years.
The intelligence quotient of
the club boy is one hundred, or twelve points higher than
that of the selected boy.
Both of them are retarded in read­
ing and arithmetic, J. C., being more so than E. S.
At the
time of their first offense they were in the same grade at
school, but separated by a difference of eleven months in
age.
There was only six months difference between the dates
of their first offenses.
Both boys belonged to a church, but
119
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Texas
Nebraska
Differ
Date of birth
4/7/24
12/5/24
8 months
Intelligence quotient
88
100
12 points
Mental age
8-8
H
H
1
O
CASE NUMBER 42
2yrs. 4mos
Test age
9-10
O
1
H
H
lyr.
Reading grade
G.P. 4.7
S.
6.8
G.P. 6.5
S.
6.8
Same
G.P. 4.5
S.
8.0
G.P. 6.6
S.
8.0
Same
School grade
9B
9B
Same
Church preference
Protestant
Protestant
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parentsr marital status
F.deceased
Divorced
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Mother
Differ
Parentsr occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Poor
Fair
Differ
Siblings
6
0
6
First offense
10/10/38
4/4/38
6 months
Offense age
14-3
13-4
11 months
Later offenses
3
3
Same
Arithmetic grade
2mos
ISO
neither had any club affiliations.
Their homes were broken,
J. 0.fs by death and E. S.’s by divorce.
The former lived
with his mother and stepfather, the latter with his motherJ
Both homes were non-relief, the selected boyfs classified as
poor and the club boy’s rated as fair economically.
The de­
sire for adventure was the principal cause for the delin­
quencies of J. C.' and an irresponsible home, the cause for
those of the club boy.
E. S. was charged with one offense,
illegal entry, after joining the Civitan Boys* Club.
CASE NUMBER 43
P. C; Selected
J. S. Club
1/15/37
Prowling
4/18/36
Sex delinquent
5/28/37
Petty theft
9/12/37
Petty theft
9/20/37
Nuisance
10/27/37
Illegal entry
4/16/38
Sex delinquent
2/8 /39
Illegal entry
7/21/39
Illegal entry
10/15/39
Sex delinquent
P. C. was born in Alabama and has lived in California
two years.
J. S. is a native of Iowa and a resident of
California four years.
The selected boy has an intelligence
quotient of 115 and the club boy one of 104.
P. C. is ad­
vanced in-both reading and arithmetic, while J. S. is re­
tarded in reading and advanced in arithmetic.
Both boys are
121
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Alabama
Iowa
Differ
Date of birth
1/12/24
3/13/24
1 month
Intelligence quotient
115
104
11 points
Mental age
15-2
10-10
4yrs. 4mo
Test age
13-2
H
0
1
oi
CASE NUMBER 43
2yrs. 91*10,
Reading grade
G.P. 10*
S.
8.8
G.P. 6.7
S.
6.8
Differ
G.P. 10*
S.
9.0
G.P. 8.9
S.
8.0
Same
School grade
8B
7A
i grade
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Normal
Divorced
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Father
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Relief
Relief
Same
Economic status
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
4
1
3
Eirst offense
1/15/37
4/18/36
9 months
Offense age
13-0
12-1
11 months
Later offenses
2
6
4
Arithmetic grade
122
from homes on relief, rated as poor economically.
P. C. is
from a normal home, J. S. from one broken by divorce.
latter lives with his father.
The selected boy had a church
preference and the club boy did not.
longed to any club.
The
Neither of them be­
At the time of their first offense, they
were separated by eleven months in age and a semester in
school.
The principal contributing cause for the delinquen­
cies of the selected boy was a lack of home understanding and
for the club boy, sex curiosity and stealing for money.
J. S.
committed three offenses after joining the Givitan Boys1 Club.
CASE NUMBER 44
R. A. Selected
R. C. Club
3 /28/38
Malicious mischief
4 /28/38
Disturbing peace
11/22/39
Traffic
12/28/39
Petty theft
7/6 /58
10/15/39
l/l /40
Intoxication
Petty theft
Property destruction
R. A. was born in Missouri and has lived in California
four years.
R. C., the club boy, is a native of Alabama and
a resident of California five years.
The selected boy has a
higher intelligence quotient by. thirteen points than R. C.
At the time of their first offense, the club boy was in the
6A grade and R. A. in the 9A.
churbh, R. C. did not.
The*latter belonged to a
Neither boy had any club affiliations.
Both of them were from non-relief homes.
R. A.'s home was
133
CASE NUMBER 44
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Missouri
Alabama
Differ
Date of birth
3/22/25
7/4/25
5 months
Intelligence quotient
97
84
13 points
Mental age
11-6
11-3
3 months
Test age
11-11
13-4
lyr. 5mos
Reading grade
G.P. 7.4
S.
6.8
G.P. —
Arithmetic grade
G.P. 6.8
S.
8.0
G.P. —
School grade
9A
6A
3 grades
Church preference
Protestant
None
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents1 marital status
Divorced
Normal
Differ
Lives with
Father
Parents
Differ
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Good
Fair
Differ
Siblings
1
0
1
First offense
3/28/38
7/6/38
4 months
Offense age
13-1
0
1
to
1
—1
1 month
Later offenses
.3.
2
1
-----
124
rated as good and R. C.rs as fair economically.
The club boy
• was .from a normal home, while the selected boy came from a
home broken by divorce and he lived with his father.
Lack of
parental understanding was the cause of the delinquency of
R. A. and an irresponsible home was the contributing factor
for R. C., the club boy.
After the latter joined the Civitan
Boys* Club he was charged with one offense, however.
CASE NtJlvlBER 45
V. B. Selected
M. D. Club
2/20/39
12/8 /38
Petty theft
3 /22/39
Disturbing peace
11/16/39
Disturbing peace
7 /3 /40
Petty theft
Petty theft
V. B., the selected boy, is a native of Long Beach.
M. D., the club boy, was born in Texas and has resided in
California three years.
The intelligence quotient of V. B.
is twenty-four points above the seventy-two of M. D.
Both
boys are retarded in their reading, the club boy much more so
than the selected boy.
Their arithmetic grades show the se­
lected boy slightly advanced and the club boy retarded.
Neither boy had any club affiliations.
V. B. was active in
the church, while M. D. expressed a church preference although
he was inactive.
The former came from a normal, non-relief
home with a fair economic rating.
The latterTs home was
125
CASE NUMBER 45
Chara cteri sties
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
Texas
Differ
Date of birth
3/2/23
2/12/23
1 month
Intelligence quotient
96
72
24 points
Mental age
12-6
8-3
4yrs. 3 mos
Test age
12-11
11-6
lyr. 5 mos.
Reading grade
G.P. 5.3
S.
6.0
G.P. 3.7
S.
7.9
Same
G.P. 6.3
S.'
6.0
G.P. 5.2
S.
8.0
Differ
School grade
10A
8B
2-§ grades
Church preference
Protestant
Protestant
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
Divorced
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Non-relief
Same
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
0
3
3
First offense
2/20/39
12/8/38
2 months
Offense age
15-11
15-10
1 month
Later offenses
0
3
3
Arithmetic grade
126
broken by divorce, M. D. living with his mother along with
three other children, and the home being rated as poor.
At
the time of the first offense, the two boys were separated in
school by two and one-half grades, but there was only one
monthTs difference in their ages.
The Juvenile Bureau as­
signed gang activity as the principal contributing cause for
the delinquency of V. B.
For the club boy, the bureau gave
irresponsible home conditions as the cause.
Since M. D.
joined the Civitan Boys’ Club, he has only committed one of­
fense.
CASS NUMBER 46
W. A. Selected
R. M. Club
5/7/40
10/5/38
Runaway
Unfit home
W. A. was born in-Honolulu and has lived in Long.Beach
for two years.
R. M. is a native of Iowa and has resided in
California three years.
The intelligence quotient of R. M.
is three points,higher than that of W. A.
When they com­
mitted their first offense, the two boys were separated in
school by two grades and in age by one year and eight months.
The selected boy is from a normal, non-relief home, which has
been given a fair economic rating.
The club boy is from a
home on relief, the home having been broken by the death of
the father.
Neither boy belonged to any club and only R. M.
expressed a church preference.
The principal contributing
187
CASE NUMBER 46
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Honolulu
Iowa
Differ
Date of birth
5/8/86
6/87/26
1 month
Intelligence quotient
89
91
3 points
Mental age
18-0
11-1
11 months
Test age
13-6
12-3
lyr. 3 mos
Reading grade
G.P. —
G.P. 7.0
S.
6.9
----
G.P. 8.2
S..
8.0
----
Arithmetic grade
G.P. —
8A
6A
2 grades '
Church preference
None
Protestant
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
Normal
F.deceased
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents* occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status
Fair
Poor
Differ
Siblings
8
1
1
First offense
5/7/40
10/5/38
lyr. 7mos.
12-4
lyr. 8mos.
0
Same
Offense age
Later offenses
|_J
1
o
School grade
0
128
cause for the delinquency of the two boys was given as a de­
sire for adventure on the part of W. A., the selected boy,
and an unfit home in the case of R. M . , the club boy.
The
latter was not brought before the Juvenile Bureau again after
he joined the Civitan Boys1-Club.
CASE NUMBER 47
H. B. Selected
J. C. Club
5/5 /38
Illegal entry
12/10/38
7/22/40
Illegal entry
• 4 /17/39
Arson
Fighting
H. B. is a native of California, having lived all his *
life in Long Beach.
J. G. was born in South Dakota and has
lived in Long Beach four'years.
J. G.Ts intelligence quo­
tient is twenty points higher than the eighty-five of H. B.
The reading grades show that H. B. is slightly advanced and
J. G. a little retarded.
However, the arithmetic grades
showed both boys to be retarded.
At the time of the first
offense, the boys were separated in school by one grade and
there was a difference of eight months in their ages.- Both
boys had a church preference and H. B. was a former Boy Scout.
The selected boy came from a normal home, not on relief, and
rated as good economically.
The club boy was from a broken
home, on relief, with a poor economic rating.
The principal
contributing cause for the delinquency of H. B. was a desire
for adventure accompanied by gang activity.
In the case of
1E9
CASE NUMBER 47
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
S . Dakota
Differ
Date of birth
9/22/23
8/26/23
1 month
105
20 points
Intelligence quotient
-85
Mental age
11-4
11-11
7 .months
Test age
13-4
11-5
lyr. llmos
Reading grade
G.P. 5.2
S.
5.0
G.P. 6.8
S.
6.9
Differ
G.P. 7.6
S.
8.0
G.P. 6.3
S.
8.0
Same
School grade
9A
10A
1 grade
Church preference
Protestant
Catholic
Differ
Club activities
Boy Scout
None
Differ
Parents’ marital status
Normal
Separated
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Non-relief
Relief
Differ
Economic status .
Good
Poor
Differ
Siblings
1
1
Same
Eirst offense
5/5/38
12/10/38
7 months
8 months
Same
Arithmetic grade
.
,
Offense age
00
1
^
1
—1
15-4 .
Later offenses
1
1
150
the club boy there was lack of home supervision.
J. G-. was
only cited before the Juvenile Bureau once after h e 'joined
the Givitan Boys1 Club.
CASE NUMBER 48
K. B. Selected
J. E. Club
2/5 /36
Petty theft
10/8 /36
2/10/36
Property destruction
4/2 /36
Runaway
9 /20/37
Peeping Tom
5/16/36
Petty theft
5 /2 /38
Peeping
K. B.
Petty theft
10/28/36 Peeping
Tom
Tom
was born in Oklahoma and has lived in Long Beach
three years.J. E . , the club boy, is
a native of California.
The intelligence quotient of the latter is ten points higher
than that of the selected boy.
Both of them are from broken
homes, on relief, and with a poor economic rating.
the boys is an only child.
Each of
The club boy lives with his
mother, while the selected boy lives with his mother and his
stepfather.
Neither boy had any club affiliations.
K. B.
belonged to a church; J. E. also belonged- but was an inactive
member.
At the time of their first offense, K. B. was in the
8B grade and
J. E. in the 10B.
There was- also a difference
of thirteen months in their ages, the club boy being the
older.
The principal contributing cause for the delinquency
of K. B . , the selected boy, was a desire for adventure ac­
companied by gang activity.
In the case of the club boy,
131
CASE NUMBER 48
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
Oklahoma
California
Differ
Date of birth
9/20/23
4/3/23 ‘
5 months
Intelligence quotient
86
96
10 points
Mental age
10-1
13-4
3yrs. 3mos
Test age
11-10
13-10
2 yrs.
Reading grade
G.P. 4.5
S.
4.6
G.P. --
G.P. 5.8
S.
8.0
G.P. —
School grade'
8B
10B
2 grades
Church preference
Protestant
Protestant
Same
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents’ marital status
Divorced
Divorced
Same
Lives with
Mother
Mother
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Relief
Relief
Same
Economic status
Poor
Poor
Same
Siblings
0
0
Same
First offense
2/10/36
10/8/36
8 months
Offense age
12-5
13-6
lyr. lmo.
Later offenses
3 .
3
Same
Arithmetic grade
----
--- -
132
home conditions and adult influence were significant factors.
After J. E. joined the Civitan Boys’ Club he was not brought
before the Juvenile Bureau again.
CASE NUMBER 49
R. A. Selected
J. G. Club
4/26/39
Petty theft
10/15/39
Petty theft
12/2/39
Petty theft
11/2 /39
Incorrigible
Both boys are natives of California.
There is a dif­
ference of ten points in their intelligence quotients.
At
the time of their first offense, petty theft for both of
them, the boys were separated in school by one semester, the
club boy being in the 7A and R. A. in the 7B grade.
was also a difference of six months in their ages.
belonged to a church.
There
Both boys
R.A. was a member of the Young Men’s
Christian Association, but J. G. did not belong to any group.
The selected boy was from a normal home, on relief, with a
poor economic rating.
The club boy lived with his mother and
stepfather in a non-relief home with a fair economic rating.
The principal contributing cause for the delinquency of the
selected boy was an irresponsible home.
In the case of the
club boy, the contributing factors were stealing for money
and sex curiosity.
J. G. was charged with one offense after
he joined the Civitan Boys’, Club.
133
CASE NUMBER 49
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
California
Same
Date of birth
4/7/26
4/15/26
8 days
Intelligence quotient
82
92
10 points
Mental age
9-10
10 - 1 1 .
lyr. lmo.
Test age
12-0
12-4
4 months
Reading grade
G.P. —
G.P. 4.6
S.
4.7
Arithmetic grade
G.P. —
G.P. 5.7
S.
