Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 19.pdf/708

 The

Green

Bag

Published Monthly at $4.00 per Annum. Single Numbers 50 Cents. Communications in regard to the contents of the Magazine should be addressed to the Editor, S. R. Wrightington, 31 State Street, Boston, Mass. The Editor will be glad to receive contributions of articles of moderate length upon subjects of interest to the profession; also an/thing in the way of legal antiquities, facetice, and anecdotes. THE MEASURE OF PUNISHMENT. One of the most striking articles in recent periodical literature is a contribution by Roland B. Molineux, twice tried for murder, entitled " The Court of Rehabilitation," in Charities and the Commons for September 28th. The author in impressive phrase re cites the customary criticisms of modern criminal punishment, which he summarizes as follows: " Vengeance, entirely, and example, largely have been abandoned as motives for imprisonment. The more modern attempt to make it protective of society is a failure. The present indeterminate sentence is farcial be cause it is indeterminate in name only and even aside from the failure of all punishment as such it is wrong because it is humanly im possible to determine what is just punish ment." " In truth " the author says " it is as impossible to punish crime as to reward harmony. Crime is intangible as is sunlight or fragrance. We attempt to punish an abstract quality whereas only the individuality of the prisoner should be considered." The author believes that present prison methods tend to confirm evil habits, and that the work of reformers and prison visitors is wholly mis directed. The information that they get from prisoners is almost always colored by the hope of obtaining favors. The author insists that the only question that the courts of law should determine is guilt or innocence, that the universal sentence should be banishment, by which the author means imprisonment, that while in prison all efforts should be di rected to education and development of the prisoner; that is, release should be possible only upon the decision of a court to which he must apply and in which he has the burden of proof of showing that he has made himself fit to live again among his fellow men. This he must prove not merely by the ordinary " good conduct " of the prisoner but by definite ac complishments, by the way in which he has availed himself of opportunities, for assistance

to other prisoners, evidence of thrift and capacity to be self-supporting, proof that he has made all possible restitution. Upon release then he would be certain of an opportunity to start again free from the old temptations and he would have every reason to avoid re turn to prison even for minor offences because he would realize that it would be almost im possible to convince the court a second time of his fitness to return to society. The author waves aside the problem of possible release of the hardened criminal by asserting that he would soon again be incarcerated and unable to secure a second rehabilitation. He believes that the court would rarely release a murderer who had plotted and calculated to kill, but would show more liberality in cases of great provo cation. The author ignores, however, the most serious objection to any system of this sort, namely, the danger of outside influence in inducing release, especially in cases of crimi nals of wealth and social position. We have not heard, however, that our present so-called indeterminate sentences have resulted in an abuse of this nature and perhaps the author is justified in assuming that the court of which he conceives would be of as high a standing as our present criminal courts and as free from undue influence. Certainly it is conceivable that it might be more free from improper pres sure than is the present pardoning power. THE CONVENTION OF PUBLIC PROSECUTORS In St. Louis on September 30th and October 1 st attorneys general from various ' states of the Union gathered at the invitation of Attorney General Hadley of Missouri, to con sider plans for uniform action by state prose cuting officers, especially in their relations to the federal executive and judicial depart ments. Several papers were read, that by Attorney General Edward T. Young of Minne sota on '* The Conflict Between State and Federal Courts " precipitating most discussion. Twenty delegates representing the legal depart