p 55-1083 RED HEADED STEPCHILD Part I Sophie Meranski Barrett early years 1901-1930
Chapter FOUR Master's Thesis 1925
THE YOUNG OFFENDER AND THE CRIMINAL LAW IN MASSACHUSETTS
Sophie Meranski 1925 thesis The Young Offender and the Criminal Law In Massachusetts "THE YOUNG OFFENDER AND THE CRIMINAL LAW IN MASSACHUSETTS" 1925 Master's Thesis SOPHIE RUTH MERANSKI (BARRETT) Mount Holyoke College South Hadley Mass. Department of Economics and Sociology [Professor Amy Hewes advisor] CONTENTS Introduction -p one Definition of Crime -p two Statistics of Crime -p three The Monetary Cost of Crime -p five Scope of the Study - p six Punishments in Colonial and Revolutionary Massachusetts -p six Juvenile Prisoners after the Revolution -p ten Separation of Juvenile Offenders and the Establishment of the House of Reformation in Boston in 1824 -p fourteen Other Juvenile Reform Schools -p seventeen Early Legislation Restricted to Juveniles -p eighteen Juvenile Delinquency in the Twentieth Century -p twenty The Era of the Clinical Criminologist -p twenty-nine Conclusions and Recommendations -p thirty-one BIBLIOGRAPHY - BOOKS Boies, Henry M., The Science of Penology (1901) Drucker, Saul, and Marurice B. Hexter, Children Astray (1923). Earle, Alice M., Curious Punishments of Bygone Days (1896) Eliot, Thomas D. , The Juvenile Court and the Community (1914) Ford, James, Social Problems and Social Policy 1923). Glueck, S.Sheldon, Mental Disorder and the Criminal Law (1925) Hart, Hastings H. ed., Juvenile Court Laws in the United States Summarized. Russell Sage Foundation (1910). Healy, William, The Individual Delinquent (1922) Henderson, Charles R. ed Prison Reform and Criminal Law. Correction and Prevention Series. Russell Sage Foundation (1910). Judge Baker Foundation., "Harvey Humphrey Baker, upbuilder of the Juvenile Court". Publication No. 1. [1920] Lewis, Orlando F., The development of American prisons and prison customs 1776-1845 [1922] Parmalee, Maurice F., Criminology [1919]. Robinson, Louis N., Penology in the United States [1921] Snedden, David S., Administration and educational work of American juvenile reform schools [1907] Stewart, Alexander H.., American bad boys in the making [1912]. Sutherland, Edwin H.,, Criminology [1924]. Thomas, William I., The unadjusted girl [1923]. Van Waters, Miriam, Youth in conflict [1925]. White, William A., Insanity and the Criminal law [1923]. Wines, Frederick H., Punishment and reformation [1919]. ARTICLES and PAMPHLETS Bailey,William B. Children before the courts in Connecticut. United States Children's Bureau,Publication No. 43 [1918]. Belden, Evelina, Courts in the United States hearing children's cases. United States Children's Bureau, Publication No. 65 [1920]. Breckenridge, Sophonisba P. and Helen R. Jeter, A summary of juvenile court legislation in the United States. United States Children's Bureau, Publication No. 70 [1920].Chute, Charles L. ,Probation in children's courts. United States Children's Bureau,Publication No. 80 [1921]. Flexner, Bernard and Reuben Oppenheimer, The legal aspect of the juvenile court. United States Children's Bureau, Publication No. 99 [1922]. Healy, William, Honesty: A study of the causes and treatment of dishonesty among children [1915]. Healy, William, The practical value of scientific study of juvenile delinquents. United States Children's Bureau, Publication No. 96 [1922] Healy, William and Augusta F. Bronner [Brenner?], "Youthful offenders: A comparative study of two groups, each of 1,000 young recidivists". The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. XXII, No. 1 [July 1916]. Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology 1911-1925.Kirchwey,George W., "Parole", The Survey, Vol. LIII, No. 12 (March 15, 1925) pp. 729-731. Massachusetts Commission on Probation, Probation Manual [1916]. REPORTS AND STATUTES: Connecticut, Revised Statutes, 1672 Massachusetts, Acts and Resolves,1692-1924 Massachusetts, Board of State Charities,Annual Reports, 1865-1878 Massachusetts, Board of Health, Lunacy, and Charity, Annual Reports, 1879-1886 Massachusetts, Board of Lunacy and Charity, Annual Reports 1886-1898 Massachusetts, Board of Charity,Annual Reports, 1899-1919 Massachusetts, Department of Public Welfare,Annual Reports 1920-1922 Massachusetts Commission on Probation, Annual Reports, 1909-1921 National Probation Association, Probation and the prevention of delinquency. Proceedings, 1923. National Probation Association, Community treatment of delinquency. Proceedings, 1924. United States Bureau of the census: Prisoners and juvenile delinquents in the United States, 1910 [1918]. United States Bureau of the Census: Statistical directory of state institutions for defective, dependent, and delinquent classes [1919]. TEXT PAGE ONE Crime is essentially a problem of youth in colflict with authority. The steady stream of persons who are constantly re-enforcing the ranks of the criminal class are for the most part human beings who have not reached their maturity. [Footnote ONE "Seventy-five per cent of all the prisoners in Sing Sing in 1923 were under twenty-one years of age." Miriam van Waters, YOUTH IN CONFLICT [1925] p. V.] They fail to conform to the demands of society, and consequently, pass through our courts, jails, prisons, and reform schools and comprise our incorrigible, neglected, and delinquent groups. Through these institutions they drift back into society. For hundreds of years the courts and the whole machinery of criminal law have dealt with the problem of crime without any resulting diminution in the number of criminal acts and prisoners.For this reason it has become a pressing obligation to find out what has been done in the past and what is being done at the present time to throw light upon the causes of this antisocial behavior.Such a search will show sharply contrasting changes of method. In the past the delinquent classes were dealt with en masse. Today, Dr. William Healy of the Judge Baker Foundation maintains that each case should be given separate study. [Footnote TWO William Healy, THE INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANT [1915] p. 5.] The history of medical science shows us why similar symptoms should not be assumed as arising from the same causes and why, consequently, generalizations PAGE TWO- as to treatment should be cautiously made. In the early days of medicine,superstition and a rough trial-and-error method were the guides for handling cases of disease. Cures were aimed for, but causes were not sought after.Similar symptoms received the same treatment regardless of the source of the disorder. A general treatment for headache was "letting blood", as the process was termed. Today, physicians make a careful investigation to learn the real nature of the cause of the headache, which may be due to any disorder from eyestrain to poor digestion.The causes of the similar symptoms may be absolutely different, and no scientific treatment can be rendered until the cause of the malady is ascertained. Careful study has, to a large extent, dispensed with the method of trial-and-error in the field of medicine; general classifications of symptoms, causes, and cures have been compiled, but each new case still demands individual diagnosis and prognosis. Only when the fundamental cause in the case of each individual is made known and the resulting symptoms noted can the results of past investigations and experience be brought into play. Similarly, proper treatment of offenders can never be attained unless their problems are understood. The slow, expensive purely inductive method of procedure is sound in practice. A scientific starting point is found only in knowledge 0of the fundamental causes of delinquency. The effort to understand and direct each criminal is worth the time and expense necessary because checking at the source is the only effective method. DEFINITION of CRIME --A crime is any act, or omission PUNISHABLE BY LAW. Since the laws of countries differ and since the laws of the same nation undergo alteration from -PAGE THREE- time to time, a corresponding change in the proportion of criminals may be brought about by the laws themselves. Many acts which once entailed severe punishments are no longer regarded as crimes, and many new crimes have been created. In bringing out the changing content of crime Edwin H. Sutherland, Assistant Professor of Sociology at the University of