8.0
School grade
7B
7A
i grade
Church preference
Catholic
Protestant
Differ
Club activities
Y.M.C.A.
None
Differ
Parents* marital status
Normal
Divorced
Differ
Lives with
Parents
Mother
Differ
Parents’ occupation
Relief
Non-relief
Differ
Economic.status
Poor
Fair
Differ
Siblings
3
0
3
First offense
4/26/39
10/15/39
6 months
Offense age
13-0
13-6
6 months
Later offenses
1
1
Same .*
134
CASE NUMBER 50
D. B. Selected
G. D. Club
5/22/37
4/21/36
Unfit home
8/1 /38
D. B. has lived all
Sex
delinquency
Illegal entry
his life in Long Beach.
native of Germany, has resided
in Long
G. D ., a
Beach six years.The
selected boy has an intelligence quotient of 114 and the club
boy one of 98.
D. B. is well advanced in both his reading
and arithmetic grades.
The boys were one grade apart when
they committed their first offense, D. B. being enrolled in
the 7A and G. D. in the 6A grade.
difference in their ages.
The club boy belonged to a church,
while the selected boy did not.
a club.
There was just one year’s
Neither of them belonged to
D. B. came from a broken home, on relief, with a poor
economic rating.
G. D. came from a normal, non-relief home,
with a fair economic standing.
There are three other children
in the family of the selected boy and one other child in the
home of the club boy.
The principal contributing cause for
the delinquency of D. B. was a careless home where the parents
were intoxicated most of the time.
The principal causes for
the delinquencies of the club boy were gang activity and a
desire for adventure.- G. D. has not appeared before the
Juvenile Bureau since he joined the Civitan Boys’ Club.
135
CASE NUMBER 50
Characteristics
Selected
Club
Differences
Birthplace
California
Germany
Differ
Date of birth
4/26/22
3/10/22
1 month
Intelligence quotient
114 '
98
16 points
Mental age
15-3
14-7
8 months
Test age
13-6
15-2
lyr. 8mos
Reading grade
G.P. 10*
S.
8.8
G.P. --
G.P. 10^S.
9.0
G.P. --
School grade
7A
6A
1 grade
Church preference
None
Catholic
Differ
Club activities
None
None
Same
Parents* marital status
F.deceased
Normal
Differ
Lives with
Mother
Parents
Differ
Parents1 occupation
Relief
Non-relief
Differ
Economic status
Poor
Fair
Differ
Siblings
3
1
2
First offense
5/22/37
4/21/36 “
lyr. lmo.
Offense age
15-1
14-1
1 year
Later offenses
0
1
1
Arithmetic grade
---- -
.----
CHAPTER IV
EXTENT AND FORM OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY
IN LONG BEACH
Every boy is a potential criminal.
By nature mischie­
vous, irrepressible, adventurous, he is unchanged through the
passing years.
He was the same in the days of the early
pioneers as he was in the time of the first settlers on the
New England coast.
The very qualities that are admired and
that capture imagination and sympathy are the ones which,
when he lacks the stabilizing and socializing'effects of a
normal home and community environment, lead by easy stages
from petty conflicts to confirmed criminality.
Any approach to the question of juvenile delinquency,
however, demands that causation be studied, and that an ef­
fort be made to discover the means of prevention.
This is
the same process that has been so effective in the fight
against disease.
tion must proceed.
In much the same way, the fight for preven­
The offender is an individual, but only
in a negligible proportion of cases can his own deliberate
choice be regarded as the sole reason for his crime.
No act
of any one person can ever be isolated from its social set­
ting.
All of the factors in a situation must be considered,
if human behavior is to be understood.
137
Background of delinquency and cost.
The American peo­
ple as a whole have been strangely indifferent to the menace
of widespread, organized crime, which as*it is known in this
country today has grown to enormous proportions.
The figures
reflect that ,it annually costs-approximately fifteen billion
dollars.
This means a cost of ten dollars each and every
month of the year for each and every man, woman, and child in
this country.1
For several years Long Beach, like the rest of the
larger cities, has been facing the serious problem of juvenile
delinquency.
From July 1, 1938 to June 30, 1939 there were
6,123 boys and girls who passed through the Juvenile Bureau.
Of this number, 1672 were girls and 4451 boys.
W. L. Butcher2 states that it costs today #440.26 to
maintain an inmate in a penal institution, juvenile or adult,
in -the United States, taking a general average of all the
states in the Union.
On the other hand, it cost $15.00 per
year to give a boy six nights a week instruction through the
instrumentality of recognized boy programs.
Directors of the Wichita Falls, Texas Rotary club, with
city officials, have been making a study of juvenile offenses
^ C. A. To Is on-,- "Youth and Grime," Vital Speeches, 2:
468-72, April 20, 1936.
2 W. L. Butcher, "The Boy Problem," Current History,
50:43-44, July, 1939.
138
in that city.
It has been found that of the 615 boys who
have belonged to the club since May 1930, only five have been
sent to the reformatory, and only forty-one have been brought
before the juvenile officer.
boy in the club for one year.
It costs $6.90 to care for one
A boy sent to a state penal
institution, on the other hand, costs the state about $500 a
year.3
Warden L. E. Lawes states that America’s heaviest bur­
den is her crime bill.
Estimated at over fifteen billion
dollars, it is still out of proportion to her other large ex­
penditures.
I have known over 40,000 men who have been inmates
of various institutions. I can positively state that
over 97 per cent of all these men were at no time
associated with well regulated juvenile groups or
supervised recreation centers. Theirs has been a
story of aimless leisure and unadjusted personalities.4
In New York City alone the cost of crime is .over fifty mil­
lion dollars, a per capita cost of $7.76, while the cost of
organized recreation is only twenty-two cents per capita.
Causative -factors of delinquency in Long Beach.
In
every case of delinquency appearing before the Juvenile
3 J. Montgomery, "Boys Don’t Want to be Criminals,"
Rotarian,.47:38-40, December, 1935.
4 L. E. Lawes, "Insurance Against Crime," Recreation,
26:507, February, 1933..
139
Bureau there are facts which are descriptive of the boy as he
was at the time of that particular appearance.
It is a well
established fact that there is no single cause of juvenile
delinquency.
in childhood.
The foundations of delinquency are usually laid
Many factors may contribute to produce delin­
quency, but the central problem in all cases is, after all,
the delinquent himself.
In an attempt to discover what fac­
tors in a boy’s make-up and in his environment might have a
specific bearing upon his anti-social behavior, a comprehen­
sive picture of the background or the lack of a background
which the delinquent possesses must be obtained.
These facts,
which include such things as age, school and grade, type of
offense, the relation between the age and the type of offense,
the frequency of occurrence, and later offenses are the items
which are treated in this chapter.
Distribution of cases by age.
For the purposes of
this study the cases were divided into fourteen groups: boys
at the age of five years to the age of eighteen years inclu­
sive.
As might be expected, the age group including boys of
ten years or less does not contain many offenders.
This does
not agree with a study made by Fenton^ in 1935 which showed
that in more than half of the cases delinquency had begun at
® Norman Fenton, "The Delinquent Boy and the Correc­
tional School,” Progress Bulletin, 1935, p. 81.
140
the, age of ten years.
Table I shows that there are only six per cent of the
total in this category.
However, the city of Long Beach for 1
the same ages was 16.7 per cent.
The selected group con­
tained four per cent, while the club group showed eight per
cent of the boys as being ten years of age or under.
It
would be safe to say that from these figures the child of ten
years is not more prone to delinquency than an older child.
It would be quite possible for a child to be a problem to his
parents and a nuisance to the neighbors, being in many re­
spects a predelinquent, without appearing in a juvenile court.
The Children’s Bureau states that twenty-five per cent came
into the juvenile court when they were still under twelve
years.
Apparently, therefore, the maladjustment had been es­
tablished at a fairly early age in a large percentage of the
cases.6
William B. Forbush in his book Boy Problem, says:
We hesitate whether to be afraid of or alarmed for
this creature who has become endowed with the passions
and independence of manhood while still a child in
foresight and judgment. He rushes now into so many
crazy plans and harmful deeds.?
A Study of 751 Cases, United States Department of
Labor, Publication No. 230 (Washington, D. C.: Children’s
Bureau, 1936), p. 35.
7 William B. Forbush, Boy Problem (Boston: Pilgrim
Press, 1913), p. 3.
141
TABLE I
DISTRIBUTION OF CHRONOLOGICAL AGES FOR THE "CLUB”
AND "SELECTED” GROUPS OF PROBLEM BOYS. ■
AND FOR ALL DELINQUENT BOYS
IN LONG BEACH
Age
Selected
Club
Total
City
City
Percentage
1
0
1
1
1
2
7
21
18
24
11
10
3
0
67
62
86
84
109
185
196
200
329
504
614
630
530
93
1.8
1.7
2.3
2.3
2.9
5.1
5.2
5.4
8.9
13.6
16.6
17.1
14.3
2.5
100
3689
100.0
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
0
0
0
1
0
1
3
9
11
13
5
5
2
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
4
12
7
11
6'
5
1
0
Total
50
50
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: one club
boy, or two per cent of the group, and 67 boys in.Long Beach,
or 1.8 per cent, were 5 years of age.
142
Swift states that a period of semi-criminality is normal for
all boys who- are healthy.
insanity.
Hall calls it an age of temporary
This age, particularly that from twelve to sixteen,
is by all odds the most critical and difficult to deal with
in all childhood.
Table I also shows that the age of highest incidence
of delinquency was fourteen years, and that twenty-four boys
were at age fourteen when they committed their first offense.
The same table indicates, further, that the ages of twelve,
thirteen, and fourteen contain the largest number of delin­
quents, for in this age span are found sixty-three of the one
hundred delinquent boys.
The ages from five to eleven inclu­
sive have thirteen boys and the four age groups of fifteen to
eighteen show twenty-four of the one hundred problem boys.
The mean age was twelve years and two months.
There are as
many boys in the age group at the fourteen year level as there
are in the fifteen to seventeen year group.
It is also shown
that there are almost twice as many delinquents in any one of
the three age groups of twelve to fourteen years as there are
for the age group of eleven and under.
The percentage for
the city of Long Beach does not follow the same pattern,
since the age span of fourteen to seventeen years represents'
61.83 per cent of the cases.
A very sudden drop in the number of cases of juvenile
delinquency among boys after the sixteen year level is shown
143
in Table I.
The city records show a decline from 530 boys of
seventeen years to 93 boy’
s who are eighteen years of age, a
drop from 14.39 per cent to 2.53 per- cent.
The two groups of
delinquent boys committed their first offense at an earlier
age than'did those based on the city records as a whole.
The
selected group were two years older than' the boys in the club
group; twenty-six per cent committed their first crime at
fourteen years of age, while twenty-four per cent committed
their first offense at the age of twelve years.
The total
for the city shows that 17,10 per cent committed juvenile of­
fenses at the age of sixteen years.
Most of the potential criminals must be reached before
sixteen, advocate Big Brothers.
Fourteen is the most effec­
tive age of contact and good work can be done as early as
nine.
Let a capable Big Brother get onto a case before a way­
ward lad has tasted prison and association with confirmed
criminals and the chances are ninety-seven per cent that he
will be guided into good citizenship.
Let the boy be com­
mitted and the chances are seventy-five per cent that he will
graduate into crime.
Figure reformatory cost at $500 and Big
Brother at $20 and the' saving of $480 per boy ought to inter­
est
anyone.8
This study shows that the need in Long Beach is
8 F. McDermott, "When a Feller Needs a Friend,"
Readers Digest, 29:32, September, 1936.
144
to reach the boys in the age group of twelve to sixteen
years inclusive.
Grade placement.
Table'll gives the grade placement
of the one hundred problem boys included in the study.
This
table would indicate~that the Junior high school represents
the highest point in the curve of maladjustment.
It may,
therefore, be concluded that an intelligent effort should be
made to study the causes of maladjustment during the forma­
tive and adolescent years of.the junior high school period
and that these corrective measures should extend into the
upper elementary grades.
Table II indicates that :the school
grade in which the highest incidence occurred was the seventh.
That is to say that more boys were found delinquent in the
first year of junior high school than in any other grade from
the first to the twelfth.
The city-wide records show that
the ninth grade was the highest.
In other words, the largest
percentage of delinquency falls in the junior high school
level.
From the seventh grade thirty boys were found to be
delinquent and twenty-nine from the eighth grade. ' The ninth
grade contained twelve delinquent boys.
The junior high
school level, or the seventh, eighth, and ninth grades, con­
tained seventy-one delinquent boys out of the one.hundred
problem cases.
In the two groups under consideration in this study
TABLE II
DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES FOR THE "CLUB" AND
"SELECTED" GROUPS OF 100 PROBLEM BOYS ‘
AND FOR ALL DELINQUENT BOYS
IN LONG BEACH
Grade
City
Percentage
Selected
Club
Total
City
1
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
i.e.
0
1
1
2
13
16
9
6
2
0
0
1
1
1
6
17
13
3
8
0
0
0
1
2
2
8
, 30
29
12.
14
2
0
0
68
95
198
186
253
414
593
566
307
164
33
2.3
3.3
6.8
6.4
8.7
14.3
20.6
19.6
10.6
5.7
1.1
Total
50
50
100
2877
100.0
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: one club
boy, or two per cent of this study, and 68 boys in Long
Beach, or 2.3 per cent of the total juvenile delinquency,were
in the first grade.
146
the eighth grade of the selected group contained thirty-two
per cent and the seventh grade of the club group had the
highest percentage, that of thirty-four per cent.
The
seventh and eighth grades of the selected group show fiftyeight per.cent of the delinquents.
The same two grades of
the club group comprise sixty per cent of the problem cases.
Table-II presents a sudden increase in delinquency from the
sixth to the seventh grade, an increase from eight to thirty
per cent.
The seventh to the tenth grades inclusive embody
eighty-five per cent of the delinquents of this study.
Only
two per cent of the total delinquency follows the tenth
grade, while thirteen per cent of the delinquency is com­
mitted before the seventh grade.
Type of offense.
The first step in understanding or
solving the problem which the delinquent himself presents is
to know with exactitude the types of delinquency which have
been manifested.
Not only this, but the frequency of repe­
tition and its relation to the other offenses.
To know what
the delinquent does is not enough, for the time of the ear­
liest manifestations, of repetitions of offenses, and the
types are very important.
In many cases' the juvenile offender was brought before
the juvenile bureau after having been guilty of more than one
offense.
In the study of these offenses it is not unusual to
find more offenses than there are cases represented.
