Transcriber’s Notes:
Underscores “_” before and after a word or phrase indicate _italics_
in the original text.
Equal signs “=” before and after a word or phrase indicate =bold= in
the original text.
Small capitals have been converted to SOLID capitals.
Typographical and punctuation errors have been silently corrected.
Vol. I. APRIL, 1893. No. 4.
THE
KANSAS UNIVERSITY
QUARTERLY
=CONTENTS=
PENOLOGY IN KANSAS, _F. W. Blackmar_
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT IN THE UNITED STATES,
_F. H. Hodder_
PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY
LAWRENCE, KANSAS
_Price of this number, 50 cents_
Entered at the Post-office in Lawrence as Second-class matter.
COMMITTEE OF PUBLICATION.
E. H. S. BAILEY
W. H. CARRUTH
E. MILLER
F. W. BLACKMAR
C. G. DUNLAP
S. W. WILLISTON
V. L. KELLOGG, MANAGING EDITOR
JOURNAL PUBLISHING HOUSE
LAWRENCE, KANSAS
1893
KANSAS UNIVERSITY QUARTERLY.
Vol. I. APRIL, 1893. No. 4.
PENOLOGY IN KANSAS.
BY F. W. BLACKMAR.
The Kansas State Penitentiary at Lansing has been noted as one of the
best prisons in the far west. And indeed in some particular features it
is quite remarkable. Among its especially good qualities, as compared
with other prisons of similar nature, are its financial and economic
management and its thorough discipline. Its financial management shows
it to be practically a self-supporting institution. The institution has
been fortunate in securing good management and in the utilization of
the labor of the prisoners, by means of the contract system of labor,
as well as in performing nearly all of the work in connection with
repairs, improvements, etc. But especially has it been fortunate in
its location immediately above a rich vein of coal, so that a shaft
could be sunk within the prison walls for the working of the mine. (See
figure 4.)
The mine has thus been made to yield a handsome income for the benefit
of the State. The running expenses of the penitentiary for the biennial
period of 1891 and 1892 were $297,409.47, while the receipts from
contract labor, coal sales and other sources were $215,190.35. Thus
making an expenditure over and above cash receipts of $81,939.94.
But if it be considered, as it ought to be, that coal to the value
of $4,420.78 was furnished the western sufferers, and that coal to
the value of $42,533.68 was furnished to State institutions by the
prison management, and also that $50,106.46 were spent in permanent
improvement,[1] it will be seen that the income of the prison has
exceeded its current expenses by a margin of over $5,000 for the
biennium of 1891 and ’92. The total income from the coal mines for two
years was $168,993.57 and the total income from contract labor in the
same period was $78,225.80. This is a remarkable showing for a prison
containing on an average about 900 prisoners of all grades and classes.
[1] Eighth Biennial Report of Kansas State Penitentiary, p. 7.
A close inspection of the prison management will convince one that a
strictly military discipline prevails within the prison.[2] It is a
busy place at the penitentiary. All able-bodied men not undergoing
special punishment are employed. It is not a place for idlers, for
the law permits and requires service. The management of the different
industries, the hospital, the library, the insane department, the
kitchen and dining room all show care and system. So, also, for
cell-ventilation and other forms of sanitation there is great care
exercised by those in authority. While it is well to acknowledge
the excellent management of the prison during the past, it is also
pertinent to consider what progress may be made in the future. As there
has been such great advancement in prison science in the past twenty
years, it may be well to measure the Kansas penological system by ideal
systems, as well as by the foremost practice in the best regulated
prisons in Europe and America, to ascertain in what especial lines
Kansas needs to develop her penological system.
No doubt it is highly gratifying to the tax-payers of Kansas that the
institution is on a self-supporting basis. Especially is this to be
approved in a new state where so much must be done in a short time;
where schools, churches, hospitals, asylums, and penal institutions
must be built and maintained by the people almost before they have made
themselves comfortable in a new country. These must be provided for,
while railroads, roads, bridges and court houses must be built and the
native resources be made productive for the support of all.
But admitting all this, the management of prisons must consider reform
as the ultimate service to be performed in all penal institutions. The
new prison law of New York has admitted that reform is the ultimate
end of all confinement. But it views reformation as the only radical
means of protection to society. Reformation consists in “the reasonable
probability that the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without
violating the law.”[3] In this the law rests on the political basis
of protecting society rather than upon the moral basis of converting
and improving the qualities of the individual for his own sake. Much
progress has been made in the past fifty years in the treatment of
prisoners respecting discipline and reform. Indeed, an entirely new
light has been thrown upon the subject of penology. A careful inquiry
has been made into the question of what men are confined for, how they
are to be managed while under confinement, and what is to be done
with them after confinement. Although the fundamental principles of
penology are quite well established concerning the object and nature
of discipline, yet there are many questions of detail respecting the
methods to be pursued in carrying out these principles of punitive
and reformatory measures. In other words, the practical application
of theory, in spite of all the progress that has been made, leaves
serious difficulties to be met and mastered. It is generally considered
by all right-thinking persons versed in prison science that the
following objects of confinement are essential in every case: First,
the protection of society; second, punishment of the offender; third,
prevention of crime; and fourth, reform of criminals. Doubtless no
theory of prison discipline may be considered complete which lacks any
one of these four great fundamental principles. Yet it is true that we
shall find, even at this day, one, two, and even three of these four
fundamental principles violated in the practice of the imprisonment
of our fellow beings. The practice of hurrying one, who does commit
a crime, away from the sight and contact of his fellow beings, is
indicative of a universal sentiment in modern society. Society demands
at least this protection, and its request and privilege should never be
denied in this respect. But the old idea of punishment for revenge has
nearly died out of modern penalties of the law. There was a time when,
coupled with the desire to shut one away from society, doubtless for
its own protection, was a desire to take revenge upon the individual
who had outraged society. Sometimes a desire for revenge precipitated
an immediate punishment regardless of law and order. Sometimes it was
studiously and systematically cruel in all its plans for punishment
as well as in their execution. But in a large measure this has been
eradicated from the spirit of our laws and institutions. We see some
evidence of it in our modern process of lynching when anger and revenge
seize upon people with such force as to cause them to lynch the
lawbreaker in a most cruel manner. So also in respect to individuals
who have committed great crimes, when the whole community seem so
desirous of revenge that they have thrown their whole support into
the prosecution of the offender. But these are exceptional cases. The
spirit of punishment in modern times is that which looks calmly on the
act of the lawbreaker as an injustice to society for which he must pay
the penalty. In other words, a man is imprisoned for life or hung, not
because society desires to wreak upon him vengeance on account of the
crime which he has committed, but because society demands protection,
and that he must be punished on account of the demand to uphold the
dignity and power of the law, for law without a penalty has little
force to the evil doer.
[2] The writer is much indebted to the present Warden, Hon. Geo. H.
Case, and to his able assistants for their courtesy in showing him the
working details of the prison.
[3] Quoted from Prison Science, by Eugene Smith, p. 7.
Again, in regard to the prevention of crime. One of the chief objects
of penal servitude is to set an example before other evil-disposed
persons of what the consequences must be if they in turn violate the
law. But in each of these cases it is to make the commitment of crime
less frequent that men are imprisoned, rather than that they should
suffer for their sins. But, finally, in the last case the reform
of criminals within or without the prison walls has become one of
the prime principles of penology. No present system or theory can
be complete in these days that does not consider in some manner the
methods of bringing back into legitimate society those who by their
deeds have become outcasts from the body politic. In the study of
sociology there are two sides of social life to be considered: First,
there is what might be called legitimate society, which has sprung up
from indefinite and simple beginnings, but has grown into a strong
organism, which might be called the proper status of social life;
and then there is the other side of humanity which may be termed the
broken down, decrepit or fragmentary part of the great social body,
which may be called disorganized society. It is as much the duty of
the reformer to study the organized and legitimate society as it is to
study the disorganized or the fragmentary. In modern times there have
been a great many who call themselves social scientists, who devote a
great deal of time to the criminal and the pauper, and properly so,
for, indeed, it is from these broken down parts of humanity that we
realize more especially the nature of human society, and discern more
clearly the means of preventing crime; but the ideal or legitimate
society must not be lost sight of. We must keep before our eyes the
proper laws, proper government and proper protection of organized
society while we investigate the habits, conditions and qualities of
its outcasts. Hence in all modern reforms there are two subjects to
consider: A reform measure which shall by direct application tend to
develop and strengthen that which is already considered good and, on
the other hand, a reform measure which shall reclaim and reform that
which is considered bad. In this respect the state prison and the state
university are not so far apart as it would seem: one tending to build
up and strengthen legitimate society, to protect the state in all
its interests, to make law more prominent, reform more stable, human
society more moral and intellectual, crime less frequent and industry
more prevalent by well ordered education. These are the objects of the
state university. While, on the other hand, in accordance with the
last one of the penological principles stated, the prison has for its
duty the same objects as the university, although applied to a class of
individuals entirely different, who overstep the bounds of the law and
by their own habits have abstracted themselves from legitimate society.
