The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-09-26
Soluing the
Problem of
the Bad Boy
Commissioner Wallstcin Re-
mort, on Juvenile Dclin-
uucnc, in New York.

nlS~4'ilfl w W
x.tc an Investigation of the subject (
~, h%Iycnilc delinquency in New York
" tho hnpr that something might he
f,ne ~ prevent boys from becoming
,ubrrlkrrs In place uf trying to re-
trm them after they had become
.,mir1'S \ few days ago Commits
,oper ~ Accounts Wallstcin COM
.,o,ed his Investigation and trans
sired his report To the Mayor. In It
~. calls attention to the fact that
here Is no provision whatever. at
,,e.en, for taking boys brought be-
,ro the Chi,d.cn's Court and remand
nc them for observation. temporarily
,snar,ting them from associations
,h,, have brought them into trouble
ard giving them "A brief period uf dis
,nlinc under rustndial care instead of
..i,. pcing them To reformatory in
i'iyCoas.
- magnitude Of the problem Is
,t.,-n ly tine fact that the Children's
cru's each year handle more than
'.O.i cases. of which ~ per cent. are
h,t, and that each year nearly 5000
h-,. are arrligned on charges of
MO- e. delinquency. More than one
~. Il .icsc boys. or some 1000. are first
,rcniers. Comm.ssiunC. Wallste!n
saws. and their appearance in the
rh'drca.s Court Is often due to con-
6,l5ns Tor which they are not rcspon-
side.
The first object ~ the court" he
continues. is properly To preserve the
Nome lie If the hoy. correcting condi-
lions t,crr Il possible. institutional
..-n4nl 49, a. .AF Y.sAK Il,
re work Of reformation. But in nu-
nervous instances the Justice is con-
y!nrcd that a hoy cannot nc effectively
df,l; with by Immediately returning
him 10 his home. even under .he SUI
perv.sion Of Il probation officer; yet
such hpy> do not merit "A long term
~ some institution
For these and other reasons Mr..
Walls,c!n recommends hat for boys
who ar. found guilty uf minor Of
fences ar f,r other causes mentioned
4 place slll, ne provided to which they
,,n No sent for a short period of de-
,ent.un instead of having them sem
fenced a. at present Cor a long period.
And he suggests that the Brooklyn
T-uant school he used for this pur-
puse.
In the course of his investigation VI
juvenile delinquency the Commissioner
discovered "A very wide difference OF
opinion as to his proposed plan. on
the one hand II was heartily approved
by the Justices of the Children's Courts
as well as by many others working in
dependcntly of institutional life for the
Nefare Of children. Yet a strong OPP
position developed from managers Of
Institutions to which children are SEN
fenced. For example, Mortimer L..
SNhif. president of the Jewish Pro-
tectory. does not believe in short term
commitments. as they seem to him to
he contrary to the proper theory Of
dealing with juvenile delinquents.
This opinion Is shared by Franklin
" Briggs, superintendent of the New
York state Training School for Boys.
who explains his views thus: A cX-
pcriencc If twenty-five years in deal
ing with delinquent boys has con
WINGED me beyond the shadow of a
donh' that a short term commitment is
the worst possible thing hat can hap
pen To a boy" And Mornay Williams.
for more than twenty years a director
and for thirteen years president Of the
juvenile Asylum, says that he Is
i'taily opposed 10 short term COM
mitmentS for children who are in
need Of rcformatory training.
An individual idea is expressed by
My'es Tierney, president Of the New
1ork catholic Protcctory, who after
considering the whole question sug-
cestS that the city at its own expense
erect a building conveniently located
Tor the housing of those who are COM
mi,'ed.
Hastings r. Hart. director Of the
apartment Of child training of the
Russell Sage Foundation. is another
VINO believes that a plan Of short term
commitment 10 any of the institutions
when are available in New York is
undesirable. Yet in direct contradic-
ton to the views of these and other
managers Of refOrmatory institutions
me establishment Of a detention home
ana clearing house is urged as an i'm
rN''tlVe necessity by the Justices of
We 'hlIdren's Courts. by volunteer
WORKERS, by probation officers and by
various social welfare agencies. The
position taken by the Children's Court
~ iAlN matter is explained thus by
lrahk.n Chase Huyt. the presiding
Justice:
There Is no question in my mind
" me absolute and imperative neces-
N.E "t establishing some kind
" institution for the reception
A" children on remands of from
"" 1" four months or longer.
personally | dislike the words
'hort COMMITMENTS as they recall
zoo VIvidly the old practice, now for
.nHdt''y discarded, of sending a child
10 a ret"rmatory institution for thirty
:" ninety days, with an absolute re-
.eaS' AT the end Of such time. There
u no connection between that Justly
o'S'!rl" method OF punitive treatment
ana the existing necessity of remand-
"g a child pending the determination
o' his case.
Inc essential need at present Is to
nave some place where a child can be
cent Tor a short period of time, which
Will not bee a reformatory sentence of
'"' wears or more, but which will act
as an effective measure of discipline
'f mo time being.
'S"S arise daily In the Children's
court where such treatment Is neces-
cry \ delinquent child whose en-
m"rt is evil may have to he re-
,N'hded until hat environment can
b ohluptd
Ihcl again children on probation