As is
shown in Table III, the offense which was found to be most
frequent ’was petty.theft, with twenty-six per cent of the
number of offenses falling into this group, followed in order
by malicious mischief 10.7 per cent, burglary 9.3 per cent,
illegal entry 7.6 per cent, sex delinquency 6.9 per cent,
runaway 5.5 per cent, property destruction 4.1 per cent,
nuisance 4.1 per cent, intoxication 3.7 per cent, grand theft
2.7 per cent, disturbing the peace and incorrigible 2.0 per
cent, peeping Tom 1.7 per cent, unfit home 1.4 per cent, car­
rying gun, fighting, lewd conduct, prowling, and traffic of­
fenses 1.0 per cent, assault .6 per cent, and arson, loitering,
truancy, and undesirable associates .3 per cent.
Table III
also shows that of the twenty-five types of offenses committed
by the one hundred delinquents of this study, those in the
selected group did not commit any of the following offenses:
arson, fighting, or lewd conduct, while the club group did not
commit any of the following: assault, loitering, traffic,
truancy, or undesirable associates.
The one hundred boys of this study committed 288 of­
fenses for which they were taken before the juvenile bureau.
The selected group committed 137, while the club group com­
mitted 151 offenses.
As is evident in Table III, both of the
groups under study and the total city records show that the
type of offense with the greatest frequency of occurrence is
.148
TABLE III
FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE FOR TWENTY-FIVE TYPES
OF OFFENSES COMMITTED BY 100 PROBLEM BOYS
137 99.4
•6
.3
1
2
•6
27 9.3
3 1.0
6 2.0
3 1.0
8 2.7
22 7.6
6 2.0
11 3.7
3 1.0
.3
1
31 10.7
12 4.1
5 1.7
85 26.0
12 4.1
•6
2
3 1.0
16 5.5
20 6.9
3 1.0
.3
1
1 ' .3
4 1.4
151 98.7
288 99.5
1
0
18
1
3
3
6
10
2
5
3
0
17
5
3
43
6
1
1
7
15
0
0
0
1
.6
11.8
.6
1.9
1.9
3.9
6.6
1.3
3.3
1.9
11.1
3.3
- 1.9
28.5
3.9
•6
.6
4.6
9.9
•
Total
100 Boys Long Beach
o
S
0
Arson
Assault
2 1.4
Burglary
9 6.6
Carrying gun
2 1.4
Disturbing peace
3 2.1
Fighting
0
Grand theft
2 1.4
Illegal entry
12 8.7
Incorrigible
4 2.8
Intoxication
6 4.3
Lewd conduct
0
Loitering
1
.7
Malicious mischief
14 10.2
Nuisance
7 5.1
Peeping Tom
2 1.4
Petty theft
42 30.6
Property destruction
6 4.3
Purse snatching
1
.7
Prowling
2 1.4
9 6.6
Runaway
Sex delinquent
5 3.6
Traffic
3 2.1
.7
Truancy
1
Undesirable associates 1
.7
Unfit home
3 2.1
Club
No.
%
•
. Selected
No.
o
S'
Offense
50
18
364
23
67
25
22
36
33
37
39
34
703
107
17
849
122
33
25
376
25
21
64
9
182
1.5
.5
11.0
.7
2.0
.7
•6
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.0
21.3
3.2
.5
25.8
3.7
1.0
.7.
11.4
.7
•6
1.9
.2
5.5
3281 99.7
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: for the
offense of arson, selected none, club one, or .6 per cent,
for the 100 juvenile delinquents,.one offense or .3 per cent,
for the City of Long Beach 50 offenses or 1.5 per cent of the
total 3281 offenses committed.
. 149
petty theft: 30.6 per cent in the selected classification,
28.5 per cent for the club, and 25.8 per cent for the city of
Long Beach.
cent.
mitted.
In this the two groups varied by only 2.1 per
Malicious mischief is next in order of offenses com-,
The selected group here shows 10.2 per cent to the
club’s 11.1 per cent.
Third in order is burglary, in which
the selected group is smaller by 5.2 per cent.
The selected
group is again smaller by 6.3 per cent in the number of sex
delinquent cases.
In the total of 288 offenses committed,
sex delinquency places fifth.
The above cases of juvenile
delinquency show the largest differentiation between the two
groups.
The smallest percentage of difference occurs in the
following classifications: the club group for disturbing the
peace is .3 per cent less than the selected group for the
same offense; the selected group is .5 per cent below the
club group for those charged-with being a peeping Tom; prowl­
ing is next in this order, the club group being smaller by .8
per cent than the selected group.
Age and type of offense.
The relation between age and
type of offense may be classified into eight age groups.
Table IV shows those who are ten years of age and younger up
to and including those boys who are seventeen years old.
The
fourteen year olds show the highest total number of offenses
committed.
There were seventy crimes listed among this age
TABLE IV
FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE FOR OFFENSES COMMITTED BY 100 PROBLEM BOYS
AT EACH AGE LEVEL 10 to 17 YEARS OF AGE
A
Offense
0 0
1 0
0 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 4
0 0
0 0
0 3
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
11S
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O'
1
1
0
2
2
0
0
1
0
a
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
IB
S
G
13
C
0 0
0 0
0 5
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
1 ■0
1 0
2 0
0 1
0 0
0 1
1 2
0 0
5 7
1 2
0 0
0 0
2 1
1 6
sr
C
0 0
1 0
2 2
2 0
2 0
0 0
0 0
1 2
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 0
8 2
3 2
0 0
10 10
3 1
0 0
0
, 1
0 1
1 0
E
14
S C
0 0
0 0
3 1
0 1
0 0
0 0
1 2
3 6
1 0
2 1
0 0
0 0
4 1
0 0
1 2
12 10
0 3
0 0
0 0
4 4
1 5
&
15
C &
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
5
0
0
1
2
1
1
0
2
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
0
0
5
0
1
5
0
0
0
1
1
15
C S
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
0
1
0
1
1
5
0
a
0
0
0
17
C T
0
0
5
0
2
0
1
1
0■
1
0
0
1
1
0
6
0
1
1
0
2 .
.
.
0
0
2'
0
0
0
01
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
,0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
150
Arson
Assault
Burglary
Carrying gun
Disturbing peace
Fighting
Grand theft
Illegal entry
Incorrigible
Intoxication
Lewd conduct
Loitering
Malicious mischief
Nuisance
Peeping Tom
Petty theft
Property destruction
Purse snatching
Prowling
Runaway
Sex delinquent
10 &
under
S
C
TABLE IV CONTINUED
G
A
Offense
10 &
under
S
C
11
s
13
12
C
Traffic
Truancy
Undesirable associates
Unfit home
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
1 11
8
6
s
0
0
1
0
E.
C
0
0
0
1
15 28
S
1
0
0
1
14
C
0
0
0
0
36 23
S
1
0
0
1
15
C
0
0
0
0
34 36
S
0
0
0
0
17
16
C
S
0
0
o• 1
0
0
0
1
18 23
C
6
0
0
0
S
C
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17 21 . 8
3
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: one club boy 15 years of age
was charged with arson; one selected boy 10 years^of age or younger was.cited
for assault; one boy 15 years of age committed assault.
151
15S
group.
Twelve petty thefts among the selected group was the
most frequent type of offense, with ten petty thefts for the
club group.
Eight hoys were charged with being runaways,
four from each group.
Nine juveniles committed illegal entry,
three from the selected group and six from the club group.
Five of the club boys of this age level were charged with sex
delinquency as compared to only one boy of the- selected group.
Malicious mischief is next with five offenders, four in the
selected group as compared to one in the club group.
Thirteen year old boys are next with fifty-nine offen­
ses.
Petty theft again is the highest group with a total of
twenty offenses, ten from each of the two groups.
Ten boys
were charged with malicious mischief, eight from the selected
group and only two from the club group.
Table IV also shows
that four boys were charged with burglary, two from each of
the groups.
On the twelve year level, petty theft was the most
frequently occurring offense of the total of forty-three of­
fenses listed.
Seven of these were committed by the club
group as compared to five by the selected group.
Seven boys
were charged with sex delinquency, six from the club group
and only one from the selected group.
Five of the club boys
were cited for burglary.
The fifteen year old boys committed forty-one offenses
as compared to thirty-eight by the sixteen year old boys.
153
In each of the two above mentioned groups, petty thefts were
the most frequently committed offenses, ten by the fifteen
year old level and five by each of the two groups under con­
sideration.
Of the total of thirty-eight offenses for the
sixteen year old boys, eleven were for petty theft, five
charges by the selected group and six by the club group.
All
five of the* burglary offenses were committed by the club
group.
Twelve crimes were committed by those delinquents who
were classified as being ten years of age and under, of which
two of the club group were held for burglary.
The smallest
offending group falls among the seventeen year old boys; the
selected group committed eight offenses as compared to three
for the club group.
Number of offenses.
Table V points out the fact that
out of fifty boys in each of the two groups, only twelve boys
of the selected group were first offenders and that seven
boys from the club group committed only one offense.
In the
largest number of offenses committed, those charged with
three crimes had a total of thirty citations; sixteen boys of
the selected group committed three offenses as compared to
fourteen delinquents of the club group.
Table V further
shows that the greatest number of offenses committed by a
single delinquent boy totaled eleven, one boy of the club
group having eleven charges.
While six offenses was the
154
TABLE V
THE NUMBER OE OFFENSES COMMITTED BY EACH
OF THE 100 PROBLEM BOYS
Number of
Club
Boys
Total boys
Committing
Offenses
Number of
Offenses
Committed
Number of
Selected
Boys
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
9
16
8
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
7
16
14
9
0
0
2
1
0
0
1
19
25
30
17
0
5
2
1
0
0
1
Total
50
50
100
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: 19 boys
had only one offense each; twelve of them were selected and
seven v^ere club boys.
155
largest number committed by a single problem boy of the se­
lected group, five boys of this group committed six offenses
each.
Order of occurrence.
The sequence of offenses as tab­
ulated in Table VI shows petty theft to be the first offense
for twenty-three boys in the selected group and twenty-one in
the club group.
Malicious mischief comes next in the order
of first offenses committed, with ten club boys to a compara­
tive eight in the selected group.
An interesting fact is
pointed out by this table, in that both burglary and sex de­
linquency occurred more frequently among the first offenses
of the club boys than of the selected group.
Petty theft, malicious mischief, illegal entry, bur­
glary, and sex delinquency are the offenses most often con­
sistently repeated by both groups.
Five boys in the club
group were runaways for their first juvenile offense, as com­
pared to four runaways among the selected group.
Later offenses.
Types of later offenses, as shown by
Tables VII and VIII, indicate very clearly that the problem
boys of this study did not repeat the same offense.
The
major type of offenses which were found to have been most
frequently repeated were, for the selected group, petty theft;
while for the club group, petty theft, malicious mischief,
and sex delinquency were repeated.
As is pointed out by
TABLE VI
R A M FOR EACH OFFENSE IN THE ORDER OF ITS SEQUENCE
Offense
_ _ _Club_______________
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 Total
0
2
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
9
2
1
0
5
0
0
0
5
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
o■0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1
0
1
0
18
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
4
2
3
0
1
1
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
2
12
4
6
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
2
2
2
2
1
1
0
0
1
0
2
4
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1'
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
6
10
2
5
3
0
8 3
3 1
0 1
23 12
3
2
1
2
0
0
0
5
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
7
2
42
10 6
1 0
0 1
21 12
0
3
1
7
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
5
3
43
2
2
1
0
1
0
6
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
6
0
1
4
0
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
9
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
7
R
,
■
156
Arson
Assault
Burglary
Carrying gun
Disturbing
peace
Fighting
Grand theft
Illegal entry
Incorrigible
Intoxication
Lewd conduct
Loitering
Malicious
mischief
Nuisance
Peeping Tom
Petty theft
Property
destruction
Purse
snatching
Prowling
Runaway
1
Selected
2. 3 4 5 6 Total
TABLE VI CONTINUED
Offense
Sez delinquent
Traffic
Truancy
Undesirable
associates
Unfit home
Total
1
2
Selected
3 4 5 6 Total
0
0
0
2
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50 38 28 13 .5
1
2
3
4
5
6
Club
7 8
9 10 11
fotal
5
3
1
3
0
0
6
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
1
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
50 43 27 13
5
4
4
2
1
1
1
151
3 137
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: one selected boy and five club
boys committed burglary as their first offense. Burglary was the second offense
for three selected boys and five club boys. Three selected boys were charged
with burglary for their third offense and also three of the club group. The
total number of burglary offenses for the selected group was nine, while there
was a total of eighteen burglary offenses for the club group.
157
TABLE 711
REPETITION OF FIRST OFFENSE COMMITTED AT A LATER DATE B7.THE SAME DELINQUENT BOY.
Case
No.
59
93
Offense
Burglary
Illegal entry
67
Malicious
mischief
3 Petty theft
tt .
tt
17
tt
ft
23
tt
ft
31
tt
tt
53
Selected
Group
first Date Later Date
10/85/37
5 /5 /38
5 /31/38
8 /20/38
5 /12/37
12/8 /37
11/21/38
4 /29/39
11/2 /37
7 /22/40
[5
17
9
1
1
5
6
/11/38
/17/38
/30/39
/9 /39
/6 /38
/9 /39
/I /39
Case
No.
Offense
Club
Group
First Date Later Date
Burglary
12/2 /34
6 /6 /37
48
10
Grand theft
Malicious
mischief
Petty theft
9 /29/35
11/25/38
7 /23/35
10/17/35
10/17/35
4 /I /35
6 /30/36
12/24/36
12/8 /38
4 /22/36
10/25/35
9 /6 /37
9 /7 /35
5 /10/37
[7 /28/37
5 /5 /38
7 /3 /40
9 /16/37
10/5 /37
10/21/34
4 /18/36
9 /14/37
f4 /16/38
10/15/39
14
18
26
30
44
tt
rt
n
tt
tt
tt
tt
tt
_
61
71
73
75
tt
tt
tt
Tt
ft
tt
tt
ft
95
97
57
tt
tt
tt
tt
Runaway
9
3
8
3
/l /38
/20/39
/18/37
/29/39
2 /5 /36
4 /26/39
1 /19/39
11/3 /38
5 /20/39
10/2 /37
|4 /2 /39
(6 /8 /40
5 /16/36
12/2 /39
4 /6 /39
90
42
32
86
n
tt
Runaway
Sex
delinquency
tt
n
158
34
159
" TABLE VIII
A COMPARISON OF FIRST OFFENSE AND DATE
WITH LATER OFFENSES AND THEIR DATES
FOR 81. PROBLEM BOYS
PART I: SELECTED OROUP OF 38 BOYS
Case
No.