Illinois, says: "Many of the early crimes were primarily religious offenses, and until comparatively recent times these remained important; few religious offenses are now included. It was a crime in Iceland in the Viking age for a person to write verses about another, even if the sentiment was complimentary, if the verses exceeded four strophes in length......The English villain in the fourteenth century was not allowed to send his son to school, and no one lower than a freeholder was permitted by law to keep a dog.The following have at different times been crimes: printing a book, professing the medical doctrine of the circulation of the blood, driving with reins, the sale of coin to foreigners....On the other hand, many of our present laws were not known to earlier generations - quarantine laws, sanitation laws, factory laws, prohibition of intoxicating liquors." [page THREE footnote ONE: Edwin H. Sutherland, CRIMINOLOGY [1924] pp. 28,29.] New inventions and new contacts bring with them the possibility of the creation of new crimes and draw presumptive criminals into the criminal class. With the use of the check came forgery and the passing of bad checks, and the automobile increased arrests for reckless driving and seduction. Thus the repeal of old laws relating to crime and the drafting of new ones determine the composition of the criminal class. STATISTICS 0F CRIME The decennial enumerations of prisoners comprise the only statistics of crime for the entire United States. As an index of crime the value of such a census has been greatly over-rated. Although it is true that each sentenced prisoner -page FOUR- represents a crime that has been committted, it is not possible to judge from the number of prisoners in confinement at a given time just what the rate of crime is at that time because an increase in prison population may result from an increase in the average length of sentence just as certainly as from an increase in the number of persons sentenced. Therefore a mere census of the prison population can result in no very definite conclusion regarding the prevalence of crime. The record of prison commitments during a given period is a better index. From the latter the conclusion sems justified that the increase in the number of prisoners is not much more than keeping pace with the growth of population.... The figures do not indicate that crime is increasing at an alarming rate in the United States. [Footnote ONE page FOUR : United States Bureau of the Census PRISONERS AND JUVENILE DELINQUENTS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1910. [1918] P. 17]. Sufficient grounds for apprehension, however, are disclosed by Dr. S. Sheldon Glueck, Instructor of Criminology and Penology at Harvard Universiuty, who states that according to the 1923 report of the Law Enforcement Committee of the American Bar Association the general population of the United States increased 14.9 per cent for the years 1910 to1922, and the criminal population increased 16.6 per cent during the same period. This report added that "the criminal situation in the United States so far as crimes of violence are concerned, is worse than in any other civilized country." {Footnote TWO: S. Sheldon Glueck MENTAL DISORDER AND THE CRIMINAL LAW (1925) p. ix.] p FIVE- THE MONETARY COST OF CRIME Statistics of the cost of crime reveal the disproportionate tax inflicted upon society by a comparatively insignificant group. Sutherland presents figures of the financial loss suffered by the victims of crime and by the general public. It is estimated that the annual loss from the takings of different criminal classes is as follows: Burglars $225,000,000 Bandits $50,000,000 Common thieves $150,000,000 Embezzlers $125,000,000 Fraudulent bankrupts and credit swindlers $100,000,000 Bad checks cashed $100,000,000 Forgers and raisers $25,000,000 Stock and land frauds and confidence games $2,000,000,000 Political graft Incalculable -[ page FIVE Note ONE Edwin h. Sutherland OP. CIT. p 66] In Boston in 1920 thefts amounted to more than a million dollars,-in Chiacgo in the same year to more than four million dollars, and in Philadelphia in 1921 to seven million dollars.It is estimated that thefts cost railroads, express companies, and other transportation companies $100,000,000 per year. In 1920 thirty insurance companies paid claims for burglary amounting to $10,000,000 and for embezzlement, approximately $5,000,000. The average loss reported per theft in 1920 was $79.00 in Rochester, $63.00 in Detroit, and $94.00 in Toronto. [Note TWO IBID. p. 65, 66. ] The Institute of Economics estimates that the total financial cost of crime in the United States is $5,000,000,000 [five billion] [Note THREE IBID. p. 68] Sutherland calls attention to the fact that five billion dollars annually [small GAP] p SIX the cost of education,which is estimated at one billion dollars. Thus the enormous financial burden, added to the human cost of crime, justifies a critical examination of our criminal code and its execution. SCOPE OF THE STUDY. The present study deals with the history and problems of juvenile delinquency in Massachusetts. The subject of juvenile delinquency calls for separate considerationsince its causes and the resulting problems, as well as the methods for its treatment, differ from those of adult delinquency. The primary consideration in the former case is the re-education and the reformation of the offender, still in the formative period of life, while there yet remains the possibility of directing his energy into socially useful channels. The initial steps in the punishment and reformation of youthful offenders have often in the past been taken by Massachusetts, and this state has served as a pattern for the procedure in many others. The review of its experience is here undertaken because the history in this Commonwealth affords the longest and perhaps most continuous efforts in this field. PUNISHMENTS IN COLONIAL AND REVOLUTIONARY MASSACHUSETTS Physical torture characterized the treatment of juvenile offenders in Massachusetts during the Colonial and Revolutionary periods,when the motive of punishment was clearly vindictive. Corporal punishment was general and included mutilations and branding. The ducking stool, the stocks, the pillory, the brank, and other devices were punishments dreaded less because of physical injury than because of the public shame which attended them. Design or intent was not considered, and there was little interest in the question of responsiblity. It was often assumed that an evil -p.seven- spirit or the devil was the motivating force, and that an individual influenced by the devil should be punished. The statutes of 1692 provided that "if any person or persons of the age of discretion (which is accounted fourteen years or upwards) shall wittingly and willingly make or publish any lye or libel ... and being duly convicted therefof ... shall be fined according to the degree of such offense not exceeding the sum of twenty shillings for the first conviction ...and if the party be unable to pay said fine, then to be set in the stocks not exceeding three hours, or be corporally punished by whipping at the discretion of the justice or justices before whom the conviction shall be." [p seven NOTE ONE Massachusetts Acts and Resolves, Vol. I, 1692. p. 53] In the case of burglary, treble damages were assessed, and the offender was branded on the forehead with the letter B for the first conviction and for the second, was set upon the gallows for one hour with a rope around his neck and severely whipped. In the case of a third offense he was put to death as incorrigible. The stocks and fines were used as punishments for swearing and cursing. The "pains of death" were inflicted by an act of 1692 (though this was revoked by the Privy Council in August 1695) for all offenses declared to be felonies. The list of felonies, for which children were equally liable with adults, included: idolatry, witchcraft, blasphemy, high treason, murder, poisoning, concealment of the death of a bastard child, sodomy, bestiality, incest, rape, and piracy. The laws relating to proper behavior on the Sabbath day must have weighed heavily on many a red-blooded "Tom Sawyer" who would have loved to spend Sunday in the old swimming hole. A statute of 1692 restrained all persons from swimming in the water on that day. p8-16 Sophie Meranski thesis 1925 #1171 p 65 Edit Thesis p 8 rom: John Barrett Add to Address Book Subject: page eight to middle tenSophie thesis Young Offender To: woostermorgan@yahoo.com PAGE EIGHT- It also restricted all unnecessary and unseasonable walking in the streets or fields in the town of Boston or other places on Sunday and prohibited recreations in the evening preceding the Lord's Day or any part of that day or the following evening.Minors were forbidden to frequent public house and taverns on the Sabbath, and parents were held responsible for their children's transgressions.