For years prisoners have not suffered much detention on account of non-payment of fines. Fines have been imposed but within the last five years less than 10 per cent. of the amount has been collected. We have no report of the operation of the new law by which fines may be paid in instalments.
Grand juries may come and grand juries may go, but the institution pursues its unwavering course. Sometimes the jury recommends improvements which the management desires as sincerely as the jury. Many of these improvements have been made, and it may be the published reports of the grand jury may have rendered the task of securing appropriations a little more easy. But it is an impossible task for any body of twelve or fifteen men within the time of two or three hours to study the conditions of an institution so as to present a well-developed scheme for its management.
We hold no brief for the Philadelphia County Prison. Doubtless some conditions could be improved. But the jury occasionally in its zeal magnifies a possible wrong or views some punitive feature out of its proper prospective. The discipline for a body of untried prisoners, some of whom may prove to be dangerous criminals, must not be squared by the discipline meted out to convicts who remain year after year in the same institution. You deal with one set as with people you know, the others present unknown dangerous proclivities. The tendency is to treat a body of transients with a stricter set of regulations. Just how far the principles of “The New Penology” have entered the precincts of Philadelphia County Prison, we are not prepared to discuss. There is a medium ground in all things and in prison management, probably the safest plan is to take the middle course. Compared with the “Tombs,” the New York County prison for those detained for trial, the prison at Moyamensing compares very favorably. The advantages, the employments, the general discipline of the New York Convict prisons at Blackwell’s and Riker’s Islands are perhaps in the main superior to our convict prison. The regulations for those held for trial should be as mild and reasonable as is consistent with safety and the convenience of the accused person. While they are not yet convicts, many of them are well-known recidivists, more or less dangerous, some are entirely unknown and need watchful care, so that any system founded on uniform treatment for all is liable to criticism. A system which combines moderate restraint with exactly the right proportion of reasonable freedom presents a problem which a novice can no more readily solve than an ignoramus the elements of an eclipse.
Down at Moyamensing they have the buildings and the space for the detention of the untried prisoners, and we have little doubt but that the manager and the court officials, if they were to meet for a conference, could unite in the adoption of regulations which would be satisfactory to all parties concerned. It is to the city’s direct interest to make use of the facilities already possessed. We are inclined to the belief that the construction of a new prison for the untried may be an economic blunder.
SCHUYLKILL COUNTY.
We learn that ten men have been working on the county farm.
This county for some years has been allowing men who were fined to be released on condition of making payments on instalments. In 1916 they collected from this source the sum of $2,081.14. If these men and women had been maintained in prison in accordance with the old law of 1836, their board and maintenance would have cost the taxpayers $4,025.38. Hence by the new arrangement a snug profit to the county of $6,106.52. They were pioneers in the rational treatment of those who were fined.
Here they believe in the principle of parole and put it into practice.
| Number on parole and probation over 16 years of age | 154 | ||
| Number on parole and probation under 16 years of age | 124 |
Some failures reported, the majority being juveniles arrested for truancy, etc.