Chapter II: Section 6: of said law reads as follows (1)

“Whenever any person, convicted in any court of this Commonwealth of
any crime, shall be sentenced to imprisonment in either the Eastern
or Western Penitentiary, the court, instead of pronouncing upon such
convict a definite or fixed term of imprisonment, shall pronounce
upon such convict a sentence of imprisonment for an indefinite term;
stating in such sentence the minimum and maximum limits thereof;
fixing as the minimum time of such imprisonment, the term now or
hereafter prescribed as the minimum imprisonment for the punishment
of such offense; but if there be no minimum time so prescribed, the
court shall determine the same, but it shall not exceed one fourth
of the maximum time, and the maximum limit shall be the maximum time
now or hereafter prescribed as a penalty for such offense: Provided,
however, That when a person shall have twice before been convicted,
sentenced and imprisoned in a penitentiary for a term of not less
than one year, for any crime committed in this State, or elsewhere
within the limits of the United States, the court shall sentence
said person to a maximum of thirty years: And provided further, That
no person sentenced for an indeterminate term shall be entitled
to any benefits under the act, entitled ‘An act providing for the
commutation of sentences for good behavior of convicts in prisons,
penitentiaries, workhouses, and county jails in this State, and
regulations governing the same,’ approved the eleventh day of May,
Anno Domini one thousand nine hundred and one.”

This section has been amended to read:

“Whenever any person, convicted in any court of this Commonwealth of
any crime, shall be sentenced to imprisonment in any penitentiary
of the State, the court, instead of pronouncing upon such convict a
definite or fixed term of imprisonment, shall pronounce upon such
convict a sentence of imprisonment for an indefinite term; stating in
such sentence the minimum and maximum limits thereof; and the maximum
limit shall never exceed the maximum time now or hereafter prescribed
as a penalty for such offense: Provided, That no person sentenced
for an indeterminate term shall be entitled to any benefits under
the act, entitled ‘An act providing for the commutation of sentences
for good behavior of convicts in prisons, penitentiaries, workhouses
and county jails in this State, and regulations governing the same,’
approved the eleventh day of May, Anno Domini one thousand nine
hundred and one.”

It will be seen that this amendment puts it into the power of the _court_ to fix _any_ minimum below the maximum, instead of a minimum not exceeding one fourth of the maximum; that it permits the court to name a lower maximum than the one now prescribed by law for any given offense; and that it strikes out the thirty-year clause altogether.

The practical effect of the former change is to destroy in great measure the value and efficacy of the indeterminate sentence as a remedial and reformatory measure. In other words, the amendment restores the vicious _inequality of sentences_, which is always so apt to breed a feeling of injustice and resentment in the one convicted, and which therefore greatly unfits him as a subject for reformatory treatment. It proceeds upon the long-accepted but false assumption that the court can in every case determine the exact degree of culpability and then adjust the punishment accurately to the crime. This is not only absurd, but it is impossible. A Solomon with all his wisdom could not have done this! As the law now stands, we shall again find, as is indeed already the case, that the same court or adjoining courts may, even under practically identical conditions, impose greatly varying sentences, instead of putting all upon whom sentence is passed on an equality and giving all, under identical conditions, an equal chance, as the law originally contemplated. Thus since the amended law went into effect sentences like these have been pronounced: Minimum 5 years, maximum 7; minimum 8 years, maximum 10; minimum 6 months, maximum 1 year; minimum 6 years, maximum 7; minimum 7 years, maximum 15. In two cases of burglary the one man received a minimum of 5 years, and a maximum of 10, but the other a minimum of only 2 years and a maximum of 5; while in another case an old crook, who had been convicted for the sixth time, and whose new crimes should have brought him a maximum sentence of 16 years, received a minimum of 3 months and a maximum of 1 year. Since the law first went into effect several courts have also imposed flat sentences, without a minimum. This is clearly in conflict with the law, which is mandatory. It does seem as if courts that try and sentence lawbreakers should be the first to have a reverent regard for law!

Again, under the amended law the _court_ virtually determines when a prisoner shall be eligible to parole. This is, however, utterly subversive of the theory upon which the indeterminate sentence is based, namely, that _parole is to be granted when a prisoner is believed to be fit to be restored to society as a law-abiding citizen_. The time when this may be done no court under the sun can fix, but only those who have the prisoner in charge and under observation, and even they may make mistakes. In the argument on the amended bill before the Senate Committee, it was said by those who opposed the original law, that it conferred judicial functions on the Penitentiary Boards, and that there was not a State in the Union whose statutes prescribed both the maximum and the minimum. But it was shown that under the laws relating to the Huntingdon Reformatory the courts in imposing sentence do not fix the duration thereof, but that the Board of Managers is authorized to terminate the sentence at its discretion, provided the detention shall not exceed the maximum of the term assigned by law for the offense of which the prisoner was convicted; also, that in many States, such as Massachusetts, Connecticut, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota and others, the minimum as well as the maximum sentence to the state prison is fixed by law. It seems strange, indeed, that those who opposed the law of 1909 should have forgotten the law as regards Huntingdon; and that they should have been totally ignorant of the laws of other States on a subject that is to-day receiving the serious attention of many of the most thoughtful minds the world over!

