Crime and Punishment in American History - Lawrence M. Friedman [318]
47 Laws Pa. 1883, chap. 110, sec. 2.
48 See, in general, Twentieth Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor, Convict Labor (1905).
49 Gildemeister, Prison Labor, pp. 168—75.
50 Zebulon Brockway, Fifty Years of Prison Service: An Autobiography 11912; reprinted., 1969), p. 166.
51 Samuel Walker, Popular Justice, pp. 94—95.
52 The law was passed March 19, 1872. Laws Ill., 1871—72, p. 294.
53 E. C. Wines, “The Present Outlook of Prison Discipline in the United States,” in Wines, ed., Transactions of the National Congress on Penitentiary and Reformatory Discipline, Held at Cincinnati, Ohio, October 12—18, 1870 (1871), pp. 15, 19.
54 “The Indeterminate Sentence” by “A Prisoner,” Atlantic Monthly, 108:330 (911).
55 Frederick H. Wines, Punishment and Reformation: A Study of the Penitentiary System (rev. ed., 1910), p. 221.
56 Richard L. Dugdale, “The Jukes;” A Study in Crime, Pauperism, Disease and Heredity (6th ed., 1900), pp. 114-15.
57 Laws N.Y. 1877, chap. 173, p. 186.
58 Laws Ill. 1899, p. 142.
59 Laws N.Y. 1901, Vol. 2, chap. 428, pp. 115—16.
60 Laws Ohio 1885, pp. 236—37 (May 4, 1885). This law also established a parole system; the “habitual criminal” was eligible for parole after serving the regular term of imprisonment.
61 Rev. Stat. N.Y. 1881, Vol. 3, pp. 2536—37.
62 See, for example, State v. Moore, 121 Mo. 514, 26 S.W. 548 (1894).
63 On parole, see Samuel Walker, Popular Justice (1980), pp. 92—98.
64 Laws Ohio 1885, p. 236 (May 4, 1885/.
65 See Sheldon L. Messinger et al., “The Foundations of Parole in California,” Law and Society Review 19:69 (1985).
66 Quoted in “Operation and Effect of the Ohio Parole Law,” a paper read by Warden E. C. Coffin of Ohio, printed in Proceedings of the Annual Congress of the National Prison Ass’n. (held in Austin, Texas, December 1897) (1898), pp. 164—66.
67 William F. Kuntz II, Criminal Sentencing in Three Nineteenth-Century Cities (1988), p. 150.
68 Kuntz, Criminal Sentencing, p. 151 (quoting Gershom Powers, agent and keeper of Auburn Prison).
69 Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law (2d ed., 1985), p. 596.
70 The Massachusetts laws are Laws Mass. 1878, chap. 198, p. 146; Laws Mass. 1891, chap. 356, p. 920. The California law is Cal. Penal Code, sees. 1203, 1215, Laws Cal. 1903, chap. 34, pp. 34—35.
71 Joel P. Bishop, Commentaries on the Criminal Law, Vol. 1 (2d ed., 1858), pp. 323—24.
72 Margaret W. Cahalan, Historical Corrections Statistics in the United States, 1850—1984 (1986), p. 113, table 5.7.
73 Cited in Robert H. Bremner, ed., Children and Youth in America: A Documentary History, Vol. 2, 1866—1932 (1971), p. 444.
74 James L. Hunt, “Law and Society in a New South Community: Durham County, North Carolina, 1898—1899,” North Carolina Historical Review 67:427, 449 (1991).
75 Laws N.Y. 1824, chap. 126 (act of March 29, 1824), see Steven L. Schlossman, Love and the American Delinquent: The Theory and Practice of “Progressive” Juvenile Justice, 1825—1920 (1977), pp. 22—32.
76 Robert M. Mennel, Thorns and Thistles: Juvenile Delinquents in the United States, 1825—1940 (1973), p. 12. Mennel is the source of much of the following text. For a firsthand account of the New York House of Refuge, through rather rose-colored glasses, see Bradford Kinney Peirce, A Half Century with Juvenile Delinquents (1869; reprint ed., 1969).
77 Gustave de Beaumont and Alexis de Tocqueville, On the Penitentiary System in the United States and Its Application in France (1833; reprint ed., 1964), pp. 139—40. The two Frenchmen felt that the alternatives were worse. In an actual prison, young people would be thrown together with men “whom age has hardened in crime.” Left alone, on the outside, their “impunity” would encourage them to “give themselves up to new disorders.” (Ibid., p. 138.)
78 Hapgood, Autobiography of a Thief, pp. 71—72.
79 Laws Mass. 1847, chap. 165, p. 405.
80 Laws Mass. 1855, chap. 442, p. 837.
81 Laws N.Y. 1875, chap. 464, p. 531. In the same year, New