The Mankato free press., 1922-12-01
BOARD OF PAROLE
WORK PAST YEAR
Sixth Biennial Report This
Minnesota Body
SENT TO GOVERNOR
Survey Deals At Length With
Present System In Operation
In State

The Board of Parole for the
State of Minnesota has just recent
H issued its sixth bienhial report
20 the governor and the state legis
lature. The report deals at length
with the present parole system
tunctioring in this state. The re
port is in the form Of a statement
sf the boards methods and practi-
. ,es in applying the parole system.
The board consists of four ex of
6cio and one member appointed by
The governor. Those members serv-
ing in the ex-ofticio capacity are
the head of the state board of con
troll, as chairman of the board. and
the heads of the three penal in
stitutions in the state, state prison,
state reformatory and the state re
formatory for women.
The parole system was adopted
la Minnesota when the state re
tormatory was adopted in 1889, and
together With it a reformatory plan
Of sentence was adopted. And in
1911 the present form of parole and
the indeterminates sentence law was
enacted applying to the state pri
son also. The law caused much
criticism. according to the report
and is combated only by statistics
which show precisely that opposite
results have been obtained to what
was expected by many. The fol
owing figures are from the records
Of the state prison:
Grand Larceny Second Degree
-
terminate sentence law was enacted
so cases, l year, 4 months. IS days.
Average time served after indie
terminate sentence Law was enact
ed. so cases. 2 years, s months, p
days.
Assault Second Degree
Average time served before indie
terminate sentence law was enact
ed. 50 cases, I year, Z months, 7
daEs.
Ave-ase time served after indie
terminate esntence law was enact
ed. 80 cases, 2 years, months, 8
days.
The above figures cover a period
in which courts did not have the
power 10 Ak maximum sentences
Under the amendment of 1917 they
now have that power. Its effect on
the length of term served is shown
by the following figures covering
the hiennium just closed, and in
cluding all cases for the ofenses
named.
Grand Larceny Second Degree.
Average maximum fixed by the
courts. I year. month 16 days.
Average term actually served un :
der the indeterminate sentence,
years, Z months, 10 DAYS.
Assault Second Degree
.vera~c maximum fixed bv the
conrts. year. 8 months, 20 days.
Average term actually served un-
der the indeterminate sentence,
years. months, days.
These tables show that by actual
experience inmates under decisions
of the parole board serve approx
matcIy twice as long as under deci-
sions made by the courts.
AS might be judged from the
above showing, almost from the
time the new parole system became
effectiye in 15i1. the board of parole
has been under constant fire oil
criticism on the ground that it de-
tains prisoners too long. The files
of the boards correspondence fur
pish an impressive revelation on
this point. In hundreds of instances
private individuals and public offl
cials have insisted that the boards
decisions have been too severe, and
that men who should have been
outside supporting their families, OIL
otherwise performing the duties oil
citizens, were being kept in the in
stitutions for no good purpose what
ever. To all such representations
the board has given careful consld
Grafton. but, of course, has been OBJ.
Uged to use its own judgment and
conscience in administering the
law. 1t is worthy of special notice
that, covering the whole period ol
the parole laws operation, with
over fifteen thousand cases acted
upon, in only three instances has
the board received any special cr1ti-
cism for releasing inmates too early
II the parole system should DC
DESTROYED what would take it's place
Automatically there would be re,
turn to the old plan; but this would
involve such a scrapping of meth
ods which have proved of inestim
able value that the very suggestion
of it ought to be sufficient to con
denim the proposal.
Te past eleven years have wit
messed the building up OF system
the full operation of which few ol
our citizens know. 1t includes vast
Iy more than sending a convict out
of prison when he has been punish
ed enough" The old plan so far as
the prison was concerned contem
plated thrusting a man into prison
for a definite term without hope ol
release, except as the pardon board
might show clemency. There was
no care Of his family, no guardian
ship of his financial interests, nc
consideration of the effects of the
Imprisonment on his growing chill
dren. He was sent out at the ex
njration OF his term with suit oi
Clothes and a pittance of money tt
Iook for job, obliged to acknow
ledge his disgrace or to lie about it
M course, there. was no regard fol
the effect of such handling on the
man himself. He faced a hostile
world. discouraged and condemned
In some respects the hand of so
cisty was against him more heavily
outside the prison than inside. I'm
employment and dependency wers
often the direct steps to furthel
Some parole violators run away
or try to do so. So long as they
remain in the state. they are sough
ont and returned without much diff
fcuIty. When they leave the state
they are follow ed as fvSittves from
jusfice. and, when appiehended
are hr1ioeht back under rec1Iisftiof