On the benefits of a just and equal indeterminate sentence, Dr. Frederick Howard Wines, one of the best informed and most eminent penologists in the United States, expresses himself as follows:

“There is not, and in the nature of things there cannot be, any
aid to a truly reformatory discipline like that afforded by the
indeterminate sentence. Every prison official can testify to the
dissatisfaction and unrest caused by the palpable inequality of
sentences; an inequality which neither the legislature nor the courts
can avoid or correct. The only equal sentence is the indeterminate
sentence, with an identical maximum for all who violate a given
section of the code, coupled with identical conditions by which to
reduce it to the minimum _prescribed by law_. Its imposition removes
all ground for complaint on this score. It also puts an end to the
fallacious hope of an unconditional pardon. The prisoner is given to
understand that the date of his release on parole depends entirely
upon himself. The authorities desire his release and will help him
to earn it; they are not his enemies, but his friends. This disarms
him of his hostility to them. He is in a favorable state of mind
to receive treatment, and is disposed to yield obedience to them,
if they keep their promise to him. This leads to coöperation in
the effort made for his restoration, without which a cure cannot
be effected. The hope of an early release sustains him under the
depressing influence of prison life and stimulates him to exert
himself to avoid losing whatever he has gained by diligence and good
conduct. He is aided to form habits of industry and obedience, which
tend to become fixed. He is trained and transformed.

“Under the indeterminate sentence the prison itself undergoes a
gradual process of transformation. The moment that reformation rather
than punishment becomes the watchword of the administration, a new
spirit takes possession of it. The governor chooses better and abler
men to govern it--men imbued with reformatory ideas and qualified to
exert a reformatory influence; men of higher education, purer moral
character, broader culture, loftier aims in life, greater devotion to
their work. These wardens of the new school grow stronger with the
passing years; their habit of opposition to everything that is low or
crooked or mean or vile lifts them to higher and still higher levels.
Failure to show reformatory results means failure in their chosen
profession. They have a new responsibility, and they rise to meet
it. They are open to every suggestion that can be of service to them
in the accomplishment of their difficult task, a task from which an
angel might shrink, and in which an angel might rejoice.”

The thirty-year clause of the act of 1909 was designed to protect society against the professional criminal. It is another absurdity of our criminal procedure that we release such periodically to renew their depredations on society. A dangerously insane person we put away until he is cured; and if he is never cured he is never released. We guard society against the contagion of certain virulent diseases. But when the habitual criminal has every now and then squared himself with the State by serving a term in the penitentiary, we again give him his freedom, though he may have hatched out another plot even before he leaves his place of confinement. Some other States have grown wiser. New York and Indiana sentence the habitual criminal for life on a third or fourth conviction; Connecticut to thirty years on a third conviction; but in Pennsylvania a thirty-year sentence, with a minimum not exceeding seven years and a half, seems to have been considered too drastic. Better let society suffer than the criminal!

In amending the law of 1909, which, under its intelligent administration for two years was yielding most happy results, Pennsylvania has clearly been compelled to take a backward step. There was no public demand for a change; those charged with the administration of the law did not desire a change, but opposed it; and there is ample ground for the belief that the change was inspired by reasons of a purely private and personal character.

Nor is the last Legislature to be commended for what it failed to do.

In his report of November 10, 1909, Mr. Bromley Wharton, General Agent and Secretary of the Board of Public Charities, called attention to the needs of the county jails in these words: “This is a matter which has received serious attention at the hands of your Board. The prevailing system of government of the county jails is, in many respects, unsatisfactory. In most of the counties the jails are in charge of the sheriff, who, as a rule, knows little or nothing of hygiene or sanitation. Few jails have yards for exercise, or workshops, which results in the prisoners loafing in the corridors, smoking and playing cards. The filthy and unsanitary condition of some of the jails causes the long-term prisoners to welcome their transfer to the penitentiary.”

At the subsequent session of the Legislature a bill, approved by the Board, was introduced designed to remedy the unsatisfactory and often disgraceful conditions existing in the prisons of various counties, and placing the control and management of all the county prisons and jails and the inmates thereof in Boards of Prison Inspectors to be named by the courts, one inspector to be a physician, and another, if desired, a woman. This carefully drawn bill, which, if it had become a law, would have inaugurated a most salutary reform where it is most needed in our penal system, passed the House, but was killed in the Senate. It was re-introduced in the last Legislature, but never even came out of committee.

A joint resolution, likewise approved by the Board of Charities, providing for the appointment of a commission to consider and report upon the advisability of establishing a state system of workhouses for misdemeanants, so that county jails and prisons could be used solely for the imprisonment of persons awaiting trial or otherwise detained, and for convicts sentenced to brief terms, met a similar fate. So also an act authorizing the pensioning of deserving superannuated employés of penal, reformatory and charitable institutions of the State.

Another bill, strongly approved by the Board, but which after its introduction never again saw the light of day, provided for the establishing of a State Reformatory for Women between the ages of fourteen and twenty-one. That such an institution is most urgently needed is only too well known to charity workers throughout the State. It is almost incredible that such a wealthy and otherwise progressive State like Pennsylvania should be considered too poor to make at least a beginning of an institution of this kind. Were the people of this Commonwealth familiar with the work done and the results achieved by such an institution as the Massachusetts Reformatory Prison for Women, they would compel their legislators to take action. Great movements in behalf of the social welfare can after all be carried through only when there is an intelligent, widespread and persistent public sentiment behind them.