= Dr. William Bailey [p. EIGHT-Note ONE William B. Bailey CHILDREN BEFORE THE COURTS IN CONNECTICUT. United States Children's Bureau, Publication No. 43 (1918) p. 15] calls attention to the strong similarity of conditions, population, and point of view in the Massachusetts and Connecticut colonies. A Connecticut act of 1672 was copied literally from the Massachusetts act of 1642, indicating that the legislation of Massachusetts was the basis of subsequent legislation in other Colonies and later in other states The act which Connecticut copied pertained to the care and behavior of children and is reflected in the compulsory education of present-day legislation. The act reads as follows: = Selectmen ... shall have a vigilant eye over their Brethren and Neighbors to see that none of them shall suffer so much Barbarism in any of their families as not to teach their children and servants the English language and especially the Bible; all Masters of families do once a week at least catechize their children and servants in the Grounds and Principles of Religion, and such children and servants might be questioned by any selectman to ascertain whether they had learned their orthodox catchism without book....And if any of the selectmen, after admonition by them given to such Masters of Families, shall find them still negligent of their duties in the particulars aforementioned,, whereby Children and Servants grow rude, stubborn, and unruly,, {then the} selectmen with the help of two magistrates [shall place] such children and apprentices -p. NINE- with some masters for years, Boys till they come to 21, and Girls 18 years of age compleat, which will more strictly look into and force them to submit unto Government, according to the Rules of this Order." [P. NINE fotnote ONE Connecticut, Revised Statutes, 1672. p. 13.] =This era in the treatment of young offenders in Massachusetts was marked by efforts to cut off the criminal groups by socially degrading those accused of petty offenses, by corporal punishment for the serious offenses, and by the death penalty for the more serious offenses. The criminal as such was absolutely disregarded; only the crime was taken into account, and the offender was often looked upon as being "possessed of the devil". No attempt to reform the offender was made, but the severity of the laws and punishments were relied upon to deter. If these failed to prevent criminal acts, the evil-doer, young or old, had to take the consequences prescribed by rigid, inflexible laws. Results and symptoms were classified and treated accordingly. Causes, on the other hand, were entirely disregarded. The brutal punishments of early days in Massachusetts are valuable only to draw attention to the inefficacy of the many "thou shalt nots" which characterized the means used to cope with the problem of the young offender of the period. = Confinement in institutions went hand in hand with the infliction of corporal punishment, and their use for the punishment and "reformation" of juvenile delinquents became increasingly prevalent with the passing of time. Prior to 1699, each town or county in Massachusetts had its jail, in which were confined minor and adult offenders of both sexes. All persons had to bear charges for conveying them to the jail and for the payment of those appointed to guard them there. While in jail they had to support themselves, and their estates were attached for this purpose.If they had no estates, service to the amount of the bill was required. = In 1699 the General Court ordered that " there should be erected, built or otherwise provided in every county within this province at the charge of such county, a fit and convenient house of correction to be used for the keeping, correcting, and setting to work of rogues, vagabonds, common beggars, and other lewd, idle, and disorderly persons, and until such house or houses of correction be erected,built, or otherwise provided, the common prison of each county may be made use of for such purpose...The master of such houses of corrrection have power and authority to set all such persons to work (if they are able) and to punish them by putting fetters or shackles upon them and by moderate whipping, not to exceed ten stripes at once, or abridge them of their food." [p. TEN note ONE Massachusetts Acts and Resolves, 1699. p. 378] These "houses of correction" may or may not have had a good influence upon the rogues, beggars, and vagabonds, but there is little doubt that they really harmed the stubborn and rebellious children whom they also housed.The early institutions for adult and juvenile offenders not only failed to correct the maladjusted and show them the error of their ways, but served in fact, as excellent preparatory schools for lives of crime.=JUVENILE PRISONERS AFTER THE REVOLUTION =Massachusetts had only local and county jails or houses of correction for the imprisonment of convicts prior to 1785. In that year a state prison was built on Castle Island in Boston Harbor. In 1804 Massachusetts gave up Castle-p ELEVEN- Island to the United States and built a state prison in Charlestown which was to be "for the reformation as well as the punishment of convicts".It was opened on the twelfth of December 1805 and cost $170,000. [Note ONE page ELEVEN Orlando F. Lewis, THE DEVELOPMENT OF AMERICAN PRISON AND PRISON CUSTOMS, 1776-1845 (1922) p. 69. + From the first, severity of treatment was marked. One feature was a basement "refractory room" in which the prisoners were chained. A punishment in this prison savoring of the old Colonial days in Masachusetts is reflected in an order of the prison board of visitors that "a gallows be erected in the prison yard, at an elevation of twenty feet, on which certain prisoners, seven in number,shall be placed, and sit with a rope around their neck for one hour, once a week, for three successive weeks; that for sixty days they wear an iron collar and chain as the warden shall direct; and that they wear a yellow cap, with asses' ears, for sixty days, and that they eat at a table by themselves; ... The sentence shall be read in the hall at breakfast in the presence of all the prisoners." [Note TWO IBID. p. 71]= Efforts were made to grade the prisoners Until 1812 the garb of convicts was half red and half blue.Second termers were clothed in three colored garments alternating red, yellow and blue. They ate at separate tables and "had only two warm meals a day and for the other only bread and water except on Sundays". Third termers were dressed in four colors, yellow, red, blue, and black. In general, the inmates were deplorable objects, and the prison discipline itself accomplished their humiliation and degradation. The re-taken convict who had escaped was compelled to wear an iron ring on the left leg to which a clog, attached by a chain, was suspended during the entire term of the imprisonment.-12- Due to the extreme severity and the solitary cells, there were continued efforts to regain freedom. One of the prisoners, who attmpted to escape, was made to wear an iron jacket for eight days, and to "stand in the broad aisle of the chapel with it on for two successive Sundays, to sleep in solitary confinement for ninety days,and to wear a clog with an iron chain for 52 days afterwards."In these examples of punishments within the prison we find reflected the public punishments before the days of state prisons.