19
59
93
81
29
41
First Offense .
Assault
Burglary
Illegal entry
Incorrigible
Malicious
mischief
Malicious
mischief
Date
Later Offenses
4 /8 /38
2
Petty theft
7 /20/38
2
Burglary and
Intoxication
11/2 /37
2
Illegal entry
7 /22/40
2
3
Illegal entry
Purse
snatching
9 /20/37
2 /8 /39
2
3
Illegal entry
Grand theft
12/8 /37
10/15/38
2
Sex
delinquency
Grand theft
5 /27/37
8 /15/39
10/25/37
5 /5 /38
8 /10/37
1 /16/35
9 /2 /37
3
67
Malicious
mischief
Date
5 /31/38
2
3
Malicious
mischief
Malicious
mischief
6 /11/38
7 /17/39
160
TABLE VIII CONTINUED
Case
No.
77
First Offense
Malicious
mischief
Date
Later Offenses
2 /5 /40
2
3
4
5
79
Malicious
mischief
Malicious
mischief
Malicious
mischief
3
4
47
Nuisance
Nuisance
Illegal entry
Intoxication
Runaway
Runaway
11/22/38
11/10/39
1 /23/40
7 /l /40
3 /5
/40
4/6
/40
Traffic
Illegal entry
and petty theft
11/10/38
3 /10/39
Disturbing
peace
Traffic
Petty theft
4 /8 /38
11/22/39
12/28/39
Property
destruction
4 /29/37
Intoxication
3 /25/39
3 /28/38
2
37
2 /7 /40
2 /28/40
10/10/38
2
3
87
Illegal entry
Petty theft
Disturbing
peace
Sex
delinquency
11/26/37
2
3
4
5
83
Date
4 /26/37
9 /10/38
2
161
TABLE VIII CONTINUED
Case
No.
69
First Offense
Nuisance
Date
Later Offenses
6 /23/36
2
4
Malicious
mischief
Illegal entry
and property
destruction
Carrying gun
7 /15/38
8 /17/38
2
3
4
Intoxication
Burglary
Petty theft
1/28/39
5/7 /39
9/30/39
2
Runaway
5 /7 /40
2
3
4
5
6
Peeping Tom
Peeping Tom
Petty theft
Nuisance
Sex
delinquency
5
6
1
1
2
3
Petty theft
Incorrigible
1 /6 /38
5 /7 /38
2
3
Truancy
Incorrigible
3 /15/39
10/24/39
2
3
4
5
6
Petty theft
Loitering
Intoxication
Traffic
Burglary
5 /9 /39
11/30/39
12/31/39
3 /Q /40
10/14/40
3
3
11
17
23
25
31
Petty theft
Petty theft
Petty theft
Petty theft
Petty theft
Petty theft
Date
11/7 /36
8 /20/38
4 /6 /40
5 /12/37
/26/38
/3 /38
/9 /39
/29/39
4 /17/39
12/8 /37
12/5 /36
11/21/38
162
TABLE VIII CONTINUED
Case
N o . . First Offense
35
Petty theft
Date
Later Offenses
6 /IS/37
2
3
45
Petty theft
61
63
Petty theft
Petty theft
73
Petty theft
Petty theft
2 /15/38
2 /24/36
6
2
3
4
Prowling
Petty theft
Illegal entry
5 /30/39
6 /1/39
6 /3 /39
2
Petty theft
11/3 /38
2
4
Sex
delinquency
Malicious
mischief
Carrying gun
8 /3 /37
8 /10/37
2
3
Petty theft
Intoxication
5 /20/39
3 /15/40
10/7 /36
10/15/36
2 /8 /37
6 /13/39
4 /29/39
9 /I /38
6 /15/37
3
71
8 /20/37
Burglary
Sex •
delinquent
Incorrigible
Property
destruction
Burglary
4
5
Petty theft
Malicious
mischief
Property
destruction
11/27/35
2
3
53
Date
7 /27/37
3 /20/39
8 /18/37
2 ■Petty theft.
3 Illegal entry
4 Illegal entry
10/2 /37
9 /6 /38
9 /17/38
163
TABLE VIII CONTINUED
Case
No. , First Offense
75
95
97
5
39
85
51
57
27
Petty theft
Petty theft
Petty theft
Property
destruction
Property
destruction
Prowling
Runaway
Runaway
Undesirable
associates
Date
Later Offenses
Date
3 /29/39
2
3
4
Petty theft
Burglary
Petty theft
4 /2 /39
10/30/39
6 /8 /40
2
3
4
Property
destruction
Runawa y
Petty theft
2 /10/36
4 /2 /36
5 /16/36
2
Petty theft
12/2 /39
2
3
Nuisance
Intoxication
4 /22/39
7 /22/39
2
Burglary
9 /26/39
2
3
Petty theft
Nuisance
5 /28/37
9 /20/37
2
3
Petty theft
Malicious
mischief
6 /20/38
2
Runaway
4 /6 /39
2
Disturbing
peace
Burglary
11/1 /37
10/21/39
2 /5 /36
4 /26/39
5 /3 /39
9 /14/35
1 /15/37
3 /14/38
7 /4 /39
1 /19/39
12/22/36
3
164
TABLE VIII CONTINUED
Case
No. First Offense
1
65
Unfit- home
Unfit home
Date
Later Offenses
Date
1 /5 /37
2
3
Petty theft
Nuisance
5 /4 /37
9 /2 /38
2
3
Petty theft
Illegal entry
1 /27/39
7 /17/40
1 /S2/38
165
TABLE VIII CONTINUED
PART II: CLUB GROUP OF 43 BOYS
Case
No. First Offense
94
34
Arson
Burglary
Later Offenses
Date
12/10/38
2
Fighting
4 /17/39
2
3
4
5
6
7
Petty theft
Petty theft
Burglary
Runaway
Intoxication
Malicious
mischief
Intoxication
1
1
6
S
5
8 /20/38
9 /15/38
3
Sex
delinquency
Prowling
3 /20/40
7 /I /40
2
3
Illegal entry
Illegal entry
11/16/36
12/19/38
2
3
Malicious
mischief
Grand theft
6 /10/38
e /SO/38
2
3
Grand theft
Petty theft
11/25/38
3 /15/39
2
3
Petty theft
Property■
destruction
10/15/39
12/3 /34
8
50
Burglary
82
48
88
Burglary
Fighting
Grand theft
Intoxication
/9 /35
/12/35
/6 /37
/7 /38
/I6/38
1 /11/40
2
72
Date
7 /30/36
5 /21/38
9 /29/38
7 /6 /38
1 /I /40
166
TABLE V I I I CONTINUED
Case
No. First Offense
6
8
10
12
54
56
76
Malicious
mischief
Malicious
mischief
Malicious
mischief
Malicious
mischief
Malicious
mischief
Malicious
mischief
Malicious
mischief
Date
Later Offenses
Date
7 /23/35
2 ■Malicious
mischief
3 Petty theft
4 Lewd conduct
4 /22/36
4 /27/36
11/19/36
2
3
Burglary
Nuisance
8 /10/36
2 /23/39
2
3
Sex
delinquency
Burglary
4 /22/36
4 /27/36
2
Petty theft
8 /15/38
2
3
4
Malicious
mischief
and Gambling
Incorrigible
Petty theft
4 /16/38
4 /18/38
8 /6 /38
2
Fighting
10/31/38
2
Petty theft
10/6 /38
4 /S2/36
7 /23/35
7 /24/38
4 /4 /38
6 /30/38
9 /24/37
167
TABLE VIII CONTINUED
Case
No. First Offense
84
Malicious
mischief
4
14
Nuisance
Petty theft
Petty theft
Date
2
3
Carrying gun
Illegal entry
4 /6 /39
8 /24/39
2
Burglary
10/19/36
2
Sex
delinquency
1 /25/38
4 /4 /38
*
2
Later Offenses
Date
8 /10/36
6 /24/37
10/17/35
2
3
4
5
18
Petty theft
24
Petty theft
Petty theft
2 /20/37
10/25/35
9 /6 /37
4 /5 /38
Malicious
mischief
9 /24/38
2
Intoxication
5 /27/39
2
Sex
delinquency
Nuisance
5 /12/37
5 /27/37
9 /23/38
2
22
2 /19/37
Sex
delinquency
Petty theft
Nuisance
3
4
Petty theft
10/25/35
2 /18/37
10/17/35
2
20
Petty theft
Burglary
Sex
delinquency
Property
destruction
4 /28/37
5 /27/36
3
168
TABLE VIII CONTINUED
Case
No. First Offense
26
50
40
44
Petty theft
Petty theft
Petty theft
Petty theft
Later Offenses
Date
4 /I /35
2
3
4
Burglary
Petty theft
Burglary
4 /2 /35
9 /? /35
9 /10/35
2
3
Petty theft
Illegal entry
5 /10/37
3 /20/38
2
Sex
delinquency
4 /9 /38
6 /30/36
10/28/37
12/24/36
2
3
4
Petty theft
Lewd conduct
Property
destruction
Lewd conduct
Property
destruction
Petty theft
Illegal entry
Illegal entry
Property
destruction
Burglary
2 /15/39
7 /I /40
2
3
Burglary
Burglary
10/30/37
4 /16/38
2
Disturbing
peace
Sex.
delinquency
5 /16/37
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
60
62
Petty theft
Petty theft
Date
7 /28/37
9 /16/37
10/17/37
2 /11/38
4 /25/38
5 /5 /38
11/25/38
1 /4 /39
10/16/36
4 /24/36
3
6 /9 /38
169
TABLE VIII CONTINUED
Case
No. First Offense
64
Petty theft
Date
Later Offenses
2 /14/35
2
66
70
78
90
Petty theft
Petty theft
Petty theft
Petty theft
Malicious
mischief
2 /20/40
2
3
Burglary
Intoxication
3 /27/37
8 /26/38
2
3
Grand theft
Nuisance
5 /4 /36
10/19/36
2
Property
destruction
10/15/39
9 /22/36
3 /13/36
3 /21/38
12/8 /38
2
4
Disturbing
peace
Disturbing
peace
Petty theft
11/16/39
'7 /3 /40
2
3
4
Peeping Tom
Peeping Tom
Peeping Tom
10/28/36
9 /21/37
5 /2 /38
2
Incorrigible
11/2 /39
2
3
4
5
Petty theft
Petty theft
Burglary
Sex
delinquency
Burglary
Purse
snatching
2 /26/38
6 /15/38
2 /20/39
3
96
98
16
Petty theft
Petty theft
Runaway
Date
3 /22/39
10/8 /36
10/15/39
2 /18/37
6
7
2 /20/39
2 /21/39
3 /27/39
170
TABLE VIII CONTINUED
Case
No. First Offense
42
46
68
80
32
Runaway
Runaway
Runaway
Runaway
Sex
delinquency
Later Offenses
Date
9 /16/37
2
3
4
Runaway
Petty theft
Grand theft
10/5 /37
12/21/37
3 /15/38
2
Petty theft
11/29/38
2
Petty theft
8 /30/38
2
Petty theft
6 /6 /38
2
Malicious
mischief
Grand theft
Sex
delinquency
4 /30/36
1 /28/37
10/30/36
8 /2 /38
1 /30/38
10/21/34
3
4
86
Sex
delinquency
5
6
7
Sex
delinquency
9 /14/37
4 /18/36
2
3
4
100
Date
Petty theft
Illegal entry
Sex
delinquency
Illegal entry
Illegal entry
Sex
delinquency
9 /12/37
10/27/37
4 /16/38
2 /8 /39
7 /21/39
10/15/39
4 /21/36
2
Illegal entry
8 /I /38
. NOTE: This table is to be read as follows: Case No.19,
a selected boy, was charged with two offenses, assault on
4/8/38 and petty theft on 7/20/38.
171
TABLE IX
A COMPARISON OF FIRST OFFENSE WITH LATER
OFFENSES WHICH.WERE OF A DIFFERENT
TYPE THAN THE FIRST OFFENSE
FOR 13 JUVENILE DELINQUENTS■
PART I: SELECTED GROUP OF- 4 BOYS
Case
No. First Offense
17
45
73
79
Petty theft
Petty theft
Petty theft
Malicious
mischief
Date
Repeated Offense
Date
5 /12/37
Peeping Tom
Peeping Tom
5 /26/38
6 /3 /38
Burglary
Burglary
2 /24/36
6 /13/38
Illegal entry
Illegal entry
9 /6 /38
9 /17/38
Runaway
Runaway
1 /23/40
7 /l /40
11/27/35
8 /18/37
11/26/37
172
TABLE IX CONTINUED
.PART II: CLUB GROUP OF 9 BOYS
Case
No. First Offense
16
26
34
44
60
72
Runaway
Petty theft
Burglary
Petty theft
Petty theft
Burglary
Date
Repeated Offense
Date
2 /18/37
Petty theft
Petty theft
Burglary
Burglary
2
6
2
.2
Burglary
Burglary
4 /2 /35
9 /10/35
Petty theft
Petty theft
Intoxication
Intoxication
1
1
5
9
Lewd (conduct
Lewd conduct
Property
destruction
Property
destruction
Property
destruction
Illegal entry
Illegal entry
9 /16/37
2 /11/38
4 /25/38
Burglary
Burglary
10/30/37
4 /16/38
Illegal entry
Illegal entry
11/16/36
12/19/38
/26/38
/13/38
/20/39
/21/39
4 /I /35
12/3 /34
/9 /35
/12/35
/16/38
/15/38
12/24/36
10/16/37
2 /IS/39
1 /25/38
1 /4 /39
10/16/36
7 /30/36
173
TABLE IX CONTINUED
Case
No. First Offense
86
90
96
Sex
delinquent
Petty theft
Petty theft
Date
Repeated Offense
Date
4 /18/36
Illegal entry
Illegal entry
Illegal entry
10/22/37
2 /8 /39
7 /21/39
Disturbing
peace
Disturbing
peace
3 /22/39
11/16/39
Peeping Tom
Peeping Tom
Peeping Tom
10/28/36
9 /28/37
5 /2 /38
12/8 /38
18/8 /36
NOTE: This table is to be
a selected boy, was charged with
offense. He committed two other
were different from the original
read as follows: Case No.17,
petty theft as his first
identical offenses which
offense.
174
Table VII, twenty-eight of the one hundred juvenile delin­
quents later repeated the original offense.
