NEW YORK (STATE) PROBATION PROBATION IN NEW YORK STA 1907-1921 BART RTECS TAT OMMISSION. Goruell Law School Library PROBATION IN Cornell University Library NT 3 1924 022 784 650 | law A Review of the Development and the use ot Probation from October 1, 1907 to September 30, 1921 BY THE NEW YORK (STATE /PROBATION COMMISSION PUBLISHED BY THE STATE PROBATION COMMISSION ALBANY, N. Y. “We know of no more marked step forward in the administration of criminal jurisprudence than the probation system.” Page Commission on Inquiry into Inferior Courts of Criminal Jurisdiction— 1910. KEN 6190 AIT J. B. LYON COMPANY, PRINTERS, ALBANY, N. Y. PROBATION IN NEW YORK STATE Tut CrimME WAVE AND PROBATION Public interest and indignation has been aroused during the past two years in the problem of crime and the treatment of offenders through the widespread and unusual publicity given to a number of serious crimes of violence. Dramatic stories of hold- ups and spectacular tales of sordid crimes of violence have appeared almost daily in the press until the general public is apt to be convinced that criminal jurisprudence has broken down, and that there exists in the United States a serious crime wave. Widely divergent opinions but no adequate or convincing sta- tistics have been given for the supposedly large increase in crime. It has been charged to the after-effects of the war, to the lax enforcement of the Volstead act, to unemployment, to lenient judges, to the technicalities surrounding the indictment, trials and appeals of offenders and to the mollycoddling of offenders by ill-advised meddlers and the resultant laxity in quick adequate punishment of criminals. The modern and more humane methods of dealing with offend- ers,— suspended sentence, probation and parole,— have also come in for their full share of criticism. It has been stated that not only are these methods used extensively and indiscriminately, but that hardened and habitual offenders convicted of serious crimes have had their sentences suspended or were released ‘‘ on proba- tion ’’ or ‘‘ parole.”’ No distinction has been made between the social value of sus- pended sentence and probation laws and the operations of the system in any particular court or locality. Inefficient administra- tion of probation is due mainly to the failure on the part of pub- lic officials in many states to provide either adequate salaries for or a sufficient number of probation officers. Without dis- criminating between the law and the operation of the law, drastic recommendations have been made in several western and southern states to repeal existing laws relating to suspended sentence and probation. The public press reports that the Law Enforcement Committee of the American Bar Association has or will recom- mend ‘‘ the withdrawal from trial judges the power to admit to probation.’’ Unfortunately, the critics, in discussing the relation of sus- pended sentence, probation and parole to the causes of the present “ crime wave,’’ have used these terms interchangeably. These three terms,— suspended sentence, probation and parole,—as used generally in the statutes of New York State have acquired a specific meaning. Suspended sentence is the release of an [3] 4 offender without further supervision. Unless the offender is again arrested for another crime the original sentence is never imposed. The suspension of sentence without proper probationary over- sight is a pernicious practice that ought to be corrected. The offender has been given his liberty upon the presumption that he will not abuse the leniency of the court. The court should know whether such proves to be the case. The weakness of suspending sentence without supervision or an adequate knowledge of the immediate past of the offender is possibly best shown by citing the case of a now notorious offender, who has been described by the judge who suspended sentence as ‘‘ the meanest thief in New York.’’ In 1912, this man was arrested for stealing a change purse and a sandwich from a young girl on her way to work. He was con- victed in one of the county courts, and the day he was to be sentenced his ‘‘ wife and four children ’’ appeared in court. The man told a pathetic story to the judge regarding his wife’s health, and the dire needs of the family. The judge, touched by his story, not only suspended sentence, but started a collection of $100 as a contribution to the supposedly needy family. Later disquieting rumors regarding this offender came to the judge who had suspended sentence and he requested that an investigation be made. The investigator found that not only was the man unmarried but that the alleged ‘‘ wife and four children ’’ had disappeared. So had the offender. In 1914, the man was again arrested and convicted and the sentencing judge, having knowledge of the trick played upon his colleague, sentenced ‘‘ the meanest thief ’’ to five years in one of the State’s prisons. On June 20, 1922, he was again arrested for pick-pocketing by the same detective who arrested him ten years before. He blithely told of his experiences and his former record and laughed when the police recalled the ‘‘ family ”’ he had brought into court to touch the heart of the judge. Probation is the term used