of State, was listened to with considerable interest, because Mr.
McDonough, as a member of the Constitutional Convention of 1894, had
much to do with framing the constitutional amendment wiping out the
contract labor system and prohibiting the sale of prison-made goods in
the open market. Under the present laws of New York no work can be done
by convicts in competition with outside labor. Whatever is made in the
prisons of the State must “be disposed of to the State or any political
division thereof, or for or to any public institution owned or managed
and controlled by the State, or any political division thereof.” At the
same time every inmate of the several State prisons, penitentiaries,
jails, and reformatories in the State, who is physically able, must
be set to work. By a strong array of figures and apparently favorable
comparisons Mr. McDonough undertook to demonstrate the merits and
success of the new system. In replying to the paper, Dr. Barrows
maintained that in spite of the law several thousand prisoners in the
jails and penitentiaries of the State are supported in idleness.
Mr. John E. Van De Carr, Superintendent of the New York City
Reformatory of Misdemeanants, on Hart’s Island, read a paper in which
he gave an account of said institution and its work. This reformatory,
which is the only one in the United States solely for misdemeanants,
is the child of Greater New York’s charter. By that charter it became
the duty of the Commissioner of Correction “to cause all criminals and
misdemeanants under his charge to be classified as far as practicable,
so that youthful and less hardened offenders shall not be rendered more
depraved by association with and the example of the older and more
hardened,” and “to set apart one or more of the penal institutions in
his department for the custody of such youthful offenders.” By an act
of the Legislature, passed in 1904, the charter of the reform school
on Hart’s Island was amended, and the institution was continued and
known after January 1, 1905, as “The New York City Reformatory of
Misdemeanants.” To this “any male person between the ages of sixteen
and thirty, after conviction by a magistrate or court in the city of
New York of any charge, offense, misdemeanor, or crime, other than a
felony, may be committed for reformatory treatment.” The time of such
imprisonment, which must not exceed three years, but must continue
at least three months, is terminated by the Board of Parole, which
consists of nine commissioners who serve without compensation for a
term of one year. The first three rules under the system by means of
which an inmate may work out his release on parole (which is determined
by merit marks based on demeanor, labor, and study) are as follows:
1. All inmates enter the New York City Reformatory of Misdemeanants
in the second grade. 2. If such inmate shall obtain 900 merit marks
he shall thereafter enter the first or highest grade. 3. If such
inmate shall violate any rules of the Reformatory, or shall in any way
be disobedient or ungovernable, he shall be reduced to the third or
lowest grade; and no such inmate shall reënter the second grade unless
he shall have obtained 300 merit marks. When an inmate is eligible
for release on parole, and is so recommended by the superintendent,
he is placed on parole in charge of a parole officer for a period of
six months, provided he has a home to go to, or employment whereby
he can become self-sustaining. Should he violate his parole at any
time, the Board of Parole has power to revoke the same and cause his
rearrest and reimprisonment as if said parole had not been ordered.
To make the system effective, the spiritual welfare of the inmates is
faithfully cared for by the Catholic, Protestant, and Hebrew chaplains
of the Department of Correction; mental training is provided for by a
teacher from the Board of Education; and six different trade-schools
furnish industrial instruction. The results so far have proved very
satisfactory, the conduct of over eighty-three per cent. of those
paroled being reported as satisfactory. “Our experience has already
convinced us,” declares the superintendent, “that the modern ideas
on this subject are purely scientific, and not sentimental, and that
many sent to prison should first be placed in some reformatory where
the class of institution in which they should justly be detained could
safely be determined. We also feel that it may become necessary to
extend the minimum term of three months to a longer period. A sentence
is really not reformatory if the minimum is three months; at least
the reformation is but temporary. Permanent reformation requires the
teaching of a trade, and a trade cannot be learned in that time,
although we have accomplished surprising results in that period. To
secure the greatest good to the boy, the trades taught should be those
that are best paid, namely, the building trades.”