Both institutions exist for the improvement of society and neither is
instituted for the purpose of revenge.
While we have carried on the work of reform of prisoners to a
considerable extent and while many seem to be carried away with it as
the only great method of solving the evils of the day, we must not
forget that the great institutions which tend to develop society on the
basis of prevention of crime are not the only ones which are important
to consider. And this arises from the very fact of reform, that if
we allow either crime or pauperism to develop rapidly, unchecked, we
shall soon find it such a burden on human society that the legitimate
and well organized will become defective on account of the increase
in the number of paupers and criminals who form a constant menace to
civil institutions. While all sentiments for reform arise primarily
from human sympathy with the weak and the erring, the state still
rests the cause of its action in the full and complete protection of
legitimate society. It matters not how individual sympathies act, the
reformation of criminals finds its cause to be in the common weal of
society. To make a prisoner more intellectual, to give him better moral
qualities, to prepare him for better industrial independence, to send
him out with a better life and means, if he wills, to support himself,
to adopt means to help him from the prison world in which he has lived
into a greater world outside: all this might arise out of benevolence,
but it has for its ultimate end the simple protection and improvement
of society as a whole. Consequently reform has become the sole great
object in detaining criminals within prison walls. All other objects
must be considered as means to this one great end.
In the discussion of penological principles one of the foremost methods
of reform to be noticed is that of the classification of all criminals.
Perhaps Belgium was the foremost state of Europe to adopt a thoroughly
practical classification of prisoners. Formerly it was considered
sufficient to have a large prison pen, a foul den into which old and
young, light offenders and heavy villains were thrust, taking them out
only occasionally for service or keeping them without service at all.
Here the old criminals, hardened through many years of repeated crimes,
would rehearse their stories to the young who were soon educated in all
of the tricks of the trade. Here in these horrid dens the propensities
for crime were increased rather than diminished, and plots and plans
were made for future depredations upon society.
Within a comparatively recent period most nations have endeavored to
properly classify prisoners. First a general classification, separating
the old from the young, the hardened criminals from the novices. The
modern tendency is to institute reform schools and work houses for
juveniles, reformatories for youth, and regular prisons for hardened
criminals. But in the highest ideal of prison science each one of these
is to be a reformatory of a different class. Kansas has determined
upon this classification. The Reform School at Topeka, the Reformatory
at Hutchinson and the State Penitentiary at Lansing represent this
three-fold classification. The reformatory at Hutchinson has not been
completed. Its methods are to be patterned after the reformatory at
Elmira, N. Y., the model institution of its class in America. The chief
difficulty in the establishment of such an institution in Kansas is
its great expense. It is a great undertaking for a young state like
Kansas to compete with an old wealthy state like New York. Yet the
Kansas reformatory may take all the essential features of the Elmira
reformatory and by obtaining rather more service from its inmates may
be made less expensive. It will be trying to Kansas tax-payers to
provide such an industrial school for the criminals of the state as
that at Elmira, while it is only by dint of close saving that they are
able to give as good an education to their own sons and daughters who
have never offended against the state. Yet it must be remembered that
this is done for the benefit of the whole state, for the purpose of
lessening crime and expense. The reformatory at Hutchinson should be
completed as soon as possible as there is a great need for it that the
prisoners at Lansing may be properly classified and a certain group of
those most susceptible of reform should be sent there.
Within the prison walls classification of individual prisoners
according to crimes, temperament and habits has been of great
assistance in their management. In the United States there are two main
systems in vogue, that known as the Pennsylvania System and that as the
New York System. The former may be defined as the solitary cellular
system, and the latter as the single cell system, with prisoners
working and dining together. The Pennsylvania system had its origin in
the celebrated Cherry Hill prison, built in 1821 to 1829, containing
over 600 separate cells for continuous solitary confinement. This
solitary confinement in large airy rooms is expensive but is considered
as the best treatment of prisoners. Here the prisoner is kept at work,
or instructed in trades or books. Work becomes a necessity to him. The
only punishment is a dark cell with deprivation of work for a period.
The New York system is as has been practiced at Auburn, by which the
prisoners are confined in solitary cells during the night, but have
companionship during the day while at work, and at the dinner table.
Each system has warm advocates. The solitary cell system has had most
practice in Europe but the American plan has made up the lack of proper
classification by the excessive work of prisoners.
Many persons hold that classification of prisoners in groups is a
failure, and that the solitary cellular system is the only commendable
method. Edward Livingston has thus set forth the advantages of this
system:
“Every association of convicts that can be formed will, in a greater
or less degree, corrupt, but will never reform those of which it is
composed, and we are brought to the irresistible conclusion that
classification once admitted to be useful, it is so in an inverse
proportion to the numbers of which each class is composed. But it is
not perfect until we come to the plan at which it loses its name and
nature in the complete separation of individuals. We come then to the
conclusion that each convict is to be separated from his fellows.”[4]
The extent of isolation which each prisoner undergoes must be
determined somewhat by the nature of his case and somewhat by the
conditions and convenience of the prison. It is hardly possible for
many modern prisons to have complete separation on account of the
expense incurred, for this would mean that within the cell itself the
prisoner must perform all labor, and that the cell shall be commodious
enough to carry on this labor by himself, or else that he be given
labor elsewhere alone. Such a system requires an increased amount of
attendance.
At the Kansas penitentiary the system of solitary cell confinement at
night and when off duty, and the silent associations of prisoners in
groups during the day while at work and at meals, is now in vogue.
Without doubt this association during the day carries with it evil
influences which are in a measure lessened by the requirements of the
law for ten hours of labor for all able-bodied prisoners.
Whatever system of classification is adopted the reform idea must
be faithfully considered. There should be an ample opportunity for
study and for work, that both physical and intellectual powers may
receive development. It has been proved by long continued observation
that the typical criminal is weak in body and in mind. He may have
intellectual cunning developed to a considerable degree, and may be
capable of great physical efforts for spasmodic periods, but he is
not a well developed being either physically or mentally.[5] Hence
his reform must frequently begin with physical discipline and this
followed by mental training, or the two must be carried on together.
In the Kansas penitentiary the law requires prisoners to work ten
hours at labor. Consequently they have left, for study and general
improvement, their evenings and Sundays. There is a school on Sunday
for all who wish to attend. This is a very meagre showing for any
systematic training with a view to permanent reform. It would seem that
eight hours of labor per day is sufficient for able-bodied persons if
any intellectual improvement is expected of them. In many instances
it would be more profitable to spend even less time in routine labor
and give better opportunity for mental discipline and general physical
culture. Mental discipline brings a reform of intelligence, of
knowledge and of judgment which are supremely necessary in the care of
persons criminally disposed and in the prevention of crime. In this
respect a careful classification of the inmates of every prison should
be had, whatever be the system adopted, and each individual should
have a treatment that best suits his case. Men are not reformed in
groups and companies but by special influences brought to bear upon
the individual. The Elmira reformatory has been a living application
of this theory. This institution has been taken as a model not only
for America but for the whole world, and at present represents the
most successful institution for the reform of young criminals yet
established. It makes no distinction between the prisoners within and
the people without any further than is necessary on account of the
difference in conditions.
[4] Tallack, Penological and Preventive Principles, p. 118.
[5] Criminology, McDonald, pp. 36-96.
When prisoners enter the Elmira reformatory they are given grade _two_
with the possibility of their falling to grade _three_ or rising to
grade _one_. Each grade is clothed differently from the others, and
in that respect a discrimination in clothing is shown between the
different groups or prisoners within the prison rather than between
those within and the people without. All attempts are here made
possible to make men dwell upon the better things of life, to turn
their whole attention to the development of what manhood is still
within them, and thus transform the criminal into independent and
self-asserting manhood.
