In Albany children's cases are heard by the police court, at a separate hour from the cases of adults. The probation system has been in use for nearly two years, the probation officers being the agents of the Mohawk and Hudson River Humane Society, and a rabbi, who acts as volunteer probation officer for Jewish children.

In

The children on probation report weekly at the office of the society and are required to bring a report from the school teacher, from employers if employed, and from the Sunday schools they attend. Each Monday the probation officers report to the court showing what children have failed to report or have otherwise violated the terms of their release. No specified period of probation is indicated when the child is placed on probation. The length of the probation rests practically in the hands of the society. A list of those who are to be discharged from further reporting goes to the judge, but the particulars in regard to the individual cases are not submitted unless he so requests. doubtful cases the child is summoned before the judge before being finally released on probation. From February 10, 1904, to December, 1905, 223 children were placed on probation, 216 boys and 7 girls. Of this number, 158 have been favorably discharged as having complied with the terms of probation: 7 have left town; 16 were rearrested; 10 were committed to institutions, and 32 remained on probation at the end of the period. Probably from 50 to 60 per cent. of these 226 children would have been committed to institutions if there had been no probation system. There is no systematic visitation of the homes of the children. The agents of the society sometimes visit them incidentally.

In Troy the conditions are much the same as in Albany, the same agent of the Mohawk and Hudson River Humane Society serving as probation officer since February, 1905. There are no other probation officers in Troy. From February, 1905. to December, 1905, 102 children were placed on probation. The number committed to institutions is much smaller than the number placed on probation. There is no fixed period of probation. The child is simply placed under the oversight of the probation officer, being directed to report to him, and remains on probation until the court or the probation officer discharges him from probation. He reports on Saturdays at the office of the Humane Society in Troy. They are required to report for periods ranging from two months to nearly a year, the average period being probably about three months. There is no regular system of visitation of the homes of the children. An assistant in the office of the Humane Society visits some of them when requested by the probation officer. A committee of ladies is being formed to visit the children at their homes. About six children who have been placed on probation have subsequently been committed

In the city of Binghamton the superintendent of the Broome County Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children acts as probation officer for all the courts within the county. The period of probation is usually three months. Of 300 cases coming before the courts from September 24, 1903, to December 18, 1905, 285, or 95 per cent., were convicted, 2 were acquitted, and in 13 cases, complaints were withdrawn. Of the 285 cases convicted, 159 were placed on parole, the parole cases being expected, as a rule, to report weekly.

1

In the city of Yonkers a salaried official of a charitable society acted as probation officer. His report for the period from March

1, 1904, to September 1, 1905, shows 19 children placed under his care, who at the end of the period were recorded as follows:

Doing well

Doing fairly well....

Rearrested and committed...

13

4

2

At present two probation officers receiving salaries from private sources have been appointed. The appointment of a salaried probation officer is under consideration.

In the city of Watervliet, in Albany county, just across the Hudson from Troy, the recorder of the city, who has jurisdiction of children's cases, has formally appointed the agent of the Mohawk and Hudson River Humane Society as a probation officer. This appointment was made a few months ago.

VALUE OF PROBATION.

This Commission is thoroughly convinced that the probation system is an exceedingly valuable factor in correctional work. Until its introduction there were but three possibilities in dealing with any person convicted of an offense, no matter what the extenuating circumstances or the record of the offender might be. These were (1) to release the prisoner under suspended sentence, but with no oversight by any person whose business it was to keep informed as to the offender's conduct and report the same to the judge; or (2) to commit the offender to a penal or reformatory institution, with all that this implies of association with more hardened offenders, loss of self-respect, and serious handicap for the future; (3) to impose a fine. The probation system offers a fourth possibility-one free from the objections to which as applied to certain cases, each of the other methods is open. It provides supervision of the conduct, employment and habits of

the person who has been convicted of an offense; it places him under a certain discipline; it qualifies his freedom; it reminds him that violation of the law brings unpleasant consequences; but it does not deprive him of his liberty; it does not set him apart from the community; it does not cause him to be placed in intimate association with large numbers of other offenders, some of whom are sure to be of a more hardened and incorrigible type. Apart from the degree of success which has been achieved in certain courts of this State during the past four years, the probation system has a creditable record for a much longer term elsewhere. In the State of Massachusetts it has been in successful operation for thirty years. It not only appeals to the humane sentiments of the community and affords rational treatment of the various classes of criminals, but has stood the test of three decades of actual use. It can show as its fruit large numbers of persons who have taken a first and sometimes a serious step in a criminal career, and who, by the friendly oversight, counsel and assistance provided by this system, and by its strong and constant appeal to the better judgment, have resisted all temptation to return to a life of crime, and are selfsupporting, self-respecting, useful members of society.,

The probation system has also another and important value to the community in its economy. The cost to the community of maintaining prisons and reformatory institutions is large. The actual saving in dollars and cents by reducing the number of persons committed to penal institutions, to be maintained therein at the expense of the public, is no inconsiderable item. The additional saving involved in the wages of men who would otherwise be unproductive is also large. Not infrequently a family has to be supported by charity while the bread winner

is imprisoned. Under probation he could support his family and the public would be saved his maintenance. This is, to be sure, a strictly incidental benefit. We would never advocate the adoption of the probation system for this reason alone, but in this case, fortunately, the course which is indicated as best for a considerable number of convicted offenders is also the course which is the most considerate of the taxpayer. As an instance, it may be noted that as a result undoubtedly of the probation work for women undertaken in 1905 in Rochester by Mrs. W. W. Armstrong, the number of women committed to the Reformatory at Albion decreased from 21 in 1904 to 11 in 1905. MERITS AND DEFECTS OF THE PROBATION SYSTEM AS AT PRESENT CARRIED ON.

(a) Probation for Adults.

In the magistrates' courts of New York City probation work as at present administered secures less satisfactory and less useful results, in the opinion of this Commission, than in any other courts in which it has been undertaken. The chief deficiencies in probation work in these courts are the following:

1. There is no system of identification of the various offenders brought before the court, and as cases are disposed of summarily there is no opportunity for ascertaining positively in many cases whether a prisoner is a first offender or not. The result is that many confirmed offenders are released upon probation, and it is at least possible, that some of the less hardened type are committed. Particularly in the case of women arrested for soliciting and similar offenses, there appears to be little discrimination on the part of some of the magistrates in the selection of cases for probation. The investigations made by this Com