The morning journal-courier., 1908-03-30
JUDICIARY REFORMS
Chaplain Craig, of Wethersfield Prison, Points Out
 Flaws.
LACK OF PROPER UNITY
Where the Superior Court, the Board of Pardons and the Board of
 Parole Crash.

NHdpldlu l. 1. 1Talg or the state prison at Wethersfield, has started a l crusade in legal matters along new lines, seeking to attain a certain uni ilcatfon in our judicial machinery ' as he calls it. The chaplain adds that
 he would like to call it an organism" rather than machine but it's existing structure forbds in his opinion. He calls for harmonious cooperation
 between the superior court of the state, the board of pardons, and the board of parole He says the situa- ton demands champion to lead the way and points out just where and how He complains that the iudici- ary and bar do not get together to exchange ideas
 Chaplain Craig was interviewed yesterday by a representative of the Journal-Courler upon the subject and asked to give his views. He was a lit tie reluctant to speak at first but final ly agreed to make a statement. He said he wished to bring the public eye to viewing certain matters which he thought had never been discussed in the press of the state.
 Take, for example," he said. 'in criminal procedure the superior court. the board of parole and the board of pardon. The first Independently of the others has supreme power to try the cause and, in case of conviction. impose a sentence with maximum and minimum limits.
 he board of parole has supreme power then independently of the court within the limits of that stated sen- tenee- Now, if like two congenial travellers. they all alike and agree in the disposal of a case G.e., the criminaD, the two boards may work the truest welfare of the prisoner. But, if the court brings the limit of the sentence close in the case of the prisoner whom the board of parole later find in their judgment is hope fui subject for parole; and the board of parole finds that, in their judg- ment, the prisoner whose sentence has limits widely enough separated for parole is yet hopeless subject, 1t can hardly be said that the two bodies are harmoniously working parts of one organism of justice, can 1t?
 "A little reflection will enable one to see that the supreme power of the board of pardons within it's sphere is independent of, and may be opposed to, the others. The prisoner remains the living. connecting link. Through him these differences of judgment, whether due to temperaments, data for Judgment, point of view. or meth od of approach do not exalt the ma jesty of law In the eyes of our mixed population in administering impartial justice.
 Now, if those three powers could meet and each demand from the oth- CT reason for his authoritative judg- ment and be required to make his position good to the Judgment of the others, would not the free discus sion develop the basic principles of justice in the treatment of criminals?
 These principles cannot be devel- oped except by exchange of views face to face, by experts and leaders of power in the several departments of justice. The sum of the wisdom of all Is better than the disjointed parts Doubtless the judges and prosecuting attorneys and other attorneys have knowledge that the directors and war den do not have. And the latter may have knowledge from their handling of criminals in punishment that the others cannot have.
 Judges and attorneys almost never follow up, by personal inspection and Inquiry, the work of their own mouths. There is no exchange of ideas and supplying of facts in the system as 1t Is. Dignity hath hedged itself about with exclusiveness. Tn the schools 1t is not so. There are institutes for exchange of ideas for greater efficiency. Teachers are re- quired to attend.
 If something similar could he in- corporated into our judicial system would 1t not be beneficial? Could it not. at least, lessen the inequalities of the present county court decisions in murder cases?
 Compare the sentence of the eigh- teen years old Italian boy on cir cumstantial evidence for execution in Fairfield county with one in Hartford county of jail sentence only, for an American boy who was known to have shot man; and another case. a young American After dispute on the ball field, the latter went to his home. got his razor, overlook his man on the street, jumped on him and cut his throat He got twelve 10 fifteen years for manslaughter. The Italian boy. of whom the prosecuting attor- ney said that in his judgment and that of the judge the ends of justice would have been served by verdict of mur- der in the second degree. which they would have had. if the boy would only plead guilty. and who was docile. gentle and obedient, must die, pun ished for the crime. second degree, Add to this, punishment for his plea and it becomes first degree If he is innocent why should he die?
 Are these glaring differences like ly to foster respect for Connecticut law in the minds of immigrant or Yankee? Isn't there possible some or legislative coordination of these powers into an organism working harmoniously, and supple mentary in their effects. on the basic principles of righteousness?
 Some one needs to champion and lead the way if it is worth while"