Kansas City journal. [volume] (Kansas City, Mo.) 1897-1928, 1899-01-14
AS TO PRISON REFoRM.

The governor of Kansas has recon-
the state board of pardons. while before
the legislature of Missouri a bill has just
been introduced for the purpose of creating
such a board. Governor Stanley very cor
rectly diagnoses the true status of the
case When he says: Whatever may have
been the object of the creation of the board
of pardops, it no longer serves a useful
purpose, for through this board the grant
ing of pardons has degenerated into an
abuse. Nevertheless it is altogether de-
sirabIe that Kansas and every other state
should have some form Of separate author
fly to deal with the question of prison
management and reform, and because the
Kansas law has shown fits futility is no
reason why some other and similar law
might not prove effective"
The trouble with the Kansas law is that
It invites the board OF pardons to go into
the evidence on which criminals have been
convicted by courts and juries-to reopen
the case and nave a new trial, as it were.
1t is the easiest thing in the world to make
out an ex-parte case very favorable to any
criminal. His friends interest themselves
in getting a good showing before the board
of pardons. whereas the people. who stand
in the relation of prosecutor, seldom ap-
near to contest the evidence which the
criminal may bring to bear. Under such
circumstances it is not surprising that fla
grant abuses have grown up under the
Kansas system. We have in mind hun-
dreds OF reports la by the Kansas boards
in which the governor was gravely assured
that the evidence on which the criminal
was convicted was not worthy OF belief
thus assuming TO pass upon the credibility
of witnesses without ever having seen
them. and in the face of the fact that this
credibility had been duly determined by a
presiding judge.
The theory on which this Kansas board
has operated is all wrong. 1t should have
been charged. not with the duty OF review
ing the work of the courts and passing
upon the guilt or innocence OF the accused,
but with the duty of investigating the
criminals antecedents, his conduct under
sentence. the gepuineness of his alleged re-
form, and of determining whether or no,
society would be endangered if he should
be given his liberty. OF course the per.
formance of these duties must be anticl-
pated by u change in the Kansas laws
The state must adopt some system Of
parole such as has been adopted in the
states most advanced in methods of solv,
ang the prison problem, and 1t is compli,
mentary 10 the heart and wisdom of the
Kansas governor that he has sanctioned
such a change.
Those who have taken the pains TO in
form themselves as 10 the practical work
ings of the parole system in such state:
as New York and Illinois are forced t.
the conviction that it serves the double
purpose of protecting society and reform
ing criminals. The man who is liberated
under parole is pledged to go to a certain
place and conduct himself according to &
certain standard. II he violates any of tn.
conditions he is taken back 10 prison x
serve his sentence. He is forced by tn,
very nature of things to start his life g
liberty amidst good surroundings and in
respectable way. 1t is the report of TIL
superintendent of the Elmira prison tina