The one progressive penal act for which the last Legislature deserves credit is the bill “providing for the selection and purchase, or the appropriation from State forest reserves, of a tract of land and the erection thereon of buildings for the Western Penitentiary; making an appropriation therefor; authorizing the removal thereto of the inmates of the said penitentiary, and directing the sale of the site now occupied by the said penitentiary, and the buildings and materials thereon.” This is in line with the recommendation of the Board of Charities, which, in its preliminary report for the years 1911-12, called renewed attention to the very unsatisfactory conditions surrounding the Western Penitentiary, and strongly urged its removal to some large tract of land in a rural section, so that labor, not in conflict with existing laws, might be provided for the inmates. In pursuing this course Pennsylvania will only be doing what some other States have already done or are about doing; and it is to be hoped that in due time similar provision will be made for the eastern part of the State. Might it not be well to keep in mind, however, the need of a central state prison for the confinement of habitual criminals, so that the two penitentiaries now in existence could be used only for first-termers? This would make the reformatory process contemplated by the indeterminate sentence infinitely easier.

Another bill of extremely doubtful utility passed by the last Legislature, authorizes the judges of the courts of quarter sessions and the courts of oyer and terminer, after due inquiry, to release on parole any convict confined in the county jail or workhouse of their respective districts, and place him or her in charge of and under the supervision of a designated probation officer. County jails as now conducted are not reformatory institutions.

It will be seen from this survey that Pennsylvania is not making rapid progress in improved penal legislation; nor is it likely that we can hope for better things until some future Legislature will see fit to empower the Board of Charities or a specially appointed commission of expert penologists to devise a carefully articulated and homogeneous system of penal and reformatory institutions for the State. Such a system should provide for a radical change in the construction, management and internal administration of the county prisons; it should include a state system of workhouses, a woman’s reformatory, a central penitentiary for recidivists, and a favorably located institution for criminals suffering from tuberculosis or dementia, where they could receive skillful treatment; it should make a strict separation between habitual criminals and first offenders, between young delinquents and those of mature years; and it should everywhere introduce approved reformatory methods, and make it possible to give those in confinement ample indoor and outdoor employment. It might, of course, be objected that a system so carefully planned and wrought out would be too expensive; but let it never be forgotten that in the end it is far better for the State, and indeed cheaper, to make _men_ than to arrest, try and support criminals, and suffer the results of their depredations.

_Philadelphia._

J. F. OHL,
_Chairman of the Committee on Legislation,
Pennsylvania Prison Society_.

SYNOPSIS OF THE EIGHTY-FIRST ANNUAL REPORT OF THE INSPECTORS OF THE STATE PENITENTIARY FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA FOR THE YEAR 1910.

It is a pamphlet of eighty pages, bearing on the reverse of the title-page this inscription: “Printed and Bound at the Eastern State Penitentiary, Philadelphia, 1911.”

There were in the Penitentiary on the first of January, 1910, as follows, _viz._:

White Males, 1,157; White Females, 21; Total White 1,178
Colored Males, 332; Colored Females, 17; Total Colored 349
-----
1,527

Received during the year:
White Males, 310; White Females, 4; Total White 314
Colored Males, 89; Colored Females, 6; Total Colored 95
-----
409

Remaining at the close of the year as follows:
White Males, 1,073; White Females, 18; Total White 1,091
Colored Males, 301; Colored Females, 15; Total Colored 316
-----
1,407

The number at same date last year 1,527

Showing a decrease of 120

The discharges were:
By Commutation Law 471
By Parole 23
By Order of Court 14
By Order of Huntingdon Reformatory 3
By Pardon 6
Died (1 Suicide) 11
Expiration of term (only) 1
-----
529
The number who served out their terms in 1909 was 7.[3]

[3] It would seem that by the actions of the commutation and parole
laws it will become very unusual for a prisoner to serve out his term.

The inspectors state that “the influence of commutation and parole which are now in action is having a restraining effect on both the thoughtless and vicious,” but they further say, “the administration of the Parole Law has been too limited in its time and extent for us to do more than make mention of our efforts to intelligently apply it.”

Some other interesting statistics are as follows, _viz._:

Number claiming this as their first imprisonment 223
Known to have been previously imprisoned 186
----
409

Number under 30 years of age 257
Number over 30 years of age 152
----
409

Number having trades 67
Number without trades 342
----
409

Number idle at time of arrest 149

Natives of United States 324
Natives of foreign countries 85
----
409

Conjugal relations:
Single 230
Married 152
Widowed 27
----
409

Number having children 111
Number of children 296

Crimes against person 124
Crimes against property 251
Crimes against person and property 34
----
409

Twenty-four pages of the Report are devoted to “Criminal Histories” of sixty-four prisoners received during 1910 who had previously served one or more terms in this penitentiary (a considerable number of them in other penitentiaries or prisons), and who are reported as “illustrations of persistency in courses of crime, indicating the growth of a permanent class, calling for the most serious consideration.”

There is also a record of forty-three prisoners received in 1910 who have relatives in this penitentiary or in other prisons.

The inspectors refer with satisfaction to the new building of concrete construction containing one hundred and twenty cells “now rapidly nearing completion,” and say “the plumbing, steam fitting and electrical work needed is under the care of experts, and furnishing the opportunity of training many of our inmates for future positions of usefulness and trust.”