in connection with the release of an offender under a suspended sentence and without imprisonment but under the oversight of a probation officer for a definite period of time and for the purpose of reclaiming him from evil courses.: Parole is the term used in connection with the conditional release from a penal or reformatory institution after a period of incarcera- tion therein. The term probation has no appropriate use in con- nection with the oversight of prisoners from reformatories or penal institutions, nor is the term parole wisely applied in con- nection with the release of offenders under suspended sentence and without imprisonment. The State Probation Commission, whose responsibility it is to supervise the administration of probation in New York State, has, since its creation in 1907, kept records of the number of offenders placed on probation and the reported results of probation. The 5 Commission, through its intimate knowledge of the work of all probation officers in the State gained through monthly and yearly reports as well as by personal investigations, points out that the use of probation in New York State has been of gradual develop- ment, and that official statistics do not show that judges have either used probation indiscriminately or have placed on probation in any one year an unusually large number of persons convicted of serious offenses. The Commission has never advocated and never will advocate probation as a cure-all or a treatment to be applied even once in every case. Since its creation it has pointed out that while pro- bation is a valuable institution it cannot be used in all cases, even of juvenile offenders, as a proper substitute for commitment. To fail to place the offender under a vigorous corrective discipline when such course is clearly indicated by the circumstances of the offense and previous record and character and present disposition of the offender is an evil only less serious than to imprison the offender when the circumstances would justify his release upon probation. Probation is no panacea for crime. There is little doubt that from time to time offenders are released on probation who should not be, but no group has emphasized the need for care- fully selecting the offenders who are to benefit by the system through careful and thorough preliminary social investigations before sentence, more than the probation officers and others inter- ested in the sane development of the probation system. Probation was never intended for the confirmed or habitual offender, the feeble-minded, the psychopathic or the insane. Sentimental leni- ency and haphazard inefficiency in the treatment of criminals and delinquents are fraught with grave social consequences. The facts, however, indicate that judges in this State thoroughly realize their responsibility to the community and to offenders and in general have carefully selected those whom they placed on probation. The provisions of the probation law in New York State are as extensive and as liberal as in any state in the Union. It allows judges to place on probation offenders convicted of any crime not punishable by death or life imprisonment. Probation is probably used as a method of social control as extensively in this State as in any state in the country. Official figures, not opinions, show that over ninety per cent of all adults placed on probation during the past fourteen years have been convicted of misdemeanors or lesser offenses. It appears extremely doubtful if the critics of probation can legitimately charge that the nine per cent placed on probation for serious offenses,— felonies, has been even a minor factor in the ‘‘ breakdown of criminal jurisprudence ”’ or in pro- ducing the present ‘‘ crime wave.”’ In support of the above statements a brief summary follows of the development of probation in New York State and official sta- tistics regarding the use and results of probation in this State for a fourteen-year period,— October 1, 1907, to September 30, 1921. 6 Tue DrevELOPMENT orf PROBATION IN New YorK STATE The courts of record in New York State have always possessed the power to reloase convicted offenders under a suspended sen- tence, and that power has been exercised from time immemorial, but without any provision for oversight or supervision of the per- sons so released. In 1893 this power was explicitly recognized by statute. The first probation law was enacted in 1901. The Code of Crim- inal Procedure was amended by inserting section 11-a and amend- ing several other sections. The act provided for the appointment of probation officers by courts having original jurisdiction of crim- inal actions in all cities of the State and outlined briefly the duties of probation officers. The act applied only to persons over sixteen years of age. During the next four years the provisions of the law were amended several times. The principal changes made were that the probation law theretofore applicable only to cities was made applicable to all parts of the State; the limitation of the application of the law to persons over sixteen years of age was stricken out, making the law applicable to children as well as adults. Since 1905 additional amendments relating to probation and its