Sacramento daily record-union., 1881-11-11
PRISON REpoRE.
Further Proceedings OF the Convention at
San Francisco.

III l-4SA 44OS-Sa4i-SS ~ LIZ NOA4fGLsAta ~
san Francisco.
In addition to Geographic advices these
notes are made of the Prison Reform Con-
vention proceedings There was read an
encouraging letter from the Rev. Fred. Fl.
Wines. the son OF the celebrated penologist
Of that name. The letter suggested that
when e convict is discharged the State
should do something to help him to get
relnunerstive work. Il expressed the
opinion that all true means of reform
should begin with the young, and the old
would not then need looking after, and
suggested that no real permanent reform
could be expected until there was gen.
eral revision OF the Pehal Code and the
practice of the criminal Courts.
Mr. Rankin said he thought the chief
cause of crime in California was the al
most perfect immunity from punishment
if the criminal be wealthy. He thought
that the legal teehnicalities now permissi-
BILE should all, or nearly all, be swept
away. sr
Mr.. Gibbon thought that the hope OF
pardon seldom or never entered into the
commission OF crime. He thought that
the act Of executive clemency was q great
Nine-tenths of the criminals leave San
Quentin worse than they entered il.
DR.. Levison thought the Dardoniug power
should be taken from the executive.
Governor Perkins said he would pardon
every boy in prison If good men would
take them to raise them up.
bIr. Cummings opposed the clause in our
law that permits proof of prior conviction
IL
ingly.
Judge Lake said that principle had been
adopted by all the States.
| General Zsbriskie said the sentence for
second conviction is not spite by the law,
but because the first sentence had not in
such cases proved deterrent. He believed
the refornlatory principle failure, and did
not believe in it. The opinion of the At.
torney-General should guide the Governor
in granting pardons.
| Judge Lake said there is great misap.
prehension about the difficulty of convict.
ing criminals on account of legal technical
| tiles. Such difficulties do not exist except
in regard TO crimes the defense of which
| is the violation of some social law. Lar
cenies and robberies do not excite the sym
| pathY of the public, the jury or the Judge.
| lnS CiS6S CD aCtOulO VI sLJ
were hard to convict were those in which
portion of the public were Of the opinion
| that violation Of the social law, not punish.
able by law, may be punished by the strong
arm Of the injured party. Jurymen are
influenced by public opinion, and for that
reason the people ought to have as many
peremptory challenges as the defense, SO
| as not to get on the jury a majority of meu
| IL 4 IL,
now, the defendant having twenty chal-
lenges, has the best OF the jury, who with
the sham defense OF insanity are nearly
sure TO acquit. It is not the Court or the
legal technicality that acquits, but the jury
acted on by public sentiment. The par
doning power was not conferred upon the
Executive to make him q Court Of
Review. He never knew an innocent man
to be convicted in this State.
Mr.. Harvey said that in his opinion
criminals pardoned never committed crime
again, and for that reason he thought that
the pardoning power should be more freely
exercised. Public opinion ought to be con.
sidered and felt as weight IN the granting
of pardons.
Moral Instructor Hill. of San Quentin
said boys under 13 when sent TO the State
Prison did not mix with the older prison.
ers, and the newspapers who said that they
did had made miastatements. A reform
school was needed for boys, and the State
should provide for something of that na-
ture.
Mr.. Gibbon said that he had visited the
prison at San Quentin, and had found the
boys in charge of convict teachers, one of
whom had been sent to prison for murder.
A paper on reform was sent in by Mr.
Wright, the architect, and referred to the
committee.
| 81. E. Highton then read paper upon
the training OF officers for prisons
and reformatories, written by his father
a well-known penologist. TIE writer
took the ground that punishment only
hardened criminals, and for that reason all
prisons should be conducted as places of
reformation and not as places of punish
ment. 1t was claimed that the cheapest
way of handling crime was to prevent it,
and to that end reformatory schools were of
the chief Importance.
Mr.. Beeching, of Alameda, member of
the California Prison Reform Association,
read paper on the work done by that So
ciety in assisting conyicts to regain their
! lost place in society.
TIE Rev. DIR. Briggs read paper upon
Eastern reformatory institutions, which had
been prepared by well-known Eastern
penologist.