IN THE PRISONERS’ AID FIELD

NEW HAMPSHIRE SOCIETY AFTER STATE REFORMATORY

At the session of the New Hampshire Legislature which adjourned on April 15, the New Hampshire Prisoners’ Aid Association co-operated with the State Conference of Charities and Corrections and the State Federation of Women’s Clubs in the advancing of two measures which were deemed of immediate importance to the State.

The first of these was a resolution calling upon the Governor to appoint special commission of three members to investigate and report to the legislature, at its next session, in 1913, on the desirability of a State Workhouse or Reformatory. The resolution, which carries a sufficient appropriation to pay the expenses of the investigation, passed the legislature and received the signature of the Governor. A similar measure presented at three previous sessions met with defeat, owing to the false impression that a central state reformatory would mean additional cost to the taxpayers. This impression was weakened by the arguments before committees that the assembling of all minor offenders in one institution would make it possible to put them at some profitable industry and in the end save money. At present minor offenders are confined in about 20 county jails and houses of correction, in only one of which is there a population sufficient to operate an industry. In nine of the jails idleness is the rule. In the remaining institutions the prisoners are dependent upon work about the buildings and upon the farm, and when this work is slackest the prisons are fullest. It is hoped that the study of the commission will result in recommendations whose execution by the next legislature will in New Hampshire do away with the evils of the locally administered jail and house of correction.

The second item on the program was a bill providing for medical inspection by the state board of health of all penal institutions, and for thorough examination of all prisoners, at the times of committal and discharge, not only with reference to their present physical and mental condition, but also with reference to their personal and family history as to mental capacity and delinquency. This measure was felt to be important, aside from its immediate advantage in institutional administration, in two respects: (1) It would undoubtedly bring about some changes in classifying and treating offenders; and (2) the careful recording of the results of the examinations would probably in the course of years build up a mass of data from which it would be possible to draw inferences as to methods of preventing delinquency. This bill was not put into presentable shape until so late in the session that it failed of favorable consideration. The chief opposition came from those who believed that the cost of careful medical examinations in county institutions would be such as materially to raise the budget for the hospital departments. On the contrary, the warden of the state prison testified that the result of such examinations as have been voluntarily adopted by him has been a lessening in the expenses of the hospital department. The centralization of minor offenders in a state reformatory will facilitate the adoption of this needed reform.

Similarly it will probably be easier to get a system of probation for adult offenders if there is a state reformatory. The Prisoners’ Aid Association pressed a probation bill two years ago and failed. This year the measure was held in abeyance so as to give the more fundamental bill the right of way. A state penal board has for many years been desired by many. This too, would logically follow state control of minor offenders. So the Association feels that the first battle has been won in the wider campaign. The next battle, and the decisive one, if we win it, will be that concerning the actual establishment of the state reformatory.

E. L. P.

A GREAT BRITAIN PLAN

Mr. Winston Churchill’s attempt to lighten the load which every discharged convict has as a handicap in his efforts to retrieve his position will be watched with much interest in all Anglo-Saxon countries. A new commission is to be organized, with the financial and moral backing of the government, for the purpose of uniting and directing the efforts of all societies which have as their common purpose the opening of opportunities for legitimate activity to men who have made a mistake and paid the penalty for it. The Home Secretary is to be at its head and, while its scope has not yet been and possibly never will be definitely delimited, it will make possible the abolition of police supervision which has been one of the almost insuperable obstacles in the path of every ex-prisoner who tried to live down his past in Great Britain. Police officers, as a rule, are too actively engaged in the militant work of fighting crime to be able to share in the task of rehabilitating the vanquished. We have not, in Canada, the problems in this connection which Great Britain has to solve but we have enough reasons for fearing that they will come with our rapid development to make our interest in the new movement more than an impersonal one.—Montreal (Que.) Star.

THE PAROLE SYSTEM AS IT WORKS

Joseph T. Byers, now the Secretary of the New Jersey State Charities Aid and Prison Reform Association, developed, while he was superintendent of the New York House of Refuge, the parole system of that institution to a high degree. In his final report to the board of managers of the House of Refuge he said:

“The most important work of the institution is that of our parole department. It has been a source of great gratification to me, as I am sure it has been also to the board, to note the development and success of this work. Convinced that short parole periods of supervision were unwise, our work was organized on a basis of supervision that should last as long as the law permitted, namely, during minority. To those who would criticise this period as being excessive and likely to work hardship to the boys, to make them restive and intolerant, I can only say that close observation during the past five years does not warrant any such statement. The monthly reports of the boys have been made, as a rule, very promptly and satisfactorily. They have not shown any great desire to be released from parole supervision; and I present as further evidence of the fact that our parole supervision has been properly adjusted, the more than fifteen hundred visits made to me during the past twelve months by paroled boys. Three-quarters of these visits were purely voluntary on the part of the boys. The credit for this condition of affairs is largely due to the parole officers. They have been tactful, sympathetic, resourceful and in every way deserving of the full confidence I have had in their integrity and efficiency.

Two thousand five hundred and five boys have been actually under supervision. Of these, 914 are still reporting and doing well, and 237 were doing well when supervision expired; 1073 have for one reason or another been unsatisfactory on parole. Of these 791 have been returned to the institution (including 56 voluntary returns); 154 have been committed to other institutions or are now on trial, and in 128 cases supervision expired with the boys not doing well. In 281 cases out of 2505 nothing is at present known. This means that 11.21 per cent. of our boys are out of touch with the institution, having left home, family moved, or for some other cause. Five hundred and six boys have attained their majority and have therefore passed from under supervision. At the time of expiration 237 of the 506 were doing well; 128 were doing badly, or were at the time in other institutions; while in 141 cases no information was at hand. It is only fair to state that of this latter number (141), 80 are boys who were paroled before October, 1905, which was before adequate parole supervision had been established. Taking only the cases of these 506 boys who have graduated from our supervision, present records enable us to account for only 46.84 per cent. who were known to be doing well. In making this statement we are not crediting ourselves with probable satisfactory cases; any boy concerning whom definite information is not at hand is placed in the unsatisfactory class.

Short parole periods are a fallacy. Of the 202 boys returned for violation of parole, 49 were out of the institution more than a year and 18 of them more than two years.

Thirty-six per cent. of 202 delinquents were returned for crime (burglary, larceny, forgery, robbery, picking pockets, and receiving stolen property). Of the total number of Protestant boys on parole 09.26 per cent. were returned for violation; of the whole number of Catholic boys, 14.04 per cent.; of the Jewish boys 14.66 per cent.

PAROLE LAW ADOPTED IN TEXAS

The new parole law in Texas embodies the following important features: A board of prison commissioners acting as a board of parole; eligibility for parole when the minimum sentence has expired; the retaking by the employes of the board of delinquent paroled men; meetings of parole board when necessary; opportunity for each prisoner at expiration to appear in person or before board; merit system of recording prisoner’s life and conduct during term; absolute release at discretion of board; agent for employment and supervision; delinquent paroled prisoner to be regarded in same light as escaped prisoner.

“When a convict who has been paroled shall have complied with the rules and conditions governing his parole until the end of the term to which he was sentenced, he shall upon a written or printed discharge by the board of prison commissioners, setting forth these facts, be entitled to a restoration of his citizenship by the Governor of the State of Texas.”