Red Headed Stepchild
(The Barrett family memoir of Navy Life)
by Sophie Ruth Meranski with photos


#1165 p. 65 Early years HARTFORD CT and MOUNT Holyoke in Sophie Barrett memoir RED HEADED STEPCHILD


Temporary entry-This small-scale photocopy was mailed to scores of people in 1998 with text of important early portions of Sophie Meranski Barrett memoir -dealing with her immigrant family- parents married 1890 and Sophie born 1901- attended Mount Holyoke College 1919-1923 and masters degree l925 in Economics and Sociology. My intention was to have this enlarged, but text has now been pasted on website from disks and emails, so I shall consult Jim Ullyot and Creative Communications staff whether it is worthwhile to try to enlarge this photocopy.(John Barrett note Dec. 22, l998) INSERT ELSEWHERE- Jack Boston Latin story- Ancient History exam question:"Tell all you know about the Emperor Caligula" {a highly depraved character}.Student received passing grad for reply, "The less said about Caligula the better." One of Sophie's stories possibly from Morgan Street Hartford or else from social work days concerns a woman who frequently got drunk and when being escorted into the police patrol would holler loudly, "Make room, make room." Amy Hewes [1877-1970] was the chair of Mount Holyoke's large department of Economics and Sociology. She invited Sophie to be her assistant in the department and statistics lab 1923-1925, advised her on her master's thesis, and helped her find jobs 1924-5 at Children's Bureau, U.S. Department of Labor; at Commonwealth Fund NewYork-Philadelphia 1926-9 and as Director of Personnel Research Macy's stores 1929-30. One of her characteristic sayings was "This well to know when 'tis done." Mount Holyoke President Mary Woolley took a great interest in individual students and remembered them all long after graduaion.Some students did not find converation easy going through reception lines at college functions.There was a story that no matter what you said, you would get a perfunctory reply, "How nice". Supposedly one girl decided to tell the hostesses "My grandmother died last night," as she went through. Sophie told this story once or twice. She liked to quote a saying "Character is resistance ro environment" and another "Reputation is what others think of you. Character is what you think of yourself." During the early years of World War 2 she wrote sayings of this sort lightly on the paint above the kitchen sink at 2415 Ala Wai Boulevard Waikiki.




November 27,l998 SCIENCE contains two reports of Archaefructus liaoningensis SUN,DILCHER,ZHENG & ZHOU. Crepet's phylogenetic cart "D" baSED ON MOLECULAR evidence places angiosperms outside a clade of gymnosperms in which living Gnetales are nested near conifers within gymnosperms. What aREE IMPLICATIONS FOR PHYLOGENY OF DOUBLE FERTILIZATION? How would one investigate possibility of pARALLELISM? THE ALTERNATIVE APPEARS TO BE A VERY FAST MOLECULAR CLOCK IN ANGIOSPERMS..I remember an article in Annals of Missouri Botanics Garden early 1990s that did present evidecne of substaintially faster clock in grasses than in conifers.Two factors aRE PLANT GENERATION TME - COMPAre Sequoiadendron and Arabidopsis- and plant cellular DNA content- cell mitosis time.Frequency of mitosis and meiosis matters, and conditions increasing pollen grain haploid competition could be relevant. Kubitzki and goittlieb had important paper TAXON August 1984 on the SHIKIMATE chemical pathwway in primitive angiosperms.It provides great chemical versatility but requires investment of nitrogen, which ROSIDS need less of.In correspondence Kubitzki called my attention to anotherOctober 1984 paper he did with Gottlieb comparing chemistrty of Gnetales and angiosperms it was in a less well known journal in Harvard Economic Botany library - perhaps (New?) Medica Materia or similar title. Chemically the Gnetales were more lilke Rosids than MaGNOLIOIDS WHICH HAVE SPECIAL OILS AND FRAGRANCES - BUT SOME SORT OF OXYGEN lINKAGE WAS DIFFERENT IN THE TWO GROUPS, ARGUING AGAINST A TOO-REcENT ANCESTOr. Archaefructus is extremely important. I shalkl be writing the authors inquiring aboput numbers of fruiting axes, what evidence exists oon Plant ECOLOGY, SIZE WOODY ? character vessels? seed structure (perisperm, endosperm?")and PALEOLATITUDE. Are there any resemblances to Sanmiguelia? In regard to taxonomy, rather than a subclass should Archaefructus be placed in a new Superclass or SubDivision?. Presumablty it comes before branching of Liliopsida. IUf Magnoliopsida and Liliopsida are Classes, then Archaemagnoliidae should be a higher category - Superclass or SubDivision.from Takhtajania -Endress bibliog Diggle P. K. & Endress P. K. (eds.) 1999. Development, function and evolution of symmetry in plants. International Journal of Plant Sciences, Special Issue. 166 pp. Diggle P. K. & Endress P. K. 1999. Symmetry in plants: Introduction. International Journal of Plant Sciences 160 (6, Suppl.): S1-S2.Endress P. K. 1999. Flower morphology and evolutionary biology, with an appreciation of the contribution by Wilhelm Troll on the centennial of his birth. Systematics and Geography of Plants 68: 25-32.Endress P. K. 1999. Symmetry in flowers: diversity and evolution. International Journal of Plant Sciences 160 (6, Suppl.): S3-S23. Endress P. K. & Igersheim A. 1999. Gynoecium diversity and systematics of the basal eudicots. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 130: 305-393.