AFTERNOON
The principal address of the afternoon was by Mr. Warren F. Spalding,
Secretary of the Massachusetts Prison Association, on “Principles and
Purposes of Probation.” He said in part:
“The probation system is the natural outgrowth of modern theories
regarding the treatment of lawbreakers. The acceptance of the
proposition that the State should reform and reclaim the offender led
to the establishment of reformatories. Later it was realized that some
might reform without imprisonment, even in a reformatory, and the
probation officer became their supervisor and custodian. His functions
are to investigate cases and report regarding past offenses, if any;
general character, home, dependents, etc., and the probability of
reformation without imprisonment, and he must visit probationers and
help them in the work of self-reformation.
“Probation is better than imprisonment for suitable cases, because it
saves the offender from the prison stigma, while it keeps him under
restraint, controlling his companionships, compelling him to work and
support those dependent upon him.
“The probation officer has custodial as well as supervisory powers,
and may surrender the probationer for misbehavior. Probation turns the
attention of its subject to the future rather than the past. Punishment
deals with one past act. Probation deals with the future--with the
establishment of character. It puts the emphasis upon what the
probationer must do, not upon what he has done.
“Probation as a means of securing reformation has an excellent record.
Punishment has failed in a great proportion of its cases. It is only
reasonable that the records of the two systems shall be compared. If
the law of the survival of the fittest is to prevail in this domain,
it is certain that the use of probation is destined for increase, and
the use of imprisonment to decrease, as a method of dealing with those
who have broken the laws. It will be adopted more and more generally
because it succeeds, while imprisonment will be more generally
abandoned because it fails.”
Papers were also read by Mr. H. F. Coates, Alliance, Ohio, on
“Probation for First Offenders,” and by Samuel J. Barrows, New York,
on “The Organization of Probation Work.” Mr. J. G. Phelps-Stokes, New
York, spoke on “The Justice of Probation.” Charlton T. Lewis once said:
“We are not dealing with acts, but with actors; not with crimes, but
with the men who have committed them.” A man is largely the creature of
environment. Too often we overlook the fact that crime is not always
chargeable to the individual, but to his surroundings. If punishment is
to be just, we must know that he who is punished is justly punished.
Some of the prolific causes of a criminal career are evil associates,
street training, and bad homes. Do we ask as we should, whether those
now in prison had such favorable surroundings as the reputable portion
of society? How many children grow up without proper home training!
Their parents must go out to hard work to the neglect of the children.
There is no play for the child except under evil influences; and in
New York alone there are 85,000 children deprived of the benefits of
a public school education because of deficient school accommodations.
Among those who can go to school, truancy is not uncommon. The
recreation which every child needs is found by many in saloons, dance
halls, cheap theatres, and other demoralizing places. The stress of
hard work and long hours also makes it impossible for many parents
to care properly for their children. Do we wonder that under such
circumstances only harmful influences come to them? Punishment is just
only in proportion to culpability; and yet how many have no opportunity
to learn what is right or wrong!
The conditions to which first offenders are subjected in many prisons
are simply appalling. Hundreds are thrown in with the vilest beings
and the most hardened criminals, and are, in addition, obliged in the
majority of prisons to endure a living death by reason of the most
unsanitary surroundings. It is horrible to sentence a man, woman or
child, not only to moral degradation, but to a physical death as well.
Imprisonment as a corrective and deterrent is a failure. Punishment can
have but two justifications: the correction of the offender, and the
protection of society. Probation, on the other hand, at least results
in making one refrain from such criminal acts as will send him to
prison.
