Edwin H.

Sutherland: The IU Scholar Who

Revolutionized the Study of Criminology
By Asher Lubotzky, Bicentennial Intern, Class of 2022, Doctoral Student, History, Bloomington

Edwin Sutherland, 1941. Courtesy of IU Archives, P0034426

Edwin Hardin Sutherland was born in 1883 in Gibbon, Nebraska, to a deeply Protestant family
of seven children. He graduated in 1904 from the Grand Island College in Nebraska and received
his PhD in 1913 from the University of Chicago. Witnessing poverty, criminality and other urban
plights of Chicago motivated him to study methods of improving social conditions.[1]

Professor Sutherland came to IU in 1935, as the head of the newly independent department of
sociology.[2] Before arriving in Bloomington, he served as a professor of sociology at Chicago
University, the University of Illinois and the University of Minnesota. While at Illinois he
decided to specialize in criminology, which was not considered as an inherent part of sociology
at the time.

Then in 1924, he published a well-received criminology textbook, (Principles of) Criminology,

the first comprehensive textbook in the field. This textbook was revised numerous times by
Sutherland before his death and then by others, and dominated the field for decades.[3]

Most of Sutherland’s innovative scholarly contribution to the field of criminology was produced
during his time at Indiana University. In 1939, in the third edition of Principles of Criminology,
he formulated the “differential association” theory which was a ground-breaking explanation of
crime causation.

Influenced by the consequences of the Great Depression, this theory aimed to replace biological,
economic or psychological-genetic explanations of criminality known generally as “born
criminal,” all of which emphasized the individual’s abnormal personality and inheritance as
precipitating factors for crime. Sutherland’s differential association theory, on the other hand,
“conceive[d] of criminality as participation in a cultural tradition and as the result of association
with representatives of that culture.”[4] In other words, Sutherland contended that criminality
was a learned behavior, thus shifting the scholarly focus into social and cultural realms.

This had significant implications for prevention and penalization of crime, for example by
stressing the need for the  humane treatment of identified criminals, and the uselessness of racial
or biological profiling. In relation to this theory, scholars Gaylord and Gallier stated in 1988 that
“among sociological students of criminal behavior, there is considerable agreement that this is
the single most important innovation during the past fifty years.”[5] These scholars also noted
that this was the first major original American theory in criminology. Previous theories had
mainly been borrowed from Europe.[6]
The title page from the original 1949 edition of White Collar Crime.
Sutherland’s work at Indiana University continued to be pathbreaking. In the last decade of his
life, his scholarship focused on what he termed “white-collar crime,” a term that since has been
integrated into our daily lexicon. In 1949, Sutherland completed his monograph on this subject.
Sutherland’s theory was revolutionary and widely discussed. One survey even selected his 1949
work as “the most important study of the decade (1940-1950).”[7]

Sutherland once again criticized existing beliefs in criminology. Building upon his new social
theory of criminality, Sutherland now argued that contemporary criminology is too absorbed
with lower class criminality, neglecting other kinds of crimes. Existing theories emphasize
personal pathologies (abnormality) or social pathologies (poverty) as the cause of delinquency.
[8] Sutherland claimed that social or personal pathologies are not “an adequate explanation of
criminal behavior,” because in fact crime is not more prevalent among the lower classes
compared to the middle and upper classes.

Sutherland proved that there is no direct line between poverty by itself and delinquency. Instead,
the casual factor was “the social and interpersonal relations which are associated sometimes with
poverty and sometimes with wealth.”[9] Wealthy people are less likely to get caught or
convicted, since they are “more powerful politically and financially.”[10] The system does not
treat upper class crimes as criminal acts, but as civil ones, and therefore statistics disregard them.
He noticed how “the legal process operates to the distinct advantage of the privileged and
influential social classes,” while “the emphasis on poverty and other conditions concentrated in
the lower socioeconomic classes…obstructed the development of a theory sufficiently general to
cover the whole range of crime.”[11]

Sutherland’s contributions to sociology have changed more than just the course of sociology and
criminology. His emphasis on criminality as a social phenomenon rebuked the then popular
notions of eugenics and other race-based theories.

The state of Indiana, specifically, led the way in implementing eugenics and genetics-based
policies, as it was among the first states  to introduce a legislation of coercive sterilization in
1907, commanding the involuntarily sterilization of “confirmed criminals, idiots, imbeciles and
rapists.”[12] Sutherland’s ideas, on the other hand, turned Indiana into the birth place of one of
the most important criticisms of eugenics.[13]

Additionally, Sutherland’s innovations came in at a crucial time for fighting racism. His work in
the 1940s was useful in the fight against Nazism (perhaps the most notorious proponent of
eugenics) abroad, and at the dawn of the Civil Rights Movement at home. Sutherland’s theories
gave an important ideological tool against both international and domestic racism.

