are amply illustrated at Bedford. The physical help derived by the inmates, combined with the wise mixture of discipline and sympathy as exercised by Dr. Davis, have been productive of many radical reformations among the young women.

Bedford is our foster child and we feel that its experience and our own among this class of moral delinquents goes far toward the refutation of the theory held by some that there is no help for the fallen woman, that once on her downward career there is no power of persuasion or force that can restrain her. She may reform for a time, they say, but eventually will go back to her old life. We have had in our experience women of the most degraded character who have come into this institution and gone out reformed, who have become useful citizens, leading regular lives, have married well and in some instances become persons of wealth and influence in the communities in which they live. The experience of Bedford is that one-third of its cases are absolutely cured, one-third materially helped, and in the apparently hopeless remaining third there is an occasional desire for reform. Our especial organization "The Women's Prison Association and Isaac T. Hopper Home," is for the benefit of women arrested and re-arrested, who, upon the expiration of their sentence, have no refuge save the streets and their companions in vice. We take them in, make them clean physically, place them under wholesome influences, give them work to do and good food to eat. There is a laundry connected with the establishment, carried on entirely by these outcast women, which turns out the highest grade of work, and many of the city's most distinguished citizens have been its patrons for years. Some of the inmates can sew and these are sent out by the day to those who will employ them. Our Home is always full, but because of limited capacity we can only care for about thirty-five women at a time and can keep them only one month each. There is, therefore, no opportunity for the new habits to become fixed and when released from our care they go back to the streets and almost inevitably fall into their old habits. To remedy this we have for years been trying to persuade the State of New York to enact a bill for the erection of a State Farm for women. This farm

should accommodate a large number of women, the maximum term of commitment to be three years. The inmates should have medical care and treatment, should perform outdoor service, such as gardening, the raising of chickens, etc., and should be taught practical indoor self-supporting work as well. After long years of weary endeavor on our part, the State has finally enacted this bill and Governor Hughes has appointed a commission which is now considering the selection of a site. By this natural method of life at the State Farm, we hope to heal body and soul at the same time.

Secretary Shirer-On behalf of Mr. Leonard, I will read the following resolution:

"Resolved, That the American Prison Association most cordially invites officials charged with the management of prisons in other countries to visit and inspect the prisons, reformatories and other correctional institutions in America for the purpose of helpful criticism, interchange of views, and such discussion of principles and methods as will tend to an early and wise solution of the great social problem of proper treatment of delinquent or criminal members of society."

The purpose of this resolution is to assure visitors from other countries, especially those who will come to the International Prison Congress, that they are welcome to our institutions. In Europe the rules concerning visitors to institutions are very rigid. They do not understand that we have practically open doors to interested persons-in some states to disinterested persons, for an admission fee. I ask that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Resolutions.

By unanimous consent, the resolution was so referred.

Adjourned at 11:45 a. m.

THURSDAY AFTERNOON SESSION.

COMMITTEE ON PRISON DISCIPLINE.

The Congress was called to order by the president at 2:45 p. m., and prayer was offered by Dr. M. A. Bullock, of Lincoln, Nebraska.

The president announced that the session would be devoted to the subject of "Prison Discipline," and that in the absence of the chairman of the committee, Mr. J. A. Leonard, superintendent of the Ohio State Reformatory, would preside. Mr. Leonard took the chair and spoke as follows:

PRISON DISCIPLINE.

J. A. LEONARD, MANSFIELD, OHIO.

It is very embarrassing to talk on prison discipline in the presence of such men as Major R. W. McClaughry, Mr. Albert Garvin, Mr. T. B. Patton and others, at whose feet I sat at the very beginning of my career in prison work, to learn the best things in prison management.

I believe I shall confine what I have to say to that phase of prison discipline that is best known in reformatories where the indeterminate sentence is in force. I know more about it than about any other. I believe, too, that we should give the benefit of our personal, carefully wrought out experiences to this body; otherwise our coming together would be of little profit.

In this matter of prison discipline we have inherited much of tradition and custom. Some of the tradition antedates Christian civilization. To respect all this tradition and custom is to credit our ancestors with a knowledge they did not possess and a wis

dom not theirs; so it is our duty to question these things, question them seriously, proving all things and holding fast those things that are good.

It is a mistake for a man young in prison service to conclude that all that has gone before him is fallacious. If any man makes a single contribution to this great question he will do well and will deserve a place as a public benefactor. We cannot hope to revise methods of prison discipline at once by dietum, but we have eliminated the worst traditions. I think upon the whole our prisons are coming very rapidly to be above harsh criticism, though they are yet subject to just but helpful criticism. I would say to those new in the business not to hesitate, after they have thought carefully and prayerfully, to make a test of a new idea.

I wish to speak on discipline for certain exceptional types in our reformatory prisons. I would first consider the "trusty." There have been trusties ever since there have been prisons. In our own work I had in mind to employ a great many young men, committed to the reformatory, in a trusted capacity-not to make them informers, not to make them a bulwark of safety to the institution, not to pamper them, not to make them envied by the other prisoners, but because the dictum to treat all prisoners alike is fallacious. All prisoners under certain given conditions should be treated alike. The even hand of justice is needed in a prison above any place else. But there are men sent to reformatories who would stay there if there was not a lock on the prison. I think fifty per cent. of the men sent to the Ohio State Reformatory would prove to be self-governing as to the matter of custody. It is to their interest to be so.

In setting aside those who are trusties, we appeal to intelligence and thoughtfulness. What has been the result? We had six hundred acres of land to farm, first as an economic proposition, and second as an agency for training. Originally our farm was a burden upon the institution, because all the farming was done under an armed guard. It was quite a spectacle for men to go along our public highways and see a boy, a convict so-called, plowing corn, with an 840-dollar man following him with a gun. It made expensive corn and was a shock to public sense. What

could we do about this matter? To make the farm profitable economically and valuable industrially, it was necessary to employ in this outside work a large number of men. I believed it possible to find young men who would go out and work faithfully without a great degree of restraint. I wanted to make the test and we put out fifteen men without an armed guard. Three ran away. That was not a comfortable experience. I put out thirty and five ran away. I put out sixty and four ran away. Last year we had on an average 150 men outside, unrestrained by any physical force, and we did not lose a man. What produced this change? A change in human nature? Not at all. We simply gave free play to an idea and the sentiment within the institution underwent a change. Three men out of the 150 tried to get away. Two of them conspired together, one running this way and one that way. The officer was fleet-footed and captured one of them. (By the way, I have come to employ officers because they can run fast rather than because of their ability to shoot straight.) This officer caught one and supposed that the other had gotten away, but when he came up over the hills by the roadside, he found him. He was on the ground; a fellow prisoner was sitting on him and saying to him: "You lie still. We are not knocking you; we are saving you trouble. You know you will be caught. We are doing you good, but that is not why we are holding you. You are knocking the system that the superintendent is trying to start here to give us a fair show, and we will not stand for it.” Public opinion in the institution is what made that possible. How do we bring it about? Public opinion within the institution is largely influenced by our practical school of ethics. This school had discussed at great length this trusty system and had given full support to the idea. Discipline will not do it.

The number trusted is growing larger and larger each year. We select them very carefully. I take a boy out quietly in the evening and have a talk with him. I ask him if he will voluntarily assume that responsibility. If he agrees, I produce a bond, one that has been prepared with some red ink, red ribbon and red seals and burdened with all the meaningless expressions with which our legal brethren have burdened us. At the bottom of it