I often search for my ancestors in newspaper archives and turn up the same articles over and over, for months on end. Sometimes, though, I find something new and spectacular. I have seen in the past quotes and comments made by my second great-grandfather Jerome E Richards, but this is the first time I was able to read a full paper that he had presented to his peers.
What follows is from the July 22, 1900 issue of the now defunct newspaper The Morning Post (Raleigh, North Carolina), page 15:
GAMES FOR POLICE RELIEF FUND
The report of the seventh annual convention of the chiefs of police of the United States and Canada, held in Cincinnati May 8-11, has just been issued in book form. It contains the texts of the various papers on municipal administration and the suppression of crime read before that body by distinguished police chiefs and detectives throughout the country. Among others is a paper presented by Chief Jerome E. Richards, of the Memphis police force. It was read by Chief Richards immediately folowing [sic] a similar paper by the distinguished detective Wm. Pinkerton of Chicago.
The theme of Chief Richards’ was “Juvenile Offenders”, and the text of his contribution to the convention follows:
“Scientists may wrangle over theories as to the origin of crime, and write learned and profoundly technical papers as to its growth and development. They may speculate as to whether it is on the wane or decrease, and whether or not crime will ever disappear from the human race. The policeman and the peace officer have nothing to do with these elements of the question, further than to carry out the letter and spirit of legislation based upon an intelligent understanding of criminal conditions, and report the results of his observation and experience.
“While I would not deprecate intelligent study and close investigations by policemen into the scientific data relating to crime, I would emphasize upon their mind that we deal with facts more than the excursions of dreamers into the realms of speculation, that our business is with conditions and not with theories. We are confronted by effects. Primarily, it is the duty of law-makers to deal with the causes and to enact laws looking to remedies that are based upon the undisputed results of scientific thought and action. Whatever may be the cause of crime in the human family, whether it was handed down from Eve’s first impulse to disobedience, or whether it is an accident in the heart of the individuals, we know that it is here. It is with us, and in spite of dreams and theories and all the schemes and plans of humanitarians and philanthropists it will not be eradicated in our generation. I fail to see how it can point us very much in our relation with criminals to know whether they are criminals by heredity or by the accident of environment. The tendency toward evil which manifests itself in offenses against the written and unwritten laws of society must be removed from the heart that harbors it before a remedy can be effected. And so all speculations and all legislation is directed to this end at last.
“If the theory of heredity were true to its extremist point it would be useless to establish schools of reform and institutions of that nature to reclaim the youth after the first manifestations of the evil instinct. It would be better for society and more humane to the embryo criminal to strangle it in youth.
“I am convinced that much weight is to be attached to hereditary conditions, but I am just as firm in my conviction that early environment is responsible for more crime than the sins of the parents. However this may be, we are confronted by the fact that offenses against the laws are increasing among the youth of this land. It is more the remedy that the cause which demands our attention.
“I am a believer in reformatory schools, and have been a consistent advocate of these systems, basing my opinion on the efficacy of these institutions upon observation no less than research. I believe in the kindergarten and the theory that we become accustomed to doing good by constant contact with those who practice doing good. There is philosophy in the ancient maxim that the tree is inclined in the direction the twig is bent.
“No child ever improved under the prison lash. Workhouse, penitentiary and rock pile with their associations, breed crime in the heart as a swamp breeds malaria in the physical system. It is the duty of parents to arrest the immoral bent of their children. When they neglect it and the child in consequence commits a crime, they are more guilty than the child. Where the domestic environments are conducive to crime, and no efforts are made to arrest the evil then, the State should provide a remedy.
“Considerations of the very highest nature are demanding the establishment of reformatory institutions for the juvenile offenders, and the continued incarceration of these erring children in dirty prisons for petty offenses will bring reproach upon the age which tolerates it. The economics of government, with equal force, demand a different method of dealing with youthful delinquents. The total cost of maintaining prisons, charitable institutions and houses of correction in the United States is something more than $75,000,000 annually. Upon this basis, the per capita cost to the citizens of the United States would be $1. By dealing more considerately with the juvenile offender, we can not only improve the morals of the country, but we can materially reduce the expenses of the government along the lines indicated.
“The social system of prison treatment known as the Mark system is probably the best method of dealing with the youthful offenders. The system was established in a British colony in Norfolk in 1840, but later was improved upon and modified by Walter Crofton, who provided, first, for a penal stage of separate punishment; second, a reformatory stage, in which the principal of classification and progression comes into play; and third, a testing stage, designed to verify the reformatory power of discipline. Reformatory institutions of this country have conformed to the Crofton system since the establishment of the reformatory at Elmira in 1876.
“Information received through the superintendents of many of the reform schools, and from other sources, indicate that the per capita cost of maintaining a juvenile delinquent in the leading reformatories of the country will range from $10 to $15 per month. The minimum is reported from a majority of these institutions.
“This method of dealing with the youthful offender would prove infinitely cheaper than the present system of annually increasing the cost of criminal prosecution without any resultant benefit to the child.
“Tennessee spends annually about $300,000 in punishing criminals and about $20,000 a year in attempting to reclaim them; and the same proportion is observed in other States.
“If I am not imposing upon you valuable time too much, I would like in this connection to make a statement of a case that I have had to deal with upon three occasions in the last two years. I received numerous complaints from our citizens that their morning papers and their milk pails were being stolen every morning. I had a watch placed, and the result was that five boys whose ages ranged fro [sic] eleven to fourteen years were the offenders. They were arrested and kept in confinement for two days and released with a strong reprimand. Within thirty days I had several complaints that robberies had been committed, and upon investigation it was plain to be seen that it was the work of a novice, and watch was kept upon these same boys, and within a few days they were caught with stolen property upon their persons, but were again released upon the promise of their parents that they would take steps to prevent them from committing any furt
her depredations; but in the course of a few months several residences and storehouses were robbed, and these same boys were finally caught in the act, and they are now in the county jail awaiting their trial. But the question presents itself to the court, what can be done with them after conviction, as there is only one reformatory in the State, and each county has its proportion, and ours is fully taken up; and I see no other course to pursue but to release them, and as they will have no restraining influence to be exercised over them, they will again enter upon criminal operations, as their extreme youth will not permit of them being incarcerated in the workhouse or penitentiary.”
The reading of Chief Richard’s [sic] paper aroused acute interest, and with it was finished Chief Crandall of Duluth, Minn., arose and moved that a vote of thanks be extended. The motion was seconded and carried.
1895 US Indian Roll, Comanche, Numbers 353-9
1896 US Indian Roll, Comanche, Numbers 393-9
1898 US Indian Roll, Comanche, Numbers 393-9
1899 US Indian Roll, Comanche, Numbers 374-9