Report is made that the library now contains 12,057 bound volumes, 852 of them in foreign languages, and that 66,887 books were taken out by the prisoners in the course of the year. A bookbinding and printing room affords employment to several prisoners; 1,419 books were bound and 743,248 pages of matter were printed for the various purposes of the penitentiary.

A school has been maintained for those classed as “illiterates,” and instruction in reading, writing and arithmetic given to 346 prisoners. The inspectors acknowledge the honor done them “by the visits of distinguished representatives of the prison systems and state departments of the nations of Europe, Asia and South America, with others of Canada and our own country, who were in attendance at the recent International Prison Congress in Washington.”

Grateful recognition is also made of “the valuable services of the visitors of the Pennsylvania Prison Society, the American Society for Visiting Catholic Prisoners, the Protestant Episcopal City Mission and the Prisoners’ Guild of the King’s Daughters, contributing to the comfort, encouragement and upbuilding of the prisoners,” and especial mention is made of the services of the Pennsylvania Prison Society in providing clothing for those prisoners in need at the time of their discharge.

The cost of maintenance for the year 1910 is reported as $99,296.70, and the following is presented as “Account With Convicts for 1910”:

DR. CR.

Balance to credit of convicts January 1, 1910 $11,644 96
Sent in by relatives and friends 20,798 33
Brought in by convicts on reception 1,013 81
Earned by over work 13,084 88
Allowance 426 00
Profit and loss 1 39
Paid to convicts on discharge $5,939 61
Sundry goods, shoes, etc. 3,564 09
Paid relatives and friends 19,249 22
Paid for tobacco, tooth brushes, soap, etc. 6,554 32
Balance due convicts January 1, 1911 11,662 13
---------- ----------
$46,969 37 $46,969 37

REVIEW OF THE BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE INSPECTORS OF THE STATE PENITENTIARY FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA FOR THE YEARS 1910-1911.

This report is contained in a pamphlet of one hundred and sixteen pages, of which about twenty pages are devoted to a historical account of the institution.

It appears that the first buildings were completed November 22, 1827, and on the supposition that very soon after prisoners were received at the institution, its penal history covers more than eighty-three years.

The statistics show that on January 1, 1910, the number of convicts was 1,261.

Received during the year 1910 297
Discharged during the year 1910 502
Population December 31, 1910 1,056
Showing a decrease of 205

Of the 1,056 prisoners there at the beginning of 1911, there were:

White Males 845
White Females 20
Colored Males 185
Colored Females 6

Those who were discharged may be classified:

Pardoned by the Governor 5
Expiration of Sentence 10
Commutation of Sentence 448
Transferred to Insane Asylum 8
Order of President (United States Prisoner) 1
Paroled 26
Died 4
----
502

The parole officer, John M. Egan, states that “the parole system ... has already been productive of good results, and promises development that will compare favorably with the most successful reformative work of other States.... The good deportment of our indeterminately sentenced inmates, their sincere efforts to map out for themselves a future foreign to their previous lives of crime and the faithful manner in which all, save two, of the convicts who have been granted conditional freedom are complying with the provisions of their parole, is gratifying.”

Of the 297 received during the year:

Those who are serving sentence for the first time 221
Those known to have been previously imprisoned 76

Under thirty years of age 152
Over thirty years of age 145
----
297

Number apprenticed to some trade, including the unapprenticed who
had worked at least four years at a trade 74
Number unapprenticed 223
----
297

Natives of United States 202
Foreign Born 95
----
297

Social Relations:
Single 159
Married 114
Widowed 23
Divorced 1
----
297

Nature of Crimes:
Against Person 172
Against Property 125
----
297

The gratuities to prisoners discharged in 1910 amounted to $3,195.00. This sum presumably was given in cash and clothing.

The bill for provisions amounted to $63,361.00.

Tobacco for the prisoners cost the State $2,471.00.

The various industries in operation at the penitentiary show substantial gains:

During the year the sales of mats and matting amounted to $114,475.00.

The profit from this industry was $29,696.00.

The profit in the hosiery department was $5,191.00.

The profit in the shoe department was $1,665.00.

The earnings by labor, piece price, in the broom department, $4,069.00.

It appears that the officials make effort to find work for the large majority of the convicts.

The number of days of labor reported by those in fair health is 275,051.

The number of days of idleness seems large, 85,074, but indicates that the convicts are at work a little over three fourths of the time.

They now have a regular optical department equipped with modern appliances, and in 1910 386 prisoners were fitted with glasses. The physician reports that in many instances those who were thus supplied showed both physical and mental improvement, to say nothing of the satisfaction of having deficiencies of eyesight remedied.

The chaplain reports that the number of bound volumes in the library is 11,882. During the year the number of books issued to the prisoners was 73,070.

The report contains resolutions of the Board of Inspectors _in memoriam_ of John Linn Milligan, whose mission since 1863 had been in looking after the spiritual interests of the inmates of the Western Penitentiary. The following paragraph from one of his recent reports illustrates the spirit of the man and of his work: “Since my official relation with this prison began, 11,624 convicted men have passed within these gates. Many of these have gone out to struggle into the cold and suspicious world, friendless and alone, to struggle against the handicap that conviction and punishment of crime bring. Doubtless many have died, bruised under the burdens they have had to bear. Doubtless many more than the public believes have been absorbed into the ranks of industrial honesty of life and purpose. A small per cent. were instinctive and professional criminals, and nothing but the sovereign grace and mercy of the good Lord, who said to the poor sinner in the face of the murderous crowd, ‘Neither do I condemn thee; go, sin no more,’ could cure the crime habit for them.

