WHY WE HAVE NO GANGSTERS

Hokitika Guardian, 3 May 1928, Page 1

WHY WE HAVE NO GANGSTERS

(By Edgar Wallace in ‘‘Daily Mail.”)

I do not think even well-informed Americans realise why the gangster of England does not approximate in ferocity, in daring, and in "ruthlessness to his American fellow. The Chicago gangster, with his “sawn-off” (a shotgun cut down almost to pistol size), his machine-gun (which is an automatic rifle), and his too-ready “rod” (automatic), has no parallel in this country. We Ixdievc that under our laws and with our incorruptible police system he could not exist. The machinery of the law moves very swiftly and with a terrible inevitability. The murderer hangs, and it would lie a had day for this country if he i..d not hang. There are no long delays, no moving for new trials, 110 fiats of state attorneys, no appeals to governors. There is the preliminary hearing at the Magistrate’s Court, the trial at the Old Bailey or at the Assizes, the inevitable appeal, the almost inevitable confirmation of sentence.

There is no such thing in this country as a political pull where the criminal courts are concerned. We holiove rightly that a judge would sentence his own brother to death and show him no more favour than lie would show to any other criminal. ***»*#

If gang warfare started in this country on a serious scale it would he stamped out. But the existence of gang warfare in any country depends not so much upon the methods employed to deal with- it. as upon 11s

cause; and the cause is inevitably dope Our own criminals do not dope; that ghastly practice is left to a few degenerate weaklings. J have only met)' one burglar who was a drug addict, and he had taken to the practice late in life.

But in America without dope there "'mid he no gunmen. Nine out of every ten of the hold-up men and hank-smashers could not go about their husimss without a “shot.” They require that momentary" exultation and recklessness of consequence which drugs bring before they can tackle even a minor hold-up. Without the “stimulant” they are spineless, nerveless things, wholly incapable of holding a pistol steady. Dur own gangs are curiously composed. AT lion a light starts between rival factious they are loosely described as “race gang” fights. It is possible that these men are racegoers, and a few years ago, until the Jockey Club took steps to deal with the menace, race gangs were very real organisations. But the gangs to which I refer are in every sense criminal. They do not work in unison to anv objective: they are largely composed of loose units, who are drawn together by their iicqiiiatance with one. another and the I act that they have a common enemy—the police. They are gangs in the sense that every law-abiding citizen is

a member of a gang—lie has a circle of friends who have a common interest, and whom he meets at his club or oil a golf course. If they take concerted action, it- is to repel the encroachment of similar coteries or to avenge a “squeak” which lias been put tip by their rivals. For there is no honour among thieves, except in one resect; a member of a gang who has boon “hashed” by another gang will never identify his assailant.

So long as dope is kept away from the habitually criminal classes-, the gangster in this country will lie a negligible quantity.