The Man Behind the Bars

by Winifred Louise Taylor

In the army the common soldier is no longer regarded as merely a shooting-machine, he is drilled and trained and schooled into development as a man as well as a soldier. In the treatment of the insane, physical restraint is gradually being relegated to the past; the patient is regarded first of all as a human being, not merely as a case. More and more the individual needs are studied and individual talents brought into activity. In schools for the mentally defective the very foundation of the methods and aims is to promote the development of the individual, to draw out to the utmost whatever rudiments of ability the child may possess and to keep the light turned steadily on the normal rather than the abnormal in his nature. Physicians, psychologists, and educators alike are realizing the importance of adapting methods to the needs of the individual.

Child-study—unfortunately, in many cases the study of text-books rather than of the living child in the family, but child-study in some form—prevails among the mothers of to-day. The gifted Madame Montessori, from both the scientific and the humanitarian standpoint, is emphasizing the importance of giving the child freedom for self-expression. In the suffrage movement we have another evidence of the same impulse toward recognition of individual rights. It comes to us from every direction, even from the battle-field where the Red Cross nurse sees neither friend nor foe, only a suffering man needing her care.

Here we have two great forces: nature's imperative demand for more freedom for the body, more of God's sunshine and fresh air; and the still more imperative demand from the spirit in man for recognition and release. The two forces unite in the one demand, Pro sanitate totius hominis—for the health of the whole man.

Some thirty years ago Richard Dugdale, a large-hearted, large-brained student of sociology, had the courage to state that the great blunder of society in dealing with criminals began with shutting up so many of them within our prisons, practically enslaving them to the state, depriving them of all rewards for their labor and often throwing their families upon public taxation for support; even in many cases making the punishment fall more heavily upon innocent relatives than upon the offenders themselves. He believed, however, that there would be a residue of practically irreclaimable criminals whose permanent removal from society was necessary, but that life for this class should be made as nearly normal as possible. Richard Dugdale was a man of prophetic insight, with a clear vision of the whole question of social economics—social duties as well. Unfortunately, his death soon followed the publication of his articles. But time is making his dreams come true, and vindicating the soundness of his theories. Even during the lifetime of this man spasmodic efforts were made in placing men on probation after a first offence instead of sending them to prison.

With the introduction of the juvenile courts early in the present century this idea assumed practical form; and Judge Lindsey, of Denver, gave such impetus to the movement to save young offenders from the demoralizing influence of jails and miscalled reformatories that this example has been followed in all directions, and thousands of boys have been rescued from criminal life. "Save the boys and girls" appealed directly to the masses, and this ounce of prevention was indorsed with little opposition.

But when the extension of the probation privilege to include adult offenders—still further to reduce the prison population—was advocated the public held back, fearing danger to society in allowing these older lawbreakers to escape the legal penalties of their offences. However, the current of progress was not to be stemmed, and adult probation has been legalized in many States. The results have been satisfactory beyond expectation, showing an average of less than five per cent of men released on probation reverting to crime, against forty per cent of reversions after a term in a non-progressive penitentiary.

This adult probation law confers upon the judge not mandatory but discretionary power, and the character of the judge plays a part not less important than the character of the offender; the application of the law is primarily a relation of man to man; the unjust judge will be unjust still, the timid judge will avoid taking risks; in the very human side in which lies the strength of this course lie also its limitations.

Now the very foundation of the probation idea is the recognition of the individual character of the offender and the circumstances leading to the crime. But no sooner was the adult probation law in force than the claim of the individual from another direction began to be recognized. Curiously enough, in legal proceedings against criminals the injured party had been entirely ignored—according to the old English precedent. It was not the crime of man against man but the crime of man against the state, the violation of a state law, that was punished. To the mind of the criminal a crime against the state was but a vague and indefinite abstraction, except in case of murder unlikely to cause remorse, or any feeling of responsibility toward the person injured. If the injured party were revengeful he had the satisfaction of knowing that the criminal was punished; but the sending of the delinquent to prison deprived him of all opportunity for reparation.

An interesting thing begins to happen when the judge is given power to put a man on probation. At last the injury to the individual is taken into consideration. Here is an actual instance in point.