help find new material for WEBSITE!p 65 w 1168


assistance is requested finding new photo and text materials appropriate for this website and replacing some of the ten thousand photos and substantial writings destroyed by thieves 1993. Substantial progress has been made in 1998 preserving writing of Sophie Meranski Barrett and photos taken and collected by Commander John Berchmans "Jack" Barrett. It is hoped much other family and historical material can be added, partcular Navy, maritime, Marine, Coast Guard material and the Army experiences of a number of family members notably career Army Officer Col. Arthur Meranski 1919-1995 Sophie's nephew and frequent correspondent. John B. Barrettt junior 113 West Third Street Port Angeles WA98362-2824 is continuing to edit and gather material and hopes to write interpretative essays and try to draw lessons about Americans military and Naval experience. An effort will be made to gather and re-create the correspondence and discussions Sophie had with Mount Holyoke college classmates on women's issues in the 1970s. Sophie was active in Massachusetts State Poetry Society 1977-1980 and spoke to Roslindale historical Society 1978 about Pearl Harbor and Hawaii. She did a great deal of work in effort of preserve 175-acre Brook Farm in West Woxbury and assisted membership growth and programming for West Roxbury Historical Society 1976-1986, worked on Boston Latin 350th program March 1985 and wrote for Jason Korell and West Roxbury Transcript newspaper on many occasions, including programs on Faulkner Hospital and West Roxbury Veterans Hospital. An essay on Musical Interests of Jack and Sophie Barrett appears on this website, and characteristic sayings of each will be colected- several I was reminded of recently: SOPHIE "It's like bumping your head against the wall - it feels so good when you stop" "Quotation by Sophie of her 1925 thesis advisor Amy Hewes chair of Department of Economics and Sociology, Mount Holyoke:" Tis well to know when 'tis done." Quotations of Jack Barrett-- "There goes Balaam on his velocipide. The next numer currently on Website photobook Page 65 wull list some Research Projects, beginning with HARTFORD CONNECTICUT. There will be many others - North China, Hawaii, Yosemite, Ireland, Egypt-Springsa - Pasanjan Philippines, Australia-Tasmania, New Zealand.


