Morning journal and courier., 1881-01-07
Friday Morning, Jan. 2, 1881.

AN INTERESTING EXPERIMENT.
 The Massachusetts Legislature of 1880
 passed law changing the punishment for
 drunkenness so that unless person had been
 convicted of that offence twice before within
 the next preceding twelve months he should
 be punished by fine of $1 without costs
 If two such previous convictions were
 proved, the punishment, if the defendant
 was male person, might be a fine not ex-
 ceeding $10, or imprisonment for term not
 exceeding one year. If the defendant was female person, the punishment for the third
 offence might be fine of $10, or imprison- ment in a jail or house of correction for twelve..months, or in the reformatory prison for women for term not exceeding two years.
 The Prison Commissioners of the State have made an interesting and valuable report concerning the working of this law. That part of the law which authorized long sen tences for habitual offenders has been freely used, and, the Commissioners think, with good results. They believe that confinement for year will often accomplish for those cursed with the appetite for and habit of rum drinking what cannot be accomplished in few months And they hope that if any change is made in the law the provision for long sem tences will not be changed unless to increase the term of confinement for men so as to equal that now provided for women-two years.
 The reduction of the fine for first offend CTS has been much criticised. The three principal objections urged against it are, that it decreases the revenue, increases drunken ness, and benefits the habitual drunkard by allowing him to escape with a small fine re- peatedly. The Commissioners do not deny that the loss of revenue is quite important, but they show that it has been greatly over stated, and that there are compensations up- on the other side. Thus the decrease in the cost of supporting the persons sentenced for short terms is quite large. The law reduces the number of commitments for non payment of fines, and shortens the term of confinement when the fine is not paid. It is estimated that the loss by the reduction of the amount of the fine has been $4S, ,95S; the saving on the board of prisoners $2O, 332 on cost of commitment, $4,000; receipts from dollar fines in cases where the old fine would not be paid, $2,OOO; total estimated loss, $4s, ,95s; total estimated saving, 6,332 total estimated net loss, $22, ,626.
 The increase of drunkenness since the new law went into effect is unprecedented, but it is claimed that the increase in Massachusetts has been less than in most of the other States The Commissioners have inquired of the police authorities of the leading cities of the country, and they find the net number of ar rests in 1880 to be from twenty to fifty per cent. greater than it was in 1879. This in- crease is ascribed to the return of good times,'' which bring added means for dissi- patton.
 It is also conceded that under this law many habitual drunkards have escaped with less punishment than they would receive under the old one. The Commissioners say upon this point and in conclusion:
 This should be remedied so as to secure 1 long sentences of imprisonment for habitual | offenders with certainty. The burden of | proving the individual to be an occasional l and not habitual offender may properly | be thrown upon him. The most certain l means of securing this would probably be to l provide that the punishment for drunkenness shall be that now fixed by law for an habitu- l al offender, with the proviso that the court l may 1mpOSc u 1cSSoE peudlGy II Iuo OueuucT | shall prove to the satisfaction of the court ! that he has not within a certain period been ] previously convicted for a similar offence. If l an addition should be made to the length of | for non-payment of the fine | and costs, and drunkenness should increase, as there is every reason to anticipate, the ca pacity of the prisons will soon be reached | Whether thirty days confinement is better than ten days, either for punishment or ref ormatiDn for this class of offenders, is a mat ter of much doubt. The additional cost for maintenance for the remaining twenty days is quite large item of expense, and for those who labor the loss of earnings to their families is equally worthy of consideration. If law can be so framed as to secure with certainty long sentences, for reformation for habltual drunkards, and moderate fine or brief imprisonment for occasional acts or states of drunkenness, it will accomplish all that it is possible to do for the intemperateA by penal legislation against them.