Fifteen boys of
the selected group and thirteen of the club group repeated
their first offense at a later date.
Two boys of each group
were arrested a third time for the original offense.
One boy
of the selected group was charged three times with malicious
mischief and one delinquent of the same group was cited a
third time on the charge of petty theft.
One boy of the club
group repeated petty theft three times and one delinquent of
the club group was arrested three times for sex delinquency.
In Table IX a comparison is made between the first offense
and later offenses of a different type which were repeated by
thirteen juvenile delinquents.
Summary.
A study of juvenile delinquency demands that
causation be considered.
The writer attempted to discover
some of the factors in a boy’s make-up which have a specific
bearing upon his behavior.
These factors which were covered
in this chapter included: age, school grade, type of offense,
the relation between the age and the type of offense, the
frequency of occurrence, and later offenses.
The age of highest incidence of delinquency was four­
teen years.
The ages of twelve, thirteen, and fourteen con­
tain the largest number of delinquents.
Sixty-six per cent
of the selected group come within this age span, as compared
175
to sixty per cent,of the club; twenty per cent of the selected
group were eleven years of age or less, as compared to sixteen
per cent of the club group.
The age span of fifteen to eigh­
teen years contains exactly twenty-four per cent for each
group.
The junior high school represents the highest point in
the curve of maladjustment.
The selected group shows seventy-
six per cent of the delinquency to be in the junior high
school, with the greatest number falling in the eighth grade,
the rank for this grade being thirty-two per cent.
The larg­
est group of the club was thirty-four per cent for the seventh
grade.
The club was sixty-six per cent or ten per cent less
than the selected group for the junior high school.
Of the
twenty-five different types of offenses committed, the major
ones were petty theft, malicious mischief, burglary, sex de­
linquency, runaway, and illegal entry.
The total of eighty-
five cases of petty theft were equally divided with forty-two
committed by the selected group and forty-three by the club
group.
Similarly, with malicious mischief fourteen cases
were reported for the selected group as compared to seventeen
for the club.
The club group committed 5.2 per cent more
cases of burglary than the selected group.
Three times as
many cases of sex delinquency were reported for the club
group as for the selected group.
The two remaining major of­
fenses, runaway and illegal entry, were very close for both
176
groups.
Wine boys of the selected group and seven of the
club group were runaways, while twelve boys of the selected
group were charged with illegal entry and ten of the club
group for the same offense.
The fourteen year old boy shows the highest total num­
ber of offenses committed, there being seventy crimes for
this age.
Thirteen year old boys committed fifty-nine of­
fenses and the twelve year old group was charged with fortythree offenses.
The fifteen year old group committed forty-
one offenses of the total of 288 for both groups in this
study.
The types of later offenses committed do not follow
any set pattern, as Tables VII and VIII reveal only twentyeight of the one hundred juvenile delinquents repeated the
same offense at some later date.
Of this group, fifteen of
the selected group and thirteen of the club group repeated
their first offense at a later date.
CHAPTER V
THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE PERSONAL FACTORS
.TO JUVENILE DELINQUENCY
The purpose of this chapter was to discuss the rela­
tionship of the personal factors to juvenile delinquency.
This was a study of the marital status of parents, home and
type of offense, economic conditions of the home, and the
size of the family.
Also included in this chapter was the
educational status of the child.
With respect to this phase
of the study, the writer presents seven tables.
Table X shows the. marital status of the parents of the
one hundred problem boys.
Table XI gives a comparison of the
type of offense for those from normal homes and those from
broken homes.
Table XII shows the economic status of the
families of the group under investigation, whether relief or
non-relief.
Table XIII gives a comparison of the type of
offense for those from homes on relief and those from homes
not on relief.
Table XIV shows the classification of the
economic status of the parents of the one hundred juvenile
delinquents.
Table XV presents the size of the families of
the two groups under consideration.
Table XVI gives the in­
telligence quotient distribution of the one hundred delin­
quent boys.
Finally, Table XVII shows the place of birth of
the boys of this study.
178
Home environment.
To obtain an entirely accurate pic­
ture of the home and its relationship to the delinquent it
would be necessary to have complete information available re­
garding every element in the situation which had any influ­
ence whatever on the behavior of the boy.
Such a study was
beyond the scope of this investigation, but some of the in­
formation was available.
There was no question about the broken home when there
was divorce, desertion, or separation.
Death of either par­
ent or both would also produce a broken home.
In the broader
sense all parental relations except "lives with parents" were
examples of broken homes.
The presence or absence of parents
in the home is regarded as the most important single environ­
mental factor in the life of the child. 3Glueck and Glueck2 call attention to the frequent ob­
servations by research workers in criminology of the large
proportion of broken homes among the families of delinquents.
Home environment is very capably summed up in this
statement from-the White House Conference, "for every child a
home and that love and security a home provides; and for that
^ B. B. Beard, Juvenile Probation (Boston: American
Book Company, 1934), p . 2b.
o
Sheldon Glueck and Eleanor Glueck, 1000 Juvenile
Delinquents (Boston: Harvard University Press, 1931), p. 75.
179
child who must receive foster care, the nearest substitute
for his own home."^
Among the familiar contributing factors to delinquency
are unhappy homes broken by the death, desertion, separation
or divorce of the parents.
Homes in which lack of affection
and harmony exists between parents and other serious emo­
tional problems of adults make it impossible to satisfy the
child’s fundamental needs for security and development.
The
broken home has been defined for the purpose of this study
as any home from which one or both parents of the child are
absent.
Marital status of parents.
It is apparent from a
study of Table X that just slightly less than fifty per cent
of the homes from which these delinquent boys came, forty-nine
per cent to be exact, were normally constituted.
The table,
taken as a whole, undoubtedly indicates that the breaking up
of a home, from whatever cause, usually results in harm to the
children.
However, there is not indicated as high a percent­
age of delinquency from broken homes, as compared with those
normally constituted, as some authorities lead one to expect.
The percentage of delinquents from broken homes according to
3
White House Conference, Address and Abstracts of
Committee Reports (New York: The Century Company, 1§30), p.46.
180
.TABLE X
MARITAL STATUS OE PARENTS OE 100 BOYS
City
City %
49
1999
45 •66
10
IB
1194
27.35
8
10
18
---
—
Mother
deceased
1
1
B
575
13.23
Father
deceased
3
4
7
--
—
Remarried
6
5
11
586
13.47
Orphan
0
1
1
31
.007
50
50
100
4385
99.717
Status
Selected
Club
Normal
30
19
Separated
2
Divorced
Total
Total
—
—
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: thirty
selected boys and nineteen club boys came from normal homes;
45.66 per cent of the juvenile delinquents in Long Beach were
from normal homes.
181
this table was only two per cent higher than was the percent­
age from homes normally constituted.
According to Table X, out of the One hundred cases,
forty-nine per cent came from normally organized homes.
The
next largest classification included those boys whose parents
were divorced, accounting for eighteen per cent of the study.
Homes in which parents were separated accounted for twelve
per cent of the group.
Sub-normal or broken home situations
in which either the father or mother had remarried were repre­
sented in eleven per cent of the cases studied.
These data
would justify the conclusion that in the majority of cases the
selected group of problem boys of this study came from normal
home situations, particularly insofar as the marital status of
the parents was concerned.
As is pointed out by Table X, the club group of the
problem boys included eleven per cent more from broken homes
than those of the selected group.
There is a close similarity
between the two groups in the type of broken homes, as listed,
in all except those from parents who are separated.
With this
type of broken home, the club group is much larger, to be
exact sixteen per cent more of the club group are from homes
of this type.
The majority of the one hundred delinquents
were from broken homes, while forty-nine per cent of the two
groups knew a normal family life according to the broader
meaning of the term "normal."
182
Of all the social institutions or agencies, none can
be so immediately and universally effective as a good home
with intelligent parents.
H. C. Cochran says, "My experience
in the Juvenile Court indicates that in an overwhelming pro­
portion of cases the home is directly or indirectly responsi­
ble for the child’s difficulty.
cent of the cases in court."4
This is true in some 90 per
In the same publication J. D.
Glueck states that, "In almost twenty per cent of the cases,
conditions were so unfavorable that the spouses had been
separated, or had been divorced, or the mother had been de­
serted by the father."5
Further indications that the broken home is one of the
leading contributing factors to juvenile delinquency is shown
in a study of 731 cases made by the Department of Labor which
stated, "over one half of the cases came from homes that had
been broken by death of one or both parents, or by divorce,
separation, or desertion."6
H.
C. Cochran, "The Child and the Law," The Yearboo
of the National Probation Association (New York: The National
Probation Association, 1934), p. 29.
5
Sheldon Glueck, "A Thousand Juvenile Delinquents,"
The Yearbook of the National Probation Association (New York:
The National Probation Association, 1934), p. 67.
^ £-A Study of 751 Cases," Children’s Bureau Publication
No. 230 (Washington, D. C.: United States Department of Labor,
1936), p. 35.
183
The -report of the hoys1 welfare center activities in
Los Angeles for 1925 to 1934 inclusive states that the three
most important contributing conditions from the point of view
of numbers, causing anti-social acts of welfare center boys,
are lack of parental control, broken homes, and bad compan­
ions.
Types of offenses from normal and broken homes.
In
Table XI a comparison is given of types of offenses committed
by boys from normal homes and boys from broken homes.
The
boys of this study committed 288 offenses, 120 of which were
committed by the boys from normal homes, while the boys from
broken homes were charged with 168 juvenile offenses.
The
club boys from broken homes committed 103 of the 288 offenses,
the greatest number of offenses of this study.
Thirty-one
club boys, or thirty per cent, were charged with petty theft;
twelve club boys from normal homes, or 36.1 per cent, were
cited for the same offense.
Exactly the same number of of­
fenses were committed by the selected and club boys of both
normal and broken homes.
One boy of the selected group from
both broken and normal homes was charged with grand theft and
three boys of the club group from normal and three from broken
homes were cited for grand theft.
Three more boys from broken homes were charged with
burglary than those from the normal group.
Within this group,
TABLE XI
A COMPARISON BASED ON 25 TYPES OE 0EEEN3ES COMMITTED BY
100 DELINQUENT BOYS FROM NORMAL .AND BROKEN HOMES
Offense
•
Normal
Arson
Assault
Burglary
Carrying gun.
Disturbing peace
Fighting
Grand theft
Illegal entry
Incorrigible
Intoxication
Lewd conduct
Loitering
Malicious mischief
Nuisance
Peeping Tom
Petty theft
Property
destruction
Purse snatching
Prowling
Runaway
Sex delinquent
0
0
0
1
6
6
0
1
1
1
0
0
3
1
3
4
0
*1
3
2
0
1
0
1
8
5
4
3
0
8
26 12
4
0
2
5
1
1
0
0
1
7
C %
C fo
S
0.
0.
1*3
0.
8*3 12.5
0.
1.3
2.0
1.3
0.
0.
1.3 • 6.2
5.5
6.2
0.
1.3
4.1
4.1
0.
2.0
0.
1.3
6.9 16.6
6.2
5.5
0.
2.7
36.1 25.0
0
1
3
1
2
0
1
8
3
3
0
0
9
3
0
16
i
0
12
1
2
3
3
7
2
3
2
0
9
2
3
31
0.
1.5
4.6
1.5
3.0
0.
1.5
12.3
4.6
4.6
0.
0.
13.8
4.6
0.24.6
.9
0.
11.6
.9
1.9
2.9
2.9
6.7
1.9
2.9
1.9
0.
8.7
1.9
2.9
30.0
2.0
0.
0.
2.0
14.5
2
1
0
4
4
5
1
1
6
8
3.0
1.5
0.
4.1
4.1
4.8
.9
.9
5.8
7.7
S fo
S
Broken
e --grjr
5.5
0.
2.7
6.9
1.3
Total
C
s
BotF
0
2
9
2
3
0’
2
12
4
6
0
1
14
7
2
42
1
0
18
1
3
3
6
10
2
5
3
0
17
5
3
43
1
2
27
3
6
3
8
22
6
11
3
1
31
12
5
85
6
1
2
9
5
6
1
1
7
15
12
2
3
16
20
H
00
TABLE II CONTINUED
Offense
Traffic
Truancy
Undesirable
associates
Unfit home
Total
S
Normal
S fo
C
C
1
1
0
0
1.3
1.3
1
1
0
0
1.3
1.3
72
Broken
B %
C $
s
Total
0
3.0
0.
0.
0.
3
1
0
0
3
1
0.
3.
0.
.9
1
3
0
1
1
4
65 103 100.0 100.0
137
151
288
B
C
0.
0.
2
0
0
0
0.
0.
0
2
0
1
fo
48 100.0 100.0
Both
NOTE: This table should be read as follows : 6 boys of the selected group
and 6 boys of the club group from normal homes were charged with burglary; and 3
boys from the selected group and 12 from the club group from broken homes were
charged with burglary. From normal homes, 72 offenses were committed by the
selected group and 48 b y ,the club group. From broken homes, 65 offenses were
committed by selected boys and 103 by the club boys.
185
however, an equal number, six each from the selected and the
club, were committed by the juvenile delinquents from normal
homes.
For the. problem boys from broken homes twelve, or
four times the number of club boys, were cited for burglary
as compared with three boys from the selected group of juve­
nile delinquents.
More than 7.3 per cent of the boys from
the broken homes committed illegal entry than the delinquent
boys from the normal group.
For those charged with sex de­
linquency, the greatest percentage was among the boys from
normal homes of the club group, in which 14.5 per cent of the
120 offenses were for sex delinquency, as compared with 7.7
per cent for the club boys from broken homes.
Seventy-two
offenses by boys of the selected group were committed by
those from normal homes, as compared to sixty-five for the
selected group from broken homes.
Over twice as many offenses
or 103, were committed by problem boys of the club group from
broken homes, as compared with the forty-eight offenses by
club boys from normal homes.
Occupation and economic status.
Social workers have
found that most young miscreants come from poor homes.7
Pov­
erty sets the stage for child crime and youngsters are often
willing to take any chance to escape into more luxurious
7 Editorial, "Bad Boys: Juvenile Delinquency Stiff
Problem for Courts," Literary Digest, 132:22, July 10, 1937.
187
surroundings.
The economic situation of the home has much
greater bearing upon delinquency than is readily admitted*
Only thirty-three per cent come from moderate or well-to-do
homes, while sixty-six per cent come from poor homes, or
those dependent upon charity.
In other words, from the econ­
omic side, sixty-six per cent of these children have very
little to look forward to.
Many times they have to go hungry.
