Chapter I: Section 1: Be it enacted, etc., That the active or visiting committee (1)

of any society heretofore incorporated and now existing in the Commonwealth for the purpose of visiting and instructing prisoners, or persons confined in any penal or reformatory institution, and alleviating their miseries, shall be and are hereby made official visitors of any jail, penitentiary, or other penal or reformatory institution in this Commonwealth, maintained at the public expense, with the same powers, privileges and functions as are vested in the official visitors of prisons and penitentiaries as now prescribed by law: _Provided_, That no active or visiting committee of any such society shall be entitled to visit such jails or penal institutions, under this act unless notice of the names of the members of such committee, and the terms of their appointment, is given by such society in writing, under its corporate seal, to the warden, superintendent or other officer in charge of such jail or other officer in charge of any such jail or other penal institution.

APPROVED--The 20th day of March, A. D. 1903.

NEW SERIES No. 58

THE JOURNAL
OF
PRISON DISCIPLINE
AND
PHILANTHROPY

REPORT OF ACTING COMMITTEE

REPORT OF COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE
PRISON SYSTEMS

MILITARY DISCIPLINE AND PUNISHMENTS, ETC.

1919

ISSUED ANNUALLY BY
THE PENNSYLVANIA PRISON SOCIETY
FORREST BUILDING, 119 SOUTH FOURTH STREET
PHILADELPHIA, PA.

FORM OF BEQUEST OF PERSONAL PROPERTY.

I give and bequeath to “THE PENNSYLVANIA PRISON SOCIETY” the sum of................Dollars.

FORM OF DEVISE OF REAL ESTATE.

I give and bequeath to “THE PENNSYLVANIA PRISON SOCIETY” all that certain piece and parcel of land. (Here enter the description.)

OFFICERS FOR THE SOCIETY FOR 1919

PRESIDENT

EDWARD M. WISTAR, Provident Building, Philadelphia.

VICE-PRESIDENT

NORRIS J. SCOTT, Moylan, Pa.

SECRETARY

ALBERT H. VOTAW, 119 S. Fourth Street, Philadelphia.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY

CHARLES P. HASTINGS, 119 S. Fourth Street, Philadelphia.

TREASURER

JOHN WAY, 409 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia.

COUNSELORS

FREDERICK L. CLARK, West End Trust Building, Philadelphia.
WILLIAM DRAPER LEWIS, Law Department, University of Pennsylvania.

GENERAL AGENT

FREDERICK J. POOLEY, 119 S. Fourth Street, Philadelphia.

ACTING COMMITTEE

FOR ONE YEAR

Harrison Walton John A. Duncan Fred Swarts Brink
Charles P. Hastings Mrs. Mary S. Grigg Dr. B. Frank Kehler
Rev. F. H. Senft William Morris Dr. J. J. Mullowney
Isaac P. Miller Mrs. Emma L. Thompson Robert B. Haines, Jr.
Charles McDole Rev. Thomas Latimer H. Wellington Wood

FOR TWO YEARS

Harry Kennedy George S. Wetherell Dr. Charles Williams
Henry C. Cassel Frank H. Longshore Charles C. Simmington
Mrs. Layyah Barakat C. Wilfred Conard Mrs. Eliza M. Cope
Rev. J. F. Ohl Rev. M. Reed Minnich Watson W. Dewees
Mary S. Wetherell Miss Emily Whelen George A. Coburn

FOR THREE YEARS

Frederick J. Pooley Miss Annie McFedries Joseph P. Byers
William Koelle Dr. John Frazer Franklin S. Edmonds
Deborah C. Leeds Dr. J. Treichler Butz Leon J. Obermayer
Mrs. Clara Hodges Allen George W. Wilkins Miss M. N. Cochran, Jr.
Miss Rebecca P. Latimer Mrs. Mary Ella deLong Miss Florence B. Kane

ACTING COMMITTEE FOR THE STATE-AT-LARGE

FOR ONE YEAR FOR TWO YEARS FOR THREE YEARS BUCKS COUNTY ALLEGHENY COUNTY ALLEGHENY COUNTY Mrs. Anna K. Garges Paul T. Beiswenger Rev. F. W. Beiswenger

CHESTER COUNTY MONTGOMERY COUNTY CENTRE COUNTY Mrs. B. K. C. Marshall Capt. Nicholas Baggs Hon. J. Linn Harris

YORK COUNTY LUZERNE COUNTY Miss Rhoda M. Starr Mrs. Anabel Wallace

STANDING COMMITTEES FOR 1919

_Visiting Committee--Eastern Penitentiary_:

MEN

Rev. J. F. Ohl Charles P. Hastings Edward M. Wistar
Rev. F. H. Senft Charles McDole Fred Swarts Brink
Harry Kennedy John A. Duncan George W. Wilkins
William Koelle Albert H. Votaw Dr. B. F. Kehler
George S. Wetherell Rev. Thomas Latimer Leon J. Obermayer
Henry C. Cassel Isaac P. Miller Chas. C. Simmington
Harrison Walton Rev. M. Reed Minnich Geo. A. Coburn
Frank H. Longshore Dr. Charles Williams H. Wellington Wood
William Morris

WOMEN

Deborah C. Leeds Miss R. P. Latimer Mrs. Mary Ella deLong
Mary S. Wetherell Miss Emily Whelen Mrs. Layyah Barakat
Mrs. Mary S. Grigg

_Visiting Committee_--_Philadelphia County Prison_--_Moyamensing_:

John A. Duncan Norris J. Scott Deborah C. Leeds
Rev. J. F. Ohl H. Wellington Wood Mrs. Clara Hodges Allen
Frederick J. Pooley Albert H. Votaw Miss R. P. Latimer