But classification should not stop here. According to our principle
each individual should be treated according to the character of his
crime and the condition of his criminality, indeed, according to his
own character. Sweeping laws which pass upon a great mass of criminals,
that are made inflexible and indiscriminative, are the most valueless
that can ever be instituted for the guidance of the warden of a prison.
In his judgment should rest the determination of many things concerning
prison discipline. A warden should be a person especially trained for
his position by long practice and theoretical study. So far as possible
he should be removed from political regime, and be continued in office
during good behavior and competent administration. There should not be
too many laws and rules instituted by boards of supervisors, which tend
to hamper him. In Kansas the Board of Directors of the state prison
make the rules for the government of the warden. Ordinarily this check
upon administrative government may be wise, but to a well prepared and
competent warden such laws are liable to prove irksome in the extreme.
Even the statutes passed by the state ought to be sufficiently flexible
to give large discretionary powers to the warden. Too many boards
are a supreme nuisance to rational government. There is no greater
mistake made than in the creation of a prison law which shall treat
a thousand prisoners as one man, whether in regard to their food, or
to the hours they shall work, or to the method of confinement, or the
length of sentence, or to grade marks, or to the method which may be
taken to reform them. Consequently the singling out of each individual
as a character study with a desire to give him the full benefit of
all helpful measures to reform him, and to place him in a way to make
himself independent after he leaves the prison is, indeed, one of the
prime factors in prison discipline. The method of classifying together
individuals of the same character and degree of criminality, with a
view to make them mutually helpful by conversation and association
rather than to deteriorate their character has been tried in some
instances but as a rule it has proved a failure. Nevertheless it does
seem that something might be done in this way. At least, possibly
those who have a life sentence should be classified together in the
same group. If prisoners must work together during the day time each
group could be placed by itself. If in any kind of association there is
contamination either by words or looks or signs, a few prisoners of the
same degree of criminality could be classified together, which without
doubt will make fewer chances for those who are very evil in nature to
degrade others. How far this may be carried with success can only be
determined by those who will make of it a practical example with an
intense desire and determination to succeed. At any rate, it may be
affirmed that the classification of prisoners in groups can be carried
on with great skill and a great deal of benefit, if the buildings
are arranged for this purpose: different dining rooms, different
apartments and reading rooms, different associations in every way.
The departmental system would have this advantage, that sets of rules
could be made for the government of each separate department and would
thus more nearly meet the conditions and needs of each separate group
of prisoners. But such a classification is urged only in cases where
the solitary system is practically impossible. In close connection with
this classification might be considered the question of hereditary
treatment. Every prisoner who enters any prison whatever should be
carefully studied as to his past history and present life, in order to
ascertain his own nature and the elements of manhood within him which
are possible of development. A careful record of every prisoner, his
past life, the crimes he has committed, his education, his conditions
and associations should be carefully considered. This record will
enable those who have charge of prisoners to study their character, and
not only enable them to manage them better as a disciplinary means,
but also furnish a means for such reform as the prisoners are capable
of. It may do more even than this, in the study of the influence of
heredity in crime. There are those who hold that not much can be made
out of the fact that criminal fathers are more apt to have criminal
children than others. But no one who has made a careful inquiry into
hereditary taints can question that there is a great tendency in
hereditary crime. The subject has not been studied sufficiently far to
give data enough to warrant us in drawing mathematical conclusions. But
cases have been cited where criminals have married and intermarried
and large numbers of children have become criminals through many
generations. An interesting fact is to be noted here, however, that a
large number of the so-called hereditary crimes arise out of existing
conditions rather than from blood taint; thus a child whose parents are
thieves, and the companions of whose parents are thieves, grows up with
his early life biased in this direction; all about him are men engaged
in these corrupt practices and the early life is impressed with the
supposition that this is a normal state of affairs and he naturally
grows up to follow the calling of his parents and neighbors, just as an
individual who is brought up to know nothing but farming, and considers
this the legitimate calling of his father and neighbors, would seem
likely to take to it as a livelihood rather than to something else with
which he is less familiar.
The investigations of such men as Charles Booth in London[6] would seem
to indicate that crime arises chiefly out of conditions, examples,
and habits, rather than from the assumption that men are born to
crime through any inherent psychological tendency. In this it is not
intended to show that heredity does not have a large influence in the
development of crime. Statistics have been prepared to thoroughly
substantiate the fact that heredity plays a great part in the
development of the criminal.
[6] Life and Labor of the People of London, by Charles Booth, 3 vols.
“Of the inmates of Elmira reformatory 499, or 13.7 per cent. have
been of insane or epileptic heredity. Of 233 prisoners at Auburn, New
York, 23.03 per cent. were clearly of neurotic (insane, epileptic,
etc.) origin; in reality many more. Virgilio found that 195 out of
266 criminals were affected by diseases that are usually hereditary.
Rossi found five insane parents to seventy-one criminals, six insane
brothers and sisters and fourteen cases of insanity among more
distant relatives. Kock found morbid inheritance in 46 per cent. of
criminals. Marro, who has examined the matter very carefully, found
the proportion 77 per cent., and by taking into consideration the
large range of abnormal characters in the parents, the proportion of
criminals with bad heredity rose to 90 per cent. He found that an
unusually large proportion of the parents had died from cerebro-spinal
diseases and from phthisis. Sichard examining nearly 4,000 criminals
in the prison of which he is director, found an insane, epileptic,
suicidal and alcoholic heredity in 36.8, incendiaries 32.2 per cent.
thieves, 28.7 sexual offenders, 23.6 per cent. sharpers. Penta found
among the parents of 184 criminals only 4 or 5 per cent. who were quite
healthy.”[7]
Such being the awful tendency of crime to breed crime, questions
arising respecting the causes of crime ought to be a careful study by
all persons interested in criminology or penology.
The question has often arisen, How will you find out correctly about
the past history of individuals? Some conclude that, because prisoners
are dishonest, there is no method by which you can find out about their
past life or early conditions. A careful study of this question by men
who are expert in handling criminals, has convinced the public that
this may be done. Possibly as much of the record of the prisoner as is
convenient to be obtained, should be procured by the court and sent to
the warden with the sentence. If it could not, the warden then could
ascertain through a commission the past history of each prisoner as he
comes to him and a full record of his life, condition, habits, etc. If
this was not complete, it could be verified from time to time or be
changed from time to time, as facts developed later on. Perhaps no one
has succeeded any better in this line than has Mr. Brockway, general
superintendent of the Elmira reformatory. Mr. Brockway presents the
subject in the following letter:
[7] Havelock Ellis, The Criminal, page 93.
F. W. BLACKMAR, ESQ., Lawrence, Kansas:
DEAR SIR:--Yours of the 21st. There is a mistaken impression abroad
about the possibility of ascertaining from prisoners the truth on any
subject. They are liars, in common with the remainder of the race not
in prison. Perhaps more apparently so, but nevertheless they are not
in this respect more untruthful than witnesses called to the stand in
courts, witnesses who have never been and, probably, never will be in
prison. My observation is, in the five investigations of my prison
administration, had during long years of it, that the statements of
prisoners before the several commissions were as truthful as are the
statements of witnesses heard at trials outside.
The real difficulty in ascertaining the truth in the examination of
prisoners is not very much more difficult than to ascertain the truth
of any other common class of witnesses. It goes without saying that the
examination of witnesses needs to be made by a competent, pains-taking
examiner, before whom it is usually easily determined whether the
witness is lying, prevaricating or making substantially a truthful
statement. Moreover, it is possible by clues ascertained in the course
of the examination from statements made by the prisoner,--names, dates,
etc., to verify or disprove the accuracy of the statement he makes on
his examination. There are some cases, not very many, where no clue can
be had or dates or names ascertained. These, however, constitute such a
small percentage of the prisoners examined, that it constitutes a class
scarcely worth considering in this connection.
The particular purpose of inquiring into the early and antecedent
history of the prisoners committed to this Reformatory during the last
fifteen years has been to ascertain the character of the defects of the
man himself, with a view to map out and conduct a course of treatment
calculated to cure such defects or build up counteracting impulses and
habitudes, as well as to determine the cause of the defects observed.
