fortune. It deals only with children and those responsible for the faults of children. It realizes that we can not have good men and women unless we start with good children. Because of infancy both the constitution and laws of the State and public sentiment will justify methods of dealing with children which would not be tolerated in dealing with adults. It believes in what statistics show, that the inception of crime is in the waywardness of misdirected children. It would take care of these children in adolescence, when character is plastic and can be molded as clay in the potter's hands. It would help to form character and not postpone the evil day in a bungling attempt to reform it. | All of this is easily said. It is not so easily done. It can be done. It is being done in some cities. It is a strenuous life. It requires men and women of intelligence, tact, skill, and enthusiasm. It is not so much the law as the work. It is not so much the statute as those who administer it. But I do not want to underestimate the importance of the law. Without it we would be fearfully handicapped; and yet without any statutory law, but invoking the principles of the chancery courts for hundreds of years in dealing with the welfare of the children of the State, and with intelligent, earnest effort much can be accomplished in any city in this land to relieve some of the distressing conditions imposed by the criminal law.

It

The original law under which the juvenile court of Denver was established was enacted in the winter of 1899. The statute was very brief, and provided, in substance, that any child under 16, incorrigible or guilty of immoral conduct, could be proceeded against in the county court as a juvenile disorderly person. The county court is the probate court, and has a certain limited jurisdiction in all civil cases. is in no sense, however, a criminal court. Systematic effort was not made to try all children's cases in this court until nearly two years later, when, in January, 1901, a probation system was established. During the winter of 1903 the legislature enacted a more elaborate juvenile-court law. The new law has made practically no change in the working of our system, except to give us much needed relief in the way of paid assistants. A house of detention is provided for. The jail for children under 14 is abolished. To reform a child by starting with putting it in jail is like trying to cure it of illness by first depositing it upon the city garbage dump. An experienced jail official once declared that city jails for children were toboggan slides straight into hell. The juvenile court in Denver has fought the jail system for two years, and succeeded in abolishing it entirely for children as formerly conducted. The detention house will be conducted by a superintendent and matron, who shall be man and wife and competent to keep all the branches of the grammar school. When a child is arrested the juvenile court may order its incarceration in the detention house. It must be kept at its desk during the day, just as in the schoolroom, H. Doc. 701, 58-2- -4

at some useful employment. At night the superintendent must sleep in the same dormitory with the boys, and the matron with the girls. It is only in this way that the hideous vices learned by children in jails and the contaminating influences to which they are subjected can be eliminated. We can not be too careful in dealing with a child needing correction, and the old methods of subjecting it to the brutalizing effects of jail incarcerations will soon be, in my opinion, a relic of the past, classed among other relics of barbarism. We have had very little trouble in obtaining attendance at court by children and parents of children, who formerly were subjected to incarceration, by merely notifying them of the time and place when their presence was required.

The most important addition to our juvenile law is an act declaring that all parents, guardians, or other persons by any act or in any manner causing, encouraging, or contributing to the delinquency of any child, as defined by the statutes of the State, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and punished by a fine not to exceed $1,000 or imprisonment not to exceed one year, or both. Our former act only permitted the punishment of parents by a fine or imprisonment while they were responsible for the habitual truancy of their children. The present act makes not only parents but all other persons responsible either for the truancy or delinquency of the child. The result is we are holding parents to a rigid accountability for the faults of their children. Out of over 100 parents brought into our juvenile court last year for the truancy of their children less than 5 per cent of such children failed to become regular school attendants. The parents were fined and sentence suspended while the law was complied with.

To illustrate how the law may operate to reach those who are really responsible for the faults of children I might instance a case with which you are all familiar. The law declares that any child who purchases liquor or who even enters or visits a saloon shall be deemed a delinquent child. Under our juvenile law we would not only bring in the child as a delinquent, but the father who sent the child to the saloon and the saloon keeper who gave the child the liquor would be prosecuted for contributing to the delinquency of that child. The wholesome effect of the law is already being realized. The evidence in any case against the child for delinquency can not be used in any other proceeding against the child at any time.

The most effective factor of the juvenile court of Denver has been what is known as the "report system." Something over two years ago we established a rule requiring all children found guilty of disorderly conduct to report to the court once every two weeks, with a statement from the teacher detailing the school attendance and conduct of the child. By arrangement with the schools of Denver a per

fect understanding is had between the court and the schools as to the method of making out these reports, so that the court is enabled to tell at a glance the record of the child in school. The truancy or probation officer makes periodical visits to the neighborhood and ascertains, as far as possible, the conduct of the child in the home. In this way we are enabled to keep up with the record of the probationer. There are now an average of 250 boys reporting to the juvenile court at every session thereof on every Saturday morning at 9 o'clock. Boys who are working report Saturday evening with statements from their employers and very often with voluntary accounts of their conduct.

RESULTS OF THE PROBATION SYSTEM.

