New Britain herald., 1930-02-03

1 overcome the pressure 10 place in competent men on the payroll. As q rule, there is no such sentry standing guard over public bust ness 10 prevent the entrance of um- trained, ill-adapted and unfit en- ployccs."
 In any attempt 10 lay down some principles Dy which the job analysis of jail wardens and guards can sci cntifically be made. the committee finds that one of the difficulties is a confused an conflicting theory as to just what the purpose of sending i a man to prison is. A considerable portion of the report is taken up in an effort to clear some of these hay ideas on the part of the public and even Of those who have the power to select prison officials. In gcn- cral, the committee finds that there is widespread effort to make i'm prisonment reformativc, instead of merely punitive in character and that our prison employees having been brought up under the punitive theory only are 10 great extent to- tally unfitted for the work needed by this new concept
 sum Cp Difficulties
 The difficulties in the way Of building up staffs adequate to cope with the existing situation found in the varous penal institutions and in tGo roroNofin, onI thus summed up:
 Tn the first place, the public has not vet been aroused to the le- ceSsity of doing it. While advanced thinkers have succeeded in passing. laws of the most scientific and hu- manitarian type, they have not car ried the general public along with them.
 "Secondly, we Americans suffer from the dcluslon that laws enforce themselves. No law should ever be passed unless all the administrative implications arc taken into account. Regardless of the evil that exists or the new vistas of human welfare that can be seen, the existing COL dtions of public administrative ser vice should, 10 q large extent. deter mine the advisdbIlitN Of cnacting the law. Law enforcement is somethin,; more than q task of forcing people to obey laws. Underlying it, is the assumption that a very large pro portion of the people want and un- derstand the law and are willing 10 spend their time and money to mako it a living force in the community. The legal setting of our penal ad- ministration is much of it a mere gesture in favor of a new anu wholly vague form Of punishment. Our fine system Of penal discipline, as has been aaid before, IS largely a paper system.
 The third reason why we have not built up, and possibly may not be able to build up, an adequate pe" scnnel in penal administration IS that there is as yet no force in pub lie life sufficient to counteract the terrific pressure Of the 'spoilS sys- tom.' Power is based on votes and votes depend not so much on what people think as on the way they arc handled. How are those to be paid " ho do the handling of poli- ties? Our leisure class have no de- sire to do this work and we have allowed services incident to vote control to be paid with the gift Of public office. Where our own inter csts are not threatened, we make no vigorous protest against this sys- tenn. Contrast penal administration with school administration. Here we have vital interest at stake of which we are acutely conscious through our children. We know th1t they will not receive proper training l. the main qualifications of teach CTS is that of ability to round uD votes. Each day Of the school year this is brought home to us. Such 1s not the case With respect to penal treatment. Our contact with prisons. with the probation and the parole services is slight. Generally, it is those who are without the power 10 influence public opinion who feel the baneful effect of the spells sy:3- tem. Consequently, only in the re-