=-In 1815 The board of visitors stated their theory of prison discipline as follows: "It should be as severe as the principles of humanity will possibly permit. His (the prisoner's) clothes ought to be a means of punishment. He should be cut off from the world,and know nothing of what is happening outside. Whenever a prisoner transgresses, he should be punished until his mind is conquered. ...The guards should consider the prisoner as a volcano, containing lava, which if not kept in subjection, will destroy friends and foe." [P TWELVE note ONE -IBID. p. 73.] =In 1816 the congestion in the prison was marked. Three hundred convicts were living promiscuouly in the prison. In that year the records of the institution showed the presence of four children under fourteen years of age. In some of the rooms four convicts and in others eight were lodged without any supervision at night. Ninety persons were under commitment for a second, third, or fourth time.Juvenile prisoners slept on the bare ground of the prison floor, or, at best, in a hard board bunk unless they were fortunate enough to have parents able to provide them with blankets.Heating during the cold months was very inadequate, and there was no real ventilation during the heat of summer.Morbidity and mortality rates were high even among those with short sentences. -p. THIRTEEN- = Radical reorganization of the prison was necessary,and in 1817 a legislative committee recommended that the prison be abandoned because of the intolerable conditions that prevailed there at the time. Segregation of children and women from adult hardened criminals had as yet not been effected, and the prison held old and young alike. Reformatory measures were subordinated for economy.= In 1827 a representative of the Prison Discipline Society of Boston found forty convicts scattered in different apartments without any keeper or inspector. The keeper could not approach the cells at night without giving warning by moving heavy doors. Recidivism remained unchecked. A prisoner who had been sentenced seven different times, twice for life, was in 1827 at the head of the kitchen squad with ten young convicts associated with him. The manufacture of counterfeit money within the prison was a common occurence. [p THIRTEEN note ONE. IBID., p. 159] The prison was not proving an agency for reform and was by no means a success, as it neither reformed prisoners nor prevented recidivism. =, At the end of the first quarter of the nineteenth century the state prison still contained the old and the young, the novice and the old-timer, the white and the colored, the men and the women. They all associated promiscuously, and the glamour of the stories told to the young by men well versed in crime and by hardened women were conducive to even greater crime on the part of minor offenders upon their release. Prison reformers were appalled by the "tender" years of some of the prisoners. One in every six prisoners was under twenty-one years of age, and children under twelve years of age had been in prison many months. Confinement of a young offender in a penitentiary of this period was about as effective for his reformation as putting a man in a pest house to cure him of a headache. -page FOURTEEN- SEPARATION OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS and the Establishment of the House of Reformation in Boston in 1826:: =The Massachusetts Legislature in 1826 gave to Boston City Council authority to send juvenile delinquents, who had formerly been committed to state prison, "to an institution which should be provided at South Boston". This was the first indication of the growing sentiment that youthful offenders should not be associated with those steeped in the ways of crime, sin, and vice.The founding of a school for the reformation of juvenile delinquents marks a positive step forward in the handling of youthful offenders in Masachusetts.= A large building was provided in an extensive field of about forty acres in South Boston. The government of this House of Reformation was vested in a board of seven directors, and the City of Boston undertook the entire support of the institution. The first superintendant was the Reverend E.M.P. Wells, a young minister. A serious episiode in his college career at Brown serves to throw light on his attitude toward the inmates of the institution. While a student at Brown, he was called before the faculty to give information about a student prank. Mr. Wells stated that he had no part in it, and, upon his continued refusal to give names, was expelled. One of the rules of the House of Reformation was that no boy should be required to give information of the faults of another. = This rule was but one of many enlightened regulations which placed the House of Reformation in Boston temporarily ahead of all American institutions in the matter of administrative methods. The rules were made with a view to the reformation of the charges. Mr. Wells's philosophy of boyhood is summed up in his statement, " However bad a boy may be, he can always be reformed while he is under fifteen years of age, and he who has been reckoned and treated as incapable of anything like honesty and honor, may be worth the most entire confidence.... We live happily together as a family of brethren, cheerful, happy, confiding, and I trust, to a greater or less degree pious.." -p. FIFTEEN- =In a period when repression and punitive treatment of children would have ben natural, the administrative methods of the Boston House of Reformation were surprisingly enlightened. Corporal punishments were entirely excluded, and methods of self-government were introduced. By a vote of the children, the instruments of physical punishment had been abandoned, and as a substitute, they offered their own word of honor to behave. Nobody was punished for a fault "sincerely avowed." A book of conduct was kept in which each child had his account of good and bad marks, and each child, in the evening assembly, was called upon to judge himself and to assign his own marks. Twelve jurymen from among the children condemned or acquited the accused. The children elected their own monitors.The manner in which these electors and jurymen carried on their work was that of utmost seriousness and solemnity. = Privileges were enjoyed by children whose conduct was good. In descending scale, discipline was secured by a systematic withdrawal of privileges until the limit was reached. After that, positive punishments, but not of a corporal nature, were administered. Under these methods, not only was the sense of justice and personal interest appealed to, but the responsibility was shifted to the young offender himself. If he were bad, it was not because of conduct forced upon him by the administration. The knowledge and anticipation of the pleasure awaiting the one who maintained good conduct were relied upon to yield the desired results. p. SIXTEEN- = The self-government features of the establishment were apparent to the newcomer at his very entrance. After the customary physical examination,bath, and the assignment of a room, the new inmate was introduced to the other boys and received a copy of the laws. He was then placed in the Second or Third "Mal" Grade where he remained for a week on "probation." If his conduct was good during this period, it was reported to the boys, who took a vote as to whether he should be received into the community.If he were voted against, he was sent back into further probation. If the conduct of a community member were exceptionally bad, he was expelled from the community and could be readmitted only after a period of probation. = Physical development and academic training were emphasized. The daily schedule gave five and a half hours to labor, four hours to school, two and a quarter hours to recreation, and one and a quarter hours to religious exercises. The day time was divided fairly equally between labor and academic instruction. The school gave mainly primary school subjects, and the manual labor was the same as in prison except for quantity and intensity. The House of Reformation succeeded in teaching the young delinquents respect for and obedience to law..= In 1832 a committee of the Boston Common Council visited officially the House of Reformation and found Wells very hard to understand. The devotional exercises were excellent, but the scholastic instruction was poor, and the financial returns from the labor of the children were inadequate.The boys, they felt, needed more care and attention and were not properly employed.They were sometimes detained too long for their own good, were not working enough, earning enough or inconspicuous enough to conform to the old standard. Since the Common Council's committe wanted system and Wells wanted .self expression and the development of personality, a parting of the ways was inevitable. -p. SEVENTEEN [continued]