It has been abundantly demonstrated by our experience here that the
record made on the date of the prisoner’s admission, which is an
abstract of the examination held by the General Superintendent, is
substantially accurate,--accurate in all the essentials required to
determine the real character of the man. I am sure, if it was deemed
important to go back one or two generations for hereditary influences,
we might ascertain enough from the prisoner on his examination to
enable further inquiry outside which, together with the statements of
the prisoner, would form very reliable data.
I am, dear sir,
Very respectfully yours,
Z. R. BROCKWAY, _Gen. Supt._
The following table shows something of Mr. Brockway’s method of
classification as the result of his investigations:[8]
[8] See Annual Report of the Board of Managers of the Elmira
Reformatory, 1889.
BIOGRAPHICAL STATISTICS OF INMATES.
1. Relating to their Parentage (Hereditary.)
Insanity or epilepsy in ancestry 499 or 13.7 per cent.
DRUNKENESS (_in Ancestry_).
Clearly traced 1,408 or 38.7 per cent.
Doubtful 403 or 11.1
Temperate 1,825 or 50.2
EDUCATION (_in Ancestry_).
Without any education 495 or 13.6 per cent.
Simply read and write 1,885 or 38.1
Ordinary common school or more 1,592 or 43.8
High School or more 164 or 4.5
PECUNIARY CIRCUMSTANCES (_in Ancestry_).
Pauperized 173 or 4.8 per cent.
No accumulation 2,801 or 77.0
Forehanded 662 or 18.2
OCCUPATION (_in Ancestry_).
Servants and clerks 376 or 10.4 per cent.
Common laborers 1,197 or 32.6
At mechanical work 1,343 or 36.9
With traffic 633 or 17.7
THE PROFESSIONS (_so-called_).
Law 16
Medicine 36
Theology 10
Teaching 25
87 or 2.4 per cent.
2. Relating to Inmates Themselves (Environment).
THE HOME LIFE.
(_a_) Character of Home Life.
Positively bad 1,883 or 51.8 per cent.
Fair (only) 1,453 or 39.9
Good 300 or 8.3
(_b_) Duration of Home Life.
Left home previous to 10 years of age 187 or 5.2 per cent.
Left home between 10 and 14 years of age 226 or 6.2
Left home soon after 14 years of age 1,121 or 30.8
At home up to time of crime 2,192 or 57.8
NOTE.--As to the 1534 homeless:
Occupied furnished rooms in cities 390 or 25.4 per cent.
Lived in cheap boarding houses (itinerant) 280 or 18.2
Lived with employer 331 or 21.6
Rovers and tramps 533 or 34.8
EDUCATIONAL.
Without any education (illiterates) 710 or 19.5 per cent.
Simply read and write (with difficulty) 1,814 or 49.9
Ordinary common school 979 or 26.9
High school or more 133 or 3.7
INDUSTRIAL.[9]
Servants and clerks 1,041 or 28.6 per cent.
Common laborers 1,853 or 51.0
At mechanical work 649 or 17.8
Idlers 93 or 2.6
CHARACTER OF ASSOCIATIONS.
Positively bad 2,072 or 56.9 per cent.
Not good 1,439 or 39.6
Doubtful 64 or 1.8
Good 61 or 1.7
NOMINAL RELIGIOUS FAITH OR TRAINING.
Protestant 1,531 or 42.1 per cent.
Roman Catholic 1,667 or 45.8
Hebrew 207 or 5.7
None 231 or 6.4
[9] It should be stated that the above who claimed some occupation are,
as a rule, not regularly employed, nor steady reliable workmen.
The study of physical, mental and moral characteristics will lead us
to other determinations and will show in physical health that the
prisoners are as a rule not much, if any, below the average of people
at large. It will also show that the majority of them not accustomed
to regular work or employment are not capable of doing as much labor
or enduring as much constant physical fatigue as would the same body
of men who are not criminals taken from the common ranks of the
people. So as to mental characteristics, we can urge that the criminal
intellect has not been keen enough to take proper rank with the average
mind. It is a fact, however, that many criminals are very shrewd and
intellectually keen. Doubtless something could be said about the
quality of such intellect and its special characteristics. It is the
intellect of a coarse nature and not cultured, refined, or properly
trained in the aggregate. The well developed mind, balanced in every
particular, is rare among criminals. It will be seen, however, that
a defect in the moral nature is in most instances a secret cause of
the crime. Moral insensibility seems to be the common characteristic
of a large proportion of prisoners. It is indeed too true with many
of them that their conscience consists merely in the humiliation of
being caught. Dwell as they may upon past deeds, the great fault of
their own, as far as they view it, is in the fact that they were caught
in the act and apprehended and punished. This moral insensibility is
found in all grades and degrees, from that of a complete lack of moral
symptoms to those of a highly sensitive moral nature.
Of the 4,000 criminals who have been through the reformatory at Elmira,
36.2 per cent showed on admission positively no susceptibility to moral
impressions; only 23.4 per cent were ordinarily susceptible.[10]
[10] The Criminal, p. 139.
The following tables, taken from the report of the general
superintendent of the Elmira reformatory for 1889, may be found
interesting. It must be observed that the majority of these prisoners
are young and all of them under the age of 30.
CONDITION AS OBSERVED ON ADMISSION.
PHYSICAL.
(_a_) As to health:
Debilitated or diseased 200 or 5.5 per cent.
Somewhat impaired 501 or 8.3
Good health 3,135 or 86.2
(_b_) As to quality:
Low or coarse 916 or 25.2 per cent.
Medium 1,354 or 37.2
Good 1,366 or 37.6
MENTAL.
(_a_) Natural capacity:
Deficient 73 or 2.0 per cent.
Fair (only) 789 or 21.7
Good 2,300 or 63.2
Excellent 474 or 13.1
(_b_) Culture:
None 1,572 or 43.2 per cent.
Very slight 1,040 or 28.6
Ordinary 916 or 25.2
Much 108 or 3.0
MORAL.
(_a_) Susceptibility to moral impressions now (estimated):
Positively none 1,318 or 36.2 per cent.
Possibly some 1,310 or 36.1
Ordinarily susceptible 851 or 23.4
Specially susceptible 157 or 4.3
(_b_) Moral sense, even such as shown under the examination,
either filial affection, sense of shame, or sense of
personal loss:
Absolutely none 1,794 or 49.3 per cent.
Possibly some 1,112 or 30.6
Ordinarily sensitive 553 or 15.2
Specially sensitive 177 or 4.9
Without doubt this is a better showing by far than can be had in any
ordinary prison. Auburn contains a different class of criminals than
is found at Elmira. So, also, for the older prisons of Europe, there
are more _recidivistes_, or habitual criminals in these prisons. In the
West there appears to be fewer of the habitual class and more of the
accidental class in proportion than are found in older countries of
denser population. Yet much of a helpful nature could be had by a more
careful study of individual characteristics of criminals than is at
present carried on. This means more time, more help and more expense,
but in the long run it would amply pay.
An excellent phase of the Kansas system is the shortening of terms on
account of good behavior within the prison walls. It is provided by
statute that three days per month for the first year shall be deducted
from the term of sentence of such prisoners as have no marks against
them for disobeying the rules of the prison. If the record has been
good at the close of the first year, six days per month shall be
deducted during the second and eight days per month during the third if
good conduct continues. These privileges apply to years or parts of a
year.[11]
Another timely measure permits prisoners to participate in their
own earnings. Five per cent. of each day’s labor at the rate of
seventy-five cents per day, are entered to the credit of each
prisoner.[12] If, on account of good behavior, a sentence is commuted
at the end of the first year, the prisoner may have the privilege of
sending these earnings to his family. There certainly is no reason why
the prisoner within the walls should not support a family, if he has
one, rather than allow it to be thrown upon the public. At least part
of his earnings should be sent home and part saved for him to the end
of his term. A certain per cent. of the earnings may be used by the
prisoner in providing himself with a few comforts. (The floor in the
cell shown in fig. 5 has a carpet provided in this way.) This, among
other rules, suggests that the condition and conduct of the prisoner,
as well as the crime, should determine the length of the sentence. If
crime can be reckoned as moral insanity, as many specialists hold, then
a sentence for a fixed time is similar to sending a sick man to a
hospital for treatment, stating that he must remain exactly two years
and three months to be cured, when in fact it may take longer or he
may be cured before the end of a year. Certain it is that no criminal
should be returned to the ranks of society until a reform has been
thoroughly commenced. And when it can be ascertained that he will not
commit crime again, it is idle to confine him longer. New York and Ohio
have taken advanced steps in this direction and have instituted what
is known as the indeterminate sentence for all criminals, whether in
reformatories or penitentiaries.[13]
[11] Kansas Statutes, 6421, 1889.
