In the Boyville Association it has always been the rule that, no
matter how great a wrong committed by a boy, and the fine or sentence
be what it may, if the boy looks forward to doing better, to putting
his whole soul into trying to do right, if he hates and despises the
act committed, that boy has a right to be honorably reinstated, and is
heartily welcomed back to his friends.
“Often” says a thoughtful writer, “men and women mourn over past
wrong-doings with which their present identity has no connection.”
A good preacher once asked a despondent soul, whose life was shadowed
by a wrong committed in early years: “Would you do the same thing
again?”
“Do it again?” answered the man, “No, a thousand times, no.”
“Then,” said the preacher, “You have outgrown the conditions that
caused the wrong-doing, and you are no longer responsible for it.”
The best way to correct wrong-doing is to prevent it, to warn a boy
against the evil vices that tend to his ruin in later years. And one
way to prevent crime is to reward virtue.
[Illustration: “HE WAS FISHING IN THE LAKE.”
_See Page 205_
]
Hon. Ben. B. Lindsey, of Denver, Colorado, Judge of the County and
Juvenile Court of Denver, after many years of hard work, intermingled
with the kind of experience that brings good results, declares that in
the work of the Juvenile Court he has found a way to make our boys of
today, who are inclined to be bad, follow paths of virtue and honesty
that will lead them to good and honorable citizenship, and his success
has been along the same self-governing plan of the Boyville Association.
We do not think there has been a more interesting official report nor
one of so great a value to the thinking people as the publication of
“The Problem of the Children and How the State of Colorado Cares for
them,” by Hon. Ben. B. Lindsey.
“Power under any law,” writes Judge Lindsey, “may be abused. Mistakes
under any law may be made. No system is perfect. If any conceives
the idea that the Juvenile Court was created for the purpose of
correcting or reforming every disorderly child, they are, of course,
mistaken. Jails and criminal courts never did that. On the contrary,
criminality among the youth of this country has been amazingly on the
increase. Over half of the inmates of jails, reformatories and prisons
combined are under twenty-four years of age. They are there largely
because of uncorrected delinquency in childhood. While the Juvenile
Court and probation system will not, and cannot, entirely overcome
delinquency and waywardness, it will do a great deal better than the
jail and criminal court ever did. The Juvenile Court generally deals
with cases in which there has been a failure in the home, the school,
and often the church. These three institutions are the places through
their various influences to form the character of the child. The
Juvenile Court is rather an aid to the home and the school in the moral
training of the child. If these two latter fail, the court, through its
officers, can supply the deficiency. In the Denver Juvenile Court none
are convicted of crime or subjected to the contamination of the jail.
“The Juvenile Court does not tolerate the idea of the child being a
criminal. It does not consider the question of punishment the important
thing. If the child cannot be corrected at home, for its own good and
for the good of society at large, it is simply sent to a State public
school, where discipline is superior to that of the home, and where
it is intended to correct waywardness and to serve as an example to
prevent waywardness in others. The purpose is, in delinquent cases, to
inspire and receive obedience, to improve and strengthen character.
We never release a boy upon probation until he is impressed with the
idea that he must obey. It is explained what the consequences will
be if he does not obey and keep his word. It is kindly, but firmly
impressed why all this is so, and why, after all, he is the one we
are most interested in and that it is for him we are working and not
against him. We want him to work with us and not against us. He must,
to do this, obey in the home, in the school, and of course, he must
obey the laws of the land and respect the rights of others. We must
know that he obeys. We know this by reports from the school, signed by
the teacher, every two weeks; by reports from the neighborhood, when
necessary to investigate, and frequently, by reports from the home,
and, in exceptional cases, visits to the home. And more important than
all this is the trust and confidence we impose upon the boy himself
through the administrative work of the Court. We arouse his sense
of responsibility. We understand him as best we can, and we make him
understand us as best we can.”
Nothing could be said or written of the history of Boyville and the
intention of its workers that could explain the great object in view
better than the above report.