EVENING
The speaker of the evening was Mrs. Maud Ballington Booth, of the
Volunteers of America, who delivered a most eloquent and sympathetic
address on “The Hopeful Side of Prison Work.” Mrs. Booth began her
work among “her boys” behind the bars ten years ago, at the time of
the division in the Salvation Army, which resulted in the formation
of the Volunteers of America. To-day she is everywhere known among
prisoners and ex-convicts as “The Little Mother.” Mrs. Booth said in
part: “I am not here to instruct wardens and chaplains, nor have I
come to represent myself, but the work of the organization for which
I stand. I see before me another audience to-night, namely, those
behind the bars. All I know regarding this work is from within the
walls, and I speak, therefore, from the standpoint of the prisoner. I
was always told that the task with criminals was a hopeless one, but
I have learned to know better. People who talk like that have never
been behind the walls of a prison. The theorist looks upon convicts as
men who are generally unredeemable. Not so the wardens and chaplains
and other prison workers, who have had practical experience. No man
or woman would be any good among prisoners without hope. Where there
is life there is hope. I do not forget the crime or the stain, and am
not a sentimentalist regarding the reformation of criminals; but I
firmly believe that no one has fallen so low as to be absolutely beyond
redemption. Many of those behind the bars have from earliest childhood
never known anything of human or divine love; but have only been cuffed
about in the world. Bring these the touch of sympathy, and tell them
something of the Father’s love and of the Saviour’s power to save, and
you again bring hope into their lives. This must be the foundation of
our work _within_ the prison; and where those who have served their
time come out, it is love again--mother love, if you please--that
must direct their course. In dealing with the convict, our first
endeavor must be to enkindle new hope within his heart; and toward the
ex-convict the public must assume a better attitude. Finally, if we
leave God out we shall not succeed.”
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18
MORNING
This day of the Congress had been set apart by the New York State
Prison Department for an excursion to beautiful Lake George. At 8.30
o’clock over three hundred delegates left Albany by special train. On
arrival at Lake George the steamer _Horicon_ was boarded, and after a
sail of several hours on the lake, the excursionists were landed at
“The Sagamore,” where a basket luncheon was served, after which the
meeting of the Chaplains’ Association was held, the Rev. William J.
Batt, D. D., of the Massachusetts State Reformatory, in the chair.
After a brief paper by the Rev. W. E. Edgin, Chaplain of the Indiana
State Reformatory, Jeffersonville, on “Soul-Winning in a Reformatory,”
and an address by Prof. Edward Everett Hale, the president introduced
Mr. Joseph F. Scott, of the Elmira Reformatory, whose admirable paper
on “The Chaplain from the Warden’s Point of View,” we here reproduce in
full:
“Because prisoners are men, they have the same impulses, motives,
hopes, and aspirations, and are susceptible to the same influences and
amenable to the same forces as other men, though possibly in a less
degree. Because some men are prisoners they need the same inspiration,
faith, strength, and courage that other men find themselves in need of.
“In the prison of which I am superintendent, there are burglars,
pickpockets, and thieves of every description. There is no law on the
statute books that has not its offenders there, and they are thought
of and spoken of by people in general as such. But when the parents of
one of these write me, they say, ‘My son’; or if the brother or sister
write, they say, ‘My brother’; and I believe if it were possible for
me to hear the words of the Father in Heaven, concerning one of these,
they would be, ‘My son,’ or the words of Jesus, ‘My brother.’ Should
not our words be the same?
“If I had a son of my own I should insist upon such rules of diet,
sleep, and exercise as would insure to him a healthful body and a good
constitution, such education, necessary to a well-disciplined mind,
such works or pursuits to assure success in life; such disciplinary and
moral training as would build up a stable character; all to the end
that his place in life would be that of a useful citizen. The need of
the prisoner and the prison discipline brought to bear upon him need be
nothing more, and should be nothing less than this. He needs physical
development, mental quickening, industrial training, discipline and
moral instruction, if he is to be returned to society a self-sustaining
and useful citizen; and no prison is doing its proper work that does
not in some way afford means for these essential elements of discipline.
