Evening star., 1934-11-05

which carry the total cost above
$2,000,000 per annum, but desire TO
emphasize the fact that with our pres
ent prison population we are con-
fronted with large expenditures for
construction and maintenance in ex-
cess Of those now being met, If We
desire to maintain safe institutions
without considering any advance in
education or reform practice.
The truth is that we simply can
not afford to put anything like the
total number of those who violate the
law in Jail for fixed sentences. The
criticism of indeterminate sentences
and parole activities is unquestionably
justified. not because the legislation
is unsound, but because the admin
istration is so superficial as to be a
joke to those sincerely interested in
its application.
Nevertheless. from financial
point OF view the Parole Board has
justified its existence. With only one
active field parole officer. the board
IN the first year Of its existence
granted 3l2 paroles, 234 prisoners
were released, of whom only II were
returned to prison as parole violators.
II the prisoners released who stayed
out Of trouble through the term of
their parole served their entire SEN
tence 1t would have been the equiva-
lent OF the maintenance of one man
for period Of 36l years at the ex-
penSe of the District of Columbia.
Large Saving Estimated.
"The board estimated the saving
at 5000 each, or $4,000 per annum.
in maintenance cost. There is also
to be considered the factor that these
additional prisoners would have ac-
celerated the need for additional
space. The total expenditures which
could be charged against the Board
of Parole. directly or indirectly, were
only $4,000. The board has several
times presented requests for person.
mel which cost approximately $4,000
per annum. 1t may be that the set
up suggested was inadvisable, but
certainly we can afford, again from
purely financial viewpoint, more
than one parole field officer.
1t seems to me that the case in
favor OF the parole and probation
cannot be judged on the record in
the District of Columbia, where the
administration has been notoriously
inadequate. Mr.. Sanford Bates. di-
rector of prisons for the Federal Gov
ernment. in recent analysis of the
results Of probation and parole re-
ferred to the experience in MaSsa-
chuSettS. where the system has been
IN effect for many years and accu-
rate records are available under rea-
Sonable administration. This data is
available for the committee study.
Il suggest that even a superficial
examination is convincin., on the
merits of an adequate parole system.
Other figures of the Division of In
vestigation in Washington show that
for the first three months of 1884 out
of 87,917 persons arrested about ! per
cent was arrested during parole. 22.-
1913 had records which showed preVi-
Gus convictions, but only 1896 of
those arrested had ever been on pa
role. In closing his discussion on
this occasion. Mr.. Bates said:
When we come to this conclusion
we shall recognize parole as an in
tegral and necessary part of any
penal system. We shall discontinue
our criticism of it as method and
concentrate upon the improvement
Of its administration
1T is my suggestion that the Bar
Committee examine carefully the ad-
miniStration of the probation and pa
role laws in the District Of Columbia,
so as TO determine whether or not,
with adequate forces and supervision.
these two modern laws will not tend
to alleviate criminal troubles"