“When I look back along the line of the regiment of convicted criminals, whom I have tried to strengthen with a new and manly purpose, the busy efforts do not seem long, nor has my knowledge and familiarity with their character hardened my heart nor diminished my desire to uplift them. Nor has the backward glance lessened my hope in true reformative efforts, patient, firm and kind, and I believe more sincerely in the deep necessity of Divine love and power for their spiritual reclamation.”

Warden Francies earnestly recommends that immediate steps be taken to remove the prison to a more healthful location on some large tract of land on which buildings may be erected largely by convict labor, and where the inmates may in the future be employed in producing their own sustenance thus saving a large part of the expense of the maintenance of the prison.

FORTY-FIRST ANNUAL REPORT OF THE MANAGERS OF THE ALLEGHENY COUNTY WORKHOUSE, 1910.

This is one of the two or three penal institutions of the State of Pennsylvania to which a farm is attached. The Allegheny County Workhouse has, during the last year, added 175 acres to its holdings of real estate, at a cost of over $288.00 per acre, and the total acreage now belonging to the institution is about 280 acres. The total number of prisoners at the close of last year was 863, an increase of 70 over the number at the close of the year 1909. The daily average of inmates was 824. During the year 1910 there were received at the workhouse 3,836 male prisoners and 606 female prisoners. The entire number was 4,442, of whom 3,606 were from Allegheny County, and 836 were sent from other counties. For the maintenance of prisoners outside of Allegheny County, the institution received $23,396.

Of the 4,442 committed, there were committed for the first time 2,301. One hundred and five had been committed seven times. One hundred and fifteen had been committed twenty times or oftener. Twelve prisoners were serving sentences for the fiftieth time or more. It is not a place for juvenile offenders. Of the whole number, 227 only were under twenty years of age. The greater part of them are between twenty and forty years of age. Only 630 could neither read nor write, of which number 438 were foreign born. Austria furnished the largest proportion of illiterates.

HABITS OF LIFE.

Four hundred and eighteen of these prisoners professed to be total abstainers from intoxicants, and 540 are classified as intemperate; 3,484 are occasionally intemperate or are moderate drinkers.

Thirty-seven hundred and forty-seven prisoners weighed at the time they were discharged 14,796 pounds more than when they commenced to serve sentence, or an average of three and ninth-tenth pounds increase for each individual. Six hundred and twenty-five women prisoners showed an increase of one and four-fifth pounds per individual.

Superintendent Leslie reports that the new wing is almost completed. It will contain 478 reinforced concrete cells, in four floors of about 120 cells each. At the back of the cells is a five-foot utility corridor, in which all plumbing, waste pipes and foul-air ducts are placed. Five feet in front of the rows of the cells is a steel proof cage, extending the full length of the rows. Between these cages and the outside wall is a corridor which is lighted by large tool proof, obscure wire-glass windows. The building is equipped with the best sanitary appliances. The entire cost will be about $210,000.00, which includes dynamos, engines and power plant of sufficient capacity for another building of similar size. The larger part of the work was done by the prisoners. During this last year the total days’ work performed by the inmates on the new building was 18,821.

But work on the new building is not by any means the sole industrial employment. The total number of days’ work of inmates is reported as 171,952. The industries comprise broom and brush making, carpet weaving, farming operations, wall building and domestic employments.

The revenue from brooms is estimated at $16,935.00; brushes, $2,062.00, carpets, $4,610.00; boarding prisoners, $31,620.00; farm products, $2,677.00.

The farm products of which the greater part was consumed on the premises include 5,865 bushels potatoes, 1,550 bushels wheat, 424 bushels sweet corn, 1,058 bushels green beans, 1,313 bushels tomatoes, 30,025 heads cabbage, 8,000 heads celery, 1,252 pounds butter, 3,039 gallons milk, 200 chickens, 496 dozen eggs. The total number of days’ employment outside the walls was 28,857, and yet but one prisoner made his escape.

Chaplain Imbrie reports that there is a Sabbath service in the prison chapel, at which attendance is voluntary. “But few absent themselves from this service.” They have a choir of their own, with an efficient musical director. During the winter there are frequent entertainments held in the chapel, consisting of lectures, elocution and music. They have a judiciously selected library of 6,000 volumes, and the number of books taken out during the year was 18,167.

They have a total enrollment in the night school of 185, with an average attendance of about 176. This school is maintained largely for the benefit of the illiterates and of those whose education has been extremely limited. The difficulties of presenting statistics of those who are permanently reformed is well illustrated by the following extract from the chaplain’s report: “As the year closes I find myself looking back and counting the meetings and partings with more than four thousand souls, who have come and gone during the past twelve months.... I have known each one for a few weeks or months, then they have gone like the ships that pass in the night.... A few have written kind letters to me after having reached their homes, a few have sent messages, ... some I have met on the streets of the city, and a few have been returned as prisoners to this institution, but the greater number have been absorbed in the great mass of humanity, and I have no further trace of them. The promises made at parting may be broken, the influence of the few weeks spent here may soon be effaced by the environments of the world, the seed sown in the gospel messages may never mature, but yet the effort has been made, and the increase is with the Father.”