The ethical standards of these juvenile court wards are no
more than is to be expected from homes of poverty and dis­
tress.
That there is not more "undue friction" coming out of
this environment is a surprising fact.
Care and treatment of
these children seems a social and economic problem of great
significance.8
The occupation of the head of the family determines
the economic situation of the home.
This investigator
learned little about the economic status of the heads of the
families.
The records mentioned the financial condition of a
family as good, fair, or poor; how poor was not explained.
Occasionally a record mentioned a certain occupation for a
family.
On the whole, the records disclosed little concerning
the material possessions of the families of the one hundred
problem boys of this investigation.
8 Kenyon J. Scudder and Kenneth Beam, Who is Delin­
quent? (Los Angeles: Rotary Club of Los Angeles, 1936), p. 6.
188
Table XII presents the occupation, whether relief or
non-relief, and the economic status, under three classifica­
tions of good, fair, or poor, of the parents of the one hun­
dred problem boys of this investigation.
Thirty-five per
cent of the cases were on relief as compared to 23.4 per cent
for the city as a whole.
Sixty-five per cent were employed
by private enterprise, while 3694 eases of juvenile delin­
quency last year in Long Beach had a percentage of 76.6 pri­
vately employed.
In the selected group of problem boys,
twenty-six per cent of their parents were on relief and
seventy-four were non-relief.
Twenty-two per cent more of
the parents of the club group were on relief than the parents
of the selected group.
Table XII also points out that eight­
een per cent less of the parents of the club group were not
on relief.
The economic status of the parents of the juvenile de­
linquents in Long Beach has -been shown in Table XII by group­
ing in three divisions, as good, fair, and poor.
Data was
available for 2835 cases showing*for Long Beach as a whole
16.2 per cent as good; 74.4 per cent as fair; and 9.4 per
cent as poor.
The economic status of the parents of the se­
lected group of delinquents was higher than that of the par­
ents of the club group.
Twelve per cent more of the parents
of the selected group were rated as good; sixteen per cent
more of the same group were rated as fair; while twenty-eight
189
TABLE XII
OCCUPATIONAL AND ECONOMIC STATUS FOR PARENTS OF
100 JUVENILE DELINQUENTS WITH PERCENTAGE
AND TOTAL FOR LONG BEACH
Group
Occupation
Non-relief Relief Total
Economic Status
Good Fair Poor Total
Selected
37
13
50
8
23
19
50
Club
28
22
50
2
15
33
50
65
35
100
10
38
52
100
Long Beach
— 2835
859
3694
461 2107
267
2835
City
Per cent
76.6
23.4
16.2 74.4
9.4
100
Total
100
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: there were
37 families of selected boys and 28 families of club boys
from non-relief homes; there were 13 families of selected
boys and 22 families of club boys from homes on public relief.
Eight selected and two club boys came from homes with a good
economic status.
190
per cent less of the parents of the selected group were rated
i
as poor, showing a very definite higher economic standing for
the parents of the selected group.
Comparing the group of one hundred delinquents under
study in this investigation with problem boys in hong Beach,
Table XII points-out that the parents of this particular
group are much lower in the economic scale than the parents
of the juvenile delinquents as a whole for the city of Long
Beach.
Fifty-two per cent of the parents of this study are
rated as poor, as compared with 9.4 for Long Beach.
Thirty-
eight per cent are rated as fair, as compared with 74.4 per
cent for the city, and 6.2 per cent less of the parents are
given a good rating.
Types of offenses from relief and non-relief. A com1
1"'
"1
—'•
parison of twenty-five types of offenses committed by the one
hundred juvenile delinquents of this study from homes on re­
lief and for those boys from homes not on relief is presented
in Table XIII.
The boys from homes on relief committed one
hundred and nine offenses, thirty-five being committed by the
selected group and over twice as many, or seventy-four, by
the club group.
Seventy more, or a total of one hundred and
seventy-nine were committed by the boys from homes not on re­
lief.
The selected group from homes not on relief committed
one hundred and two offenses, as compared with seventy-seven
TABLE XIII
COMPARISON OE 25 TYPES OE OEEENSES FOR 100 DELINQUENT BOYS FROM
HOMES ON RELIEF AND THOSE FROM HOMES NOT ON RELIEF
Offense
3
Arson
Assault
Burglary
Carrying gun
Disturbing peace
Fighting
Grand theft
Illegal entry
Incorrigible
Intoxication
Lewd conduct
Loitering
Malicious
mischief
Nuisance
Peeping Tom
Petty theft
Property
destruction
Purse snatching
Prowling'
Runaway
Relief
C
3 fo
0 fo
S
Non-relief
0
S fo
C
fo
S"
Total
C
Both
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
4
1
1
0
0
1
0
11
0
0
2
1
5
0
3
3
0
0.
2,8
0.
2,8
0.
0.
0,
11.4
2.8
2.8
0.
0.
1.3
0.
14.8
0.
0.
2.7
1.3
6.7
0.
4.0
4.0
0.
0
1
9
1
3
0
2
8
3
5
0
1
0
0
7
1
3
1
5
5
2
2
0
0
0.
.9
8.8
.9
2.9
0.
1.9
7.8
2.9
4.9
0.
.9
0.
0.
9.0
1.2
3.8
1.2
6.4
6.4
2.5
2.5
0.
0.
0
2
9
2
3
0
2
12
4
6
0
1
-1
0
18
1
3
3
6
10
2
5
3
0
1
2
27
3
6
3
8
22
6
11
3
1
4
2
0
11
7
4
3
20
11.4
5.7
0.
31.4
9.5
5.4
4.
27.0
10
5
2
31
10
1
0
23
9.8
4.9
1.9
30.3
12.9
1.2
0.
29.7
14
7
2
42
17
5
3
43
31
12
5
85
2
1
1
4
4
0
0
3
5.7
2.8
2.8
11.4
5.4
0.
0.
4.0
4
0
1
5
2
1
1
4
3.9
0.
.9
4.9
2.5
1.2
1.2
5.1
6
1
2
9
6
1
1
7
12
2
3
16
191
TABLE XIII CONTINUED
Offense
Sex delinquent
Traffic
Truancy
Undesirable
associates
Unfit home
Total
S
Relief
S fo
C
1
0
0
6
0
0
0
1
0
1
35
Non-relief
C
S fo
fo
S
2.8
0.
0.
8.1
0.
0.
4
3
1
9
0
0
3.9
2.9
.9
0.
2.8
0.
1.3
1
2
0
0
.9
1.9
74 100.0 100.0
102
C
s
Total
C
11.6
0.
o*
5
3
1
15
0
0
20
3
1
0.
0.
1
3
0
.1
1
4
137
151
288
77 100.0 100.0
Both
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: one club boy from a home on
relief was charged with arson; one selected boy from a home on relief was charged
with assault; and one selected boy from a non-relief home was also charged with
assault. There were lo9 offenses committed by boys from homes on relief and 179
offenses committed by boys from non-relief homes.
193
citations for the club group from relief homes.
Eleven of­
fenses, or 31.4 per cent of the offenses for the selected
boys from homes on relief, were for petty theft; while the
club boys from relief homes committed twenty offenses, or
twenty-seven per cent, of the total for that particular
group.
Eleven boys, or 14.5 per cent, from the club group
were cited for burglary and none from the selected group.
From the homes not on relief thirty-one boys, or 30.3
per cent, from the selected group were arrested for petty
theft, as compared with twenty-three boys, or 29.7 per cent,
from the club group.
In the case of burglary from non-relief
homes, Table XIII shows only a difference of .2 per cent.
Grand theft shows the largest comparative difference taken
from both homes on relief and non-relief homes, indicating
that the non-relief group committed seven per cent more of­
fenses than the relief group.
The offense of sex delinquency
was charged against 5.3 per cent more of the club boys on re­
lief than the selected group of boys.
The club boys from
families not on relief committed 7.7 per cent more sex of­
fenses than the selected boys.
Table XIV presents the economic status of the parents
of one hundred problem boys.
These parents are classified
into three economic groups, good, fair, and poor.
one hundred homes 288 offenses were.committed.
From these
Thirty-one,
or 10.8 per cent, were from homes grouped as good.
Of the
194
TABLE XIV
CLASSIFICATION OF THE ECONOMIC STATUS
OF THE PARENTS,OF 100 PROBLEM BOYS
Offense
Good
c
S
S
Fair
C
S
Poor
G
”
Total
Arson
Assault
Burglary
Carrying gun
Disturbing peace
Fighting
Grand theft
Illegal entry
.Incorrigible
Intoxication
Lewd conduct
Loitering
Malicious mischief
Nuisance
Peeping Tom
Petty theft
Property
destruction
Purse snatching
Prowling
Runaway
Sex delinquent
Traffic
Truancy
Undesirable
associates
Unfit home
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
0
3
2
2
11
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
6
1
3
0
1
5
2
4
O'
1
6
2
0
16
0
0
5
0
1
0
3
7
1
1
0
0
4
0
0
12
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
5
2
1
0
0
5
3
0
15
1
0
11
1
2
3
3
3
1
3
3
0
13
5
3
30
1
2
27
3
6
3
8
22
6
11
3
1
31
12
5
85
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
2
2
1
1
0
0
2
8
0
0
2
1.
1
6
£
1
0
5
1
1
5
7
0
0
12
2
2
16
20
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
4
Total
27
4
60
45
50
102
288
NOTE; This table should be read as follows; one seleoted boy and two club boys from families with good economic
rating were charged with burglary; six selected boys .and five
club boys from homes with a fair economic rating were cited
for burglary; and two selected boys and eleven club boys from
homes with a poor economic rating committed burglary.
195
above group, twenty-seven were selected and four were club
boys.
In the second group-of homes, rated.as fair from an
economic standard, there were one hundred and five offenses,
or 36.1 per cent of the total number.
The third or poor
group committed one hundred and fifty-two offenses, or 52.5
per cent.
The selected group was cited for fifty of them, as
compared to twice as many, or one hundred and two offenses,
committed, by the club group.
Eleven of the club boys from
poor homes were charged with burglary and only two boys from
the selected group.
The boys from fair and poor homes were
charged with seven offenses of grand theft.
Six of these of­
fenses were charged to boys from the club group, three being
from poor homes and three from fair.
No runaways from good homes are indicated in Table XIV.
Of the sixteen listed runaways, five were from homes rated as
fair economically, two of these being from the club group and
three among the selected boys.
The remaining eleven cases
came from poor homes with six selected boys and five club
boys.
Sex delinquency was similar to running away, in that
nineteen of the twenty offenses were committed by the fair
and poor groups.
The selected groups in the fair and poor
economic classifications committed two each.
Eight of the
fair group and seven of the poor group were club boys.
Size of families.
Table XV is a study to show the
size of the families of the one hundred problem boys.
The
196.
tabu; x v
SIZE OF FAMILIES OF 100 PROBLEM BOYS
Number
Siblings
Selected
Group
Glub
Group
Total
0
7
5
12
1
17
8
25
2
9
5
14
3
4
6
10
4
4
'17
21
5
1
3
4
6
3
5
8
7
3
0
3
8
1
0
1
9
0
1
1
10
1
0
1
Total
50
50
100
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: seven boys
of the selected group and five club boys had no brothers or
sisters; in seventeen of the selected and eight of the club
families there was one other child.
197
average number of siblings per fami;y for the selected group
was 2.6 and for the club group, 3.2.
one family of ten children.
the group.
The selected group had
This was the largest family of
The club group had a family with nine children.
Seven of the juvenile delinquents from the selected group had
no brothers or sisters.
Five of the problem boys of the club
group were only children.
Intelligence quotients.
Table XVI gives the intelli­
gence quotient distribution for one hundred juvenile delin­
quents.
129.
These cases ranged' from a low of 65 to a high of
In the club group four per cent of the cases were in
the lowest interval, 65-69.
The lowest interval in the se­
lected group, 70-74, contained two per cent of the distribu­
tion.
The boy with the highest intelligence quotient fell in
the interval 120-124 and belonged to the club group.
The se­
lected boy with the highest intelligence quotient was in the
interval 125-129.
In the total number of cases, fifty-six per cent of
the club boys fell in the interval of 75 to 94, showing that
the club group was definitely lower in intelligence.
Thirty-
eight per cent of the selected group came within the same
range.
There were also among the selected group fifty-two
per cent that came in the range 95 to 114.
Among the club
boys, thirty per cent of the distribution fell within the
same range.
198
TABLE XVI
INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT DISTRIBUTION
OF 100 PROBLEM BOYS
I. Q,. Range
Selected
Frequency
Club
Total
125-129
1
0
1
120-124
1
1
2
115-119
2
3
5
110-114
5
2
7
105-109
8
4
12
100-104
6
4
10
95-99
7
4
11
90-94
5
6
11
85-89
4
7
11
80-84
7
10
17
75-79
5
5
8
70-74
1
2
3
65-69 •
0
2
2
50
50
100
Total
NOTE: This table is to be read as follows: the I. Q.
of one selected boy fell in the interval 125-129.
199
Birthplace.
Table XVII records the birthplaces of the
one hundred juvenile delinquents in this investigation.
Forty-eight of the one hundred boys are natives of California.
Of the fifty-two remaining boys, four were born outside of
the United States, one in Canada, one in Alaska, one in Hono­
lulu, and one in G-ermany.
The remainder, or forty-eight boys,
were born in twenty-four different states, the largest number
coming from Oklahoma with a representation of seven boys.
Five boys came from Texas, four from Nebraska, and one each
from Alabama, South Dakota, and Iowa. Eighteen of the se­
lected group were natives of California and thirty-two were
out-of-state boys.
Thirty of the club boys were natives of
California and twenty were from out of the state.
Summary.
In compiling the statistics of the marital
status of parents of the juvenile delinquent boys, the con­
clusion was formed that most of the boys were from homes with
both parents living.
The parents of the next highest number
of boys were separated.
A large percentage of these parents
were among the remarried group.
There was only one orphan in
the group studied.
The delinquent boys from normal and broken homes showed
various types of offenses.
Petty theft was the major citation
with malicious mischief, burglary, and sex delinquency showing
the next largest groups of offenders.
