[A] From an article by Mr. Mikell in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, January, 1917. The article clearly indicates the urgent need of revision of our criminal code.
AMERICAN PRISON ASSOCIATION.
ATTENDANCE.
The meetings of the American Prison Association in 1917 were held in New Orleans, November 19-23. Outside of the State of Louisiana, the registration of delegates and attenders amounted to 261, of whom seven were from Canada, one from Mexico, one from Cuba and one from Guatemala. One hundred and thirty-seven registered from Louisiana. Outside of this State, Massachusetts enrolled the largest number, thirty-two being accredited to the Bay State. Then followed New York, with twenty-nine, and Pennsylvania was third with twenty-two, of whom nine were Official Delegates. It must not be forgotten that there were many attenders at these meetings who had not received appointment as Official Delegates, but who were active and welcome participators in the discussions. In 1916 and 1917, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has been well represented, but for several years previous the attendance from the Keystone State had, from a numerical point of view, been rather insignificant.
THE PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS.
Dr. David C. Peyton, Superintendent of the Indiana Reformatory at Jeffersonville, ably officiated as presiding officer of the various sessions of the Association. He is evidently a believer in strict discipline administered by the officials who are legally appointed as the guardians of the offender, yet no one who visits the institution over which he presides, would assert that the regulations are harsh or unreasonable. His view of the Honor System would not involve government by the inmates.
“In prison management there have developed two colossal evils. One was peculiar to the past and the other in a measure characterizes the present. Most of the evils that are associated with prison work have come from these two roots. They are antipodal as east and west. They are cruelty and sentimentality. As the first was the child of ignorance, the second springs from half knowledge and is not the less reprehensible. True reform will come, not by a softening and relaxation in prison discipline, not by imputing to criminals qualities which their whole activities have proven them to lack and the very absence of which is the cause of their incarceration, not by making their pathway smoother and easier, nor yet by touching it with the magic of romance. If a little of the leaven of common sense were allowed to permeate the situation it seems to me that the clouds in our pathway would lift somewhat.
“Of course cruelty, the other bête-noir, is only named to be condemned, and thanks to our even half-knowledge it has no place in modern prisons except in isolated spots. But I doubt if ever cruelty was any more cruel than a regime which threatens to become popular today. It seems to me that prisons should be run for the purpose of training men for sane living. If that is true, then they should in fact train these men for sane living.
“A modern prison should be a beehive of industrial activity and should be more than self-supporting. Indeed, men should be able to serve their sentences and earn enough overtime money during their terms to support their dependents—in part at least. A trade should be taught when practicable, but even more important than a trade is the idea of inculcating industrious habits. It is not a misfortune for men to have to labor, but it is a blessing both for them and for us.
“Discipline should be strict but not arbitrary. The rules should be based on experience and should be obviously sound.