_Visiting Committee_--_Philadelphia County Prison_--_Holmesburg_:

Frederick J. Pooley William Koelle John A. Duncan

_Visiting Committee_--_House of Correction_:

William Koelle Robert B. Haines, Jr.
Fred Swarts Brink Mrs. Layyah Barakat

_Committee on Discharged Prisoners_:

Dr. Charles Williams George W. Wilkins
Miss Florence B. Kane Charles P. Hastings

_Committee on Legislation_:

Rev. J. F. Ohl Mrs. E. M. Cope Hon. J. Linn Harris
C. Wilfred Conard Joseph P. Byers

_Committee on Membership_:

Isaac P. Miller George W. Wilkins Miss M. N. Cochran, Jr.
John A. Duncan George S. Wetherell

_Committee on Police Matrons_:

Mrs. Mary S. Grigg Miss Emily Whelen Mrs. Mary Ella deLong

_Editorial Committee_:

Rev. J. F. Ohl Miss Florence B. Kane Joseph P. Byers
Rev. F. H. Senft Albert H. Votaw

_Finance Committee_:

George S. Wetherell John A. Duncan
Robert B. Haines, Jr. Fred Swarts Brink

_Auditors_:

John A. Duncan Isaac P. Miller Watson W. Dewees

THE JOURNAL OF PRISON DISCIPLINE AND PHILANTHROPY

ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-SECOND ANNUAL MEETING OF THE PENNSYLVANIA PRISON SOCIETY.

The 132d Annual Meeting of THE PENNSYLVANIA PRISON SOCIETY was held by appointment in Assembly Hall, Church Building, northwest corner Fifteenth and Race Streets, Philadelphia, on the evening of January 14, 1919, President Edward M. Wistar in the Chair.

Twenty-five members were present.

The Minutes of the 131st Meeting were read and approved.

The Report of the Acting Committee for the year 1918 was read by the Secretary. It was approved and directed to be printed. (See pages 7-14.)

The Treasurer, John Way, presented a detailed statement of the receipts and payments for the fiscal year ending December 31, 1918, accompanied by a schedule of the securities held for the Society by the Fiscal Agent, The Provident Life and Trust Company. The statement had been audited and the securities had been examined by the auditors. (See page 15.)

On behalf of the Committee on Nominations, the Secretary presented a list of nominations for the Officers of the Society and for members of the Acting Committee to succeed those whose terms expire on February 1. Watson W. Dewees and George S. Wetherell were appointed Tellers. The election being duly held the persons nominated were elected to the offices designated in the report of the Committee. (See page 3.)

A communication was read, sent by Leonard G. Yoder, Esq., Solicitor for the Berks County Prison, calling attention to the fact that the Act of the Assembly, approved 1917, provided that prisoners in the county prisons could be employed at agricultural labor only during the continuance of the war which is now interrupted by the armistice. The net profit of the labor of prisoners thus employed in Berks County in 1918 was $800, and the Solicitor recommends that this Act should apply permanently and requests that this Society should exert an influence on the present Assembly for the purpose of encouraging the continuation of this beneficial measure for the employment of prisoners. By motion, the communication was referred to the Legislative Committee of the Acting Committee.

Dr. George W. Kirchwey of New York delivered the Annual Address. He is the Counsel for the Commission under appointment to investigate prisons and to recommend such revision of our present penal system as may seem advisable. While the report of the Commission was not yet entirely prepared, he intimated that some scheme of Central Administration would be proposed, not so much to take the management away from the present Boards of Inspectors as to exercise advisory and supervisory powers and to correlate our various correctional institutions. The conditions now obtaining in regard to the employment of prisoners were deplorable in this Keystone State, and it was the aim of the Commission to provide some form of productive labor for all able-bodied prisoners. They were prepared to recommend an extension of agricultural operations and favored the early removal of the Eastern Penitentiary to a farm in the eastern portion of the State. He deprecated every form of brutality in the treatment of delinquents and evidently thought the old repressive spirit and measures could still be found to have lodgment in some of our prisons. He was sure that a large number of our prisoners, possibly a majority, were mentally deficient and ought to have special treatment adapted to their needs, which, under present circumstances of incarceration, was impossible. If we wish to restore the men whom we confine in our prisons, we must do more than simply restrain them within certain limits; we must treat them as erring brothers and sisters, not as dumb driven cattle.

To nominate to our next Annual Meeting the officers of the Society and members of the Acting Committee whose terms expire next year, the President appointed William Biddle, Robert Dunning Dripps, John A. Duncan, William C. Warren and Miss Emily Whelen.

ALBERT H. VOTAW,
_Secretary_.

REPORT OF ACTING COMMITTEE FOR THE YEAR 1918.

At a meeting which was held May 8, 1787, in Philadelphia, at which the “Philadelphia Society for Alleviating the Miseries of Prisons” was organized, provision was made for the appointment of an Acting Committee which should discharge the executive functions of the Society. It was composed of nine persons, the President, the two Vice-Presidents, and six additional members. The first Acting Committee was composed of

Bishop William White, President,
Dr. Henry Helmuth, Vice-President,
Richard Wells, Vice-President.

Additional members:

Tench Coxe, John Kaighn,
Dr. George Duffield, Benjamin Wynkoop,
William Rogers, George Krebs.

From time to time, on account of additional duties, responsibilities and opportunities for service, this Committee has been enlarged until at the present time it is limited to sixty persons, and at the present time is composed of fifty-six members.

In 1886 the name of the Society was changed to “The Pennsylvania Prison Society”--a name indicating no change of purpose, but rather a wider scope of operations.