“The moral instruction is the especial work of the prison chaplain,
and he should be given that freedom of action and breadth of scope to
make his work efficient. I believe that Christianity is the greatest
moral force in the lives of men to-day, because it has humanity as the
basis of its ethics. It has come down through the years as a forming,
transforming and reforming force in the lives of men, and I believe
it is to go on through the ages until selfishness shall have been
uprooted, and men brought closer and closer together; when we shall
love our neighbor and be willing to work for him as for ourselves,
and will do unto others as we would be done by; when we shall live
in one great fraternal organization; when wars, and robberies, and
strife shall cease and poverty shall be no more; when the strong shall
carry the burden of the weak, and succor the unfortunate, and men will
live together in brotherly love, under a Christian socialism or in the
New Jerusalem, or such designation as you may please to give it. This
force, which has accomplished and is to accomplish so much for the
world, we cannot deny a place in transforming the lives and characters
of prisoners, to that of upright living.
“The prison chaplain, in his work among prisoners, should thoroughly
believe that these great Christian forces which have done so much
for the world are applicable to the men under his charge and are
as efficient in their lives as in the lives of other men; and any
Christian clergyman, desirous of helping his fellow men and entering
into the service of the Lord and humanity, and of placing himself
where he can do the most good, should not hesitate to accept a prison
chaplaincy; and a call to such a place should be in his mind equal to
the call to one of the best churches in the land.
“It is not my purpose to give a detailed outline for the work of a
prison chaplain. No two men can perhaps be successful and do their
work in the same way; but every person connected with the prison, be
he superintendent, warden, or chaplain, or other officer, should seek
every inspiration and good example and ideal within his possibilities,
and then simply be his natural self in dealing with the prisoners’
needs.
“When I was superintendent of the Massachusetts Reformatory at Concord,
it was the custom there to avail ourselves of the services of the
students from Andover Theological Seminary. One student, fresh from his
work in the seminary, came into my office one day and asked me what he
should do in the prison. I told him that if I were to get some one to
do what I wanted done, I would probably get some one else, but that I
expected him to go into prison, mingle freely with the prisoners, and
find something, some place where he thought he could be of use to them,
and give those qualities in himself that he thought would be of the
most help. And that is what I would say to a prison chaplain entering
the work. Where one is strong another may be weak, and each should work
along those lines where he himself feels that he can do the greatest
good. The compensation of a prison chaplain should be sufficient to
command the services of clergymen of high attainments, and to support
themselves and families in a comfortable way. And never should a
chaplaincy be looked upon as a place for a broken-down clergyman, or
one who has failed in other fields of activity. The chaplain should
be given, as I have previously said, sufficient latitude and freedom
of action in the prison to carry on the work in such lines as he
himself feels that he can be of the greatest service. Therefore, the
superintendent, or warden, should not place upon the chaplain such
routine duties as will interfere with his doing this. It is recognized
by all that the Sabbath is the special day for the chaplain’s work. I
believe that we should go further than this, and set aside to him some
portion of each day for such religious work as he deems best. He should
not be burdened with such work as supervising inmates’ correspondence,
the library, teaching school, or the many routine duties which are
foisted upon him in many instances, unless he feels that they may be
avenues through which he may do his best work.
“If there was one injunction of the Saviour which has given more
impetus to Christianity in the world than another, it was His last,
‘Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations,’ or, as found in the other
gospel, ‘Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every
creature.’ I believe this injunction is especially applicable to
prisoners, and that the chaplain, first of all, should be a teacher,
and his intercourse with the prisoners should be in the form of
teaching. Most prisoners are without the truth, and they need to be
instructed in the truth, and my experience is that most of them are
desirous of learning the truth. And I believe that no chaplain ever
failed to interest or impress prisoners when he preached to them a
sermon teaching them the simple gospel. I have never failed to see,
in a prison chapel, the attention of the men arrested by the simple
reading of the gospel, or anything pertaining to the life or teachings
of Jesus Christ, or the explanation, by the chaplain, of what those
simple truths and teachings consist in. I believe that any chaplain
makes a mistake when he goes before his congregation of prisoners with
other subjects than the simple gospel, if he thinks thereby to awaken
greater interest in other ways.