Purse snatching,
200
TABLE XVII
BIRTHPLACE OF 100 JUVENILE DELINQUENTS
NOW LIVING- IN LONG BEACH
ise
mb
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Selected _
Birthplace Residence
Club
Birthplace Residence
Alabama
5
So. Dakota
5
Arkansas
5
Oklahoma
5
3
Oklahoma
California
9
Virginia
So. Dakota
3
Minnesota
6
Massachusetts 1
California
California
Utah
4
California
Nebraska
3
Oklahoma
1
Missouri
11
California
California
California
Wyoming
9
California
Washington
5
7
Indiana
Iowa
7
3
Minnesota
Arizona
5
9
Nebraska
Texas
8
5
Indiana
10
Nebraska
California
Virginia
6
California
California
California
California
California
California
California
California
California
California
California
California
California
California
California
California
Oklahoma
Canada
Oregon
California
Missouri
Tennessee
Kansas
Texas
California
Oklahoma
Florida
Pennsylvania
California
Alaska
California
Oklahoma
California
California
Michigan
California
California
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
Life
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
year
Life
Life
yrs.
Life
yrs.
year
yrs.
Life
Life
Life
yrs.
Life
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
Life
yrs.
Life
Life
4
3
5
4
3
4
5
3
4
5
4
3
5
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
Life
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
Life
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
Life
yrs.
Life
yrs.
Life
Life
yrs.
Life
Life
201
TABLE XVII CONTINUED
Case
Number
36
37
38
39
40
.41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Selected
Birthplace Residence
California
Wyoming
California
Colorado
Nevada
California
Texas
Alabama
Missouri
California
Honolulu
California
Oklahoma
California
California
Life
4 yrs.
Life
5 yrs.
3 yrs.
Life
1 year
2 yrs.
4 yrs.
Life
2 yrs.
Life
3 yrs.
Life
Life
Club
.Birthplace Residence
California
California
California
California
California
Texas
Nebraska
Iowa
Alabama
Texas
Iowa
So. Dakota
California
California
Germany
3
2
4
5
3
3
4
6
Life
Life
Life
Life
Life
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
yrs.
Life
Life
yrs.
NOTE: This table is to be read as follows: Case No.l,
the selected boy was born in Alabama and has resided in Long
Beach five years; the club boy is a native of California.
Case No.2, the selected boy is from South Dakota and has been
in Long Beach five years; the club boy is a native of Cali­
fornia and has always lived in Long Beach.
202
truaney, and arson were among the offenses least often com­
mitted.
The background of these boys from parents on relief
and not on relief showed that the largest group of offenders
came from homes not on relief and from homes that have a poor
economic status.
The relief boys of selected groups committed only half
as many crimes as the club boys; and the selected boys from
non-relief homes were cited for more offenses than the club
boys.
From the homes classified according to their economic
status, the selected boys from good and fair homes were the
largest offending groups, while among those homes listed as
poor, the club boys had more citations.
Most of these problem boys came from families with one,
two, or three children.
Twenty-one families out of one hun­
dred had four children, but there was only one family with
eight children, one with nine, and one with ten siblings.
The intelligence quotients of these problem children
indicated that they are of average classification.
Eight of
the selected group fell in the interval of 105 to 109, while
only one selected boy fell in the 70 to 74 interval and two
club boys fell in the 65 to 69 interval. The median intelli­
gence quotient for the club boys was 84.2 and for the selected
boys, 96.4, with a median of 93.6 for all the delinquents.
CHAPTER VI
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Today juvenile agencies have come to the realization
that the program for crime and vice prevention must begin
with the pre-delinquent children.
Recognition of this lies
back of the development of present day programs for the con­
trol of such delinquency.
The conception that law enforce­
ment organizations are to be devoted entirely to the appre­
hension of those who have already committed crimes has
rapidly given way to the idea that such an organization
should at least attempt to prevent crime and criminal activi­
ties, as well as arrest and convict offenders.
The youth of
today must be counseled and guided carefully in his morals to
offset his falling into crime and vice later in life.
He
needs careful guidance in the activities and relationship of
life.
The purpose of this study was to make a comparative
investigation of two groups of juvenile delinquents in Long
Beach, attempting to ascertain the influence of the Civitan
Boys* Club on a group of juvenile delinquents.
The major
aims of the study have been:
1.
-To determine whether a constructive program can be
substituted for the crime and delinquency now common in most
communities.
204
2.
To determine whether this program prevents further
delinquency by enriching the life of the underprivileged boy
by providing him with an intelligent and sympathetic friend.
.3.
To compare favorably or unfavorably the number of
juvenile delinquents affected by the Long Beach Boys’ Club
with a selected group.
4.
To study the recorded conditions causing juvenile
delinquency.
5.
To determine the changes, if any, of the cases in
relation to the Boys* Club.
6.
To determine whether or not the Civitan Boys' Club
has been a factor in minimizing juvenile delinquency among
the boys of Long Beach.
7.
To summarize the findings of the study in such a
manner as to indicate the weakness and strength of a club
program.
I.
SUMMARY”
The Long Beach Boys’ Club, as sponsored by the Civitan
Club of Long Beach, has made an unique contribution to the
program of delinquency prevention among the juvenile boys of
Long Beach.
This contention has been based upon facts ob­
tained through statistics from the Juvenile Bureau’s office
of Long Beach.
In the following pages will be found a sum­
mary of the findings from these statistics with conclusions
205
and recommendations, which, are the outgrowth of the data pre­
sented in previous chapters.
In this summary facts are pre­
sented which were descriptive of the one hundred juvenile•
delinquents when these boys.first appeared before .the Long
Beach Juvenile Bureau.
The six chapters into which the study is organized in­
clude respectively: Chapter I, a statement of the problem,
importance of the study, purpose of the investigation, and
definitions of terms used.
Chapter II contained the related
materials with a review of similar investigations and the de­
velopment of the boys1 clubs.
The history of their growth
was traced, together with contributions of various agencies
to the growth and development of boysT clubs.
A review of
investigations similar to the one made in this study showed
that about sixty per cent of the delinquent boys are first
offenders and that thirty-nine per cent are recidivists.
The
junior high school age has more delinquency per one hundred
pupils than any other school segment.
Various organizations
have offered activity programs which have materially decreased
juvenile delinquency in a given district.
A follow-up study
of behavior-problem boys showed that fifty-eight per cent of
the cases studied made a satisfactory adjustment.
The most
important contributing conditions to delinquency are lack of
parental control, broken homes, adult influence, the gang
activity, and the desire for adventure.
Chapter III presented
206
case studies of the one hundred problem boys with a brief
summary of their background.
In Chapter IV the extent and form of juvenile delin­
quency in Long Beach was shown by a number of tables.
It was
found that the age of highest incidence of delinquency was
fourteen years and that twenty-four boys were at age fourteen
when they committed their first offense.
It was indicated,
further, that the gges of twelve, thirteen, and fourteen con­
tained the largest number of delinquents, for in this age
span were found sixty-three of the one hundred delinquent
boys.
The two groups of delinquent boys committed their first
offenses at an earlier age than did those based on the city
record.
The selected group was two years older than the boys
in the club group; twenty-six per cent of the former committed
their first offense at fourteen years of age, while twentyfour per cent of the latter committed their first offense at
the age of twelve years.
A tabulation of the grade placement of the one hundred
problem boys included in this study indicated that the junior
high school represents the highest point in the curve of mal­
adjustment.
It may, therefore, be concluded that an intelli­
gent effort should be made to study the causes of maladjust­
ment during the formative and adolescent years of the junior
high school period and that these corrective measures should
extend into the upper elementary grades.
In the two groups
207
under consideration in this study, the eighth grade of the
selected group contained thirty-two per cent and the seventh
grade of the club group had the highest percentage, that of
thirty-four.
The seventh and eighth grades of the selected
group showed fifty-eight per cent of the delinquents.
The
seventh to the tenth grades inclusive contained eighty-five
per cent of the delinquents in this study.
Only two per cent
of the total delinquency followed the tenth grade, while thir­
teen per cent was commitrtred’ before the seventh grade.
In listing the twenty-five types of offenses committed
by the one hundred delinquents studied, it was found that
these boys committed 288 offenses for which they were taken
before the juvenile bureau.
The selected group committed 137,
while the club group committed 151 offenses.
The offense
which was found to be most frequent was petty theft, twentysix per cent of the number of cases falling into-this classi­
fication, 28.5 per cent committed by the club and 30.6 per
cent by the selected group.
Then followed in order malicious
mischief, 11.1 per cent by the club and 10.2 per cent by the
selected group; burglary 9.3 per cent, 11.8 for the club and
6.6 per cent for the selected group; illegal entry 7.6 per
cent,- 6.6 per cent by the club and 8.7 per cent by the se­
lected group; sex delinquency 6.9 per cent, 9.9 per cent com­
mitted by the club boys and 3.6 per cent by the selected
group.
It was shown that of the twenty-five types of crimes
208
committed by the one hundred delinquents of this study, the
boys in the selected group did not commit any of the follow­
ing offenses: arson, fighting, or lewd conduct; while the
club group did not commit assault, loitering, traffic, tru­
ancy, or undesirable associates.
In tabulating the offenses according to chronological
age it was learned that the fourteen year olds showed the
highest total number of offenses committed.
There were
seventy crimes listed among this age group.
Twelve petty
thefts among the selected group was the most frequent type of
offense, with ten petty thefts for the club group.
Eight boys
were charged with being runaways, four from each group.
Nine
juveniles committed illegal entry, three from the selected and
six from the club group.
Five of the club boys of this age
level were charged with sex delinquency, as compared to only
one boy from the selected group.
next with fifty-nine offenses.
Thirteen year old boys were
In the twelve year level,
petty theft was the most frequently occurring offense of the
total of forty-three offenses listed.
The fifteen year old
boys committed, forty-one offenses, as compared to the thirtyeight by the sixteen year old delinquents.
Twelve crimes were
committed by those delinquents who were classified as being
ten years of age and under.
the seventeen year old boys.
The smallest offending group was
209
Further tabulations disclosed that the greatest number
of offenses committed by a single delinquent boy was eleven,
one boy of the club group having this number.
The sequence
of offenses showed petty theft to be the first offense for
twenty-three boys in the selected group and twenty-one in the
club group.
Burglary and sex delinquency occurred more fre­
quently among the first offenses of the club boys than of the
selected group.
Petty theft, malicious mischief, illegal en­
try, burglary and sex delinquency were the offenses most often
consistently repeated by both groups.
It was indicated very definitely that the problem boys
of this study did not repeat the same offense.
The major type
of offenses which were found to have been most frequently re­
peated were, for the selected group, petty theft, and for the
club group, petty theft, malicious mischief, and sex delin­
quency.
Twenty-eight of the one hundred juvenile delinquents
committed the same offense later on.
Of the twenty-eight boys
fifteen were from the selected and thirteen from the club
group.
Two boys from each group were arrested a third time
for the original offense.
One boy of the selected group was
charged three times with malicious mischief and one delinquent
of the club group was arrested three times for sex delinquency.
There seemed to be no significant relationship between
age and repeated offense.
Recidivism has been found by other
investigators to have some relationship to age, but the data
£10
in this study did not justify so definite a conclusion.
The purpose of Chapter V was to present the relation­
ship of the personal factors to juvenile delinquency.
It was
found that fifty-one per cent of the boys represented in this
study came from broken homes.
Of this group, eighteen per
cent of the parents were divorced; twelve per cent, separated;
eleven per cent remarried; two percent, the mother was de­
ceased and the father had not remarried; and seven per cent,
the father was deceased and the mother had not remarried.
As
was pointed out by the tabulations, the club group of the
problem boys included eleven per cent more from broken homes
than those of the selected group.
There was also a close re­
lationship between the two groups in the types of broken homes
listed in all cases except those from parents who were separ­
ated.
larger.
With this type of broken home, the club group was much
To be exact, sixteen per cent more of the club group
were from homes of this type.
The majority of the one hun­
dred delinquents were from broken homes, while forty-nine per
cent of the two groups knew a normal family life.
By making a comparison of the two groups, it was found
that the boys from normal homes committed 120 of the total
288 offenses and the boys from the broken homes were charged
with 168 juvenile delinquencies.
The club boys from broken
homes committed 103 of the offenses, as compared with the 48
offenses by club boys from normal homes.
Seventy-two crimes
211
by boys of the selected group were committed by those from
normal homes, as compared to 65 for the selected group from
broken homes.
There seemed to be a definite relationship be­
tween the number of offenses committed and the marital status
of the parents.
In presenting the occupation and economic status of the
parents of the boys in this investigation, it was learned that
thirty-five per cent of the cases were on relief, as compared
to 23.4 for the city as a whole.
In the selected group of
problem boys, twenty-six per cent of their parents were on re­
lief and seventy-four per cent were non-relief.
Twenty-two
per cent more of the parents of the club group were on relief
than the parents of the selected group.
The economic status
of the parents of the selected group of delinquents was
higher than that of the parents of the club group.
Twelve per
cent more of the parents of the selected group were rated as
good, sixteen per cent more of the same group were rated as
fair, while twenty-eight per cent less of the parents of the
selected group were rated as poor, showing a very definite
higher economic standing for the parents of the selected
group.
A tabulation was made of the twenty-five types of of­
fenses committed by the one hundred juvenile delinquents,
giving consideration as to whether they came from homes on
relief or non-relief homes.
It was found that the boys from
212
homes on relief committed 109 offenses, 35 feeing committed fey
the selected group and 74 fey the club group.
A total of 179
offenses was committed fey the boys from homes not on relief.
The selected group of boys from non-relief homes was charged
with 102 offenses, as compared with 77 citations for the club
group from non-relief homes.
Seventy, or 24.2 per cent more
offenses were committed fey the boys from non-relief homes,
indicating that a home on relief is not one of the factors of
juvenile delinquency.
Most of these problem boys came from small families
with only one, two, or three children.
out of one hundred had four children.
Twenty-one families
There was only one
family with eight children, one with nine, and one with ten
siblings.
A .study of the intelligence quotients showed that
sixty-three per cent of the group rated below normal in intel­
ligence.
93.6.
The median intelligence quotient for the group was
The median intelligence quotient for the club group
was 84.2, indicating a median intelligence of dull normal.
Of the entire group, thirteen per cent were of definitely low
intelligence, rating between fifty and eighty.
From these
figures it would doubtless be fair to assume that low intelli­
gence was a contributing cause to delinquency in this group.
The case summaries showed that sixty per cent of the
delinquents did not have any religious affiliations.
Of the
213
forty per cent expressing a church preference, thirteen per
cent indicated that they were active in the church.
Thirty-
six per cent of.the selected boys and twenty-four per cent of
the club boys did not have any church connections.
This indi­
cated little except that most of these problem boys had not
received any religious instruction.
The natural inference is
that religious organizations are failing to make their moral
teaching effective and failing, likewise, to keep their hold
upon the boys of the adolescent age.
