Illinois is concerned-with the handicap of inadequate appropriation and personnel-sentences imposed by the Parole Board have been much more severe, but not excessively so, than those of juries and trial judges in either state or federal courts. Observation reveals that extreme punishment often produces unsatisfactory results.

VOLUME OF WORK INVOLVED

Investigation, examination, and the consideration of certain information inadmissible in court are essential to justice in fixing time to be served under indeterminate sentences. More thorough investigation, preparation of records, and consideration of individuals as well as of crime should result in more satisfactory terms, when sentences permit, and even in permanent confinement for hopeless criminals, as well as in earlier releases for accidental offenders, especially youths. As a rule, vicious and habitual criminals, who plead guilty to lesser crimes, profit by reduced sentences and conceal their criminal records.

BETTER STATISTICAL INFORMATION NEEDED

Every student of crime knows that lack of information and of uniformity in records makes intelligent interpretation of parole statistics difficult. The statement that 80 to 85 per cent of paroled convicts make good is misleading. No definite record is available except as to the 15 to 20 per cent failures. Formerly, with rare exceptions, discharges from parole were granted after twelve good reports. All contact was then lost, and authorities were ignorant of address, occupation, or personal life of the parolee. Crimes may have been committed in other communities, under aliases, and the facts not discovered or recorded. Similarly, "first offender" records are often valueless, as criminals with no other "convictions of record" are classified as first offenders, despite admissions to the contrary. Accurate statistical information is highly important and there is ample room for improvement in present methods.

STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITIES

In a great majority of serious felony cases, court and jury are. without power to impose definite-time sentence. Upon the Parole Board is placed the statutory responsibility for determining the amount of time to be served by 80 to 85 per cent of persons committed by the criminal courts of one hundred and two counties, one of which alone has a population of nearly four million people. To function efficiently, the Board should have protection and powers equal to those of the courts.

The length of parole restriction is important. No final discharges from parole have been granted since July, 1926, and the Board is now keeping contact with parolees until sentences expire,

with little or no inconveniences to them. The responsibility for reasonable assistance to parolee, and proper supervision of him while on parole, is likewise statutory and desirable from every viewpoint.

At the same time, it is urged that the sooner criminals learn that justice is swift and certain, and that sentences are imposed to be served-less reasonable allowance for good conduct-the better it will be for society; and there will be a decrease in the number of such atrocious crimes as murder, indecent liberties with children, rape or incest, as well as major crimes of robbery and burglary.

This report is the result of two years' intensive and discriminating study. It reveals facts that should arouse the people of Illinois to action and serve as an aid to improvement in government.

It has a special message for public officials, financial and industrial leaders, educators, the general public, and the press.

HINTON G. CLABAUGH

INTRODUCTION

To the Honorable Hinton G. Clabaugh, Chairman of the Parole Board, Chicago, Illinois:

Over year ago at your request President David Kinley of the University of Illinois, President Walter Dill Scott of Northwestern University, and President Max Mason of the University of Chicago appointed a member from each of their faculties to compose a committee to make a study of the operation in Illinois of the indeterminate sentence and of parole. The members of this Committee, consisting of Dean Albert J. Harno of the Law School of the University of Illinois, Judge Andrew A. Bruce of the Law School of Northwestern University, and Ernest W. Burgess of the Department of Sociology of the University of Chicago, held their first meeting with you on January 8, 1927, when the scope and general plan of the study was determined.

At this first conference you made it plain that the Committee was to be absolutely independent in its study, that all records of the Parole Board would be open for its examination, and that no limitation would be placed on the nature and extent of the study. With this understanding the members of the Committee entered into prosecution of the undertaking. It is only proper to state here that the letter and spirit of this agreement have been faithfully kept, and that you have given the Committee your complete cooperation in securing access to the records and in making contacts with the penal and reformatory institutions of the State.

Soon after the organization of the Committee, Mr. John Landesco, an expert in vocational education and an experienced student in criminology, was appointed as field worker, and later. Mr. Clark Tibbits was selected as research assistant upon certain special phases of the subject. At the same time the members of the Committee have been continuously and actively employed upon the study, two members of the Committee having been released by their Universities from certain teaching duties for this purpose.

The Committee addressed its attention to the securing of those facts that would answer two fundamental questions:

1. Should the indeterminate sentence and the parole system be abandoned, or continued?

2. If abandoned, what substitute should be found for it; if continued, what changes, if any, should be made?

In order to answer these questions, the Committee has centered its efforts upon six different inquiries:

1. A survey was made of the history of punishment and parole in

Illinois, with special attention upon the changes in the statutes bearing upon the indeterminate sentence and upon parole.

2. An intensive study of a limited number of parole records was undertaken in order to obtain a grasp upon the policies and action of the Parole Board and upon the actual administrative procedure in the trial and sentence of the criminal by the court, in the examination of the prisoner, and in his treatment by prison officials.

3. A more extensive study of the entire criminal and penal record of 1,000 men paroled from the Illinois State Penitentiary at Joliet, of 1,000 men paroled from the Southern Illinois Penitentiary at Menard, and of 1,000. men paroled from the Illinois State Reformatory at Pontiac was completed in order to discover the factors bearing upon success or failure when placed on parole. The cases from each institution were all consecutive, beginning with December 31, 1924, and going backward until 1,000 had been examined from each institution. Therefore each man had been released on parole from the institution at least two and one-half years and in certain instances four, and even five years at the time the inquiry was made.

4. Each of the five chief penal and reformatory institutions of the State the Illinois State Penitentiary at Joliet, the Southern Illinois Penitentiary at Menard, the Illinois State Reformatory at Pontiac, the St. Charles School for Boys and the State Training School for Girls at Geneva-was visited. Conferences and interviews were held with the superintendents and members of the staff, and a careful examination was made of each institution to find out the conditions affecting the preparation of the inmates for a return to society.

5. A study of probation was next taken up in order to secure comparative information of the policies and practice of granting probation by the court with those of the granting of parole by the Parole Board. A study of the acceptance of pleas of guilty to lesser offenses than the crime committed or charged in the indictment was also made because of its practical effect upon the work of the Parole Board.

6. Finally, a relatively small number of life histories were secured of men who had been discharged from parole in order to obtain their reaction to their experience with the penal and parole system.

While certain aspects of the study could be profitably pursued much farther if the time of inquiry were extended, the Committee is convinced that it has covered the main body of facts essential to determining the values and the limitations of the policy and practice of parole in Illinois and in making recommendations for your consideration and for the consideration of the Governor, the Department of Public Welfare, the Legislature, all the other state, county, and municipal officers charged with the administration of the criminal law, and for the consideration of the people of Illinois.

Accordingly the findings and recommendations of the Committee are presented herewith. They are organized into five main parts, as follows:

I. "The History and Development of the System of Punishment and Parole in Illinois," by Judge Andrew A. Bruce.

II. "The Workings of the Parole Board and Its Relation to the Court," by Dean Albert J. Harno.

III. "Preparing Men for Parole and the Rehabilitation of the Criminal; a Study of the Penal and Correctional Institutions of Illinois and of Parole Supervision," by John Landesco.