“Phillips Brooks, when he used to visit the institution at Concord,
it was said, never varied his sermons one jot or tittle in presenting
them to the prisoners of that reformatory, than in giving them to
his cultured congregation in Trinity Church, and he never failed to
instruct, impress, and move his congregation of prisoners as no other
man to whom I ever listened. And that leads me to the point that I
believe that all religious services in a prison should be carried
through with the same care on the part of the clergyman, and with the
same dignity with which he would conduct the services in any church.
The ritual of the church service always appeals to prisoners. The
services of the mass, or the ritual of the synagogue, never fail in
receiving the reverent attention of the devotees of those faiths; and
my observation is that prisoners always respond to those services in
which they themselves are largely participants. Congregational singing,
responsive readings, repetition of Psalms and the Lord’s Prayer are
usually entered into with interest and satisfaction.
“The prison chaplain should be keen in his appreciation of human
nature, in dealing with the individual prisoner, that he may see the
good that exists in each prisoner with whom he comes in contact, and
work upon that side of his character. Humanity is much alike the
world over. Race and condition have not so much influence upon the
characteristics as we sometimes believe. In the modern American prison
will be found prisoners from nearly every nationality under the sun.
Their methods of evil are about the same, and they all respond to the
same influences, and are actuated by the same motives, each as the
other; and the prison chaplain who has learned this, and has learned
that there is always something in every prisoner which he can draw out
and develop, is well on the road to successful dealing with them. It
is not so much the work of the superintendent, warden, or chaplain, to
make over a man into something else, as it is to develop him along the
lines of his better self.
“When the Saviour called the fishermen, Peter and Andrew, to be his
disciples, he did not say to them, ‘Follow me, and I will make you
into great orators, or great preachers,’ but, ‘I will make you fishers
of men.’ So, when we approach the prisoner, we should not ask him to
be something different from himself, but should try to bring out and
develop his better self; by holding before his vision the ideal Man,
which is Jesus, and the ideal society, which is Christianity in its
perfection.”
EVENING
The evening session was again held in the Senate Chamber of the
Capitol. The first address was made by Mr. Frederick G. Pettigrove,
Chairman of the Massachusetts Board of Prison Commissioners, on “What a
Central System May Do to Promote the Efficiency of Prison Methods.”
“A world-famous essayist and statesman said that a complete theory of
government would be a noble present to mankind, but he added, it is a
present that one could neither hope nor pretend to offer. We are forced
to remember this limitation when we examine the various systems of
prison government and attempt to suggest remedies for the deficiencies
in them. I shall try to show that in whatever way the prisons are
governed there are certain reformatory methods and agencies that can be
made much more effective and available by the aid of a central system
than by being left entirely to local administration. I shall make no
attack upon any system, because it would be unjust and ungracious not
to remember the great service that has been rendered to the State
by the able and philanthropic men and women who have devoted their
services to the prisons, and have striven to lift them from mere places
of detention to a condition of high public service.
“If all the corrective methods that are now stamped with the approval
of public sentiment could be maintained to the best advantage in a
single prison, there would be no need of any central authority. It
could not be contended that a general board would be any wiser in
appointments than the local boards of management. Nor could there be
any larger or more humane interest in the affairs of a particular
prison, than is shown by the supervisors who have only one prison under
their charge. But it would be manifestly impossible, in the larger
States at least, to include in a single establishment all the various
agencies that are needed for the discipline, the training and the
treatment of prisoners; and it is therefore essential that different
places should be provided to furnish opportunities best suited to the
capacities and the needs of the widely differing individuals.
“The managers of one prison cannot command a knowledge of all the
prisons as well as a central board, and if the methods that are now
employed are to be used for the greatest good, and to be made available
for the largest number of offenders, there must be some general
authority to rearrange and reassign prisoners after they have been
committed.