considerable use, both before and since the enactment of the Probation Law of 1901, of suspended sentence, and, in effect, of the probation system. A county official, under the title of county detective, has, in effect, been assigned to probation work for the past nine years.

During these nine years, ending December 31, 1904, 1,184 cases were released on suspended sentence under his care. He visits them at least once a month in their homes for a period of six months, and thereafter less frequently. He does not consider that having the prisoners call upon him is of any value. He helps the prisoners find employment, secures clothing for them, and advises and counsels them. They are considered to be formally under his oversight for the maximum term for which they might have been committed, but he aims to maintain friendly relations indefinitely. A year is the minimum period at which he thinks it possible to form judgment of the results of probation, and he does not consider it safe to form a final judgment within three or four years.

Of the 1,184 prisoners placed under his care during these nine years, 191 were rearrested and sentenced. In 107 cases, what are termed "extraordinary results" were secured, meaning by extraordinary results, that the probationers had done exceedingly well in every particular for a period of several years. Satisfactory results" have been secured in 532 cases; i. e., the offenders have not been rearrested and have done as well as they could." On December 31, 1904, 354 persons remained under observation, of whom 21 have subsequently been rearrested and sentenced.

In the County Court in Rochester, presided over by Hon. Arthur E. Sutherland, the probation system has been developed to a

considerable degree. Mr. Alfred J. Masters, whose title is parole officer of the County Court, but who receives a salary as a court attendant, has in effect been a county probation officer. From May 16, 1901, to August, 1905, 143 persons were released under his probationary oversight. These persons were accounted for on August 19, 1905, as follows:

Still under observation and doing well...

Died...

Left the city..

No recent record...

Rearrested and committed..

60

2

25

19

37

More recently a member of this Commission, Mrs. W. W. Armstrong, has acted as a volunteer probation officer for a consider able number of female offenders.

In Broome county probation work has received considerable attention, primarily through the efforts of Mr. H. Clay Preston, then superintendent of the Broome County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, and now superintendent of the similar society in Brooklyn. Since January 1, 1902, 47 persons have been placed on probation. The court does not limit the period of probation except in rare instances, contemplating continued oversight until the end of the maximum term for which the defendant might have been imprisoned. The superintendent of the Broome County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children acts as a probation officer for adults as well as for juvenile offenders. Probationers are required to report every three months. Of 47 cases placed on probation, in only two cases has the suspension been revoked and the offenders committed.

So far as this Commission has been able to ascertain, no considerable amount of probation work for adults has been carried on, other than as above described, although the counties of St. Lawrence, Wayne, Oswego and Westchester have. appointed probation officers. Sheriff Caldwell, of St. Lawrence county, voluntarily accepted the appointment of probation officer, and his devotion to this work and personal interest in the cases submitted to him have produced excellent results. In Wayne county a deputy sheriff is the probation officer. In Oswego county a private citizen is the probation officer. In Westchester county a number of volunteers have been appointed, as well as the sheriff of the county; and the chiefs of police of Yonkers, Port Chester and Tarrytown. The cities of Rensselaer, Ogdensburg, Hornellsville, Hudson, Newburgh, Middletown, Poughkeepsie, Mount Vernon, Cohoes and Geneva have also appointed probation officers. The appointees, as a rule, are chiefs of police. In most cases they are appointed both for adults and for children. Many of these appointments have been made very recently.

The reports required, under the provisions of the probation law of 1901, to be made to the Secretary of State, are incomplete. They indicate, however, that, the practice of releasing under suspended sentence obtains, to a considerable extent, in all parts of the State. The figures for the year 1904 indicate that 860 persons were released under suspended sentence in These figures would be vastly increased

courts of record alone.
if the returns included reports from the lower courts.

There are no doubt individual instances in which the court requests some person of discretion to "take an interest in " an offender released under suspended sentence, but, as a rule, they are without subsequent oversight, and the court is without

information as to their subsequent conduct except such as may be gained accidentally or by reason of the reappearance in court of the offender.. It is believed that the number of persons released under suspended sentence would be considerably greater if the services of probation officers were at the disposal of all the courts.

(b) Probation for Children.

In the boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx practically all children's cases are heard in the Children's Court, established in 1902, as a part of the Court of Special Sessions, and presided over by a justice of that court. The court is held in the building at the corner of Third avenue and Eleventh street, apart from all other courts. In the same building is the Bureau of Dependent Children, maintained by the Department of Public Charities, which passes upon the applications for the admission of destitute children to institutions as public charges. The Court of Special Sessions consists of six justices, the children's part being presided over by one or the other of these justices, not necessarily in rotation but as assigned by the board of justices. The justice whose experience in the Children's Court antedates that of the other members of the court, Justice Olmsted, states that there is no "probation" work in the Children's Court, i. e., no placing on probation, under the provisions of the law of 1901, as amended. Many children are, however, released "on parole and under oversight. The secretary and superintendent of the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, Mr. E. Fellows Jenkins, has been appointed chief probation officer. He is assisted by the salaried agents of that society, and also by a number of volunteers. A group of Catholic

ladies, who attend the Children's Court in succession, assist as volunteer aids in the case of Catholic children. Mrs. Sophia Axeman (who is also a probation officer for adult offenders, in the Court of Special Sessions), with one or two volunteer aids, assists in the case of Jewish children. As to the Protestant children, the numbers are few and there appears to be no organized volunteer aid, though an Episcopal clergyman stands ready to assist if called upon.

According to the testimony of Justice Olmsted, when the child is released on parole he is under no probationary or other oversight. His testimony on this point reads as follows:

A. I think I stated it very briefly when I stated we had no probation officer and only this parole system which we have described.

Q. How many parole officers have you appointed? A. None. Q. None? A. No, I would not; it requires six justices to act. The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children acts in the matter of investigation and reporting.

Q. That is preceding the decision as to whether you will commit, or is it subsequent to that? A. Both before and after.

Q. If a child is convicted of some minor offense and is released on parole for a period of one month under whose surveillance is he during that month? A. Nobody's; that is one of the things I think is necessary. You do not want anybody holding up that child; otherwise, when that uplifting influence is gone, down goes the child. I believe the reforming process must be in the child itself. If you are to save a child, you must teach that child to do something for itself. If you have somebody with the child all the time, the child is afraid to do wrong owing to the deterrent influence. When that influence is taken away, they are likely to go wrong, but if you rely on the child it will bring out elements of character to hold it up.

"Q. Then it is the society that exercises this oversight during the months of parole? A. They do not exercise any oversight. They get the report, perhaps a week before the time is up.