CORRESPONDENCE.

MT. LEBANON PRISON, SYRIA.

... This prison is located in Bate-id-deen, where the governor-general and all the government officials reside. There I had an interesting call on the governor of Mt. Lebanon, Yusuf Pasha Kusa.

I found him a very fine, polished gentleman, promising that he will help to put a check on the drinking habit of his country, and he gave me the privilege of visiting the prison and meeting all the prisoners. It was a great opportunity after the iron bars were opened and the kind-hearted warden let me in. The prisoners gathered around me in great curiosity, as they had never seen a woman in the court before. There were two hundred and seventy-five (275) men prisoners. There were Arabs, Druzes, Christians of all sects. The prison is a round building with dark rooms around and an open court in the center--four or five in every room. They are required to furnish their own beds, clothing and food, except they receive a portion of bread (about one and one half pounds) each day. They gathered around me and were very eager to hear what I had to say. For an hour and three quarters they listened very attentively, and at last they showed their appreciation by promising to live better lives. At the close of my speech one of the prisoners asked the privilege of speaking, which was granted. He said: “We want our friend to know that not every one of us is a criminal, some of us are here through lack of justice. If we were in a Christian country, under Christian and just laws, many of us would not be here.”

The poor prisoners who had no friends to supply them with any food have been living on bread and water, and I was allowed the privilege of providing half of a sheep. They were very grateful for it.

This will show you how prisoners live in a non-Christian country. Then I thanked the Lord for the Pennsylvania Prison Society, that is bettering the lives of the prisoners.

Respectfully,
LAYYAH A. BARAKAT.

January 19, 1911.

A KIND WORD FROM BULGARIA.

SOFIA, BULGARIA, May 2, 1910.

I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of the copy of the JOURNAL OF PRISON DISCIPLINE AND PHILANTHROPY (January, 1910), published by the Pennsylvania Prison Society. I have read it with great interest and much benefit, especially the paper of Rev. J. F. Ohl on “The Administration and Needs of a Modern State Prison”; the excellent address of Mr. Frederick Howard Wines on “The Indeterminate Sentence, the Parole and the New Criminology”; and the articles by the Secretary on “County Prisons” and “Pentonville Prison, London, England.” I appreciated the memorial of Rev. Samuel J. Barrows, whom I knew for many years.

With the highest respect,
DR. D. MINKOFF.

HUMANE OFFICIALS.

A few days ago I went to your city to secure the release from Central Police Station of a young lady about twenty-one years of age, who had been in Philadelphia but a few months. She had been accused by her employer of stealing. Whether so or not, the judge, Hon. David S. Scott, and the officials did not seem to believe it. That very efficient officer of the Pennsylvania Prison Society, Mr. Fred J. Pooley, telegraphed her brother in this county to send some one to Philadelphia to look after her interests. I went and found that Judge Scott had the right idea of treating uncertain cases of first offenders. He told me that he always gives the prisoner the benefit of doubt, and so metes out justice that supposed offenders might have a chance to reform, if guilty, and not be made hard-hearted criminals. In this case he turned the young lady over to me, and I took her to her home, where a heartbroken father and mother awaited her.

I want to congratulate your city upon having such just and humane officials as Judge Scott, Reserve Officer Runner, Matron Cooper--the right woman in the right place--and Mr. Pooley is moving in the right direction in helping to save accused criminals. His is a great work, and no better man could be found for the position.

WILLIAM G. KERBIN, _Attorney-at-Law_.

Snow Hill, Md., Sept. 22.

--_From The Philadelphia Record._

A STRIKING CONTRAST.

Westmoreland County is one of the prosperous and wealthy counties of Pennsylvania. An evidence of its ability to spend money for public improvements is its splendid courthouse. This cost a million and a half. It is a magnificent structure, rich in its art work and furnishings, and spotlessly clean. Few county officers in the United States are more comfortable and luxuriously housed.

Within a block or two of this fine pile stands another county building. It is the jail. What a contrast! Here, too, human beings are found, not, however, for a few hours of the day, but by day and by night, for weeks and months and years. But was there no thought for their physical well-being when this jail was built? Is there none now for their bodily and spiritual health? Not only is this jail an example of an altogether faulty type of prison construction, but as at present conducted it is unclean, and therefore unsanitary; it is shamefully overcrowded; young and old, first offenders and hardened criminals, are allowed to congregate indiscriminately in the corridors; no attempt at classification or reformation is apparent, and thus the history of many another county jail is repeated in the midst of a community that by reason of its Christian character, intelligence, and wealth ought to be among the first in penal reform.

It is still true that many county jails are a blot--a very dark blot on our civilization. When will reform begin where it ought to begin, namely, at the bottom of our penal system?

AN OFFICIAL VISITOR.

COUNTRY LIFE FOR CONVICTS.

For some years this subject has claimed much attention, and latterly on account of the successful issue of experiments in this direction, the reforming possibilities of such methods have been prominently brought into notice. Hence we have felt justified in devoting considerable space in this number to this topic. It is appropriate that the citizens of Pennsylvania particularly should have their attention called to the out-door life for misdemeanants, since the Managers of the Western Penitentiary have decided and have been permitted to remove that institution to some large tract of ground within the State.

