The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1914-04-09
NO MAXIMUM AND
NO Minimum LAW
An Inmate, Stirred by the Mirrors Edi-
torial on this Important Subject, Gives
His Views Doubts Wisdom Of
Change from Present Law.
PURPOSE OF THE LAW
By Sherlock.

The subject of legal reform in our
present system of penal manage
ment has the same objection that all
reform has, in fact. that any sub
ject has which invades inertia. To
my mind everybody is a reformer.
In the nature of things every man is
taking part in reforming condi-
tions, for the better or for the
worse. But, is this so in this pres
ent instance?
Before answering that question
it is necessary to consider the con-
stitution and the jurisdiction of the
existing Indeterminate Law" of
this state. 1t must also be clear
that if abolition of one system is to
take place, there must, in the pres
ent state of society, be the substi-
tuition of another system. l pro-
pose, therefore, in the first place, to
give short account of the SEN
tence laws as applied in this state
in their relation to crime preven-
ton, and to ask your candid opinion
IT we, as prisoners, or society at
large will, in any great measure, be
benefited by the enactment into the
statutes no maximum or mini
mum law" OF the functions of the
state there is one that is primary in
both time and importance, and this
is the defense of its citizens, and
especially the defense of it's citizens
from crime or internal wrong.
This function is the primary one,
and it would therefore seem that
the state should bring all it's forces
to bear that this function may act
efficiently that it should ID. sy syen igs With With
or functions ~Eathsr than let this
primary one languish.
An Antiquated System.
But is it the case that in Mime
sofa the state deals thus with this
primary function? Does it bring
all it's forces to bear for the suppress
sion of crime? And does it with
draw aid from other functions rath-
er than that this primary one should
languish? | think not! For, l
think we shall find that the sup
preston of crime was allowed to be
carried out on an antiquated sys-
tenn that was but rudely adapted to
the present day, instead of being
carried out according to the best
dictates of modern penal science;
and l think that we shall find,
moreover, that, while millions are
paid for defense from this foreign
foe, very small fraction of this
sum is grudgingly made over to
keep society free from this foe at
their door. Nay, more: in some
cases it is left to private charity
to provide scientific means to ac-
complisb this purpose.
The consequence was that soci-
ETY. was actually carrying out sys-
tenn that the very officials who car
ried it out denounced in no
stinted terms; for has not one of
our foremost police officials said
that Our absurd system for punish.
ing crime will not effect reforma-
tion.' Has not one of our able
judges placed himself on record as
openly declaring that time after
time he has been compelled to pro-
nounce a sentence which he knew
wonld only allow the criminal to
prey upon society"
You. dear readers, may think,
perhaps, that 1 have chosen long
course in proving my failure to note
any advantages to be gained by
abolishing this present system for
the maximum, electra. but you can
not study the construction of
house without first commencing
upon the foundation, and to get
definite. idea of the Indeterminate
law one must. study conditions
which lead to it's Inauguration.
What, then, was this system
which may be thus characterized?
What was the method which was
thus denounced by those who we
might expect to uphold it? l think
it may be roughly set forth as fol-
lows:
| Brought to Trial.
Criminals, after they were arrest
ed by the efficient police force. and
remanded to the prosecuting author
tiles, who settled before which
court to bring them to trial, accord
ing as they thought the crime