[12] Ibid., 6439.
[13] See Proceedings of the National Conference of Charities, 1891, p.
290.
When the solitary cellular system is in vogue, the prisoners are
limited to certain occupations within the cell, but when the associated
system is practiced, all kinds of industry involving machinery may
be carried on. This has given rise to what is known as the contract
system, a method of employing prisoners, which should not be confounded
with the unfortunate and nearly antiquated lease system. The statutes
of Kansas[14] permit the contracting of prisoners to responsible
parties, but still the state maintains its disciplinary control over
the prisoners. The directors are obligated to advertise for bids in
the leading papers in each congressional district. Contracts shall
not exceed a term of ten years, and awards are made to the highest
responsible bidder. Forty-five cents per day for able-bodied men is
the minimum point below which bids are not accepted. There is a great
controversy respecting the defects of the contract system, but it is
not as bad as it at first appears when laborers are employed otherwise
with great difficulty. Doubtless the better way is absolute management
of all industries, as in case of the coal mines, by the prison
superintendent.
[14] Revised Statutes, 6442, 1889.
The management of the mines is intrusted to a skillful engineer, Mr.
Oscar F. Lamm. The writer has investigated the conditions under which
men work, and has been to the face of the mines where they were at
work, and can testify that the stories circulated about hard usage in
the mines are wholly unfounded, except by persons who consider all
labor, particularly mining, hard usage. The air below is pure--men are
sent down every morning to test the air before prisoners are allowed
to go down--and the mining is comparatively easy. There is very little
difficulty in it, and the prisoners are not so bad off in these mines
as are the miners in private mines elsewhere in Kansas. It may be a
dreary life to lead for a person who has not been accustomed to work
underneath the ground, but the average miner would pronounce the life
in the mines endured by the prisoners as one of comparative ease and
very few hardships. In all the experience of the mines, only one
individual has been seriously hurt, and that when he disobeyed orders
directly.
There have been many objections to the contract system urged by persons
who are outside of the prison and its management. Whatever objections
there may be to the contract system in itself, those usually observed
are of no force. It is said that the goods made by prisoners come into
close competition with goods made by union men outside of the prison
and therefore the union men urge the repeal of the law granting the
privilege of contracting prisoners for work. There can be no reason in
this from the following principles: First, because every citizen of
Kansas is interested in the right management of the prison as a means
of protecting him and his family. In order to have this protection it
is necessary that laborers be given employment for the sake of proper
management. As there are less than a thousand of these prisoners all
told, many of them are employed about the buildings and grounds and
many employed in furnishing coal and other goods to state institutions,
the competition does not figure at all in the great labor market.
Again, while the prison mines have been putting forth abundance of
coal in supplying state institutions and the market elsewhere, other
coal mines in and around Leavenworth have been unable to fill the
orders in supplying the demand upon them. Superintendents have tried
again and again during the past two years to obtain sufficient miners
to take out enough coal to supply the market, but they have failed.
So far as the mines are concerned, the hue and cry about competitive
labor amounts to nothing. Again, the contract system is carried on
in this way: The prisoners are always under the charge of the warden
and prison authorities. Contracts are let to the highest bidder for
a certain number of laborers. This labor must be done on the prison
grounds and under the general oversight of the prison authorities. If a
prisoner is not doing well at a certain occupation, he is transferred
to some other occupation. He has much the same treatment everywhere.
Care is taken to adapt the prisoner to the labor that best suits his
condition. When these goods are finished they pass out on the market
in competition with other goods of the state and neighboring states.
This, as has been stated, cannot be avoided unless the solitary system
is adopted and with it an exclusion of machinery. The minimum price
for contract laborers is forty-five cents per day, and as a matter of
business, as those contracts are let to the highest bidder and as labor
is plentiful outside of the prison, there can be very little difference
in the effect of this contracting for prison labor and the injury of
union labor outside as respects the cheapness with which goods can
be thrown upon the market. However, it seems to me that it would be
better to have all prisoners and all manufacturing under the direction
of the prison, and that raw material should be purchased to supply the
machinery placed there for the purpose of manufacturing the goods and
then the goods should be furnished to state institutions where they
need them and the surplus be thrown upon the market at the usual price.
This would keep all the prisoners employed and would also give them
instructions by way of learning and drill in completing the finished
product, which is an education in itself. Then wherein it is necessary
and possible, part of the time should be employed in obtaining a fair
theoretical as well as industrial education. In this way the management
of the prisoners in their graded condition would be more directly under
the control of the warden and, instead of being treated as a gang at
work in the shop and elsewhere, an individual consideration of every
prisoner would be reached in discipline, manual labor and intelligent
training.
It is not the purpose of penal institutions to humble or degrade
humanity. There is no object in it and moreover it has a tendency to
breed crime. Men who are sufficiently evil and reckless to commit
flagrant crimes are not benefited by a punishment that degrades them
or tends to rob them of the appearance of manhood. For this reason
the striped suits worn by prisoners should be abandoned and suits
which will classify persons within the walls, be adopted. If it be
said that it is more difficult to apprehend those who escape if the
traditional striped clothes are abandoned, let it be said this is of no
importance; if the Bertillon or French system of registry be adopted,
as represented in the following tables, there will be little chance of
escape.
[Illustration: BERTILLON OR FRENCH SYSTEM OF PRISON MEASUREMENT AND
REGISTRY.]
[Illustration]
One of the great difficulties in connection with prison reform is that
of restoring to important places in legitimate society the ex-convicts
who have been serving long terms of imprisonment. First and foremost
is the consciousness of the prisoner that he has been a convict, that
he has worn the striped clothes and been separated from society for a
period of years on the supposition that he was not worthy to live in
said society and therefore had forfeited his right to live in it. If
he be strong enough to overcome the effects of such a feeling he must
indeed have received a permanent reform or be strong in character. In
addition to this is the fact that people know he has been a jail-bird
and they will not want to employ him or trust him. This has a tendency
to make him feel that he is still an outcast from society and that
there are greater walls than those of the prison separating him from
the trust and confidence of society. If he is employed by those who do
not understand that he is from prison he carries with him continually
the consciousness of deception, and this in itself has rather a bad
tendency in developing a spirit which (if it does not already exist)
will tend to make him feel that he is an enemy to the society which
seems against him. It will be a strong character, even though it be
determined to do right at all times and even though the prison reform
has been salutary, if it resists the influence of such conditions. True
there are prisoners of entirely different character, who consider all
attempt at reform within the prison walls as so much nonsense, or at
least nothing more than opportunities for winning the favor of their
superiors while under sentence, and when they pass from the prison
walls they still feel, if they feel at all, that society is against
them and they are against society, and they are ready at the slightest
opportunity to engage in their old pursuits without even attempting to
enter a legitimate calling and live respectable and honored citizens.
To relieve all this there have been attempts to form prison
associations which would receive the prisoner at his discharge, place
him in the hands of individuals who understand his life and character
and who would sympathize with him in the attempt to continue his well
begun reformation, and he, understanding them, would have confidence
not only in himself but in the people around him. In this way he makes
the connection which has been broken off between himself and legitimate
associations, and has a possibility of outliving the past. Such an
association in Kansas might accomplish a vast deal of good. It ought
to be formed by philanthropists and business men who would take an
especial interest in this work. Each prisoner when he has finished
his sentence should be assisted quietly and earnestly in securing the
proper place. It would save very many, who have left the prison with
good intentions, from returning to old practices.
