There is a misunderstanding in the public mind, and unfortunately with some of the police officers, as to “suspended sentence.” It means that criminal punishment is not then inflicted, but may be the following week or month or some time thereafter, but will not be so long as the youngster is of good behavior. The boys understand that they will not be molested so long as no bad report reaches the Court, and the most of them act accordingly. Quite recently several on parole for engaging in street stone fights were separately asked what they did during the epidemic of stone battles that broke out in January. They replied that they ran home and stayed there while the fight lasted. A suspended sentence is quite apt to work in the same way with most boys, for a second conviction would surely disclose the former, and punishment then is severe.
Occasionally a boy is sent to an institution on his first conviction as a safeguard against parents whose depravity and shameless indifference are positively detrimental, and sometimes a child is permitted to go home and remain so long as the mother avoids drink. Good work has been done in both directions—the boy removed from iniquitous surroundings, or these mended through parental affection.
A child is rarely committed for the first offense, no matter how serious it may be; there is a remand to the Society for its officers to gather and report information of the individual and environment, and then sentence is deferred and the child put on parole. He goes home with an opportunity to earn a suspended sentence by his individual conduct, which covers a wide range. It is intended to correct every bad trait; evil associations are to be avoided; staying away from home nights must cease; conduct everywhere—in the house, on the streets and at school—must be exemplary. During this time he is under the supervision of the parole officer, to whom there must be a report each week and at the end of the period—four, five or six weeks—appearance and report in Court. If a high standard of excellence is reached, sentence is suspended; if there is improvement, parole is continued; if the boy continues in his old ways, sentence is imposed, or there may be a short parole with certain commitment at the end if a radical change is not shown.
By these means the boy sees that others are interested in his welfare, and he gets encouragement in all directions, for neighbors, noting the change, treat him accordingly. Frequently he gets sufficient satisfaction out of the experience to determine that he will continue in the same way, and in all cases he learns what he can do by exercising self-control; it never works harm and often produces most gratifying results. I mention a few as indicative of many within the experience of every justice holding the Court.
In October last a widow had her only child, a boy of fourteen, taken into custody by the police for absolute incorrigibility; he stayed out nights, associated with bad companions, would not work and was rude and insolent. On the following morning the mother appeared in Court to press the charge under oath and insisted that the boy be committed forthwith. The usual practice was followed; the boy was remanded to the Society and an investigation ordered; the report confirmed everything the mother had alleged, and the few days of separation had in no way changed her determination to have the boy committed, for, as she declared, she was completely discouraged, and he was past redemption. Something about the boy led me in the opposite direction and I said to her, “I think we had better give this young man just one more chance,” and, turning to him, I said, “Don’t you think so, my boy?”
“Yes, Judge,” was the quick response.
After some conversation with the mother, who finally relented, a five weeks’ parole was ordered. On the return day both were in Court. The boy, tidy in appearance, stood erect and looked me manfully in the eye as he took his place before the bench. The parole officer’s report, in writing, told me that immediately following parole the boy had secured a position in a hardware store, and by industry, attention and intelligence had obtained a voluntary promise of increased wages; that he had spent his evenings, during parole, at home, which the mother confirmed and with moistened eyes she added:
“I could not ask for a better boy, and we are both happy.” The boy had found what he could do by trying, and was satisfied. It would be difficult to determine which was the prouder and happier, the mother or son, as they left Court together.
A disorderly boy at school, and an habitual truant, coming up for commitment asked me to try him on parole. He came back a month later with a school certificate of 100 per cent. in attendance and deportment. A father brought his boy of fourteen to Court for commitment because of prolonged disobedience, which could not be corrected by chastening; he was a nuisance in the neighborhood and the complaints sent to the house had utterly destroyed paternal confidence. He was put on parole against the father’s protest. A month later the father reported a satisfactory change, which, as the parole officer’s report stated, had been noticed by the neighbors. On request the parole was continued for a month, when the report of father and parole officer showed almost perfect conduct. On the father’s special request the parole period was extended two months. While these are exceptional cases they are by no means rare.
From this extreme there is a gradual shading downward to the point of absolute hopelessness, when the subject is turned over to the disciplinary methods of a reformatory. During the year 1904 out of 1,098 paroles 170, or 15½ per cent., were subsequently committed, which shows satisfactory results of 84½ per cent. Nineteen hundred and three was a trifle better with its 1,117 paroles, of which 13⅕ per cent. refused to be benefited. But if one-half of the lads can be redeemed or kept within reasonable bounds during character formative period, the Court will prove a success, and intelligent citizens will regard the parole system as worthy of continuance and extension. It is harmful to none and gives each a fair chance to test self-reliance and manhood; it does not injure the boy past redemption, but simply postpones commitment, and is a wholesome demonstration to him that his misfortune is of his own choosing.