The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1909-11-06

cy mas reduced the arrests from
 drunkenness alone from 49.73s in
 1905. 1906 and 1907, an average of
 over 16,500 year to 3.592 for 190S) Exclusive Service the Survey Press
 Bureau)
 On various occasions since the incep- ton Of our common sense or so-called "Golden Rule Policy in the Police Department of the City of Cleveland on January 1st, 1908. I have been ask ed by various interests just what our policy Is and what 1t does for the people of this community. The real Intent of the law is not to punish or disgrace. but to prevent violations. Therefore. 1t aims not to place anyone behind prison bars until 1t is shown that the person to be arrested is the person who really violated the law and that the police have sufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt-to satis- fy any competent judge that the per- son under arrest has violated the law. It affords persons an opportunity to explain before being put behind pri- son bars as we'll as afterwards Ac- cording to our plan we do not make arrests where they would do more harm than good It makes the police man the first judge, and it is upon his testimony and judgment that the final judge must come to a conclusion as to what penalty to impose, there
 
 to the guilt and who dares say that a policeman should not use discretion?
 This golden rule policy adds char acter to the force and gets away from the old idea, that the police are brutes. and simply persecute people. It is a newer and better justice It never cat CTS to crime or criminals It encour- ages and never discourages men, The police force is for the prevention of crime. the capturing of criminals and those who make their living by crim- inal means and practices and for the aid and convenience of the public. Not for the purpose of causing the weak. the thoughtless and pnwise and. their innocent relatives to suffer and be dis graced.
 Through the golden rule" plan, we have reduced the arrests for intoxica- ton alone, from 49.T3s during the years 1s05.1906 and 1907. under the old and general custom of making arrests, Gan average of over 16.5OO Der year. and the arrests were growing larger in each yeaT to 3.592 for 1908 and still lower in 1909. the total for nine months up to October 1st being but 7S7.
 Through years of study and obser- vations We were thoroughly familiar with the fact that the evil of indis- criminate methods of making wholesale arrests in first and minor violations, as in cases of intoxication. not only greatly enhanced the possibility of "a large number of fsecond offenders" but proved -conclusively, that their ar rest and arraignment had accomplish ed positive harm The innocent wives, children, mothers. fathers brothers sisters and relatives were the sufferers and very often they were deprived of even the necessary food to sustain thm after the loss of time from work, lawyers and witnesses fees, profes-' sional bondsmen. besides the various ways of pretending. blackmailing pol iticians in levying upon the oppressed. through their willingness to sell influ- ence which they do not command. This practice we have done away with and dive-keepers, grafters, gamblers har- lots. and suspicious persons have re- ceived our undivided attention, with the result that the strict police sur veillance we have been able to main tain toward this class. has made it almost impossible for them to operate in Cleveland.
 With the reduction of arrests of mil nor or first offenders, we have also in- creased the arrests of real criminals and those who make their living by criminal means and practices. until now we have less actual crime com mitted in this city than for a great many years previous to the adoption of our policy. Our total arrests have been reduced from 23.4s4 and 23.102 for the first nine months of the years 1906 and 1907 respectively. to S.1Ss for the same period in 1908 and 4.363 for the sa emtinne in 1909
 Can you imagine the great number Of persons who have thus. been saved from disgrace and stigma of prison contamination? Can you even think that this policy has not produced grat- flying results with the assistance that the police has shown petty offenders. or can any one imagine any harm done in the application of this policy? Which would produce the best results, placing a man in prison for some min or violation and publicly disgracing him forever by arraigning in police court, even though he be discharged by the magistrate. (which statistics show, is the case in over sixty per cent of all minor arrests throughout America), or applying the common sense policy at the station. and there show him the error of his ways. with out public disgrace and without ar rest?
 Who could it possibly benefit if we should take money in the way of a fine from a poor unfortunate. who has some minor law or ordinance, with no intent to inture the property or person of another? What fair minded person objects to paying his just tax when every aim of the law points toward the reformation of these poor unfortunates instead of their pun ishment? I think there is no qualifi- cation that policeman can enjoy higher than that of sympathetic un- of the people. whom he is from time to time, called upon to in struct, assist or restrain This adds greatly to the honorable pride and self respect of the policeman. by giving him a rightful judicial discretion in making arrests because every police man is in a certain sense a judge. and should and must have enough judg- ment to know when to arrest and when not