Perhaps the furlough system, as carried on by the Elmira reformatory,
is the most unique that has ever been tried for the purpose of making
the connection of the discharged prisoners with the industrial and
social life without. Prisoners are discharged on furlough of three
years, during which time they are placed under good influences and
have all the opportunities for continuing the reform outside of the
prison walls. These prisoners report monthly to the prison authorities
and of their own accord. If, at the end of three years, they have
made satisfactory progress and have occupied positions of trust
without betraying confidence, they are given their final discharge on
the supposition that they are, from that time on, able to care for
themselves in a manly way. Of the discharged prisoners by the furlough
system over 75 per cent. have completed their three years with credit
to themselves, which speaks well for the permanent reforming character
of the Elmira system. There is need of such a school in Kansas. When
the Hutchinson reformatory was projected, commissioners were sent to
study the Elmira system and other systems and it was determined to
carry out or follow as nearly as possible the former, believing it
would be of benefit to Kansas. Certainly a reform prison is needed at
present for the younger criminals, where they can be separated from the
old and hardened and be placed under the best influence possible. One
chief detriment to the effective working of such a reform school in
the West is that it is an expensive institution, and that the people
of to-day are not willing to pay sufficient taxes for the support
of an institution in which so much care is given to those who have
committed crimes against the state. There is a feeling here still that
it is better to give support to our educational institutions and to
all efforts along the line of educating that part of society which is
already good and making it better, rather than spending so much money
on that which is broken down. But it must be remembered, as was stated
in the foregoing principles, that the care for the broken down parts
of humanity is only in the interest of general humanity and should be
considered upon that basis. However, I think also that a reformatory
could be carried on at Hutchinson on a less expensive basis than that
one at New York, and with proper management it could be made to go a
long way towards supporting itself and still give proper reformatory
practice for all who should come within its scope. At least the
Hutchinson institution should not be abandoned under any consideration
whatever. It would relieve the present overcrowded condition of our
penitentiary and provide in a large measure for a class which are not
sufficiently provided for.[15]
[15] The Kansas Legislature at its recent session made an appropriation
to complete the Hutchinson Reformatory.
Discharged prisoners from Lansing find but little difficulty in
obtaining work in the mines if their previous training has prepared
them for it. So, also, those who have trades well learned need not
be out of employment and the prison authorities render assistance to
prisoners in a general way in obtaining work after being discharged.
Much more might be said about criminology and penology in Kansas, of a
more scientific nature than what is contained in this somewhat general
discussion; it is the intention of the writer to refer again to this
subject in connection with the study of sociology at the University of
Kansas.
A Brief Bibliography of Municipal Government in the United States.
BY FRANK H. HODDER.
In political science, things near at hand and always with us are
slighted, while remote and obscure questions are made the subject of
most careful investigation. Taxation is a notable illustration of this
fact. There is no act of government which so directly and intimately
concerns the whole people, and yet it would be difficult to name one
which has received so little careful study. In English there is not
a single systematic and comprehensive work on the subject. Similarly
with municipal government. With the present distribution of population
this department of government controls more than one-fourth of our
whole people in all their most important political relations. There is
still no systematic treatise on the subject, but public interest has
been aroused, and a large number of lectures, articles in periodicals
and scientific journals has been printed in recent years. It is a
hopeful sign that municipal government is beginning to receive careful
attention in colleges. For the purpose of assisting college study of
the subject, a list of such literature as could be found was printed
some time ago. As it has been found useful in several institutions,
it has seemed worth while to extend it and bring it down to date. The
study of municipal government at home is very properly preceded by a
summary of local government generally and by a glance at municipal
government abroad. The order of the references is as follows:
I. Introductory.
1. Local Government Generally.
2. European Cities.
a. London.
b. Paris.
c. Berlin.
d. Other Foreign Cities.
II. American Cities.
1. Legal Status.
2. Statistics.
3. Finance.
4. General Discussions.
5. Municipal Industries.
6. Various Topics.
7. Particular Cities.
a. New York.
b. Other American Cities.
I. INTRODUCTORY.
1. LOCAL GOVERNMENT GENERALLY.
Short accounts of the systems of local government of the principal
countries of continental Europe are given in the Cobden Club Essays:
Local Government and Taxation, London, 1875, edited by J. W. Probyn.
See also F. Béchard’s _De L’administration de la France_, 2 vols.
Paris, 1851, with appendix on municipal organization in Europe.
The best short description of English local government is M. D.
Chalmers’s Local Government, “English Citizen” Series, London, 1883.
See also Local Administration, “Imperial Parliament” Series, London,
1887, by Wm. Rathbone, Albert Pell and F. C. Montague. For still
shorter account read chapter 15 of May’s Constitutional History and
article on “Local Government in England” by F. J. Goodnow in the
Political Science Quarterly, December, 1887, vol. 2, pp. 338-65,
and an article by the same writer on “The Local Government Bill” in
the Political Science Quarterly, June, 1888, vol. 3, pp. 311-333.
Supplement Chalmers with Cobden Club Essays: Local Government and
Taxation in the United Kingdom, London, 1882, edited by J. W. Probyn.
The most exhaustive work on English local offices is Rudolph Gneist’s
_Self-Government: Communalverfassung u. Verwaltungsgerichte in
England_, untranslated, 3d ed., 1876. For full bibliography see Gomme’s
Literature of Local Institutions, London, 1886.
The best short outline of local government in the United States is an
article by S. A. Galpin on “Minor Political Divisions of the United
States,” in Gen. F. A Walker’s Statistical Atlas of the United States.
The papers on the local institutions of several of the States in the
Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science
are especially valuable. Chas. M. Andrews has articles on Connecticut
towns in the Johns Hopkins Studies, vol. 7, and in the Annals of
the American Academy of Political Science, October, 1890, vol. 1,
pp. 165-91. Especially important is Prof. Geo. E. Howard’s Local
Constitutional History of the United States, vol. 1.: “The Development
of the Township, Hundred and Shire,” printed as an extra volume in
this series. John Fiske’s lecture on “The Town Meeting,” delivered
at the Royal Institution, was printed in Harper’s Magazine, vol. 70,
pp. 265-272, and in his American Political Ideas, N. Y., 1885. A
different view of the present importance of local institutions is taken
by Prof. S. N. Patten in an article on the “Decay of State and Local
Government,” in the first number of the Annals of the American Academy
of Political Science. For comparison of American and foreign methods,
read R. P. Porter’s article “Local Government: at Home and Abroad,”
Princeton Review, July, 1879, N. S. vol. 4, p. 172, and reprinted
separately. See two articles on “Local Government in Prussia,” by F. J.
Goodnow in the Political Science Quarterly, December, 1889, vol. 4, pp.
648-66, and March, 1890, vol. 5, pp. 124-58. For further reference on
local self-government see W. F. Foster’s Monthly Reference Lists, vol.
2, pp. 23-29, and his pamphlet of References on Political and Economic
Topics, p. 24.
For Canada, see J. G. Bourinot’s “Local Government in Canada: an
historical study,” in Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada for
1886, vol. 4., sec. 2, pp. 42-70; printed separately by the publishers,
and reprinted, with a letter on the municipal system of Ontario, in
the 5th series of the Johns Hopkins Studies. A paper on “The Ontario
Township,” by J. M. McEvoy, printed in 1889, forms No. 1 of the Toronto
University Studies in Political Science.
2. EUROPEAN CITIES.
For the purpose of comparison, some study should be made of municipal
government abroad. Dr. Albert Shaw gives a general view of “Municipal
Government in Great Britain,” in Notes Supplementary to the Johns
Hopkins Studies, No. 1, January, 1889, and in the Political Quarterly,
June, 1886, vol. 4, pp. 197-229. Of larger works on English municipal
history, mention may be made of J. R. S. Vine’s “English Municipal
Institutions; their Growth and Development from 1835 to 1879,” London,
1879. Dr. Chas. Gross has printed a very complete “Classified List of
Books relating to British Municipal History,” Cambridge, 1891, as No.
43 of Bibliographical Contributions of Harvard University. Foreign
experience is of very little assistance in the solution of the general
problem of municipal government in the United States, but it may be
useful in indicating improved methods of administration in particular
departments of a city government. Several cities that illustrate
different forms of municipal government may be taken as examples.
_a._ _London._
Specially excepted from the operation of the Municipal Corporations
Act of 1835. For outline of government read Chalmers, chap. 10. For
full description see J. F. B. Firth’s Municipal London, 1876, and his
Reform of London Government and of City Guilds, “Imperial Parliament”
Series, London, 1888. For history of the corporation consult W. J.
Loftie’s History of London, 2d ed., 1884, and the same author’s small
work, London, published in 1887 in Freeman’s series on “English
Historic Towns.” Both books are based on new material, part of it
recently discovered by Bishop Stubbs. For additional references, see
Gomme, pp. 122-134.
There have been a great many articles on the municipal government of
London in recent periodical literature. Among them may be cited those
by W. Newall, Contemporary Review, 1873, vol. 12, p. 73, and 1875,
vol. 25, p. 437; W. M. Torrens, Nineteenth Century, 1880, vol. 8., p.