In the year 1829, the Acting Committee, by Act of Assembly, were appointed Official Visitors of all prisons in the Commonwealth. Our Society was the only one having such duties until the year 1903, when, by another Act of the Assembly, the privilege was granted to the Acting Committee of the Catholic Society for the Visitation of Prisoners.

OFFICIAL VISITATION.

While many members of our Visiting Committees have been zealous in their endeavor to open the door of hope to the prisoners, and to stimulate them to higher ideals of life, the general conditions obtaining in the prisons have also claimed attention. It is a prescribed function of the Visiting Committee of any prison, whether State or County, to note the “condition of the buildings ... the discipline and management,” and to make report of their observations. Great discretion and a full understanding of the situation are essential in publishing the results of such comments and observations. In the early history of our organization, there were so many abuses prevalent in the management of prisons that by far the larger part of the activities of the Acting Committee consisted in the effort to remedy the evils of management. These efforts were eminently successful in those days of emergence from medieval methods; and while we all rejoice in the very great amelioration of conditions, it must be confessed that penal improvement has lagged behind all other agencies for betterment. If we compare our educational system, hospitals, transportation methods, agricultural development--any field of human endeavor--with our correctional institutions, we are overwhelmed by the extreme lack of corresponding progress.

PERSONAL VISITATION.

The reports of the Visiting Committees for the year 1918 indicate that there is no loss of interest or effort in seeking to restore men and women to their better selves. In consequence of the quarantine caused by the epidemic of influenza, which resulted in keeping visitors away from four to six weeks, the statistics do not bulk as large as usual.

Number of reported visits to the Eastern Penitentiary 337
Number of reported interviews with the inmates 6,435
Number of reported interviews with the inmates of the
Philadelphia County Prison 3,631
Number of prisoners interviewed at Central Station
by Agent 15,933
Number of discharged prisoners receiving direct aid 590

On practically every Sabbath one or more of our members take part in the religious services in the prisons.

We are convinced that many of those with whom we meet from time to time are victims of circumstances, and also that many of them are defective in mentality and in self control. At some time, we trust the General Assembly will take up seriously the subject of the degenerates who need treatment in accordance with the most approved psychiatric methods. Some of them need institutional care for a much longer time than is indicated by the Court sentence. Here they should be restrained until they are deemed ready to become useful to the community.

EMPLOYMENT OF PRISONERS.

In the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the most flagrant evil of the prisons is the lack of wholesome employments for the inmates. Even some of our laws designed to help conditions have aggravated the evil. For instance, the law of 1913, which, with the best intentions, repealed other laws for employment in the State Penal Institutions, in order that the inmates might all be employed in making articles for State use, did not create a sure market for the articles thus manufactured, and therefore the number of prisoners profitably employed in the penitentiaries is not so large as under a former law when 35 per cent. of them could be kept at work in the manufacture of articles or products to be sold in the open market. A simple remedy for this deplorable state of affairs may be found in granting the privilege of selling the surplus stock in the market at the prevailing price. Organized labor found undesirable competition with the products of free labor only when the prisoners were employed on the vicious contract system. Under the present methods, the prisoners are to receive a fair wage and the products are to be sold at the market price. Perhaps we could make a beginning by listing certain industries in which the convicts may be employed. Place no restrictions on agricultural products, including canned goods, on the work of stone crushing and in general the manufacture of road-making material, and also allow two or three indoor industries, such as the manufacture of carpets and knit goods. Thus the problem may be solved. When we consider the very small number of persons so employed in comparison with the hordes of outside workers, it appears very evident that the amount of real competition would reduce to the vanishing point. No industry would be injured, the tax-payers would be relieved from a large part of the expense, the prisoners would earn their own maintenance, and thus the demoralizing effects of idleness would be averted.

DISCHARGED PRISONERS.

It has sometimes been stated that for some visitors, the prisoner loses his charm when released from confinement. He may be decidedly interesting behind the bars, or perhaps he may be simply an object of curiosity, or a psychological specimen to be studied, like some abnormal freak of nature. Within the wall the visitor may show warmth, interest, cordiality, sympathy, a certain degree of familiarity, but on the outside the atmosphere is below zero. This is a species of charlatanism for which we have no sympathy. It is an exceedingly important part of our mission to set the discharged man on his feet, and to establish his goings. If ever any man needed sympathy and material aid, it is when the man released from confinement again becomes a member of the community. Not all the men and women who are released seem to require special help, but those who are in need are very greatly dependent upon human kindness till they have regained some sense of confidence and have again become self-supporting. If aid and good cheer are not forthcoming at this crucial time of testing, there is imminent danger of a relapse into former bad habits. We believe that all of our visitors realize the importance of maintaining our interest and kindly feeling for the prisoner at the time of his release.

SECURING EMPLOYMENT.

During the last two years there has been no difficulty in finding work for any able-bodied man. There are some disappointments, but we are learning not to become discouraged. Possibly we may allow ourselves to dwell unduly on the failures, when we should recall the many instances of reclamation. The saying “Once a crook, always a crook” has no place either in our experience or in our philosophy. If this saying represents a truth, we would become pessimistic regarding the human race. Show us the man or woman who has never erred. Please note some examples:--

The other day we met “A” on Market Street. Accompanied by his little son, he was speeding away in his “flivver.” He stopped to give us a greeting, and indicated that happiness and prosperity were his portion.

“B” is a spick and span policeman in a neighboring city. Though you may say “Set a thief to catch a thief,” this particular guardian of the public peace is discharging his duty to the community.

“C” seemed particularly pleased to meet us the other day uptown. He had joined the church, and had attained to the dignity of usher.