RESEARCH PROJECTS HARTFORD - Please help p 65 w 1169


TRIN*ITY COLLEGE 1926 YEAR BOOK An excellent photo of Sophie's youngest brother Dr. Israel Peter Meranski for some reason appears in the 1926 TRINITY College Year Book, although he graduated in 1925 and left for Unioversity of Maryland Medical School, where he was a l929 grad. Trinity archivist Peter Knapp very kindly supplied a copy of this photo a few years ago along with some interesting inform,ation on "Izzy"s college year and activity in the Maryland Trinity alumni, but this material was in desks and bureaus stolen 1993 West Roxbury and needs to be replaced. HARTFOD PUBLIC library in 1988 had the l917 YEARBOOK of Hartfoird Public High School, with photos of Sophies sister Bertha (Mrs. Sam Pollack) and her classmates and friends Eva Levin (Levine?) (later Mrs. Bacon and ..Lynette? Silverberg. They were in the Business Course, and two additiona of these three friends appear together in the Glee Club and Girls Business Club Photos. It would be desirable to obtain copies of the photos - an ordinary library photocopy machine should be adequate, as these photos are already digitalized. Further details later on: Jewish historical Society of Greater Hartford Bloomfield Ave West Hartford - one important item is Oral Hiostory tapes by Rose Roesenblatt Witkower, who remembered Sophie's immigrant parents and whose own husband's family traced back to Brody Galicia, Austria and came through Vienna arriving hHartford 1890. the STOWE-DAY house has records of Hartford Public High School history account to Marjorie Doty, Secretary of the class of 1919 organizer of 1979 reunion and many years a teacher at the high school. HEBREW HOME- many old timers would have usefuyl memoiries - Esther Meranski was a resident about 1973-1981 and fairly active in various ways untikl shortly before her breast cancer recurrred as she pproached age 87. Sophie's mother's brother Jacob Goldfield (name apparently changed from Goldfeld about 1915 accordiung to directories_ was a resident 1930-31. ZION HILL CEMETERY -David and RThalia Meranski are believed buried here l933 and l925. David Meranski was active in the Capital City Lodge, which helped immigrants and others make funeral plans to reduce economic impact on their families. It might be possible to reconstruct many details about lodge activities and friends. David Meranski was active in Montefiore society helping immigrants including learing English for citizenship,].


SophieMeranski 1925 thesis The Young Offender and the Criminal Law In Massachusetts#1170 p 65


"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 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


Thesis p 8 page eight to middle tenSophie thesis Young Offender 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


Sophie thesis p 17-25 p 65 w1172 Thesis is w1170-3.


THESIS p17 a break was inevitable,and Wells, far ahead of his day in penological philosophy, resigned. The idea of juvenile delinquency as a problem in education was, however, destined to live.Simultaneously with Mr. Wells' retirement,an "association of gentlemen of great respectability" purchased Thompson's Island in Boston Harbor containing about twenty acres of land, where they erected a farm school for the education and reformation of boys who were exposed to extraordinary temptations and "who were in danger of becoming vicious and dangerous."Another charitable association, the boston Asylum, had been incorporated in 1814 to receive, instruct, and employ indigent boys of Boston, and in 1835 this institution was merged with the new Farm School on Thompson's Island under the title of the boston Asylum and Farm School for Indigent Boys. Since this establishment received only such boys as had not yet committed crime, its function was wholly preventive, and in fact, the number of inmates of the boston House of Reformation was reduced as a result of the work of this institution. OTHER JUVENILE REFORM SCHOOLS The impetus for the establishment of the House of Reformation in boston in 1826, for the New York House of Refuge in 1824, and for the House of Refuge in Philadelphia in 1826, came from England. The agitation of the public conscience in Great Britain in the eighteen twenties resulted in the English Society for the Improvement of Prison Discipline and for the Reformation of Juvenile Delinquents.The spirit of this work spread both to continental Europe and America.After this, the movement for the reformation of young offenders lagged for about twenty years.Before 1850 there was established in addition to those mentioned above only the State Reform School of Massachusetts in 1848 [now the Lyman School] , the Western House of Refuge at Rochester, New York, in 1846, and a few privately supported homes, mostly for girls. About 1850 there was a renewal of interest, which led to the founding of many of the strongest schools, which have carried their work down to the present time.These reform schools include the Massachusetts Reformatiory [for boys], the Industrial School for Boys at Shirley, the Suffolk School [for Boys], the Lyman School [for boys], the Industrial School for Girls at Lancaster, and the Plummer Farm School at Salem. Industrial work was provided, with the idea of future use in the community, and education was stressed.These schools have largely taken the place of the walled prisons for juvenile delinquents. Today, whenever possible, they are located in the country, and wholesome outdoor life is relied upon as a factor in reformation. EARLY LEGISLATION RESTRICTED TO JUVENILES Laws with special reference to young offenders were enacted in Massachusetts before similar legislation was passed in other states. By an act of 1847 the first state reformatory in the United States was established in Westboro, Massachusetts (now the Lyman School for boys). In 1870 it was provided that in the county of Suffolk (mainly Boston) all children under seventeen years of age who were brought before the court should "have the complaints against them heard and determined by themselves, separate from the general and ordinary criminal business." (UNDERLINED) This measure was the first provision of its kind passed in the United States. The first legislative action in the United States with regard to the appointment of a judicial official for the trial of children appeared in 1872 when the executive was authorized to "designate and commission such number of justices of the peace as the public interest and convenience may require to try juvenile offenders."The provision was repealed in 1877.Perhaps the first statutory use of the term "session for juvenile offenders" appeared in the act of 1877 which provided that juvenile offenders should be tried apart from the trial of other criminal cases, at suitable times.These hearings were to be known as the session for juvenile offenders, and a separate record and docket were to be kept. Massachusetts boasts of the fact that it is known as "the home of probation." In 1870 a visiting agent of the board of state charities, whose function corresponds to that of the probation officer today, was authorized. This agent was to be notified of complaints pending against children under seventeen years of age, was to investigate their cases, attend their trials,and protect their interests in general.. He stood between the child and the reformatory, and his recommendation might result in placing the child in a house with a private family or in any other disposal which seemed to him desirable.Thus what was in effect juvenile probation was frequently used in the period from 1870 to 1880 in Massachusetts.Its good results were, in fact,responsible for the probation system for adults, which was created by a law in 1878, and 1880, when paid probation officers were authorized throughout the state.The probation law of 1891 provided a paid probation officer for each municipal,police, or district court.Under these circumstances, the former provision for the primary intervention in juvenile cases by the agent of the state board of charity proved cumbrous and was superseded by the provisions of the Delinquent Children Act of 1906. The basis of the present court procedure so far as young offenders are concerned is to be found in an "Act Relative to Delinquent Chi/ldren" which was passed on May 24th, 1906. [Footnote ONE Massachusetts Acts and Resolves,1906. Chapter 413.] Definitions indicating changed points of view are contained in this act. A delinquent is defined in this statute as anyone between seven and seventeen years of age who has violated a city ordinance or town by-law or committed an offense not punishable by death or by imprisonment for life.A wayward child is designated as one between seven and seventeen who habitually associates with the vicious or immoral or who is growing up in circumstances inducing an immoral,vicious, or criminal life. It is emphasized that the law should be liberally construed and that the chiuldren should be treated not as criominals but as in need of aid,encouragement, and guidance.It was made the aim of the court to approximate the care which the children should have received from the parents. The proceedings against children under this act are not to be regarded as criminal in character.No child under fourteen may be committed to a lockup either in default of bail or fine or upon conviction of any offense not punishable by death or by imprisonment for life. The parent or guardian is to be summoned to the hearing, and the child may appeal to the Superior Court. This act stresses the importance of having the session for children at a separate time and when practicable in a separate place from that of criminal trials and forbids any minor to attend a hearing unless he is needed. It further stipulates that it is the duty of the probation officer to investigate each case of waywardness or delinquency and to report on the character, record, and environment of his charge. He is required to attend the trial, to be ready to assist the court with information, and at the end of the probation period to report the conduct of trhe child under his supervision.A delinquent child's case may be placed on file, or the child may be placed under the care of a probation officer.If he proves unmanageable, he is to be committed until twenty-one years of age, if a boy under fifteen, to the Lyman School for Boys, and if a girl under seventeen, to the State Industrial School for Girls. It is the privilege of the court to commit any delinquent child to any institution excepting a jail or house of correction. If it is found that the parent is in any way responsible for the juvenile delinquency, he may be fined not more thasn $50.00 or imprisoned not more than six months. In an "Act Authorizing Probation Officers for Children" in 1908 [Footnote ONE Massachusetts Acts and Resolves ; 1908. Chapter 637.] each inferior court whose district has a population of 30,000 to 125,000 is authorized to appoint a paid probation officer for wayward and delinquent children. The Massachusetts Commission on Probation was created by law in the same year. It has supervision of the probation officers in all the courts of the state. The Commission consists of five members appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court. Its powers consist of prescribing records to be kept by the probation officers and to require the reports which it deems necessary.Beyond these items, its powers are only advisory,but it is charged with the responsibility of coordinating the work and promoting an exchange of information between officers. [Footnote TWO National Probation Association, Proceedings 1923 (underlined), (1924) p. 208] The juvenile court movement is one of the most important developments in the history of penology. It affords marked contrasts with the earlier methodd of identical treatment for both young and old offenders. The first juvenile court was established in Chicago in 1899. After that date others followed rapidly. Within ten years, twenty-two states had passed similar laws to that of Illinois, and by 1920 all but three states - Maine, Wyoming, and Connecticut had done so. In these three states some features of the method of procedure used in the juvenile court were to be found. The Boston Juvenile Court is the only Juvenile Court in Massachusetts which was established by a special law and which has "independent jurisdiction." [p 22 Footnote One Evelina Belden, (underlined) "Couts in the United States hearing children's cases." United States Children's Bureau. Publication No. 65 (1920) p. 76] The remaining courts hearing children's cases come under the police, district, or municipal court systems. In 1918 [Footnote TWOibid. p. 28] there were seventy-one courts in the state which were reported as hearing children's cases. Two-fifths of these had a significant amount "of specialization and organization for work with children." The others were "general courts" and did not report specially organized juvenile work. In the latter cases, the judges devoted most of their time to other court duties. All of the courts made use of probation. The act "to establish the Boston Juvenile Court" was approved on June 15, 1906 [Footnote THREE Massachusetts Acts and Resolves. 1906. CHAPTER 489.] It provides for one justice and two special justices to be appointed by the executive. All complaints which relate to children under seventeen are to be transferred p.23 to this court, and so far as possible the court is ordered to hear all cases in chambers. All unnecessary persons are to be excluded. The Boston Juvenile Court was largely determined by the personality of its presideing officer. Mr. Roy H. Cushman, for eight years a probation officer of the court, has portrayed the character of Harvey Humphrey Baker, the court's first judge. He has made it evident that the court WAS Judge Baker and attributes the high rank of the boston court to the "work and eminent service" of its first magistrate. When the Governor appointed Mr. Baker judge, there was open speculation as to whether he would be a successful worker with boys because it was assumed that such a position required a man who was informal, able to meet boys on their own level, and a man whose boyhood was somewhat similar to that of the children's whom he aimed to guide. Judge Baker was a bachelor, a man who had led a life free from care in the matter of earning a living, and was a citizen carefully trained in self discipline.He proved to be very successful, and his success has been attributed to "his sense of fairness, his untiring devotion to duty, his great patience, his firmness when occasion demanded, his judicial turn of mind, his profound legal sense and knowledge of the law, his keen intelligence, his tactfulness - but above all to the beauty, simplicity, and genuineness of his personal character. Such a nature as his conquered by force of its sincerity. All who came in contact with him were enobled." [p 23 FOOTNOTE ONE Judge Baker Foundation, "underlined HARVEY HUMPHREY BAKER: MAN AND JUDGE." Publication No. One (1920) p 4. ]. Judge Baker took into account the problems of the parents as well as those of the child and invariably insisted upon seeing at least one of the parents of every child who came before him. If it were inconvenient for the parents to appear in the daytime, he arranged to see them in the evening.Before Judge Baker accepted the judgeship. he traveled about the country and visited many of the already existing juvenile courts and institutions for delinquent children and industrial schools. He witnessed the operation of methods which were proving successful and availed himself of every opportunity to talk with any expert whose advice might be valuable to him. When he committed a child, he knew the institution to which he was sending him, sometimes visited him at the institution, and even watched his career while there and after parole Since its establishment the Boston Juvenile Court has been "administered on the assumption that the fundamental function of a juvenile court is to put each child who comes before it in a normal relation to society as promptly and as permanently as possible, and that while punishment is not by any means to be dispensed with, it is to be made subsidiary and subordinate to that function." [p 24 footnote ONE Ibid. p. 109.] Every effort is made to realize this goal. The quarters of the court are in the main courthouse of the city in a quiet, removed corner. The young offenders, their parents, and all others concerned with the case, are required to wait in a large room until the case is called. The keynote to the entire procedure is simplicity. The judge interviews the child alone, with sometimes the probation officer present. All newspaper men and persons not directly connected with the case are not allowed admittance, but exceptions are sometimes made in the case of officers of reform schools, officers of agencies interested primarily in children, and social workers. No more than two at a time are ever allowed to be present at the proceedings. p 25 When the case is called, the probation officer takes the child before the judge, who sits behind the desk on a low platform.While talking to the child, the judge carefully examines his general appearance and makeup, and although he holds the formal papers in his hand, he rarely reads the complaint. The child is not asked to plead either "guilty" or "not guilty." The procedure takes the form of an interview between the judge and the child. In every case the court tries to make clear that is will do everything possible to promote the interests of the child. If this interview has been a success, the parents, the police officer in charge of the case, and sometimes the aggrieved parties are brought in, and the case is stated to them. If the judge feels that the parents are to blame for the child's delinquency, the child and the police officer are sent out, and the judge admonishes the parents without running the risk of lowering them in the estimation of the child. The offender is then brought before the judge again, informed of the disposition of the case, and after friendly advice is dismissed. If, on the other hand,the judge can make no headway in the private interview with the child who absolutely denies any share in delinquency, the parents and officer are asked to return to the chamber, and the case is carried on in the usual way. The child has the right to be represented by counsel, bit it is generally understood that the judge's decision is the wisest for promoting the child's welfare. Probation is one of the most important features of the Boston Juvenile Court. The Massachusetts Commission on Probation defines probation as " a process by which the court, pending disposition of the case or under suspension of sentence, places a person convicted of crime n the care of a probation officer with a view to reformation". [p 25 Footnote ONE Massachusetts Commission on Probation "Probation Manual" (1916) p. 15] Probation may be granted to any person convicted of a crime, but the welfare of both the offender and society must be taken into consideration. member that after the LEXINGTON was sunk in the Coral Sea we all got our heads together & decided we were not going to burn as did the LEX.But how to do that?You see, there are gasoline fueling lines running from the main fuel tanks up to the hangar deck & the flight deck for the fueling of the planes.We could & did launch as many as a hundred planes at one sitting,& that called for a lot of gasoline.Then when the ship was hit with a bomb or a torpedo, it was to be expected that thes


SophieMeranskiMAthesis pp26-34 p 65 #1173


Sophie Barrett thesis 1925 MA Mount Holyoke Economics & Solciology continued p 26----Although the terms of probation are left to the discretion of the court, they generally include all or some of the following: The defendant shall 1. Comply with such orders as the court may make; 2.Report promptly to the probation officer as required; 3. Work regularly; 4. Keep good company and indulge in no bad habits'; 5. Refrain from violating any law, statute, ordinance, by-law or regulation, the violation whereof is punishable; 6. Pay to the probation officer before 191 , $ as costs 7. Pay to the probation officer before 191 , $ as restitution or reparation. [Footnote ONE p 26 "ibid." p 17] The probation officer is required by law to investigate each case brought before the court. His report to the judge includes information regarding the family from which the child comes, the nature of his environment, personal history, school record, the gang to which he belongs,and especially the circumstances of the offense in question. When the court decides on an order of probation, the probation officer is required to return the child to court if, in his opinion, the child's conduct does not warrant further probation. In addition to probation and commitment in the disposition of cases, the court may fine the culprit although it is the aim today to discourage the fine of children under fourteen. Probation has many advantages over fining. After the offender has paid his fine, the court loses all control over him until a new charge can be brought against him. If, however, the child is on probation, he can be committed without proving a charge against him, and if his conduct is unsatisfactory, he can be surrendered to the court and committed at any time. In this way the court has a hold on the child for many months and in some cases for a number of years. Many offenders would immensely prefer to pay a fine and "be done with it all." The court also makes use of the suspended sentence. The term of suspension and the term of sentence imposed are to be distinguished. A child may be sentenced to a reformatory until he is twenty-one years of age and the sentence suspended for one year, and if , during the period of suspension, the offender's conduct is beyond reproach. the case may be dismissed. If the defendant violates any laws during the period of suspension, the court may revoke the suspension and inflict the penalty. Dispositions are made by the court according to the nature of the delinquency and the attendant circumstances. They vary from the task of copying the State regulations for several hours to commitment in an institution until majority has been reached. The aim in each case is to adjust the child to his social environment. The very fact that the child has appeared before the court is an indication to the judge that an adjustment is needed. When a girl is brought to the courthouse,she is immediately put under the care of a woman unless her parents arrive promptly and are thought by the court to be capable of taking care of her until the case is called. The judge never interviews a girl alone, and after the case has been heard, every effort is made to keep the girl away from the court house. The Massachusetts Commission on Probation asked the Legislature in 1923 to make a special appropriation to enable the Commission to make a study of the subsequent careers of persons who had been on probation. The Commission wanted to find out whether probation was justified by the conduct of the persons after the period of probation had expired and whether its efforts actually "returned people in the community with security to the community and with benefit to themselves". The Legislature granted the request and appropriated $4,000.00 for the investigation, [Footnote ONE p 28 National Probation Association "Proceedings 1923" (1924) pp. 252,253.] The study made included 312 juvenile delinquents, from several cities exclusive of Boston, who were placed on probation in the ordinary district courts in the first half of the year 1915. The majority (294) were boys ranging in age from eight to seventeen whose offenses consisted for the most part of larceny, breaking and entering, stubbornness, and assault and battery. [Footnote TWO "Ibid." "Proceedings 1924" (1924) p. 46] When placed on probation, the boys averaged fourteen years of age, and at the time of the investigation, they averaged twenty-three years of age. Over four-fifths (82.0 per cent) of the boys who were eligible for commitment at the time they were put on probation avoided that experience throughout the nine years since the offense was committed.The remaining fifth were committed to institutions. The importance of home conditions in relation to the efficacy of probation was made clear. Boys from homes with both parents present and no bad conditions failed to the extent of ten per cent, those from broken homes to the extent of thirty per cent, and those from homes where one or both parents drank, to the extent of forty per cent. As a result of this study, the Commission felt that probation had been more than justified as a method. The fact is that the big majority of young people for whom probation had been an alternative for commitment were never commited was accepted as clear evidence. Even in the cases where probation had seemingly failed, notably the cases of broken homes and other unfavorable home conditions, the Commission concluded that probation developed along lines to suit the special needs of these cases - rather than its abandonment- was the best course to take. THE ERA OF THE CLINICAL CRIMINOLOGIST Judge Baker realized the inadequacy of treatment based wholly on the observations of the judge and his probation officers. He voiced the need of a clinic to diagnose problem cases.After his death, his associates raised a fund to establish a memorial of his work, which is called the Judge Baker Foundation, and which provides the kind of scientific assistance to the Juvenile Court which Judge Baker advocated. The Foundation was organized in April, l917. Its function has been to cooperate not only with the court but with all agencies dealing with problem cases of children and their families to bring about a better understanding of the human material with which the juvenile court deals. Since its establishment, four thousand boys and girls have been studied. The majority of these children were referred to the Foundation by the Boston Juvenile Court. The rest came to its attention through the schools, hospitals, and child agencies. The information which has been gathered during the years of its operation has been published in the form of case records. Medical, social and psychological studies of the children are made under the supervision of Dr. William Healy. Probation officers, the field worker, and the workers of cooperating agencies are enlisted to carry on the social investigations of the heredity, home conditions, and school and street life of the individual in question. The psychological examination aims to bring to light the underlying causes of the child's delinquency as well as his special aptitudes and interests. The child's own story, including an analysis of his experiences, is appended to the results of the mental and physical examination and to the information which has been gathered to throw light on heredity and environment. At the staff conference which is held twice a week and which is attended by the doctors,the psychologists, and the social worker, the findings are related to get the interplay of causes. The best method of procedure is discussed, and the recommendations to be presented to the interested parties are drawn up. Each case is carefully followed up, and , if necessary, a re-study and new recommendations are made. The most recent development in the work of the Foundation is its emphasis on preventive work. It now studies the aptitudes and capabilities of presumptive criminals before they are allowed to join the ranks of the criminal class. The schools, hospitals, and social agencies, as well as the juvenile court, are sending children in increasing numbers to the Foundation for diagnosis with a view to vocational guidance, and recommenations are made as to the type of education and training advisable. Although it formerly dealt almost exclusively with children presenting behavior problems, it is now recruiting its clients to a high degree from the ranks of those who have committed no crime as defined by the law but who, without expert advice and training, would in all probability drift into vice sooner or later. Just as the problem of poverty in society has come to be regarded as not merely the relief of the poor already in existence, but the more fundamental problem of the distribution of the social income, so the basic problem of juvenile delinquency is seen to be not only the reformation of bad boys and girls,,but the larger and far more important undertaking of the social control of those factors in the environment which bring bad boys and girls into existence. One of the best services which the juvenile court and other institutions can render to-day is to make such a study of the individuals entrusted to their care as will bring to light the causes of delinquency and so make possible a program of prevention. The evolution of the care of the young offender in Massachusetts, and in the country as a whole,has been a slow process often characterized by failures but one in which a very real advance is also seen. Although many of our juvenile courts still fail to understand the individuals whose fate they must decide, the work of a few enlightened institutions makes the outlook for the future brighter.The beginnings,. as reflected in the corporal punishments of the seventeenth century, which aroused in many cases a desire for vengance on the part of the offender,have no counterpart today. The next step, that of housing youngsters in jails and houses of correction, too often resulted in a hatred for society and in a life of continued crime. The transition period brought with it reforming and educational measures, but since the seat of the difficulty was not sought after nor understood, the old urges recurred when the child was released from the reformatory, and very little from the point of view of preventing delinquency or checking recidivism was effected.The modern period, with its juvenile courts and diagnostic clinics, marks a real step forward in its effort to understand the motive and driving forces and to supply normal outlets for repressed wishes, but the children are reached by these institutions only after they have committed an offense which is punished by law.The most, consequently, that can be hoped from the juvenile court is the checking of recidivism. If the juvenile court forced back upon the preventive agencies all cases properly belonging to them and if the schools, churches,playgrounds, habit-clinics, placement, and relief organizations reched their maximum efficiency, there would be little work for the juvenile courts to do.The formula for the prevention of delinquency is the perfection of the agencies which come in contact with the child before he has committed his first offense. The juvenile courts of Massachusetts, and of other parts of the world, are at best only remedial instituiions, and as they are at present organized are not capable of combating delinquency at its source. The most that can be expected of them is the checking, and ultimately, the prevention of recidivism.Since the court can do very little to avert first offenses, and since it is only after the offense has been committed that the child appears before the court,there is very evident need of better work from the preventive institutions. All agencies whose primary function is to see that nothing goes wrong in the first place should be much more effective than the juvenile court in preventing crime because they are nearer the heart of the difficulty. Since, however, it is too much to hope for the present, at least, that complete successs will be attained in preventing delinquency through the agencies suggested above,the juvenile court will continue to hold an important place in effecting cures and in curbing recidivism. Because the juvenile court is the best agency at present for dealing with the problem of the young offender, every effort shoulod be expended to strengthen its work. An increase in the number of diagnostic clinics for problem cases which do not respond normally to the method of treatment prescribed by the court is strongly recommended. The establishment of such research institutions would be costly, it is true,but if the work were extended so as to include children who are potential criminals, and if they were set upon the highway of life capable of self-support and free from any history of delinquency, the investment would repay the public with a high rate of interest, and the juvenile courts would be near the realization of their maximum efficiency. The work of the juvenile courts throughout the state suffers because of the small number of probation officers attached to each court. The accepted maximum cases to be carried by one probation officer for careful work has been stated to be seventy-five cases per worker,The officers of the Boston Juvenile Court have carried from 125 to 150 cases. The juvenile court will defeat its own purpose if it does not have an adequate and well-trained force to carry out its policies. Further, the work of these courts could be reduced if something were done to prevent the overlapping of the work of visiting teachers, truant officers,social case vistors,and probation oofficers, which often results in neglect because the fields of each agency are not carefully defined.The placing agency shoud relieve the court of the necessity of placing children; the relief agency should take full responsibility for all dependent children,, and the school should take care of its truants.The probation officers would then be free to concentrate all their efforts on the rehabilitation of the delinquent child and not be forced to be "Jack of all trades". By limiting the field of their activities and by decreasing the number of their active cases, the officers could make more use of preventive measures. There is need at the present time in reform schools for teachers who understand the problems of offenders with abnormal mental and nervous habits, defective speech,and physical defects of all varieties, and who are suffering from conflicts which are not immediately apparent. We are continually losing sight of the fact that the chief function of the reformatories is to help children tide over the period of adolescent instability and to provide an environment which is educational and reformative. After the most marked cases of mental defect have ben sifted out and sent to the institutions for defective delinquents, then by means of intelligent vocational training, reformatories guided by the recommendations of state-supported diagnostic clinics might have a chance to return useful citizebs to society. Finally, further study and comparison of the experience of the juvenile courts is recommended.At present the successes and failures are not avaiable in such a way as to guide further procedure. The standardization of methods of record keeping is important. Only accurate, complete, and comparable statistics can be relied upon to make general trends clear and to point out the interplay of cause and result. THIRTY FOUR PAGES PLUS CONTENTS and BIBLIOGRAPHY end of text.