766; Alderman Cotton, Benj. Scott, City Chamberlain, and Sir Arthur
Hobhouse in Contemporary Review, 1882, vol. 41, pp. 72, 308, and 404
respectively; the Westminster Review, for January, 1887; Dr. Albert
Shaw on “How London is Governed,” in the Century, November, 1890, vol.
41, pp. 132-147, and on “Municipal Problems of New York and London,”
in the Review of Reviews, April, 1892, vol. 5, p. 282; James Monroe on
“The London Police,” in the North American Review, November, 1890, vol.
151, pp. 615-629; Sir John Lubbock on “The Government of London,” in
the Fortnightly Review, February, 1892, vol. 51, p. 159; and an article
on the “Municipal Administration of London,” in the Edinburgh Review
for April, 1892. For a good review of attempts since 1860 to regulate
the London gas supply, see an article in the British Quarterly for
January, 1879.
A Royal Commission on the City Livery Companies reported May 28, 1884.
See the discussion by Sir R. A. Cross, one of the dissenting members
of the Commission, in the Nineteenth Century for 1884, vol. 16, p. 47,
and by Sir Arthur Hobhouse in Contemporary Review for 1885, vol. 47, p.
1. The most important work on the London guilds is William Herbert’s
“History of the Twelve Great Companies of London,” London, 1837. The
latest contribution to the subject is Price’s “Description of the
Guildhall,” London, 1887.
_b._ _Paris._
A sketch of its government by Yves Guyot, a member of the municipal
council, may be found in the Contemporary Review, March, 1883, vol.
43, p. 439. Dr. Shaw gives an excellent short account in an article
entitled “The Typical Modern City” in the Century, July, 1891, vol. 42,
pp. 449-66. He cites as the principal authority on the subject Maxime
Du Camp’s _Paris, ses organes, ses fonctions, et sa vie dans la seconde
moitie du dix-neuvieme siecle_. An extended description is also given
in a work entitled _Administration de la Ville de Paris_, written
by Henri De Pontich under the direction of Maurice Block, Paris,
Guillaumin, 1884. The _Rapports et Documents and Process-Verbaux_ of
the municipal council are printed yearly in three large quarto volumes,
and the municipal bureau of statistics issues an annual report.
_c._ _Berlin._
An excellent short account of the government of Berlin is given by
Dr. Rudolph Gneist, a member of the municipal council since 1848, in
the Contemporary Review, December, 1884, vol. 46, p. 769. See also
the report on the “Administration of the City of Berlin” in Foreign
Relations for 1881, p. 487, made by Assistant-Secretary of Legation
Coleman at the request of Hon. Andrew D. White, then Minister to
Germany. Also the articles by Prof. R. T. Ely in the Nation for
March 23 and 30, 1882, vol. 34, pp. 145 and 267. In the Nation for
September 25, 1892, vol. 55, p. 221, Mr. Leo S. Rowe combats some of
Dr. Shaw’s generalizations respecting municipal government in Europe,
taking Berlin as his text. The Magistracy of Berlin publish reports
at irregular intervals. The first, _Bericht ueber die Vervaltung der
Stadt Berlin, in den Jahren 1829 bis inclu. 1840_, Berlin, 1842, and
the second, _in den Jahren 1841 bis incl. 1850_, Berlin, 1853, are of
considerable importance. A third, published in 1863, covers the period
from 1851 to 1860, and a fourth, printed in 1882, covers the period
from 1861 to 1876. The Director of the Statistical Bureau of the city
publishes annually _Das Statistische Jahrbuch der Stadt Berlin_.
The present municipal system of Prussia dates from the reorganization
of the municipalities by Stein and Hardenburg, November 19, 1808.
See Seeley’s Life of Stein, part 5, chap. 3, and Meier’s _Reform der
Vervaltung-Organization unter Stein und Hardenberg_, Leipsig, 1881. The
present “Municipal Corporation Act,” _Stædte-ordnung_, was passed May
30, 1853. See Kotze, _Die Preussischen Stædte Verfassungen_, Berlin,
1879, and Backoffner, _Die Stædteordnungen der Preussischen Monarchie_,
Berlin, 1880, and especially Eugen Leidig’s _Preussisches Stadtrecht_,
Berlin, 1891. See also the articles on local government in Prussia
cited above.
_d._ _Other Foreign Cities._
Statistics of all important German cities are given in Dr. M. Neefe’s
_Statistisches Jahrbuch Deutscher Stædte_, Erster Jahrgang, Breslau,
1890. Financial statistics of the great European cities are given
in Joseph Körösi’s _Bulletin Annual de Finance des Grandes Villes_,
Dixième Année, Budapest, 1890.
A short account of the municipal government of Vienna is given in
a report by Mr. Kasson in Foreign Relations for 1879, p. 64 and
an extended account in Dr. Felder’s _Die Gemeinde-Vervaltung der
Reichs-haupt und Residenzstadt Wien_, Vienna, 1872. For the government
of Budapest see Dr. Shaw’s article in the Century, June, 1892, vol.
44, pp. 163-179. Prof. F. G. Peabody gives a sketch of Dresden in an
article entitled “A Case of Good City Government,” in the Forum, April,
1892, vol. 13, p. 53.
The following relate to various British Cities: Dr. Shaw’s “Glasgow, a
Municipal Study,” in the Century, March, 1890, vol. 39, pp. 721-736;
the same writer’s “Municipal Lodging Houses,” in No. 1 of the Charities
Review, November, 1891; Julian Ralph’s “The Best Governed City in the
World” (Birmingham) in Harper’s Magazine, 1890, vol. 81, pp. 99-111;
Thos. H. Sherman’s report on “Liverpool, its Pavements, Tramways,
Sewers and Artisans’ Dwellings,” in Consular Reports, June, 1890, vol.
33, pp. 284-303; and Consul Smyth’s report on “Tramways and Water Works
in England,” in the Consular Report for December, 1891.
II. AMERICAN CITIES.
1. LEGAL STATUS.
For comparison of the provisions of the state constitutions relating
to municipal corporations, see F. J. Stimson’s American Statute Law,
Boston, 1886, vol. 1, articles 34, 37 and 50. Note the classification
of municipalities in Ohio. On the relation of municipalities to the
states, consult the chapter on “The Grades of Municipal Government”
in Judge T. M. Cooley’s Constitutional Limitations, 6th ed., Boston,
1890, and a short chapter at the close of the same author’s Principles
of Constitutional Law. Judge J. F. Dillon’s Treatise on the Law of
Municipal Corporations, 4th ed., 2 vols., Boston, 1890, is the standard
authority on the subject. Note the introductory historical sketch. A
new text-book on the Law of Municipal Corporations, by Chas. F. Beach,
Jr., has been recently issued by Houghton, Mifflin & Co. Reference may
also be made to Judge Dillon’s Law of Municipal Bonds, Chicago, 1877,
and to A Treatise on Municipal Police Ordinances, Chicago, 1887, by N.
T. Horr and A. A. Bemis, of the Cleveland bar. The authors of the last
work say in their preface that “The necessity for it arises from the
fact that, except in those cities and towns where the municipal council
has the assistance of regularly employed legal advisers, the limits of
lawful legislation are apt to be exceeded.”
Numerous references to articles in law journals are given on pp.
386-388 of Jones’s Index to Legal Periodical Literature, Boston, 1888.
An article by J. R. Berryman on “Constitutional Restrictions upon
Legislation about Municipal Corporations,” in the American Law Review,
May-June, 1888, vol. 22, p. 403, may be cited.
2. STATISTICS.
The Eleventh Census will give very full statistics of cities, but
though some of the results have been announced in bulletins, none
of the final reports have yet been issued. These results have been
summarized by Hon. Carroll D. Wright in the Popular Science Monthly for
1892, vol. 40. On “Urban Population” see p. 459; on “Social Statistics
of Cities” p. 607, and on “Rapid Transit,” p. 785.
The following Reports of the Tenth Census treat of this subject: vol.
1, Population; vol. 7, Valuation, Taxation and Indebtedness; vol. 18,
Social Statistics of Cities: New England and Middle States (reviewed in
the Nation, vol. 44, p. 256); and vol. 19, Social Statistics of Cities:
Southern and Western States.
