The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-12-22
YERY RLIND .IUSTLCE

Dandage about her eyes lnterfereS q little too
much with her sight, and that while the tilt
ing of the scales she holds tells her when to
strike, she is not always able to guess cor
rectly where or how to deal the blow. A re-
cent incident in our criminal court may, to
layman's mind, be an apt illustration of this
idea. Three members of the bootblack bri-
gade, two of them verging into manhood,
knowing, shrewd fellows, who have fre-
quently before occupied seats in the
prisoners DOCK and the third,
a little, friendless boy, whose parents have
deserted him, but who had hitherto kept out
of this court, were found guilty of stealing
from Second street shop piece of muslin
valued at some two or three dollars. The two
larger boys, who, bear in mind, were old
offenders, were sent to prison for eighteen
months, while the little boy, with another
youngster who had committed asimiar offense,
were sent to the House of Refuge, not for
punishment, but for reformation. After a
stay of some four OF five days in that model
institution, the managers thereof returned
them to court with the very modest mes
sage, "That they were ungovernable, be-
yond control, and too bad for the institu-
ton, and their presence there was not only
without benefit to themselves but was detri-
mental to the moral progress of the other
inmates. Taking this for granted, as per-
fectly true and just, the judge of the court
stood the children up to the gaze of the idle
and gaping rabble, administered to them a
lecture, and, assuring them that what he was
about to do was for their own good and saliva
tion, consigned each to solitary cell in the
Eastern Penitentiary for the term of too yea1S
and ten montbs. The accomplices and Sc
ducers of one of these boys were sentenced
to but one-half that term, eighteen months,
and negro man, but recently convicted of
murder in the second degree, received a SEN
tence of only three years. Does it not
seem that Justice has missed her mark
in doubling the punishment upon
this poor unprotected child, because he was
so young and weak as to be led astray by his
elders? Is it not, in the eyes of the multi
tude, levelling murder committed by a man
to the grade of the theft of a rag by home
| less, destitute boy? If the Nervousness of the
crime regulates the penalty, where lies the
difference between this case of murder and
| that case of larceny? We fear the layman
will fail to see it. If his Honor had in view
the welfare of the stray lamb, as he assured
him, he must have forgotten that three years
of solitary confinement, which the law i'm
peratively prescribes for the inmates of the
penitentiary, will cast dark cloud over his
youth that can never be cleared away; will
| estrange him from his fellows will give
| no learning to his mind at the time when it
| is most easily impressed with the truths of
knowledge; will blight every tender germ
which has root in his heart and which, with
little cultivation, can be made to grow and
| bear good fruits will make him hardened,
| senseess misanthrope. These strike us as
being most serious considerations in applying
| the law to child who should rather seem to
| be the object of her special and most tender
care, than her avowed and acknowledged
enemies. Far be it from us to interfere with
judge in the just exercise of his authority
and discretion: we only present these facts as
rather singular and as worthy of note.
| But another very pertinent query here arises:
| To whom does the House of Refuge belong
and what is it for? Does it belong to the
county of Philadelphia, to the people whose
money supports our public insti-
tutions Or is it the sole property
of that little aristocracy of men who
happen for the nonce to be tits managers
This question answers itself. Is it for the
correction and reformation of those youthful
offenders who are too naughty to be left at
large, yet whose tender years prohibit their
treatment as hardened criminals Or is it
merely for the accommodation of those boys
and girls who are docile and we'll behaved,
who need no correction, and will give the
managers no trouble, and who might as well
be at home helping their fathers and mothers?
The action of the managers in the case above
cited would seem to indicate that the latter
would be their answer; but it certainly does
not accord with the popular, common sense
notion of the matter.
1t seems that the Court has been unrea-
sonably imposed upon in this matter, and un-
necessarily led to adopt the strict course
above mentioned and if the Judge had at
once remanded the juvenile prisoners to the
House of Refuge, and enjoined the worthy
managers to an energetic and faithful per-
formance of their duties, it would have
appeared more consonant with the principles
of charity and true justice than to have con-
signed them, for long and dreary period to
the convict's dress, the lonely cell, and the
lasting infamy of the penitentiary.
| THE MORAL EFFECT OF THE
DRAMA.
IT is fact, proved beyond the possibility o.
doubt that during the last five years there