administration have been made. The present general probation law and the law relating to the duties of probation officers are as follows: “* Penal Law. Sec. 2188. Duty of court to sentence; sus- pending sentence; suspending execution of judgment; pro- bation. ‘‘ The several sections of this chapter which declare certain ermmes to be punishable as therein mentioned devolve a duty upon the court or magistrate authorized to pass sentence to determine and impose the punishment prescribed; but a court or magistrate authorized to impose sentence upon conviction of any crime not punishable by death or life imprisonment, or in any case of juvenile delinquency, or in any other pro- ceeding of a criminal nature, whether the defendant has pre- viously been convicted of a crime or not, may suspend sentence or impose sentence and suspend the execution of the whole or a part of the judgment and may in either case place the defendant on probation in accordance with the provisions of section eleven-a of the code of criminal procedure. No pro- vision of this chapter or of the code of criminal procedure or of any general statute shall be construed to prevent the court or magistrate authorized to impose sentence from exercising diseretion to suspend sentence or suspend the execution of the whole or a part of the judgment or to place on probation as hereinabove provided. If sentence shall have been sus- pended, or, if sentence shall have been imposed and execution of the whole or a part of the judgment shall have been sus- pended, at any time thereafter within the longest period for which a defendant might have been committed in the first 7 instance, or, if the defendant is on probation and the period of probation exceeds the period for which the defendant might have been sentenced, at any time while the defendant remains on probation, the court or magistrate having jurisdiction may issue process for the rearrest of the defendant, and when such defendant is arraigned may, if sentence shall have been sus- pended, impose any sentence or make any commitment which micht have been imposed or made at the time of conviction or may, if sentence shall have been imposed and execution of the whole or part of the judgment suspended, revoke the order suspending execution of judgment and order executed the judgment or the part thereof the execution of which shall have been suspended or may modify the judgment so as to provide for the imposition of any punishment which might have been imposed at the time of conviction. Provided, how- ever, that the imprisonment directed by the judgment, shall not be suspended or interrupted after such imprisonment shall have commenced.”’ “‘ Code of Criminal Procedure. Sec. 1l-a. 2. Duties of probation officers. Every probation officer, when so directed by the court, or by a magistrate of the court, in which he is serving, shal] inquire into the antecedents, character and cir- cumstances of any person or persons accused within the juris- diction of such court, and into the mitigating or aggravating circumstances of the offense of such person, and shall report thereon in writing to such court or magistrate. The term ‘* probationer ’’ shall mean a person placed on probation. It shall be the duty of every probation officer to furnish to all persons placed on probation under his supervision a state- ment of the period and conditions of their probation, and to. instruct them concerning the same; to keep informed con- cerning their conduct and condition; to aid and encourage them by friendly advice and admonition, and by such other measures, not inconsistent with the conditions imposed by the court or magistrate, as may seem most suitable to bring about improvement in their -conduct and condition; to report in writing at least monthly concerning their conduct and con- dition to the court having jurisdiction over such probationers, or to a magistrate thereof; to keep records of their work; to keep accurate and complete accounts of all moneys collected from probationers, to give receipts therefor and to make at least monthly returns thereof; to perform such other duties in connection with such probationers as the court or magis- trate may direct; and to make such reports to the state pro- bation commission as the commission may require. Any pro- bation officer may act as parole officer for any state penal or reformatory institution when so requested by the authorities thereof, and when requested by the county judge shall act as parole officer over persons released on parole under section nine hundred and ten. 8 ‘© 3. Powers of probation officers. Every probation officer may require such reports by probationers under his care as are reasonable or necessary and not inconsistent with the con- ditions imposed by the court or magistrate. Every probation officer shall have as to persons placed on probation under his care, the powers of a peace officer, ‘(4 Methods of procedure. When any court suspends sentence and places a defendant on probation it shall deter- mine the conditions and period of probation, which period of probation shall not exceed, in the cases of children, their eighteenth birthday; in the case of any other defendant con- vieted of an offense less than a felony, two