Chapter FOUR Master's Thesis 1925
THE YOUNG OFFENDER AND THE CRIMINAL LAW IN MASSACHUSETTS
Sophie Meranski 1925 thesis The Young Offender and the Criminal Law In Massachusetts "THE YOUNG OFFENDER AND THE CRIMINAL LAW IN MASSACHUSETTS" 1925 Master's Thesis SOPHIE RUTH MERANSKI (BARRETT) Mount Holyoke College South Hadley Mass. Department of Economics and Sociology [Professor Amy Hewes advisor] CONTENTS Introduction -p one Definition of Crime -p two Statistics of Crime -p three The Monetary Cost of Crime -p five Scope of the Study - p six Punishments in Colonial and Revolutionary Massachusetts -p six Juvenile Prisoners after the Revolution -p ten Separation of Juvenile Offenders and the Establishment of the House of Reformation in Boston in 1824 -p fourteen Other Juvenile Reform Schools -p seventeen Early Legislation Restricted to Juveniles -p eighteen Juvenile Delinquency in the Twentieth Century -p twenty The Era of the Clinical Criminologist -p twenty-nine Conclusions and Recommendations -p thirty-one BIBLIOGRAPHY - BOOKS Boies, Henry M., The Science of Penology (1901) Drucker, Saul, and Marurice B. Hexter, Children Astray (1923). Earle, Alice M., Curious Punishments of Bygone Days (1896) Eliot, Thomas D. , The Juvenile Court and the Community (1914) Ford, James, Social Problems and Social Policy 1923). Glueck, S.Sheldon, Mental Disorder and the Criminal Law (1925) Hart, Hastings H. ed., Juvenile Court Laws in the United States Summarized. Russell Sage Foundation (1910). Healy, William, The Individual Delinquent (1922) Henderson, Charles R. ed Prison Reform and Criminal Law. Correction and Prevention Series. Russell Sage Foundation (1910). Judge Baker Foundation., "Harvey Humphrey Baker, upbuilder of the Juvenile Court". Publication No. 1. [1920] Lewis, Orlando F., The development of American prisons and prison customs 1776-1845 [1922] Parmalee, Maurice F., Criminology [1919]. Robinson, Louis N., Penology in the United States [1921] Snedden, David S., Administration and educational work of American juvenile reform schools [1907] Stewart, Alexander H.., American bad boys in the making [1912]. Sutherland, Edwin H.,, Criminology [1924]. Thomas, William I., The unadjusted girl [1923]. Van Waters, Miriam, Youth in conflict [1925]. White, William A., Insanity and the Criminal law [1923]. Wines, Frederick H., Punishment and reformation [1919]. ARTICLES and PAMPHLETS Bailey,William B. Children before the courts in Connecticut. United States Children's Bureau,Publication No. 43 [1918]. Belden, Evelina, Courts in the United States hearing children's cases. United States Children's Bureau, Publication No. 65 [1920]. Breckenridge, Sophonisba P. and Helen R. Jeter, A summary of juvenile court legislation in the United States. United States Children's Bureau, Publication No. 70 [1920].Chute, Charles L. ,Probation in children's courts. United States Children's Bureau,Publication No. 80 [1921]. Flexner, Bernard and Reuben Oppenheimer, The legal aspect of the juvenile court. United States Children's Bureau, Publication No. 99 [1922]. Healy, William, Honesty: A study of the causes and treatment of dishonesty among children [1915]. Healy, William, The practical value of scientific study of juvenile delinquents. United States Children's Bureau, Publication No. 96 [1922] Healy, William and Augusta F. Bronner [Brenner?], "Youthful offenders: A comparative study of two groups, each of 1,000 young recidivists". The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. XXII, No. 1 [July 1916]. Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology 1911-1925.Kirchwey,George W., "Parole", The Survey, Vol. LIII, No. 12 (March 15, 1925) pp. 729-731. Massachusetts Commission on Probation, Probation Manual [1916]. REPORTS AND STATUTES: Connecticut, Revised Statutes, 1672 Massachusetts, Acts and Resolves,1692-1924 Massachusetts, Board of State Charities,Annual Reports, 1865-1878 Massachusetts, Board of Health, Lunacy, and Charity, Annual Reports, 1879-1886 Massachusetts, Board of Lunacy and Charity, Annual Reports 1886-1898 Massachusetts, Board of Charity,Annual Reports, 1899-1919 Massachusetts, Department of Public Welfare,Annual Reports 1920-1922 Massachusetts Commission on Probation, Annual Reports, 1909-1921 National Probation Association, Probation and the prevention of delinquency. Proceedings, 1923. National Probation Association, Community treatment of delinquency. Proceedings, 1924. United States Bureau of the census: Prisoners and juvenile delinquents in the United States, 1910 [1918]. United States Bureau of the Census: Statistical directory of state institutions for defective, dependent, and delinquent classes [1919]. TEXT PAGE ONE Crime is essentially a problem of youth in colflict with authority. The steady stream of persons who are constantly re-enforcing the ranks of the criminal class are for the most part human beings who have not reached their maturity. [Footnote ONE "Seventy-five per cent of all the prisoners in Sing Sing in 1923 were under twenty-one years of age." Miriam van Waters, YOUTH IN CONFLICT [1925] p. V.] They fail to conform to the demands of society, and consequently, pass through our courts, jails, prisons, and reform schools and comprise our incorrigible, neglected, and delinquent groups. Through these institutions they drift back into society. For hundreds of years the courts and the whole machinery of criminal law have dealt with the problem of crime without any resulting diminution in the number of criminal acts and prisoners.For this reason it has become a pressing obligation to find out what has been done in the past and what is being done at the present time to throw light upon the causes of this antisocial behavior.Such a search will show sharply contrasting changes of method. In the past the delinquent classes were dealt with en masse. Today, Dr. William Healy of the Judge Baker Foundation maintains that each case should be given separate study. [Footnote TWO William Healy, THE INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANT [1915] p. 5.] The history of medical science shows us why similar symptoms should not be assumed as arising from the same causes and why, consequently, generalizations PAGE TWO- as to treatment should be cautiously made. In the early days of medicine,superstition and a rough trial-and-error method were the guides for handling cases of disease. Cures were aimed for, but causes were not sought after.Similar symptoms received the same treatment regardless of the source of the disorder. A general treatment for headache was "letting blood", as the process was termed. Today, physicians make a careful investigation to learn the real nature of the cause of the headache, which may be due to any disorder from eyestrain to poor digestion.The causes of the similar symptoms may be absolutely different, and no scientific treatment can be rendered until the cause of the malady is ascertained. Careful study has, to a large extent, dispensed with the method of trial-and-error in the field of medicine; general classifications of symptoms, causes, and cures have been compiled, but each new case still demands individual diagnosis and prognosis. Only when the fundamental cause in the case of each individual is made known and the resulting symptoms noted can the results of past investigations and experience be brought into play. Similarly, proper treatment of offenders can never be attained unless their problems are understood. The slow, expensive purely inductive method of procedure is sound in practice. A scientific starting point is found only in knowledge 0of the fundamental causes of delinquency. The effort to understand and direct each criminal is worth the time and expense necessary because checking at the source is the only effective method. DEFINITION of CRIME --A crime is any act, or omission PUNISHABLE BY LAW. Since the laws of countries differ and since the laws of the same nation undergo alteration from -PAGE THREE- time to time, a corresponding change in the proportion of criminals may be brought about by the laws themselves. Many acts which once entailed severe punishments are no longer regarded as crimes, and many new crimes have been created. In bringing out the changing content of crime Edwin H. Sutherland, Assistant Professor of Sociology at the University of Illinois, says: "Many of the early crimes were primarily