In the year 1909, the legislature enacted our first law providing for
the indeterminate sentence and for the parole of prisoners at the
expiration of their minimum sentence. The minimum sentence was not to
exceed one fourth of the maximum, and the privilege of parole was to be
granted according to the decision of the board of inspectors who were
constituted the board of parole.
In the year 1911, the legislature amended this act because of the
objections of several judges in the State who were not ready to endorse
the 1909 law. The length of sentence is now at the option of the court.
The judges are to impose both a maximum and a minimum sentence with no
restriction except the maximum is not to exceed the maximum time now
imposed by law for any offence. A sentence may read “Maximum, 25 years;
minimum, 24 years”; or “Maximum, 25 years; minimum, one year.”
In 1913 the privilege of parole was extended to all confined in the
penitentiaries of the State, who were sentenced prior to July, 1911,
provided they had served one third of the sentence imposed. Under the
operation of this act, several hundred prisoners in the State prisons
were entitled to parole provided they could comply with the conditions
of the board of parole. These conditions, as a rule, include good
behavior while in prison, suitable employment and a sponsor.
Some editors in the State have rather severely criticised what they
have termed a general jail delivery. A few of those released have
violated the terms of their parole and have been returned to the
penitentiary. These instances are widely published, thus creating in
the minds of some who are not thoroughly cognizant of all the facts
in the case that a lot of desperadoes are being turned loose in the
community.
Close observation of the statistics seem to show that about eighty-five
to ninety of the paroled men make good. Of those who return the
number who have again committed crime is a very small percentage. A
man who is out on parole is liable to be returned for intemperance,
idleness or failure to report. If we may estimate the number who
have returned as fifteen per cent. of the entire number released on
parole, a comparatively small number of this percentage are brought
back on account of actual crimes committed. It is too early to decide
with reference to the four or five hundred recently paroled. But a
comparison with our general experience during the last three years
would indicate that not more than two or three out of a hundred will be
brought back on account of crime.
Probably the community is not in as much danger from the paroled men
as from those who are regularly dismissed after serving their full
time. It must not be forgotten that many hundreds of prisoners every
year are released from the penitentiaries and from the county jails
who have served the full sentence imposed by the court. Whatever their
state of mind or of morals, their time is up and they go forth without
any restraints such as assist the paroled prisoner to lead a life
of rectitude. The prison authorities are often quite well convinced
that a prisoner is far from “healed,” but there is no recourse. The
authorities of a hospital would receive just condemnation if they
allowed a patient to be discharged who was uncured of his typhoid fever
or of his small pox, but the officers of a penitentiary often turn
loose a scoundrel to prey upon the community simply because the time of
confinement deemed right by the lawmakers and by the court has expired.
The men who make application for the privilege of parole are carefully
studied. That some mistakes have been made is readily admitted. With
larger experience these errors may largely be eliminated. The work is a
growth and the efficient officers who are giving careful study to the
practical workings of the matter are confident of higher results than
they have hitherto attained.
A purely economic side of the question was somewhat discussed in a
recent report of the Pennsylvania Prison Society. The annual saving at
that time by allowing the paroled prisoners to earn their own living
instead of being maintained in institutions supported by the State was
estimated last year at about $50,000. The cost of the parole management
for the same time did not exceed $8,000.
There may come a time when the sentence imposed by the court will be
wholly indeterminate. The judge may impose a sentence of one year,
with the additional restriction that he is not to be discharged until
penological experts shall have pronounced him ready for citizenship.