“D,” who was once an accomplished burglar, having served at least two terms in prison, has built up a manufacturing industry, and is quite prosperous.

“E” is foreman in the jewelry department of a large department store “somewhere in America.”

“F,” a one-armed piece of ebon jollity, is one of the handiest men employed on a certain prosperous truck farm.

“G,” who began cooking for Blank Firm at $10 weekly wages, now reports with a grin that he is getting $65 a month with board and lodging.

“H” is one of the most popular clerks in the office of a mammoth establishment. That he once fell from grace is known, but it is no longer reckoned against him.

“I” one year ago began as a solicitor and now his business has so enlarged that he has taken a suite of rooms for his office.

We could easily exhaust the alphabet with such cases. There are failures, but we try to discount our disappointments when we take account of those who are “making good.” The Parole Officers have informed us that seventy-five per cent. are becoming satisfactory citizens. By far the larger part of those whom we willingly assist, in a short time are beyond our ken. They take with them our hopes and our fears--our fears, that they may again yield to the manifold temptations on every hand; our hopes, that they have learned their lesson, and with courage and by the help of divine grace are performing their duty to the community.

A REVOLVING RELIEF FUND.

A few of those to whom we render assistance return a part, or all, of the funds which we have advanced to them. We do not press them for payment. Those who are invalids or who have families to support are not expected to repay us. From many years of experience, we have learned that it is not wise indiscriminately to make grants of cash in hand. Old chums are waiting just around the corner for a treat. Temptations of all sorts are manifold. We guarantee bills for board and lodging, purchase tools and clothing, furnish transportation, and provide outfits for those who are sent to the State Sanatoriums. But there are some who should feel an obligation to return the value of the assistance rendered. Thus we hope to create a sort of revolving fund which may be used for cases of need, and when returned is ready for the next man. Many of these released men have some natural pride or self respect, and do not wish to be considered mendicants.

THE AMERICAN PRISON ASSOCIATION.

On account of the epidemic of influenza so prevalent in the autumn, the meeting of the American Prison Association was called off. At a meeting of the Executive Committee held recently it was concluded to postpone till next year the sessions of this body. New York had been selected as the place, and it has been decided to meet in the same city, October 20-24, 1919.

THE AGENT’S WORK AT THE CENTRAL POLICE STATION.

One of the most important features of our relief work is under the management of our Agent, Mr. Fred J. Pooley, at the Central Station, City Hall. From the forty-two Police Stations throughout the city, there arrive almost hourly at this Central Station van loads of human freight which in some way or other must be quickly disposed of by the Committing Magistrate. Most of these are petty offenders, but also there are numerous cases of arrest on suspicion or for vagrancy, and such as these need special care in order to prevent injustice, and to be saved from criminal associations. Agent Pooley endeavors to have a brief interview with these derelicts or victims of misfortune before they are taken before the Magistrate. In ten months of last year he thus interviewed 15,933 arrested persons, and on their behalf wrote to their friends 1,937 letters. His experience for many years has taught him to distinguish the ring of the true from the sound of the false, so that when the cases come up before the Court, he is ready to interpose a word on behalf of the accused person. Often the unfortunate man or woman, boy or girl, is placed in the care of the agent, who sends them to their homes or friends, or places them in some detention home until he may verify their story or hear from their parents or relatives. No day passes with a blank record in this work of rescue.

In the Agent’s report, an abstract of which is printed in the Annual Journal of which this report forms a part, a number of instances are narrated, illustrating the importance of this service.

During the time of the closing of the saloons on account of the epidemic of influenza, the number of arrests for drunkenness and disorderly conduct greatly decreased, thus clearly demonstrating that a prohibitory law would have a decided tendency very greatly to diminish crime and disorder in this city.

LEGISLATION.

We have delayed the printing of our annual report in order to include in the JOURNAL the Report of the Commission to Investigate Prison Systems, of which the Secretary of the Society is a member. The Legislative Committee of the Society has endorsed the findings of the Commission and has urgently requested the General Assembly to take favorable action on the bills presented by the Commission. A synopsis of these bills presents the following desirable features.

1. The enlargement of the functions of the State Board of Public Charities so as to include the appointment from their number of a Committee on Delinquency with supervisory power over all prisons of the Commonwealth and with authority to condemn unsanitary conditions and provide for betterment, and also to have especial direction over the prison industries. Medical and psychiatric examination of convicts is provided with power to transfer defective criminals to the institution most suitable for their care and restoration.

2. The establishment of State Industrial Farms to which those sentenced to the county jails may be sent.

3. An Amendment to the law of 1911 which deals with the imposition of sentences by the Courts to the extent that convicted prisoners may be eligible for parole when one-third of the maximum sentence has expired.

4. Abolition of the fee system in county jails, a practice universally condemned by all who have studied the problem.

5. The removal of the Eastern Penitentiary to a farm in the eastern part of the State. This suggestion is in line with the recommendation of the Commission of 1915 of which the present Warden was a member. At that time the purchase of a farm for the use of the institution was proposed.

6. The provision that goods and articles made by the labor of prisoners shall be used whenever practicable by public institutions of the Commonwealth, thus insuring a market for such products.

The full report of the Commission is found in the present issue of the JOURNAL, pages 19-46.

THE ROLL OF MEMBERS.

During the last year we have to a considerable extent enlarged the membership of our Society. We presented the matter to a number of our citizens, many of whom had been contributors to our work for some time, who very cordially accepted membership. Seventy-five persons have been added to our membership during the year 1918, and we are deeply gratified to place on our roll the names of so many estimable citizens. The number of members at the present time, including life members, is 252.

MORTUARY NOTICES.

During the last year four of the members of the Acting Committee have been called away by death.