religious offenses, and until comparatively recent times these remained important; few religious offenses are now included. It was a crime in Iceland in the Viking age for a person to write verses about another, even if the sentiment was complimentary, if the verses exceeded four strophes in length......The English villain in the fourteenth century was not allowed to send his son to school, and no one lower than a freeholder was permitted by law to keep a dog.The following have at different times been crimes: printing a book, professing the medical doctrine of the circulation of the blood, driving with reins, the sale of coin to foreigners....On the other hand, many of our present laws were not known to earlier generations - quarantine laws, sanitation laws, factory laws, prohibition of intoxicating liquors." [page THREE footnote ONE: Edwin H. Sutherland, CRIMINOLOGY [1924] pp. 28,29.] New inventions and new contacts bring with them the possibility of the creation of new crimes and draw presumptive criminals into the criminal class. With the use of the check came forgery and the passing of bad checks, and the automobile increased arrests for reckless driving and seduction. Thus the repeal of old laws relating to crime and the drafting of new ones determine the composition of the criminal class. STATISTICS 0F CRIME The decennial enumerations of prisoners comprise the only statistics of crime for the entire United States. As an index of crime the value of such a census has been greatly over-rated. Although it is true that each sentenced prisoner -page FOUR- represents a crime that has been committted, it is not possible to judge from the number of prisoners in confinement at a given time just what the rate of crime is at that time because an increase in prison population may result from an increase in the average length of sentence just as certainly as from an increase in the number of persons sentenced. Therefore a mere census of the prison population can result in no very definite conclusion regarding the prevalence of crime. The record of prison commitments during a given period is a better index. From the latter the conclusion sems justified that the increase in the number of prisoners is not much more than keeping pace with the growth of population.... The figures do not indicate that crime is increasing at an alarming rate in the United States. [Footnote ONE page FOUR : United States Bureau of the Census PRISONERS AND JUVENILE DELINQUENTS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1910. [1918] P. 17]. Sufficient grounds for apprehension, however, are disclosed by Dr. S. Sheldon Glueck, Instructor of Criminology and Penology at Harvard Universiuty, who states that according to the 1923 report of the Law Enforcement Committee of the American Bar Association the general population of the United States increased 14.9 per cent for the years 1910 to1922, and the criminal population increased 16.6 per cent during the same period. This report added that "the criminal situation in the United States so far as crimes of violence are concerned, is worse than in any other civilized country." {Footnote TWO: S. Sheldon Glueck MENTAL DISORDER AND THE CRIMINAL LAW (1925) p. ix.] p FIVE- THE MONETARY COST OF CRIME Statistics of the cost of crime reveal the disproportionate tax inflicted upon society by a comparatively insignificant group. Sutherland presents figures of the financial loss suffered by the victims of crime and by the general public. It is estimated that the annual loss from the takings of different criminal classes is as follows: Burglars $225,000,000 Bandits $50,000,000 Common thieves $150,000,000 Embezzlers $125,000,000 Fraudulent bankrupts and credit swindlers $100,000,000 Bad checks cashed $100,000,000 Forgers and raisers $25,000,000 Stock and land frauds and confidence games $2,000,000,000 Political graft Incalculable -[ page FIVE Note ONE Edwin h. Sutherland OP. CIT. p 66] In Boston in 1920 thefts amounted to more than a million dollars,-in Chiacgo in the same year to more than four million dollars, and in Philadelphia in 1921 to seven million dollars.It is estimated that thefts cost railroads, express companies, and other transportation companies $100,000,000 per year. In 1920 thirty insurance companies paid claims for burglary amounting to $10,000,000 and for embezzlement, approximately $5,000,000. The average loss reported per theft in 1920 was $79.00 in Rochester, $63.00 in Detroit, and $94.00 in Toronto. [Note TWO IBID. p. 65, 66. ] The Institute of Economics estimates that the total financial cost of crime in the United States is $5,000,000,000 [five billion] [Note THREE IBID. p. 68] Sutherland calls attention to the fact that five billion dollars annually [small GAP] p SIX the cost of education,which is estimated at one billion dollars. Thus the enormous financial burden, added to the human cost of crime, justifies a critical examination of our criminal code and its execution. SCOPE OF THE STUDY. The present study deals with the history and problems of juvenile delinquency in Massachusetts. The subject of juvenile delinquency calls for separate considerationsince its causes and the resulting problems, as well as the methods for its treatment, differ from those of adult delinquency. The primary consideration in the former case is the re-education and the reformation of the offender, still in the formative period of life, while there yet remains the possibility of directing his energy into socially useful channels. The initial steps in the punishment and reformation of youthful offenders have often in the past been taken by Massachusetts, and this state has served as a pattern for the procedure in many others. The review of its experience is here undertaken because the history in this Commonwealth affords the longest and perhaps most continuous efforts in this field. PUNISHMENTS IN COLONIAL AND REVOLUTIONARY MASSACHUSETTS Physical torture characterized the treatment of juvenile offenders in Massachusetts during the Colonial and Revolutionary periods,when the motive of punishment was clearly vindictive. Corporal punishment was general and included mutilations and branding. The ducking stool, the stocks, the pillory, the brank, and other devices were punishments dreaded less because of physical injury than because of the public shame which attended them. Design or intent was not considered, and there was little interest in the question of responsiblity. It was often assumed that an evil -p.seven- spirit or the devil was the motivating force, and that an individual influenced by the devil should be punished. The statutes of 1692 provided that "if any person or persons of the age of discretion (which is accounted fourteen years or upwards) shall wittingly and willingly make or publish any lye or libel ... and being duly convicted therefof ... shall be fined according to the degree of such offense not exceeding the sum of twenty shillings for the first conviction ...and if the party be unable to pay said fine, then to be set in the stocks not exceeding three hours, or be corporally punished by whipping at the discretion of the justice or justices before whom the conviction shall be." [p seven NOTE ONE Massachusetts Acts and Resolves, Vol. I, 1692. p. 53] In the case of burglary, treble damages were assessed, and the offender was branded on the forehead with the letter B for the first conviction and for the second, was set upon the gallows for one hour with a rope around his neck and severely whipped. In the case of a third offense he was put to death as incorrigible. The stocks and fines were used as punishments for swearing and cursing. The "pains of death" were inflicted by an act of 1692 (though this was revoked by the Privy Council in August 1695) for all offenses declared to be felonies. The list of felonies, for which children were equally liable with adults, included: idolatry, witchcraft, blasphemy, high treason, murder, poisoning, concealment of the death of a bastard child, sodomy, bestiality, incest, rape, and piracy. The laws relating to proper behavior on the Sabbath day must have weighed heavily on many a red-blooded "Tom Sawyer" who would have loved to spend Sunday in the old swimming hole. A statute of 1692 restrained all persons from swimming in the water on that day. p8-16 Sophie Meranski thesis 1925 #1171 p 65 Edit Thesis p 8 rom: John Barrett Add to Address Book Subject: page eight to middle tenSophie thesis Young Offender To: woostermorgan@yahoo.com PAGE EIGHT- It also restricted all unnecessary and unseasonable walking in the streets or fields in the town of Boston or other places on Sunday and prohibited recreations in the evening preceding the Lord's Day or any part of that day or the following evening.Minors were forbidden to frequent public house and taverns on the Sabbath, and parents were held responsible for their children's transgressions.