The two following articles are from “The Review,” published by the National Prisoners’ Aid Association, 135 E. 15th St., New York City.

THE FARM TREATMENT OF MISDEMEANANTS.

JAMES F. JACKSON.

Superintendent of Charities and Correction, Cleveland, Ohio.

The old type institution for misdemeanants failed to accomplish satisfactory results, mental, moral and physical. It seemed incapable of developing industry; it was unhygienic, without classification and with no adequate facilities for developing a man’s will or increasing his capacity to do right. There was no individualism. The old workhouse was typical of the most intensified institutionalism, and institutionalism for an adult is an assured failure. Neither the arrangements of the building nor the manner of life nor the administration were conducive to the rehabilitation of the man. The old type of workhouse was constructed to avenge the wrong and not to correct the wrong-doer.

When the failure of that plan was fully recognized, people cast about for a remedy. They saw the success and satisfaction attending the location of charitable institutions in the country, and the idea of similar locations for various types of prisons occurred to them. And the cry against prison-made goods gave impetus to the movement.

The prison did seem to be the last place to make real the fact that “a man’s a man for a’ that.” But when the plowshare and the pruning hook began to supplant the stripes and the dungeon, people were certain that at last the dignity of manhood would be realized and that life and immortality were come to light.

St. Paul and Minneapolis were among the first to adopt the farm policy. Various other corrective institutions were established upon farms in foreign countries and in this country, especially within the past twenty years. One of the best institutions for misdemeanants thus established was located at Witzwyl, Switzerland, in 1891. But I wish to-day to speak with particular reference to Cleveland’s situation, its old workhouse and its new correction farm.

The Cleveland workhouse was constructed over forty years ago on the old lines for 500 prisoners, two miles from the center of the city. In 1904 and 1905, about 750 acres were purchased by the city nine miles from its center. Upon this land building was commenced several years later. Thus far there is built only the “service building” which at present fulfills all purposes. Ultimately it is to be used for store-rooms and shops. There are also to be built dormitories for trusties and semi-trusties, cell-blocks for the least tractable, kitchens, dining rooms, a chapel, women’s industrial building, school building and a greenhouse, all within a high wall inclosing eleven acres. The present intention is that the buildings and wall shall be constructed by the labor of inmates. Unfortunately there are no funds in sight to proceed with this construction.

All commitments are made to the original workhouse in the city. There the women remain, but about two fifths of the men are transferred to the correction farm. On a recent day the 102 men at the correction farm were assigned to work as follows: On construction of the sewage disposal plant, 24; in the stone quarry, 7; on the farm, 10; in the garden, 7; driving teams (working the farm and hauling material to the filter bed), 12; care of horses and stock, 10; to work on the adjoining infirmary farm, 10; firemen, 2; carpenter, 1; barber, 1; and in the preparation and serving of the meals and care of the buildings and grounds, 18. Some of these last eighteen are unable to do heavy work, but all have fresh air and sunshine daily. At other times men do concreting, making artificial stone, fertilize and drain the land, which is not fertile, make roads on the farm and later they will construct the wall and buildings, plant trees and perform every sort of labor that will develop the land, and cause it to be highly productive and attractive in appearance. I also hope that later they will make and repair the needed wagons, tools and all the smaller farm implements; in fact, they now do some of that work, especially the repairing.

An apple orchard and much small fruit have just been planted under the direction of the state agricultural department. Last year by attention to pruning, spraying and smudge fires on cold nights, ours was one of the few orchards bearing fruit in all that region. Bee culture will be introduced and scientific forestration is to be developed. We are about to construct a dairy barn entirely by prison labor that will be a model of simplicity, sanitary construction and efficiency for the neighboring country.

We propose that the farm shall gradually become a model in all respects. In fact, this year we will produce certified milk for the city and the contagious disease hospitals. We plan, as soon as possible, that the correction farm shall produce the meat, milk, vegetables and fruit, both fresh and canned, for the entire workhouse and the public hospitals, while the adjoining infirmary farm will render similar service for its own use and that of the growing tuberculosis sanatorium.

From the standpoint of the prisoner, the farm policy is to give to each man the largest degree of liberty consistent with the well-being of others. The ultimate purpose is to employ as many without the walls as possibly can be trusted, and to employ out-of-doors within the walls all the remainder except those whose conduct imperatively demands closest supervision.

For years there will be work for all workers, no “idle-house” in any sort of weather or trade conditions. Every working day from twelve to twenty men are sent to work on the adjoining infirmary farm. Such transfer was one of the purposes of placing the infirmary on a great contiguous tract of land. But the plan works to the detriment of the correction farm, which for years, and perhaps always, can use to advantage the labor of all men committed to its care. No key is turned on these men during the day. The night guard and the locked door are more to remove temptation than to prevent escape. You realize this when you know that all these men, instead of sleeping in stuffy cells, sleep in large dormitories, giving them every facility for overpowering the night watch and making their escape. Prisoners arrive a typical bridewell company, drunken, dirty, diseased and discouraged. They go away bronzed, with regular habits of living, accustomed to work, with a new determination and a new grip. Of course, some fail and return, but we do not assume to insure immunity against all the wiles of the world, the flesh and the devil.