As a result of the probation system, during the first two years of the juvenile court 554 children, of whom 39 were girls, were found guilty of disorderly conduct and placed on probation, being required to report in the manner stated. These children had committed various offenses, which, if committed by an adult, would have been burglary, larceny, gambling, railroad depredations, forgery, and petty offenses, embracing a number of cases of truancy. There were returned to the court, during the entire period of two years, of these 554 children, for renewed offenses of such à character as to require their commitment to the industrial school, just 31 boys, and a number of these were returned because of the hopeless lack of home surroundings or an environment to aid in their reformation. We therefore have in two years all but 5.5 per cent of 554 children found guilty of mostly serious offenses, giving unusual and unexpected satisfaction under the probation system. It is true that during this period there were committed, at the time of trial without being placed upon probation, about 40 children out of 715 brought before court for delinquency. Yet nearly all of this number were committed because of lack of home conditions and environments, which, in the opinion of the court, would justify their being submitted to the probation system. In other words, such children were both dependent and delinquent. The fact remains, however, that out of 715 children brought into the juvenile court in Denver in two years it became necessary to commit to the State Industrial School only a little more than 10 per cent. We consider this a very gratifying record over the method of dealing with children in the criminal court of Denver in former years, when at least 75 per cent of the children tried were committed to institutions. The saving in expense in proportion to the number of trials and commitments made has exceeded $100,000. This is demonstrated in detail in the first report of the court. The governor of the State in his recent inaugural address declared that in eighteen months the juvenile court of Denver had saved the State and county $88,000.

VOLUNTARY DELINQUENTS.

As a result of the methods of assistance, encouragement, and help, with such firmness as is necessary to enforce proper discipline, over 150 boys have come voluntarily into the juvenile court during the past two years. These boys are what we term "voluntary delinquents." They have been brought to the court principally by other boys who have been proceeded against in court. Many of them have come voluntarily to myself and stated that they desired to be placed upon the probation list because of some bad habits to which they had become addicted and wanted to be assisted to employment, and expressed a desire to correct their evil tendencies. It may be said, however, that the effect of requiring some 200 boys to appear in court once every two weeks gives the court opportunities not otherwise, as a rule, acquired. Once each month we have what is known as a Saturday morning talk, in which some subject or topic of an appropriate character is taken up and discussed. Again, it is my custom very frequently to take boys into my chambers, and through confidential and companionable talks (being very much of a boy myself, understanding and appreciating their troubles and difficulties) get into their lives, find out who their companions are, with the result very frequently that a number of boys, not brought into court at all, are either implicated in their troubles or committing like offenses.

The result of this system has been to encourage boys to assist the court not only in helping them, but in helping other boys who are disposed to evil ways. Let me illustrate the idea with a few cases in point: One evening five boys came to my chambers at the courthouse to see me. I had never seen but one of the boys before. This particular boy was what we might class as a "street boy," in fact, originally a very difficult and dangerous case. He said to me, "Judge, I told dese kids that they was sure to get caught by the cop for swipin' wheels, and we's been talkin' it over, and just concluded that the best thing to do was to come up here and snitch up. I told de kids dey would git a square deal." I soon became acquainted with these boys, although I was amused at first to notice the apparent fear or trepidation, mixed with doubt and misgivings, upon the countenances of the four new ones. They were not yet satisfied that the assurances of their friend were as safe as represented. We were not long in becoming fast friends, however, and those boys, in a free and easy fashion, gave me the history of their pilferings, which disclosed that I had upon my hands a very serious case. The result was a free, easy, and friendly talk which did not involve either preaching, cross words, or threats. I just talked with those boys as though I was one of them, a companion and a friend in trouble, and advising the best way out, and the best way to keep out for all time. Four of those

boys to this day are voluntary probationers. They have never even been charged or tried for any offense, although they had thirteen stolen bicycles to their credit, or rather discredit. I personally investigated at the police station, and found complaints that fitted exactly the number they had admitted. The wheels had been changed and shifted around, and either sold or destroyed.

I remember telling this incident to a police officer, a good man at heart, and he did not exactly agree with me in my method of treating this case. He thought the boys should have been arrested, and an effort made to return the wheels. This was very impracticable under the circumstances. I told him that I thought more of the boys than I did of the wheels; that I believed there was even a greater duty to save those boys than to save the bicycles, notwithstanding I respected the rights of the owners. I haven't a particle of doubt that the result of that incident was to save many citizens' property which would otherwise have been stolen. I have no doubt that but for that incident the police would never in any event have recovered a particle of that property. I therefore justify my treatment of that case. I have been entirely satisfied with the result. For over a year these boys have been reporting to me on an average once every two weeks. It is true I have had occasion to assist some of them to different positions of employment. Yet, during that time I am sure their lives have been entirely free from thefts or other serious improprieties. Had any of these boys shown a disposition to return to their former bad habits, it was thoroughly understood between us that I retained the privilege to have them charged with the offense they had voluntarily confessed.

Oscar C. had been repeatedly arrested by the police before he was ever brought to a juvenile court. He was regarded as a hopeless case, having also served a term at the industrial school. We obtained a position for Oscar, which he promptly lost because of incompetency; but we did not lose him. He was braced up and put to work at another place with much encouragement and urging. He managed to stick satisfactorily, and we were rewarded months later with the highest commendation by his employer. One night Oscar came to see me, apparently to show off his new clothes, the result of his month's wages, and to please me as well as himself, with a good report. He had with him another boy. Of course he was welcomed and inquired about in the most friendly way. I soon learned that Harvey was an old chum of Oscar's. "Judge," said Harvey, "will you help me get a job at the cement works?" Of course I volunteered any assistance in my power, and I suggested, "Harvey, we are just as ready to help a boy here who has not been in trouble as we are one who has been." "Oh," said he, "I might as well be honest. The only difference between Oscar and me is that Oscar got caught and I didn't." The boy disclosed to me that he had committed a number of thefts, and had been deterred