= Dr. William Bailey [p. EIGHT-Note ONE William B. Bailey CHILDREN BEFORE THE COURTS IN CONNECTICUT. United States Children's Bureau, Publication No. 43 (1918) p. 15] calls attention to the strong similarity of conditions, population, and point of view in the Massachusetts and Connecticut colonies. A Connecticut act of 1672 was copied literally from the Massachusetts act of 1642, indicating that the legislation of Massachusetts was the basis of subsequent legislation in other Colonies and later in other states The act which Connecticut copied pertained to the care and behavior of children and is reflected in the compulsory education of present-day legislation. The act reads as follows: = Selectmen ... shall have a vigilant eye over their Brethren and Neighbors to see that none of them shall suffer so much Barbarism in any of their families as not to teach their children and servants the English language and especially the Bible; all Masters of families do once a week at least catechize their children and servants in the Grounds and Principles of Religion, and such children and servants might be questioned by any selectman to ascertain whether they had learned their orthodox catchism without book....And if any of the selectmen, after admonition by them given to such Masters of Families, shall find them still negligent of their duties in the particulars aforementioned,, whereby Children and Servants grow rude, stubborn, and unruly,, {then the} selectmen with the help of two magistrates [shall place] such children and apprentices -p. NINE- with some masters for years, Boys till they come to 21, and Girls 18 years of age compleat, which will more strictly look into and force them to submit unto Government, according to the Rules of this Order." [P. NINE fotnote ONE Connecticut, Revised Statutes, 1672. p. 13.] =This era in the treatment of young offenders in Massachusetts was marked by efforts to cut off the criminal groups by socially degrading those accused of petty offenses, by corporal punishment for the serious offenses, and by the death penalty for the more serious offenses. The criminal as such was absolutely disregarded; only the crime was taken into account, and the offender was often looked upon as being "possessed of the devil". No attempt to reform the offender was made, but the severity of the laws and punishments were relied upon to deter. If these failed to prevent criminal acts, the evil-doer, young or old, had to take the consequences prescribed by rigid, inflexible laws. Results and symptoms were classified and treated accordingly. Causes, on the other hand, were entirely disregarded. The brutal punishments of early days in Massachusetts are valuable only to draw attention to the inefficacy of the many "thou shalt nots" which characterized the means used to cope with the problem of the young offender of the period. = Confinement in institutions went hand in hand with the infliction of corporal punishment, and their use for the punishment and "reformation" of juvenile delinquents became increasingly prevalent with the passing of time. Prior to 1699, each town or county in Massachusetts had its jail, in which were confined minor and adult offenders of both sexes. All persons had to bear charges for conveying them to the jail and for the payment of those appointed to guard them there. While in jail they had to support themselves, and their estates were attached for this purpose.If they had no estates, service to the amount of the bill was required. = In 1699 the General Court ordered that " there should be erected, built or otherwise provided in every county within this province at the charge of such county, a fit and convenient house of correction to be used for the keeping, correcting, and setting to work of rogues, vagabonds, common beggars, and other lewd, idle, and disorderly persons, and until such house or houses of correction be erected,built, or otherwise provided, the common prison of each county may be made use of for such purpose...The master of such houses of corrrection have power and authority to set all such persons to work (if they are able) and to punish them by putting fetters or shackles upon them and by moderate whipping, not to exceed ten stripes at once, or abridge them of their food." [p. TEN note ONE Massachusetts Acts and Resolves, 1699. p. 378] These "houses of correction" may or may not have had a good influence upon the rogues, beggars, and vagabonds, but there is little doubt that they really harmed the stubborn and rebellious children whom they also housed.The early institutions for adult and juvenile offenders not only failed to correct the maladjusted and show them the error of their ways, but served in fact, as excellent preparatory schools for lives of crime.=JUVENILE PRISONERS AFTER THE REVOLUTION =Massachusetts had only local and county jails or houses of correction for the imprisonment of convicts prior to 1785. In that year a state prison was built on Castle Island in Boston Harbor. In 1804 Massachusetts gave up Castle-p ELEVEN- Island to the United States and built a state prison in Charlestown which was to be "for the reformation as well as the punishment of convicts".It was opened on the twelfth of December 1805 and cost $170,000. [Note ONE page ELEVEN Orlando F. Lewis, THE DEVELOPMENT OF AMERICAN PRISON AND PRISON CUSTOMS, 1776-1845 (1922) p. 69. + From the first, severity of treatment was marked. One feature was a basement "refractory room" in which the prisoners were chained. A punishment in this prison savoring of the old Colonial days in Masachusetts is reflected in an order of the prison board of visitors that "a gallows be erected in the prison yard, at an elevation of twenty feet, on which certain prisoners, seven in number,shall be placed, and sit with a rope around their neck for one hour, once a week, for three successive weeks; that for sixty days they wear an iron collar and chain as the warden shall direct; and that they wear a yellow cap, with asses' ears, for sixty days, and that they eat at a table by themselves; ... The sentence shall be read in the hall at breakfast in the presence of all the prisoners." [Note TWO IBID. p. 71]= Efforts were made to grade the prisoners Until 1812 the garb of convicts was half red and half blue.Second termers were clothed in three colored garments alternating red, yellow and blue. They ate at separate tables and "had only two warm meals a day and for the other only bread and water except on Sundays". Third termers were dressed in four colors, yellow, red, blue, and black. In general, the inmates were deplorable objects, and the prison discipline itself accomplished their humiliation and degradation. The re-taken convict who had escaped was compelled to wear an iron ring on the left leg to which a clog, attached by a chain, was suspended during the entire term of the imprisonment.-12- Due to the extreme severity and the solitary cells, there were continued efforts to regain freedom. One of the prisoners, who attmpted to escape, was made to wear an iron jacket for eight days, and to "stand in the broad aisle of the chapel with it on for two successive Sundays, to sleep in solitary confinement for ninety days,and to wear a clog with an iron chain for 52 days afterwards."In these examples of punishments within the prison we find reflected the public punishments before the days of state prisons.