Americans seem in constant search for a cure-all. There is a great demand for some hobby for the alert philanthropist to ride. In their order institutionalism, organized charity, juvenile courts, medical charities and country life have had their turn in the spotlight. Each is efficient, but all together are not sufficient. It is urged that if a convict be sent out under the blue sky to breathe God’s pure air, behold green fields and hear the birds sing from the swaying boughs, he will become as one of the best citizens, especially if he digs in the dirt. But unfortunately the country does not afford the alchemy which converts men into angels. This is amply attested by the record of most diabolical crimes committed by country-bred men who would not know an elevator from a subway. The farm prison is no panacea, but it is tremendously worth while.

The men do not wear stripes in either prison. Consideration is combined with firmness in all our dealings, for it is the purpose that every requirement shall appeal to the fair-minded prisoner to be in his interest and for his benefit.

From the experience of the Cleveland correction farm several rather obvious deductions may be made; we are dealing with men, free moral agents, and a good physical environment does not guarantee their reform any more than does instruction in good rules for living.

We have learned that men are sent to the house of correction for a purpose. These men have faults to be corrected. These defects in the human mind are to be corrected, and no ordinary workhouse sentence will effect a cure of such defects as are hereditary or fully acquired. There is some concealed materialism abroad under the guise of environment, but the rankest exponent of environment should not expect to cure twenty years of bad surroundings accompanied by indifferent or bad actions even by a ninety-day period on a farm. And ninety days is in excess of the average period of confinement, although Cleveland “golden-rule policies” do not burden us with five-, ten- or fifteen-day men.

Our first appeal is to their sense of honor. Their appreciation of the confidence reposed in them often proves a potent influence for good. The transfer to the farm is such an expression of confidence. But it is given with discretion. Hardened criminals are not sent on distant missions unattended. In fact, they are rarely transferred to the farm.

As a part of their teaching the misdemeanants need discipline. It is necessary to keep the men on the farm for some time if they are to receive the needed development, especially the men who are sent for intoxication. Discipline is essential to instruction whether in the day school, the home or any other form of education. Many of these men are committed because of their lack of self-control and time is required for its development. We have learned that the men need to be taught the habit of industry and how to do some particular thing well. This is for their good while they are on the farm, and it is essential after they return to their homes. We have learned that not all men can be trusted, and we believe it has a bad influence on a man to attempt to get away, so we make him feel the bad result when he is caught. And the police are faithful to help catch deserters. Personality is a big factor; one man will accomplish far more with and for prisoners than another.

The farm does build up the body of the anæmic; it gives a good physical development. Moreover, the habit of industry can very much better be taught where results are being achieved on the farm than where work is being done at little or no profit in a factory. And efficiency is better developed on the farm. The farm has a direct physical value and an indirect mental and moral value. It clears a man’s mind and allows him to think straight. It affords a foundation for developing the spiritual structure, though of itself it will only slightly develop one mentally or morally. The man is now physically well, having had lessons in life. Here is the opportunity to further develop his will in order that he may do right. Looking to that end, we have introduced the regular presentation of the gospel in an orderly way. We intend to teach by example, but we need an official who shall be recognized by the prisoners as their friend, one who shall know them and make it his exclusive business to help them establish the desire to do right and aid them to be able to fulfill that desire. This seems one of the unsolved problems in Cleveland and in nearly all such institutions.

We have the parole system in operation, though there is not help enough for its most efficient execution. There is the Brotherhood Club for the men who have no home to which to go, established at the suggestion of a former prisoner. There a man may stay until he appears strong enough to live a normal life. The club is intended to be self-sustaining.

In my opinion the country is the place for the misdemeanant, for the very obvious reason that it affords plenty of light, pure air, a variety of good food and wide opportunity for productive occupation for the prisoners. There work is purposeful, not a time-killer. They work, eat, sleep, have recreation and religious teaching, all under approximately normal conditions. Every man is treated with kindness and consideration; discipline is not on parade. In short, the prisoner is treated like a man and to the extent that if there is manhood in him it will come out. The purpose is to develop honor and faithfulness, to accustom every man to useful occupation and to teach him to be effective. The officers are not armed, they are not even called guards. In fact, they act as teachers, foremen or farmers, as the occasion requires.

There is so much work to do in developing, enriching and cultivating the land, in erecting buildings, in making roads, that every feasible labor-saving machine is used. This of itself speaks to the man the appreciation of his work as a man and not a substitute for a machine.

The hope is that the farming and the making of its equipment, and incidentally the care of the prisoners and their quarters, will profitably occupy practically all the available labor in such manner as to make a man not only fit but anxious to work. It is hoped that a large majority will be improved and many rehabilitated in an environment which favors giving every man all the chance he will use to reform. Moreover, it will thereby be apparent that the government is not only strong, but so merciful and so genuine in its fatherly desire to help each man that in turn he will cease to be “agin” the government; that he will turn from being a consumer to become a producer of taxes, turn from being his own and other’s enemy to become a friend to men.

PRISONERS AFIELD.

WARDEN J. T. GILMOUR, CENTRAL PRISON, ONTARIO, CANADA.

[Stenographic report of Dr. Gilmour’s address at the annual meeting of the New Jersey State Charities Aid and Prison Reform Association, April 1, 1911.]