In January our dear friend, Mrs. Elizabeth M. Gormly, who has faithfully visited for many years the prisoners in Pittsburgh, died at an advanced age. She had been a member since 1903. She was also connected with the Women’s Christian Temperance Union, being the State Superintendent of Evangelistic Work among Prisoners.

In August, Mrs. Annie Fassitt, of Philadelphia, also of an advanced age, passed from works to rewards. She had been a member from 1896, and had given special assistance to hundreds of prisoners. She was one of the founders of the “Door of Blessing,” and for many years was prominent in the support and management of this effort for the restoration of erring sisters. She was a real “Angel of Mercy.”

John Smallzell, a member since 1905, also passed away in the month of August. His visits to Eastern Penitentiary will long be remembered. Wherever he went, he took a message of good cheer. He was most sincere and devout, and carried with him everywhere the influence of a devoted Christian life.

In April, 1919, our esteemed Vice-President Joseph C. Noblit, in the eighty-sixth year of his life, was called to his everlasting home. He was elected a member of the Society in 1899 and was made a member of the Acting Committee in 1900. In 1916 he was chosen as one of the Vice-Presidents, and on occasion presided at the meetings of the Acting Committee with dignity and a high sense of responsibility. He was a diligent attender of the meetings and his judgment on the many matters coming before the Committee was sound and discreet. He was a faithful visitor to the inmates of our prisons, earnest in the endeavor to bring to them a true gospel message and to induce them to choose the better way of living. He knew the deep principles of experimental religion, and was solicitous that all with whom he came in contact should know for themselves the consolations of a devoted Christian life. “He giveth his beloved sleep.”

On behalf of the Acting Committee,

EDWARD M. WISTAR,
_President_.

ALBERT H. VOTAW,
_Secretary_.

FINANCIAL STATEMENT.

RECEIPTS FOR THE YEAR 1918.

To Balance January 1, 1918 $1,716 94
“ Contributions 3,439 00
“ Dues from Annual Members 410 00
“ Life Membership (Edw. M. Wistar) 50 00
“ Income from Investments 2,152 60
“ Income from I. V. Williamson Charities 720 00
“ Income from Anna Blanchard Fund 220 50
“ Income from Joshua L. Baily Fund 157 62
“ Income from Henry A. Rogers Fund 25 20
“ Income from Isaac Barton (Tool Fund) 80 33
“ Interest on deposits 42 05
“ Sale of Literature 90
“ Returned by Discharged Prisoners 40 25
“ Refund Account Wardens’ Conference 129 45
---------
Total Receipts $9,184 84

PAYMENTS.

For Aid and Relief Discharged Prisoners $1,408 34
“ Journal and other Publications 650 80
“ Dues, various affiliated Associations 11 00
“ Library, Periodicals 27 35
“ Postage, Printing, Stationery 383 75
“ Office Expenses, Telephone, Incidentals 275 89
“ Traveling Expenses, Secretary and Agent 98 60
“ Rent of Office 480 00
“ Salaries of Officers 3,710 00
“ Life Membership Fee Transferred to Fiscal Agent 50 00
“ Balance, December 31, 1918 2,089 11
---------
Total Payments including balance $9,184 84

REPORT ON FUNDS HELD FOR HOME OF INDUSTRY.

Receipts on Account of Income $361 28
Payments to Home of Industry 361 28

Respectfully,
JOHN WAY, _Treasurer_.

We the undersigned members of the Audit Committee, have examined the foregoing account of John Way, Treasurer, compared the payments with the vouchers, and believe the same to be correct.

We have also examined securities in the hands of our agents, The Provident Life and Trust Company of Philadelphia, and find them to agree with the list thereto attached.

Philadelphia January 1, 1919. JOHN A. DUNCAN,
ISAAC P. MILLER,
_Auditing Committee_.

REPORT OF GENERAL AGENT FREDERICK J. POOLEY.

During the year 1918 the Agent made daily visits to the cell-room at the Central Station at City Hall. Twenty thousand and thirty-nine men and women prisoners were detained there for preliminary trial, 15,933 of whom the Agent visited while at the Central Station and the remainder after they arrived at Moyamensing Prison.

Number visited at County Prisons 2,829
Number of notices and letters written on their behalf 1,888
Number discharged prisoners receiving financial aid 345

The opportunities for helpful service are very numerous. In a large number of cases of suspicion or of a trivial character, the Agent has been instrumental in securing the discharge of the prisoners, or in placing them under the care of the Probation Officer, thus saving their family from disgrace and the County from expense.

It might be of interest to mention a few cases of interest.

No. 1. A young man from the west, arrested as a suspicious character, had been from home nine years, and was held for a hearing. The Agent got in touch with his relatives and he was discharged and sent home.

No. 2. A young man from Pittsburgh, Pa., money all gone, while pawning his watch was arrested; the pawnbroker thought he had stolen it, and when your Agent received word from his mother that it was his own watch, he was discharged and sent home.

No. 3. Two young men from St. Louis, with no money, were held as suspicious characters in order to give the Agent a chance to get in touch with relatives. One mother came on, and the other sent ticket, and they both went home.

No. 4. A young man who had gone from town to town, ashamed to write home, until he landed in our City Hall cell. A few words from the Agent, brought tears to his eyes and he allowed a letter to be written. The magistrate discharged him and he is now at home, and he writes: “I am so glad you found me when you did, for your letter found my mother and brought her to my rescue, and now _I am free_ and expect to keep in the right path the remainder of my life.”

With the close of the year 1918, your Agent completed 20 years of service at the Philadelphia County Prison and eight years of service at the Central Police Station, City Hall, and in all these years your Agent has not lost sight of the fact that it is the kind word and a kindly grasp of the hand, at the proper moment, that may be the means of turning an unfortunate from the wrong to the right path.

Very truly,
FREDERICK J. POOLEY,
1/15/19. _General Agent._

PAROLE STATISTICS--EASTERN PENITENTIARY.

The whole number of prisoners released on
parole, including some who have been
re-paroled, from September, 1910, to January
1, 1919 2,773

Number thus released in 1918 510
Whole number returned to the Penitentiary
since September, 1910 515

Some of those paroled have died, some have been pardoned and some have received final discharge.

Number who should now be reporting 930
Of these, the number actually reporting 728
Number known to be in jail elsewhere 37
Number whose present address is unknown 165 930

Less than six per cent. of the entire number have vanished. It must not be considered that all of these have committed crime. Doubtless many of them have been in the trenches. They have broken connection with the parole officials in order to serve Uncle Sam, who has stated that he will not accept those who have been guilty of felony. From outside sources, we have known that a large number of former convicts have thus endeavored to expiate their former offenses. Much praise has been given to ex-convicts in Canada and Great Britain from which countries many were released in order to join the army or navy. In fact very few of these absconders are supposed to have again committed crime. Nearly every penal institution of the country receives notice of these decampers accompanied by their photographs, so they are easily identified. The few who again committed some crime have thus been detected and either returned whence they came or held with detainers. Probably nearly all of them desire to get entirely away from any restraint or semblance of authority. They make a grievous mistake for they are liable at any time to be apprehended and to be brought back in disgrace. They live the life of hunted animals. Never for one hour can they feel secure. We believe that a penalty should be levied upon those who abuse the privilege of parole. They have violated their word of honor, and should serve additional time.

There are some persons who will argue against the granting of parole because some eight and one-half per cent. of these obtaining this privilege have again been guilty of violations of law and order. Nearly all these violations are of the nature of misdemeanors. Comparatively few have been guilty of felonies. The problem involves a deep study of human psychology. In order to determine who shall be released, there are many elements to be considered. Mistakes are made both within and outside the prison walls. Those on the inside often give the applicant the benefit of their doubts when the logic of the case seems to urge further detention. When the man is on the outside he is often disappointed in the attitude of the community of which he really desires to become a law-abiding citizen. The members of the community assume a serious responsibility when they put stumbling-blocks in the way of the man who is endeavoring to make good. “Woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.”

But the conclusion is irresistible that an argument against release on parole, based on the fact that about eight per cent. have again become lawbreakers, is a stronger argument against release at expiration of sentence.

For a much larger percentage than eight per cent. of those who are released because their terms have expired and therefore can not longer be detained, become recidivists. Often one-half of the prisoners at a penal institution have served previously, and yet a comparatively small percentage are parole violators. In other words, the same argument which is used against release on parole will apply more strongly to any release whatever. Again, it must be remembered that the paroled man or woman is under watchful care, while the person absolutely released is subject to no restraint.

Out of every 100 persons reported January 1, 1919, as being on parole, 74 were making good. Of the remaining 26, barely two have committed felonies. This record is better than Boards in some other States have reported. Our Parole Officials are giving deep study to this subject with a view to increasing the percentage of successful effort.

A. H. V.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA.

REPORT OF COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE PENAL SYSTEMS.

_To the General Assembly_:

Your Commission duly appointed pursuant to Act of the Legislature, No. 409, 1917, “to investigate the prison systems and the organization and management of correctional institutions within this Commonwealth and elsewhere; to recommend such revision of the existing prison system within this Commonwealth, and the laws pertaining to the establishment, maintenance and regulation of State and County correctional institutions within this Commonwealth as it shall deem wise, and to report the same to the General Assembly at the session of 1919,” respectfully submits the following report of its proceedings, together with its conclusions and recommendations and proposed bills for carrying the same into effect.

The Commission was constituted as follows:

Fletcher W. Stites, Narberth, Chairman,
Alfred E. Jones, Uniontown,
Mrs. Martha P. Falconer, Darling P. O.,
Louis N. Robinson, Swarthmore,
Albert H. Votaw, Philadelphia.

On November 1, 1917, the members of the Commission met in the City of Philadelphia, for the purpose of organization and assigned the work of investigation which had been committed to it to the several members thereof. On July 1, 1918, the Commission retained Dr. George W. Kirchwey, of New York City, as its counsel to direct the subsequent course of the investigation and to aid the Commission with his counsel and advice.

I.

SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION.

The Commission was fortunate in having in its personnel as thus constituted four members, including its counsel, who had through long experience and previous investigations acquired considerable information as to penal institutions and their management in this and other States. The investigation covered:--

(1) A careful study and analysis of the laws governing penal conditions and institutions in this Commonwealth;

(2) An examination of the six correctional institutions directly controlled by the State, namely:

The Eastern Penitentiary, at Philadelphia;
The Western Penitentiary, at Pittsburgh;
The New Central Penitentiary, at Bellefonte;
The State Industrial Reformatory, at Huntingdon;
The Pennsylvania Training School, at Morganza;
The State Industrial Home for Women, at Muncy;

(3) A similar examination of the Glen Mills Schools--the Girls’ Department, Sleighton Farms, at Darlington, and the Boys’ Department at Glen Mills;

(4) A similar examination of the Philadelphia House of Correction and of the County Convict Prison at Holmesburg, Moyamensing Prison in Philadelphia, the Allegheny County Workhouse at Hoboken and many other county institutions;

(5) A study of the constitution, organization and functions of the State Board of Public Charities, and specifically of those of its Committee on Lunacy;

(6) A study of the powers and activities of the Prison Labor Commission instituted under the Act of June 1, 1918;

(7) A careful survey of the entire history of the penal system of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from the colonial period down to the present time, based on the historical research of Professor Harry E. Barnes of Clark University, Massachusetts;

(8) An investigation of significant correctional institutions in several other States, notably in New York, New Jersey and Ohio.

To supplement and enlarge the range of these inquiries and studies, the Commission was permitted to avail itself of the results of previous investigations conducted by two of its members; on the Employment and Compensation of Prisoners in Pennsylvania, by Professor Louis N. Robinson, as Secretary of the Penal Commission of 1913-1915, and on the county jails and workhouses, made periodically from 1914 to 1918 by Albert H. Votaw, as Secretary of the Pennsylvania Prison Society.

The Commission desires to express its sense of deep obligation to the officials and inspectors of prisons in this Commonwealth for the courtesy and hospitality extended to its members in the course of their investigations. It also acknowledges its indebtedness to the Secretary and members of the Board of Public Charities and to the Secretary of the Public Charities Association for their helpful co-operation.

The Commission has heretofore submitted to the Governor two preliminary reports, one a Special Emergency Report on Prison Labor, bearing date September 1, 1918, and a special report on the State Industrial Home for Women, under date of September 15, 1918, both of which are hereto appended.

While both these reports were called out by war emergencies, the former by the dearth of labor power to man the war industries of the Commonwealth, the latter by the need of providing a place for the detention and treatment of the large number of dissolute women convicted of offenses against Federal and State laws enacted for the protection of the soldiers in the training camps--the Commission believes that they are still pertinent and that the recommendations which they contain should form a part of any constructive scheme for the improvement of the penal system of the Commonwealth.

II.

DEVELOPMENT OF PENAL SYSTEM OF PENNSYLVANIA.

The most inspiring and significant chapter in the history of penology is not the achievement of John Howard in redeeming the common gaols of England from the degradation into which they had fallen, nor of Lord Romilly in his lifelong struggle against the barbarities of the English penal laws, but the leadership which for more than a century the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania gave to the world both in prison reform and in the amelioration of the penal code. The two former were the revolt of sensitive and humane natures against hoary abuses; but the latter was all this and something more. It was a bold and imaginative reconstruction of the whole basis of penal discipline. As far back as the last quarter of the seventeenth century the Quaker colonists of Pennsylvania introduced for the first time the practice of employing imprisonment at hard labor as the ordinary method of punishing anti-social action. After the reversion of the American colonies for fifty years to the barbarous criminal jurisprudence of the mother country, Pennsylvania was the first State, the first community in the world, to break with this system and to substitute imprisonment for the various brutal and degrading types of corporal punishment. The Walnut Street Jail in Philadelphia, in 1790, was the earliest institution in America in which these more enlightened principles were put into practice. From this second beginning, for a period of forty years, Pennsylvania was elaborating and perfecting the first of the two great systems of penal administration which were destined to dominate the penology of the civilized world during the nineteenth century--the separate confinement of malefactors. Visited, admired and imitated by large numbers of eminent and enthusiastic European penologists, the Eastern Penitentiary at Cherry Hill was the pivotal point linking American and European penology for more than a generation after 1830.

Then followed that long period of inertia, of lassitude, of marking time, which is so apt to succeed to a period of ardent reforming energy and which to this very day has maintained its spell over the State and the Nation.

Not that there have not in the last half century been notable improvements in the theory and practice of penal administration, some of them bold enough to bring America from time to time into the forefront of interest and example to the penologists of the Old World, but in most of these the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has been content to play a secondary role. Throughout this era of slackened energy she has not cared or dared to initiate, to lead, to “carry on,” but has followed belatedly and afar off the progress of other States. Examples of this are the Auburn congregate system, which divided with the Pennsylvania system of solitary confinement the interest of European as well as of American penologists, and which was adopted in the Western Penitentiary in 1869, a full generation after its establishment in New York State, and which has only recently conquered the parent institution on Cherry Hill; the justly famous Elmira experiment of progressive classification and industrial training of inmates embodied in the Huntingdon Reformatory in 1889, and the long-promised reformatory for women at Muncy, which, six years after its creation by legislative action, has not yet been rendered available for the purpose for which it was designed.

The first step in the development of an intelligent conception of delinquency and its treatment came not in an accurate conception of the nature of crime and its causes, but in a clearer and more correct notion of the function of punishment. By 1790 the element of deterrence in punishment was recognized and emphasized. The element of reformation was a cardinal point in the theory and practice of the Philadelphia Society for Alleviating the Miseries of Public Prisons, and this Society did its best to infuse this doctrine into the Pennsylvania system of prison administration. Before 1830 it was very generally asserted that reformation, as well as deterrence and social revenge, was to be regarded as a chief aim of punishment, though the offender was still regarded as an unregenerate free moral agent.

This theory of crime received a severe shock in the “forties” from the investigations of Dorothea L. Dix and others, who showed the great prevalence of insanity and idiocy among the delinquent classes. It could scarcely be denied even by the traditional jurists that the exercise of free will was likely to be seriously impeded by insanity or feeble-mindedness. From 1850 to the beginning of the present century the most notable advances toward a more intelligent conception of crime and its treatment consisted in the gradual but definite triumph of the notion of detention and punishment as agencies for reformation rather than as instruments of social revenge.

For more than a century of its history the penal, reformatory and correctional institutions of Pennsylvania were limited to the county jails and the few and scattered workhouses, which were erected mainly in conjunction with the almshouses. In the jails there could be no approach to anything like a differentiated treatment of delinquents. In them were herded promiscuously those imprisoned for debt, those convicted of crime and those accused or held as witnesses; those of all ages and both sexes; those convicted of all categories and grades of crime punishable by imprisonment; those of all mental states--normal, feeble-minded, neurotic, psychotic, epileptic. The few colonial workhouses were employed as little more than an agency for suppressing vagrancy.