=-In 1815 The board of visitors stated their theory of prison discipline as follows: "It should be as severe as the principles of humanity will possibly permit. His (the prisoner's) clothes ought to be a means of punishment. He should be cut off from the world,and know nothing of what is happening outside. Whenever a prisoner transgresses, he should be punished until his mind is conquered. ...The guards should consider the prisoner as a volcano, containing lava, which if not kept in subjection, will destroy friends and foe." [P TWELVE note ONE -IBID. p. 73.] =In 1816 the congestion in the prison was marked. Three hundred convicts were living promiscuouly in the prison. In that year the records of the institution showed the presence of four children under fourteen years of age. In some of the rooms four convicts and in others eight were lodged without any supervision at night. Ninety persons were under commitment for a second, third, or fourth time.Juvenile prisoners slept on the bare ground of the prison floor, or, at best, in a hard board bunk unless they were fortunate enough to have parents able to provide them with blankets.Heating during the cold months was very inadequate, and there was no real ventilation during the heat of summer.Morbidity and mortality rates were high even among those with short sentences. -p. THIRTEEN- = Radical reorganization of the prison was necessary,and in 1817 a legislative committee recommended that the prison be abandoned because of the intolerable conditions that prevailed there at the time. Segregation of children and women from adult hardened criminals had as yet not been effected, and the prison held old and young alike. Reformatory measures were subordinated for economy.= In 1827 a representative of the Prison Discipline Society of Boston found forty convicts scattered in different apartments without any keeper or inspector. The keeper could not approach the cells at night without giving warning by moving heavy doors. Recidivism remained unchecked. A prisoner who had been sentenced seven different times, twice for life, was in 1827 at the head of the kitchen squad with ten young convicts associated with him. The manufacture of counterfeit money within the prison was a common occurence. [p THIRTEEN note ONE. IBID., p. 159] The prison was not proving an agency for reform and was by no means a success, as it neither reformed prisoners nor prevented recidivism. =, At the end of the first quarter of the nineteenth century the state prison still contained the old and the young, the novice and the old-timer, the white and the colored, the men and the women. They all associated promiscuously, and the glamour of the stories told to the young by men well versed in crime and by hardened women were conducive to even greater crime on the part of minor offenders upon their release. Prison reformers were appalled by the "tender" years of some of the prisoners. One in every six prisoners was under twenty-one years of age, and children under twelve years of age had been in prison many months. Confinement of a young offender in a penitentiary of this period was about as effective for his reformation as putting a man in a pest house to cure him of a headache. -page FOURTEEN- SEPARATION OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS and the Establishment of the House of Reformation in Boston in 1826:: =The Massachusetts Legislature in 1826 gave to Boston City Council authority to send juvenile delinquents, who had formerly been committed to state prison, "to an institution which should be provided at South Boston". This was the first indication of the growing sentiment that youthful offenders should not be associated with those steeped in the ways of crime, sin, and vice.The founding of a school for the reformation of juvenile delinquents marks a positive step forward in the handling of youthful offenders in Masachusetts.= A large building was provided in an extensive field of about forty acres in South Boston. The government of this House of Reformation was vested in a board of seven directors, and the City of Boston undertook the entire support of the institution. The first superintendant was the Reverend E.M.P. Wells, a young minister. A serious episiode in his college career at Brown serves to throw light on his attitude toward the inmates of the institution. While a student at Brown, he was called before the faculty to give information about a student prank. Mr. Wells stated that he had no part in it, and, upon his continued refusal to give names, was expelled. One of the rules of the House of Reformation was that no boy should be required to give information of the faults of another. = This rule was but one of many enlightened regulations which placed the House of Reformation in Boston temporarily ahead of all American institutions in the matter of administrative methods. The rules were made with a view to the reformation of the charges. Mr. Wells's philosophy of boyhood is summed up in his statement, " However bad a boy may be, he can always be reformed while he is under fifteen years of age, and he who has been reckoned and treated as incapable of anything like honesty and honor, may be worth the most entire confidence.... We live happily together as a family of brethren, cheerful, happy, confiding, and I trust, to a greater or less degree pious.." -p. FIFTEEN- =In a period when repression and punitive treatment of children would have ben natural, the administrative methods of the Boston House of Reformation were surprisingly enlightened. Corporal punishments were entirely excluded, and methods of self-government were introduced. By a vote of the children, the instruments of physical punishment had been abandoned, and as a substitute, they offered their own word of honor to behave. Nobody was punished for a fault "sincerely avowed." A book of conduct was kept in which each child had his account of good and bad marks, and each child, in the evening assembly, was called upon to judge himself and to assign his own marks. Twelve jurymen from among the children condemned or acquited the accused. The children elected their own monitors.The manner in which these electors and jurymen carried on their work was that of utmost seriousness and solemnity. = Privileges were enjoyed by children whose conduct was good. In descending scale, discipline was secured by a systematic withdrawal of privileges until the limit was reached. After that, positive punishments, but not of a corporal nature, were administered. Under these methods, not only was the sense of justice and personal interest appealed to, but the responsibility was shifted to the young offender himself. If he were bad, it was not because of conduct forced upon him by the administration. The knowledge and anticipation of the pleasure awaiting the one who maintained good conduct were relied upon to yield the desired results. p. SIXTEEN- = The self-government features of the establishment were apparent to the newcomer at his very entrance. After the customary physical examination,bath, and the assignment of a room, the new inmate was introduced to the other boys and received a copy of the laws. He was then placed in the Second or Third "Mal" Grade where he remained for a week on "probation." If his conduct was good during this period, it was reported to the boys, who took a vote as to whether he should be received into the community.If he were voted against, he was sent back into further probation. If the conduct of a community member were exceptionally bad, he was expelled from the community and could be readmitted only after a period of probation. = Physical development and academic training were emphasized. The daily schedule gave five and a half hours to labor, four hours to school, two and a quarter hours to recreation, and one and a quarter hours to religious exercises. The day time was divided fairly equally between labor and academic instruction. The school gave mainly primary school subjects, and the manual labor was the same as in prison except for quantity and intensity. The House of Reformation succeeded in teaching the young delinquents respect for and obedience to law..= In 1832 a committee of the Boston Common Council visited officially the House of Reformation and found Wells very hard to understand. The devotional exercises were excellent, but the scholastic instruction was poor, and the financial returns from the labor of the children were inadequate.The boys, they felt, needed more care and attention and were not properly employed.They were sometimes detained too long for their own good, were not working enough, earning enough or inconspicuous enough to conform to the old standard. Since the Common Council's committe wanted system and Wells wanted .self expression and the development of personality, a parting of the ways was inevitable. -p. SEVENTEEN [continued]
No comments:
Post a Comment