The 15 years Sutherland spent at Indiana University were during the prime of his career and
scholarship. During this time, he published three new books and two revised editions of his
textbook and earned national acclaim. He worked relentlessly to empower the newly independent
department of sociology, and encouraged IU to hire such innovative scholars as Alfred
Lindesmith, Harvey Locke, and John Mueller. In 1939, Sutherland was elected to serve as the
president of the American Sociological Society (known today as the American Sociological
Association), a position that reflected the recognition and respect for his achievements.[14]

The letter asking Sutherland to an interview at IU.Sutherland’s letter of appointment to IU, C286
– Box 258Sutherland’s letter of acceptance, C286 – Box 258
Aside from his world-renowned scholarly contributions, Sutherland was remembered by students
and colleagues as an influential teacher, community leader, and a humble, self-critical and
respectful interlocutor. Professor Alfred Lindesmith, a student (at Chicago) and later a colleague
of Sutherland, had favorable memories of Sutherland as an inspirational figure:

Sometime after taking this first criminology course, I took another from Sutherland in which I
had a very important and interesting experience. I was sitting in the classroom waiting for things
to get started when Sutherland arose and said that a guest lecturer would take over the class and
then introduced a professional thief names Broadway Jones. I was at first shocked by this until
Broadway arose and remarked that ‘there are people who, when they have stealing to do, are
damn fools enough to do it themselves. There are others who get hold of someone who knows
how to do it. That’s where I come in.’…This was the first professional thief I had ever met. Also,
he was the first opiate addict I had met and became an important, if not crucial, figure in
determining what my dissertation topic and research would be…I chose…to do a study of opiate
addiction and matters connected with the narcotics traffic.[15]

Lindesmith also remembers how Sutherland was open to different opinions and criticism and
took feedback from everyone including students and not just from respected scholars like
himself.  Lindesmith favorably recalled how when he had been just a graduate student, he “felt
pleased and flattered when Sutherland…accepted my view…as the growing point of science,”
especially compared with the skeptical and critical reviews he had received frequently from
faculty at the University of Chicago University.[16]

Courtesy of IU Archives, P0021850

Sutherland’s warm, caring personality was evident not only with scholars and students, but also
in regards to the criminals he studied during the years. According to Lindesmith, Sutherland
cared deeply for the former and current criminals and delinquents whom he studied, at some
cases keeping in touch and consulting them for years.[17] John Mueller noted in 1950 that
Sutherland was “as proud of [getting recognition and gratitude from “his criminal friends”] as he
was of [his] presidency of the American Sociological Society.”[18]

Sutherland’s self-criticism was a prevalent theme in his lectures and seminars. He worked
constantly to improve and develop his theories:

His students were encouraged to tear into the theory, to criticize it mercilessly. This they did, and
without any fear that their distinguished teacher would punish them for their boldness. Indeed,
the most able and telling critics among Sutherland’s students became his favorites…Sutherland
acted on his belief in democratic relations among fellow scholars, be they distinguished veterans
like himself or first year graduate students.[19]

Similarly, Professor John Mueller praised Sutherland’s talent of teaching and the admiration his
students felt for him. Soon after Sutherland’s death in 1950, Mueller wrote:

It is as a teacher that Professor Sutherland was least known to his national associates; but to his
students this aspect of his career, of course, loomed potently large. In this function he was
immeasurably aided by his personality and temperament. The graduate students who were
attracted to Indiana were imbued with the sincerity and objectivity with which he cultivated his
research. Sutherland was amazingly open-minded, and his seminar constituted a collaborative
inquiry rather than a transmission of information. He would spend hours with a student in office
or home, discussing the problems which he was revolving in his own mind. With his soft-spoken
demeanor, his readiness to listen to critical rebuttal, he impressed the student as a man of
parental wisdom. He never taught in terms of sarcasm, ridicule or abuse. In fact, he never
“taught” at all, but presided over a Socratic inquiry into human relations.[20]

Sutherland engaged with community and national service. During World War II, Sutherland was
a member of the American Sociological Society’s subcommittee on the Participation of
Sociologists in the National Emergency Program.[21] This subcommittee examined the ways in
which sociologists can contribute to the war effort through cooperation and participation in the
federal administration. During this time, he was also a member of Indiana University’s War
Council.

Sutherland (second from the right) as part of IU’s War Council. Courtesy of IU Archives,
P0036395
Sutherland was deeply involved with local issues which contributed his expertise to community
issues. In 1937, for instance, Sutherland completed a special study about youth delinquency in
Bloomington, Indiana that aimed to be “a basis for a program for the reduction of delinquency”
in the city. Leading a team of 64 staff members, Sutherland’s group mapped Bloomington’s core
areas of delinquency.

Both Bloomington and the surrounding areas were hit hard during the Great Depression, with
more than 30% of the population of Monroe County relying on relief in 1935, the year when
Sutherland arrived at IU. Sutherland’s community work came at a critical moment in the history
of Bloomington.

In accordance with his cultural and social theories, Sutherland noticed that youth crime soared in
areas where organized recreational facilities were absent, suggesting that solving social and
cultural issues would reduce crime (instead of focusing on specific types of populations). The
city was advised to tackle the neighborhood holistically, and focus not just on individuals.
Changing cultural attitudes toward law breaking and crime was the real challenge.[22]
Sadly, soon after his retirement, on October 11, 1950, on the way to teach a class, Sutherland
stumbled and fell, dying on the IU Bloomington campus.

The Terre Haute Tribune, 12 Oct 1950,

Thu, Page 2
Search