The case summaries
showed, further, that only three boys of the one hundred de­
linquents of this investigation had ever had any club exper­
ience of any type whatsoever.
A comparison of the number of offenses for each boy and
the number of later offenses committed by each boy, on the
basis of the date of affiliation with the Civitan Boys1 Club
was made in Table XVIII on the following page.
Of the 288
offenses committed by the one hundred juvenile delinquents,
the selected boys were charged with 137 and the club boys with
the remaining 151 offenses.
Twelve selected and seven club
boys committed only one juvenile offense.
Before the fifty
boys of the club group had joined the Civitan Boys* Club they
had committed 125 offenses.
After the date of their affilia­
tion with that organization, fourteen of the club group were
again brought before the local juvenile bureau for committing
a total of twenty-six offenses.
Seventy-two per cent, or
214
TABLE XVIII
A COMPARISON OF THE NUMBER OF OFFENSES FOR EACH BOY
AND THE NUMBER OF LATER OFFENSES COMMITTED
BY EACH BOY ON THE BASIS OF THE DATE OF
AFFILIATION WITH- THE BOYS* CLUB
Case
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Total Number
of Offenses
Selected Club
3
4
3
1
1
2
1
1
6
2
1
3
3
3
3
6
1
3
2
2
3
1
6
2
1
3
4
1
2
2
.
2
2
4
3
3
2
5
7
4
2
2
3
4
1
3
4
8
1
1
2
4
11
2
3
3
1
4
2
1
3
Number of Offenses
After Club Affiliation
Selected Club
1
3
3
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
0
0
2
1
1
6
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
4
1
2
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
4
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
215
TABLE XVIII CONTINUED
Case
Number
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Total
Total Number
of Offenses
delected Club
Number of Offenses
After Club Affiliation
Selected Club
2
4
3
3
4
3
4
4
5
5
3
3
3
4
1
1
2
4
2
1
3
2
3
2
3
3
1
2
2
2
3
3
7
3
4
1
2
4
2
.2
2
0
2
1
0
3
2
4
5
4
1
0
0
2
0
1
1
0
1
0
137
151
68
0
1
0
0 •
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
3
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
26
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: Case No* 1
the selected boy was charged with three offensesthe club
boy two. After the date of affiliation the club boy did not
commit any further delinquencies. The selected boy after the
same date was charged with one offense.
216
thirty-six boys made good, in that they did not again appear
before the juvenile bureau.
On the same basis of date,
thirty-five of the fifty boys of the selected group committed
sixty-eight offenses.
Therefore, it must be concluded that
the Civitan BoysT Club and the men who are directly responsi­
ble for its activities are filling a definite need of the
underprivileged boys of Long Beach.
While a large number, seventy-two per cent, of those
who had an opportunity to profit by the club experience made
good, it must be remembered that a comparatively small number
was accorded this experience.
Because of the limited number
in this group, it is possible that these data are not repre­
sentative.
However, many of the more serious cases were sent
to the club and the group is a picked one, consisting of the
boys guilty of the more serious offenses.
II.
CONCLUSIONS
The investigator concludes, therefore, from the find­
ings of this study that, as Mangold says,
The juvenile delinquent has become an individual
who is not necessarily guilty of some particular
offense, but who has developed an anti-social atti­
tude or characteristics of behavior that will if not
checked lead inevitably to conduct that the public
cannot tolerate.1
G-. Mangold, Problems of Child Welfare (New York: The
Macmillan Company, 1936) , p. 368.
217
The need for a Boys* Club is shown by the fact that a
vast number of juvenile delinquents have absolutely no con­
tact with character-building organizations or recreation
groups.
Only three of the one hundred boys of this study had
ever been members of such groups.
There are some organiza­
tions which deal only with delinquents.
They are few in num­
ber and their budgets are small, for the public is more in­
terested in appropriating money for the up-and-coming youth
agencies than for delinquents.
The ironic point is that the better youth organiza­
tions do not directly prevent crime.
Excellent institutions
that they are, they miss the target.
They keep a high type
of youth off the streets and strengthen his character.
But
that type is the boy with excellent home life, church affili­
ations, and probably comfortable economic status— a poor can­
didate for crime.
But the type of boy who really presents a
problem is not served by agencies or organizations as well
equipped and financed.
Emphasis upon statistics forces these
organizations to do an extensive type of work for vast numbers
of boys, while the juvenile delinquency problem calls for in­
tensive work and individual attention to those who are out of
step.
Juvenile authorities know that it is misdirected
leadership of boys that causes gangs to plunder, destroy, and
rob, rather than engage in pursuits making for good and
218
helpful citizenship.
Parrott says,
A surprising bareness of recreational life was re­
vealed in Jacksonville, Florida, only 18 of the 100
had ever belonged to any of the organized programs
for young peopleTs activities. Many of their fami­
lies did not know how they spent their leisure time.
Nearly all the families were in serious economic
straits. Only 14 out of the 100 had their homes
intact.2
Regarding delinquency, Warden L. E. Lawes writes:
The expense of maintaining proper juvenile wel­
fare agencies is less than one-tenth the cost of
operating reformatories and prisons. Boys1 clubs
and kindred organizations help to translate the
gang spirit into helpful and constructive activi­
ties. These organizations really reach the heart
of the problem of juvenile delinquency. Milwaukee
has reduced, by a system of boys1 clubs, its de­
linquency about 50 per cent.3
Los Angeles county1s answer to the rehabilitation of
juvenile delinquency was an honor camp.
It was started in
1930, when as many as four hundred boys a week were arriving
in the county.
The county’s director of camp activities
estimates that as many as three thousand boys have passed
through the various camps, the average stay being about
eighteen weeks.
He reports that in a four-year survey 89 per
cent of these boys had remained clear of trouble.4
Z
L. Parrott, ”100 Young Delinquents and Why,” Survey,
73:344, November, 1937.
3
Warden L. E. Lawes, "Insurance Against Crime,”
Recreation, 26:507, February, 1933.
4 R. Shellaby, ”Boys Rebuilt,” The Christian Science
Monitor, March 2, 1940, p. 7.
219
Private social agencies have mobilized to reduce ju­
venile delinquency.
In one large city a boysT club released
the following statement.
"In 1935 we had a batting average
of .995 in citizenship rating.
That is, only 6 of our 13,228
members were in trouble with the police or juvenile courts
during the year."5
In the many intensive and scientific studies that have
been made, no unit cause of crime has ever been discovered,
but four conclusions have been reached which have particular
relation to the problem of juvenile delinquency and the part
that boys* clubs may play in combating it.
There is substan­
tial agreement today that crime starts in childhood, caused
many times by home conditions.
The second accepted fact in
regard to crime is that it is localized in specific and rela­
tively small areas, usually the neglected districts of the
cities.
A third well established fact in the study of causa­
tions of crimes is that much of the wrongdoing, especially in
its initial stages, takes place in leisure time.
The fourth
accepted fact of crime causation is the recognition of crime
as a group reaction.
Atkinson^ stated that a study of a large number of
confirmed criminals made under the direction of the New York
R. K. Atkinson, The BoysT Club (New York: Association
Press, 1939), pp. 144-146.
220
Crime Commission showed that in practically every case there
was an undesirable home condition.
From disobedience in the
home to minor misconduct, in some cases at as early an age as
eight or nine, the offenses increased steadily in seriousness.
He added that the records of Sing Sing prison show that 97 per
cent of the present inmates never were associated with a boys'
club or any other juvenile group.
Evidence of the validity of
this assertion is shown by the fact that of the 145 men com­
mitted to prison in New York state in a sixty day period, only
five had had contact with any organization that provided
leadership or guidance in leisure time.
Ill.
RECOMMENDATIONS
As a result of the study it is recommended that:
1.
The schools should locate their problem children,
actual and potential, as early as possible.
Once these chil­
dren are known, treatment can be started when there is the
greatest chance of cure.
2.
Full and complete histories should be gathered for
these problem children.
3.
Schools can and should discover family and neigh­
borhood situations conducive to delinquency.
4.
Since any program for the prevention of juvenile
delinquency requires funds, a publicity campaign should be
started to convince the public how worthwhile is the extra
cost of dealing with these problem children.
5.
Juvenile delinquents should be handled as boys and
girls in need of guidance, rather than as wilful criminals.
Mayor La Guardia has made a great effort in decreasing the
formality of their treatment in New York City.
His faith has
been vindicated, for in 1939 there was a decline of thirty
per cent'in court appearances.7
7
J. Hargan, "Salvaging Boys from Dead End," The Com­
monweal, 27:287, January 7, 1939.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A.
BOOKS
Adams, Jane, et al., The Child, the Clinic and the Court.
New York: New RepublicTTnc., X925. 24? pp.
Atkinson, R. K . , The Boys* Club.
1939. 186 pp.
New York: Association Press,
Beard, B. B., Juvenile Probation.
pany, 19341 219 pp.
Boston: American Book Com­
Burt, Cyril, Young Delinquent.
Company, 1930. 619 pp.
New York: D. Appleton-Century
Cooley, E. J., Probation and Delinquency.
Nelson and Sons, 1927. 467 pp.
New York: Thomas
Fenton, Norman, The Delinquent Boy and the Correctional
School. Claremont, California: Claremont bollege Guidance
Center, 1935. 182 pp.
Forbush, William B., Boy Problem.
1913. 219 pp.
Boston: The Pilgrim Press,
Glueck, Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck, One Thousand Juvenile De­
linquents. Boston: Harvard University Press, 1934.
341 pp.
Healy, William, The Individual Delinquent.
Brown and Company, 1915. 279 pp.
Boston: Little,
Hea.ly, William and Augusta Bonner, Delinquents and Criminals:
Their Making and Unmaking. NewTork: The Macmillan
Company, 1926. 317 pp.
Mangold, George, Problems of Child Welfare .
Macmillan Company, 1936 . 549 p p .
New York: The
Owens, Albert A., The Behavior-Problem Boy: A Socio-Educational
Survey. Philadelphia: published by the author, 1929.
188 pp.
Pendry, Elizabeth R., and Hugh Hartshorne, Organization for
Youth. New'York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1935. 359 pp.
Reckless, Walter C., and Mapheus Smith, Juvenile Delinquency.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1932. 412 pp.
224
Robison, Sophia M . , Can Delinquency be Measured?
Columbia University Press, 1936. 277 pp.
New York:
Scudder, Kenyon and Kenneth Beam, Who is Delinquent? Los
Angeles: Rotary Club of Los Angeles, 1936. 56 pp.
Stone, Walter L . , What is Boys* Work?
Press, 1931. T96‘"pp.
New York: Association
, The Development of BoysT Work in the United States.
Nashville: Fress oT~CuTlom and Ghertner Company, 1935.
182 pp•
White House Conference on Child Health and Protection, Vol.
Delinquent Child. New York: The Century Com­
pany, 1932. 4 9 9 "pp.
Year Book of the National Probation Association, The Child
and the Law. New York: The National Probation Associa­
tion,' T934. 232 pp.
B.
PERIODICAL ARTICLES
Butcher, ¥. L., tfThe Boy Problem," Current History, 50:43-44,
July, 1939.
Lawes, L. 1., "Insurance Against Crime," Recreation, 26:507,
February, 1933.
McDermott, F., "When a Feller Needs a Friend," Readers Digest,
29:32, September, 1936.
Montgomery, J., "Boys Don’t Want to be Criminals," Rotarian,
47:38-40, December, 1935.
Scudder, J. W., "Guidance vs. Delinquency," Educational
Method, 15:97, November, 1935.
Tolson, C. A., "Youth and Crime," Vital Speeches, 2:468-472,
April 20., 1936.
_______ , "Bad Boys: Juvenile Delinquency Stiff Problem for
Courts," Literary Digest, 132:22, July 10, 1937.
C.
PUBLICATIONS OP LEARNED ORGANIZATIONS
Children’s Bureau, A Study of 751 Cases. United States De­
partment of Labor Publioation, No* 830, 1936.
______ * Facts About Juvenile Delinquency. United States De­
partment of Labor Publication, No. 829, 1935.
Statutes and Amendments to the Code of California, 1939.
Fifty~tEird
s sion, Chapter 1099, p. 3027.
Be
D.
UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS
Buss, Otto Earl, "Recreation and Physical Education as a Pre­
ventative of Crime and Juvenile Delinquency in the Dis­
trict Affected by the All Nations Boys* Club." Unpub­
lished Master’s thesis, University of Southern California,
Los Angeles, 1931. 89 pp.
Dyke, P. John, "A Study of Normal Junior High School Problem
Boys." Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of South­
ern California, Los Angeles, 1931. 224 pp.
Eng, R . , " A Study of 319 Juvenile Delinquents from the Files
of the San Diego County Probation Office." Unpublished
Master’s thesis, University of Southern California, Los
Angeles, 1938. 118 pp.
Gordon, D. IS*, "Problem Boys in the Special Schools of Los
Angeles." Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, 1936. 123 pp.
Maxwell, William C., "An Investigation of Boy Delinquency in
Long Beach and its Implication for the Public Schools."
Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Southern Cali­
fornia, Los Angeles, 1935.. 346 pp.
Newcomb, Douglas A., "Juvenile Delinquency in the Public
Schools." Unpublished Master’s thesis, Stanford Univer­
sity, Palo Alto, California, 1927. 87 pp.
Pagliassotti, Louis F., "A Comparison of Problem Boys from
Normal and from Broken Homes." Unpublished Master’s
thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
1937. 76 pp.
226
Perry, G. E . , "Juvenile Delinquency in the Junior and Senior
High Schools of Los Angeles; its'Prevalence, Manifesta­
tion, and Causes." Unpublished Master’s thesis, Univer­
sity of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1937. 75 pp.
Richardson, Allen T., "A Follow-up of 440 Behavior Problem
Boys Enrolled in Fort Hill School.” Unpublished. MasterTs
thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
1932. 33 pp.
Skinner, Kenneth R . , ”A Survey of the Prevention of Crime
Through Juvenile Summer Camps for Underprivileged Boys.”
Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, 1939. 137 pp.
Thompson, C. S., ”A Natural History of a Boys’ Club.” Unpub­
lished Master’s thesis, University of Southern California,
Los Angeles, 1939. 95 pp.
Walther, Henry W ., ”A Survey of Employment and Subsequent
History Records of Behavior' Problem Boys Who Have Passed
Through the Welfare Centers of Los Angeles City Schools.”
Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, 1937. Ill pp.
Документ
Категория
Без категории
Просмотров
0
Размер файла
8 869 Кб
Теги
sdewsdweddes
1/--страниц
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа