Second: His ability as a wage-earner.

Third: His past career as affecting his likelihood of making good.

Fourth: His ability to satisfactorily place him outside the institution.

Fifth: His conduct in the institution.

In the educational world today we find educators somewhat divided as to the fundamental principles which are at the bottom of the methods adopted. There is a close analogy, it seems to us, between the situation in the educational world and the situation in our penal institutions. The advocate of each method, both of education and prison management, is sincere in his belief. The sole question at issue is which method will accomplish the results, and, as in the educational world so in the penal institution, the result is the best adjustment of the individual to society.

In the educational world we have at the one extreme those persons who believe in developing the child along the lines of his own instinctive desires as expressed through his own activities; the adult, the parent, the teacher, is to follow along the lines indicated by the child and is not to impose his preconceived theories or his notions as to what is best upon the unfolding life. The development is to come from within and the parent or teacher is to only assist in the unfolding of the inherent faculties of mind. At the present moment the Montessori system is a good exponent of this method. At the other extreme, we have the educational system which is the result of a careful study on the part of the teacher of what he believes to be best for the child. At every turn, the child is directed by those whose greater age and experience of the world have decided what is best for it. Little attention is paid to his own wishes, his initiative is curtailed, his imagination stifledand yet there are still those who advocate this extreme. In between we have two other groups. First, a group who, while believing that the child's instincts should be given free play and that his own capacity should be developed rather than forced, yet believe that these unfolding traits of mind and spirit should be guided by the wisdom gained from life. They would grant the truth that the extreme radicals hold but would add a little borrowed from

the group at the other extreme. They are the radicals with a touch of conservatism. The fourth group are the conservatives with a touch of radicalism. They would not go so far as to refuse to recognize altogether the initiative of the child or his unfolding instincts, but they are inclined to say that in most respects the wisdom of the elders and the imposition of authority are for his best good. In prison management and in prison discipline we find today these four groups. One end of the scale is probably best exemplified by the ideas advanced by Warden Osborne of Sing Sing, which have attracted much attention. Mr. Osborne believes that the men in his charge will be best fitted for freedom by giving them the largest practicable measure of control over the prison activities. which do not have to do directly with the outside world. Accordingly, at Sing Sing today we find a very complete organization of the prisoners, by the prisoners, and for the prisoners, inspired and infused, of course, by the spirit of Mr. Osborne. The prisoners are in almost complete control of the discipline. They have their representative body based on the shop as the political unit, each thirty-five men being given one representative in the council. At present this council chooses nine members as an executive committee which can divide itself up for special purposes-really a commission form of government. Very large privileges are given the prisoners as to correspondence; purchase of clothing; freedom to see visitors, a committee of prisoners receiving and showing through the institution such of the general public as visit there; freedom in the way of recreation, amusements, etc. It is further contemplated to introduce a system of token money in which payment for all work performed shall be made, and out of which in turn the prisoner shall pay for food, clothing, postage, and whatever he has. Any surplus to his credit on leaving the institution is to be redeemed by lawful money. Mr. Osborne believes that it is only through practicing the general principles of democracy, of self-government, and self-direction that the men can so develop their powers of self-control as to make it probable that they can return to society as social individuals. Mr. Osborne does not personally believe in classification within the institution on a basis of character and conduct, holding that in the world good and bad

alike meet, and that the mixture of good is a restraining and educating influence over the bad; that men must learn to resist temptation. In short, that so far as his personal relations to the community in which he lives goes, a man in prison should live as normal a life as possible, the only difference being that he is restrained of his freedom. Mr. Osborne believes that the greatest possible success on parole will come through a system such as this because the man has practiced all through his period of incarceration that which he must practice when he leaves the fostering care of the institution. Mr. Osborne is first of all to admit that the system is not perfect; that in many ways it is in the experimental stage. He claims for it, however, the fundamental basis which is claimed by those who believe in the free development of the child nature.

It is needless to say that at the opposite end of the scale we have what up to comparatively recent times has been held to be the proper penal method-that of extreme repression, of rules framed. entirely by the officials in accordance with what seems to them good; this good, of course, being the good of the prisoners themselves. This method presupposes strict rules of discipline, and while it presupposes sanitary surroundings and humane treatment, there is little in it that is calculated to develop self-control or selfdirection. Probably a considerable proportion of the prisons of the United States are governed by this method, and not a few of our citizens still believe that it is the proper way to protect society by deterring the commitment of crime on the one hand, and by punishing those who have broken the law on the other. The difficulty of this system comes in the sharp break between the life of the institution, the constant living under restriction and in accordance with rules, and the sudden freedom on the other hand to follow one's own impulses. It is like removing a straitjacket from a person under confinement therein and who has lost control of his powers of motion. It seems to many thoughtful people that the breakdown of the parole system comes largely as a result of this method of administration.

Between these two methods comes, first, a system in which there is classification and promotion based on effort, self-government being given to the group which has shown that it desires and is

capable of a certain measure of self-control. This is the method that your chairman personally employed at the State Reformatory for Women at Bedford Hills. By those who believe in this method it is held that inasmuch as rather a high percentage of our prisoners are mental defectives, and inasmuch as a large percentage have never learned to do anything but act on impulse, certain training, for the good of the community as well as for the individual, is desirable before self-government is granted, but that this self-government should be granted so far as possible before release, in order that there may be a gradation from the anti-social period which existed previous to imprisonment through a rather firm regime up to the period of considerable freedom followed by parole.

The fourth method corresponding to the fourth educational group is that practiced in many of our best prisons of very high standing-typical among these is Great Meadow in New York, Warden Gilmour's prison in Guelph, Ont., and San Quentin in the State of California. Here a large proportion of the privileges allowed, for example, at Sing Sing are enjoyed by the prisoners. They are allowed to associate with each other under supervision; under supervision they work and play. There is nothing of the harsh or the repressive in their treatment, but the advocates of the selfgovernment method claim that it is too paternalistic and that there is not enough opportunity for exercising self-direction to make a firm foundation for self-direction on parole.

That we are in the experimental stage in prison management we all realize. There is no doubt in our minds that the great proportion of prison officials, at least of those in control, desire to do the best possible thing for their charges. That it is impossible to come to final and absolute decisions as to best methods is obvious. So long as we have great economic and social questions in society at large unsettled, we cannot hope to arrive at a final and conclusive decision on prison problems. Therefore, discussion is the best educator and the value of a meeting like this is that people who care for the same thing from all parts of America meet to discuss these vital questions. It is hoped that in particular the organic relation between institutional methods and the success of parole will be fully discussed at this session.

Signed by the full Committee.

CLOSING EXERCISES.

President Byers asked Secretary Sehon to escort the incoming president, Arthur Pratt, to a seat on the platform.

Amos W. Butler, Chairman of the Committee on Resolutions, presented the report of the committee, as follows:

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON RESOLUTIONS.

We have come to the end of another very successful congress of this association. This is its second meeting west of the Rocky Mountains. We are met under new conditions and our gathering has been most pleasant and profitable. We should like to name all who have contributed in any degree to that end. We realize in the nature of things that cannot be done. But we do thank them all even though they are not mentioned in this resolution.

Resolved, That our thanks are hereby tendered to the prosperous city of Oakland and especially to his honor, Mayor John L. Davis, for the welcome extended us; to the Chamber of Commerce and Commercial Club for making this meeting possible; to Rev. Dr. Francis J. Van Horne for the excellent conference sermon and to all the ministers who opened their pulpits to our members; to the women of Berkeley, Alameda and Oakland for the delightful reception tendered us and for many other courtesies; to the musicians who have added to the pleasure of our sessions; to W. A. Gates, our faithful friend, for assisting the Secretary; to Warden J. A. Johnston and the Board of Prison Commissioners for the facilities given to visit the prison at San Quentin; to the newspapers and the Associated Press for their reports of this meeting; and to all who have contributed to the comfort and pleasure of our stay in this beautiful city.

Resolved, That the American Prison Association expresses to Mrs. Phoebe A. Hearst its sincere appreciation of her generous hospitality in the delightful reception extended to its members at her home, and manifested in other ways, and extends to her its grateful acknowledgement thereof. That in addition to spreading this resolution upon its