Scribner’s Statistical Atlas of the United States, N. Y., 1883,
exhibits the figures of the census graphically (p. xlv, statistics of
population). Plate 21 illustrates the growth of American cities since
1790. There were then only eight cities of eight thousand inhabitants,
and the population of New York was 33,131. Plate 30 gives ratios of
different nationalities to total population in the largest fifty
cities. Plate 76 gives net per capita debt in the largest one hundred
cities.
On movement of population see an article by B. G. Magie, Jr., in
Scribner’s Monthly, January, 1878, vol. 15, p. 418; Prof. Richmond
Smith’s “Statistics and Economics,” p. 264 in vol. 3 of the
Publications of the American Economic Association; a study on the
“Rise of American Cities” by Dr. A. B. Hart in the Quarterly Journal
of Economics, January, 1890, vol. 4, pp. 129-157; an article by
Lewis H. Haupt on “The Growth of Great Cities” in the Cosmopolitan
for November, 1892, and another by John C. Rose, on “The Decrease of
Rural Population” in the Popular Science Monthly for March, 1893, vol.
42, pp. 621-38. Cf. work by E. Levasseur, entitled _Les Populations
Urbaines en France, comparees a celles de l’Etranger_, Paris, 1887.
The Annual Statistician, published by L. P. McCarty, San Francisco,
gives the following statistics for leading cities: Number of votes
registered and polled; number of voting precincts; strength of police;
losses by fire and number of fire-engines and firemen; value and
capacity of gas and water works; number and character of street lights;
vital statistics; number of murders, suicides, and executions; length
of street railroads and cost of motive power; telegraph and telephone
mileage; number of saloons and cost of licenses; attendance and cost of
schools, annual tax-rate, expenditure and the public debt.
3. FINANCE.
Volume 7 of the Reports of the Tenth Census, compiled by Robert P.
Porter, gives statistics of local taxation and indebtedness, and a
summary of the provisions of the several state constitutions limiting
the rate of taxation, the amount of municipal debts, and the purposes
for which they may be contracted. See p. 674 for an analysis of the
purposes for which the debt outstanding in 1880 was contracted. The
Eleventh Census will give similar data. Mr. Porter published an article
on municipal debts in the N. Y. Banker’s Magazine for September, 1876,
and another in Lalor’s Cyclopædia of Political Science, vol. 1, p. 730.
Cf. also his article in the Princeton Review, n. s., vol. 4, p. 172.
For a further study of this subject, read Prof. H. C. Adams’s Public
Debts, N. Y., 1887, Part 3, chap. 3. See also G. W. Green’s article
on “Municipal Bonds,” Lalor’s Cyclopædia, vol. 2, p. 920; Prof. S. N.
Patten’s “_Finanzwesen der Staaten und Stædte der Nordamerikanischen
Union_”, Jena., 1878; C. Hale’s “Debts of Cities,” Atlantic, vol.
38, p. 661, for the law of Massachusetts; D. L. Harris’s “Municipal
Economy,” Journal of Social Science, vol. 9, p. 149, for the experience
of Springfield, Mass., the articles in Bradstreet’s for February 10 and
March 3, 1883, for a comparison with local debts in England, and H. B.
Gardner’s “Statistics of Municipal Finance” in the Publications of the
American Statistical Association, June, 1889, vol. 1, pp. 254-67. On
the debt of New York City see the paper by Wm. M. Ivins cited below.
A Statement of Facts Concerning the Financial Affairs of the City of
Elizabeth, N. J., which has the largest per capita debt in the United
States, was published by some of the citizens of that place in January,
1886.
Municipal taxation is treated at length in Prof. R. T. Ely’s Taxation
in American States and Cities, New York, 1888. The Reports of the
Commissioners Appointed to Revise the Laws for the Assessment and
Collection of Taxes in New York, 1871 and 1872, contain much valuable
material. The members of the Commission were David A. Wells, Edwin
Dodge, and George W. Cuyler. The first report was reprinted in New York
by Harpers, and both were reprinted in England by the Cobden Club. Cf.
also Wells’s “Theory and Practice of Local Taxation in America,” in the
Atlantic Monthly for January, 1874; “Rational Principles of Taxation,”
a paper read in New York, May 20, 1874, Journal of Social Science, vol.
6, p. 120; and his “Reform of Local Taxation” in the North American
Review for April, 1876. On the evils of double taxation see a paper on
“Local Taxation” by William Minot, Jr., read in Saratoga, September
5, 1877, and printed in the Journal of Social Science, vol. 9, p.
67. See Report in 1876 of New Hampshire Tax Commission, composed of
Geo. Y. Sawyer, H. R. Roberts, and Jonas Livingstone; and Report of
the Michigan Commission, House Journal, February 23, 1882. A similar
Commission, appointed by the City of Baltimore, reported in January,
1886. The Report contains, in addition to the recommendations of the
Commission, a paper by Prof. R. T. Ely, entitled “Suggestions for
an Improved System of Taxation in Baltimore.” A further article on
“Municipal Finance” may be found in Scribner’s Magazine, January, 1888,
vol. 3, pp. 33-40, and a thesis entitled “Special Assessments: A Study
in Municipal Finance,” by Victor Rosewater, is announced for vol. 2 of
the “Studies in History, Economic and Public Law,” issued by Columbia
College.
4. GENERAL DISCUSSIONS.
Adams, Charles Francis. “Municipal Government:
Lessons from the Experience of Quincy, Mass.”
Forum, November, 1892, vol. 14, pp. 282-92.
Berryman, J. R. “Constitutional Restrictions upon
Legislation about Municipal Corporations.”
American Law Review, May-June, 1888, vol. 22, p. 403.
Bowles, Samuel. “Relation of State to Municipal
Governments, and the Reform of the Latter.”
Journal of Social Science, vol. 9, p. 140.
A paper read in Saratoga, September 7, 1877.
Bradford, Gamaliel. “Municipal Government.”
Scribner’s Magazine, October, 1887, vol. 2, pp. 485-493.
Browne, G. M. “Municipal Reform.” New Englander,
February, 1886, vol. 45, p. 132.
Bryce, James. “The American Commonwealth.”
Lon. and N. Y., 1888.
This well known work contains the following
chapters on municipal government: chapters 50
and 51, “The Government of Cities;” chap. 52,
“An American View of Municipal Government in the
United States,” by Pres. Seth Low; chapters 59-64
explain the working of party machinery; chap. 88,
“The Tweed Ring in New York City,” by F. J.
Goodnow, and chap. 89, “The Philadelphia Gas Ring.”
Cambridge Civil Service Reform Association.
“Prize Essays on Municipal Reform.” 1884.
Contents:--“The Selection of Municipal Officers:
their Terms and Tenures,” by T. H. Pease, of
Chicago, Ill.; “The Appointment of Municipal
Officers,” by John Prentiss, of Keene, N. H.;
and “The Selection and Tenure of Office of
Municipal Officers,” by Prof. H. T. Terry, of
the University of Tokio, Japan.
Chamberlain, Joseph. “Municipal Institutions in America
and England.” Forum, November, 1892, vol. 14, pp. 267-81.
Mr. Chamberlain was Mayor of Birmingham 1873-6.
He compares its government with that of Boston.
Crandon, F. D. “Misgovernment of Great Cities.”
Popular Science Monthly, vol. 30, pp. 296 and 520.
Eaton, Dorman B. “Municipal Government.”
Journal of Social Science, vol. 5, p. 1.
A paper read in Boston, May 13, 1873.
Eliot, C. W. “One Remedy for Municipal Misgovernment.”
Forum, October, 1891, vol. 12, pp. 153-168.
Fassett, J. S. “Why Cities are Badly Governed.”
North American Review, May, 1890, vol. 150, pp. 631-7.
Senator Fassett summarizes the results of the investigation
in 1890 of a committee of the New York Senate on cities.
Field, David Dudley. “Our Political Methods.”
Forum, November, 1886, vol. 2, pp. 213-22.
Fisher, Wm. R. “Municipal Government.”
Publications of the Philadelphia
Social Science Association.
This Association has united with the American
Academy of Political and Social Science and its
publications are now furnished by the Academy.
Fiske, Amos K. “Remedies for Municipal Misgovernment.”
Forum, April, 1887, vol. 3, pp. 170-77.
Fiske, John. “Civil Government in the United States.” N. Y., 1890.
Chapter 5.
Ford, Worthington C. “American Citizen’s Manual.” N. Y., 1882.