The first step in a differentiated treatment of crime and criminals came with the erection of a semi-state prison in the Walnut Street Jail in 1789-90. This provided for a partial differentiation between those convicted of the more serious crimes and those convicted of petty offenses or awaiting trial. It did not however, attempt any scientific differentiation on the basis of age, sex or mental state. Children and adults, male and female, sane and insane, were confined in contiguity. The opening of the State penitentiaries at Allegheny and Philadelphia in 1826 and 1829, with their fundamental principle of solitary confinement, carried further the process of differentiation, but still continued to apply the same general type of treatment to all incarcerated inmates. It was a system of separation rather than of a differentiated treatment of special types of prisoners.

The second important development in the direction of specialization in the provision of institutional treatment of delinquents appeared in the establishment of a House of Refuge for juvenile delinquents in Philadelphia in 1828. Though this was at first a private rather than a State institution and was of very limited capacity, it marked an epoch in the progress of Pennsylvania penology by making possible some elementary differentiation on the basis of age, degree of criminality and relative susceptibility to reformation. The next attempt at further differentiation came with the erection of the State Hospital for the Insane at Harrisburg between 1841 and 1851, chiefly as a result of the agitation initiated by Dorothea L. Dix. This and the other State hospitals for the insane, subsequently erected, provided for a treatment of the more important types of mental disorder, though no adequate provision was made for removing the insane from the prison. Not until 1905 was an act passed providing for the erection of a State hospital for the criminal insane at Fairview which was opened in 1912.

During the quarter of a century following 1850 there was an active agitation to provide a means of differentiating the treatment of criminals on the basis of age, sex and degree of criminality. The first important achievement in this direction was the further development of reform schools for juvenile delinquents through the removal and enlargement of the Philadelphia House of Refuge in 1850-54 and the erection of the Western House of Refuge at Allegheny during the same period. Juvenile delinquents, if petty offenders, could thereafter be removed from their degrading confinement in the state prison or worse county jails and receive the properly specialized treatment which their circumstances demanded. No provision for the differentiated treatment of the less definite and confirmed types of adult delinquents was made until the opening of the reformatory for men at Huntingdon in 1889 and the authorization of the State Industrial Home for Women at Muncy in 1913. The provision of reformatories and juvenile correctional institutions marked a double process of differentiation, in that these institutions not only called for a diversity of treatment according to age, sex and degree of criminality, but also from the fact that they were clearly differentiated from the State prisons and the county jails in making reformation rather than punishment or detention their chief aims.

Along with this development of a properly differentiated system of treating the delinquent population, has gone the growth of specialized institutions for dealing with the closely related class of defectives, which was once treated indiscriminately along with the delinquent classes when its members were guilty of criminal action. The State institution for feeble-minded at Polk, opened in 1893, and at Spring City, provided by an act of 1903, and the State Village for Feeble-minded Women at Laurelton, not yet available for use, are designed to furnish scientific treatment for large numbers of those who would today be confined in the state prisons or county jails, if the ideas and institutions of 1840 prevailed. Even an institution for inebriates was contemplated in an act of 1913.

But this vital and all important process of the differentiation, classification and specialized treatment of the delinquent and defective classes has now proceeded far beyond that most elementary stage of furnishing separate institutions for dealing with the most general classes of delinquents and defectives. It has been found that the terms defective, insane and criminal have only a legal significance and are practically useless when involving the problem of exact scientific analysis and treatment. Each general class of delinquent boys, of defective girls or of criminal adults, for instance, is made up of distinguishable and distinct types which demand specialized treatment in the same way that it is required for one general class as distinguished from another. Though it is as yet very imperfectly developed, the present tendency is for each institution to differentiate into a number of specialized departments, each designed to provide the proper treatment for one of these types.

Finally, within the last decade beginnings have been made in what is likely to be an important future development, namely the non-institutional care of the less pronounced and confirmed types of delinquents, particularly of delinquent minors. The developments along this line have, up to the present, consisted chiefly in the adoption of parole systems in all the State penal, reformatory and correctional institutions and in a more liberal use of the suspended sentence and probation. The recently established Municipal Probation Court of Philadelphia is a pioneer in Pennsylvania in this promising new development in the preventive treatment of the less confirmed type of delinquents.

Looking at the whole matter as it stands today, it cannot be said that conditions in Pennsylvania are in any material respect either better or worse than in other progressive States, except in the one matter of the useful employment of the convict population. Here, as elsewhere, some lucky chance has placed a man or a woman of exceptional qualifications at the head of an institution, one who has by his strong personal initiative made the best of a bad situation, as in the case of the Eastern Penitentiary, or who has, with something akin to genius, seized upon a new opportunity, as in the case of the Girls’ School at Darlington and the new Penitentiary foundation at Bellefonte. But these are sporadic and exceptional developments and have furnished no new principle of a revolutionary character to mark the dawn of a new era in penal administration.

Meanwhile the hopeless and demoralizing idleness to which most of the inmates of the Eastern Penitentiary and of most of the county institutions of the Commonwealth are doomed, is a spectacle in which the people of Pennsylvania can take nothing but shame. But even if this is remedied, as it should be at once by drastic legislative action, Pennsylvania will have done no more than reach the level of penological theory of the Quaker innovators of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The step is an imperative one, but it will not restore to the Commonwealth the proud position of leadership which once was hers, which is still, by virtue of past achievements and by common fame, attributed to her.