years; and in the ease of any other defendant convicted of a felony, five years. The conditions of probation shall be such as the court shall in its discretion prescribe, and may include among other con- ditions any or several of the following: That the probationer (a) shall indulge in no unlawful, disorderly, injurious or vicious habits; (b) shall avoid places or persons or disrepu- table or harmful character; (c) shall report to the probation officer as directed by the court or probation officers; (d) shall permit the probation officer to visit him in a reasonable man- ner at his place of abode or elsewhere; (e) shall answer any reasonable inquiries on the part of the probation officer con- cerning his conduct or condition; (f) shall, if a child of com- pulsory school age, attend school; (g) shall, if an adult, or if a child but not required to attend school, work faithfully at suitable employment; (h) shall remain or reside within a specified place or locality; (i) shall abstain for a reasonable period from the use of alcoholic beverages, if the use of the same contributed to his offense; (j) shall pay in one or several sums a fine imposed at the time of being placed on probation; (k) shall make reparation or restitution to the aggrieved parties for actual damages or losses caused by his offense; and (1) shall support his wife or children. The court or a magis- trate thereof may modify the conditions and the period of probation; may in case of violation of the probationary con- ditions issue a warrant for the arrest of the probationer; and may at any time discharge the probationer; and in case of violation of the probationary conditions, the court may impose any penalties which it might have imposed before placing the defendant on probation, provided that, if committed, he be committed to an institution authorized by law to receive com- mitments for the offense of which he was originally convicted, and of persons of his age at the time of his commitment. Ifa probationer without permission disappears from oversight, or departs from the jurisdiction of the court, the time during which he keeps his whereabouts hidden or remains away from the jurisdiction of the court may be added to the original period of probation,’’ 9 The passage of the first probation law did not mean the estab- lishment of an effective probation system throughout the State. The use of probation at first developed slowly and irregularly. In some places good work was done; in some places bad, and in most places not any. The special State Probation Commission appointed in 1905 to ‘‘ make a careful inquiry into the opera- tions of the probation system in the State of New York ’’ in its report to the Governor in 1906, said: ‘‘ The appointment of probation officers has been carried into effect in but few of the courts.’’ Describing the irregularity and inconsistency of the work then done, it said: “‘ The underlying weakness of the probation system as now conducted is to be found in the very large number of courts possessing the power of appointrhent of probation officers and in the absence of any supervision, coordination or organi- zation of the work of probation officers, except such as may be exercised by the courts to which they are attached. There are practically as many systems of probation as there are courts using the probation law.”’ To aid in curing these evils and to extend the probation service to all courts of the State, this Commission recommended central State supervision. Their report said: ‘We are, therefore, strongly of the opinion that, while probation work must always be permitted a considerable degree of flexibility to meet local conditions and individual needs, there should be provided, nevertheless, some form of central oversight. This should involve the collection of information in regard to the extent to which probation is utilized in different portions of the State from time to time, the manner in which probation work is carried on, and the value of the results secured. It should include the authority to make formal and detailed investigations of probation work in any given court or locality, when such are deemed advisable; it should provide for the making of sug- gestions to the legislature from time to time for the improve- ment of the probation system, and for recommendations from time to time to public authorities, judicial and executive, concerned in the administration of probation; it should involve the promotion of probation work in those localities in which it is not availed of.’’ As a result of the report the Legislature in 1907 passed a bill creating a permanent commission (the present State Probation Commission). This Commission is authorized ‘‘ to exercise gen- eral supervision over the work of probation officers, to keep informed as to their work, to improve and extend the probation system, to collect and publish information thereon and make recommendations. 10 THe DrvELopMENT oF Prosation In New York State From Ocroser 1, 1907 to SzpremBer 30, 1921 Prior to the creation of the State Probation Commission in 1907, there were no statistics available as to the extent of the use of probation. In that year the probation system was reported as used in 16 cities, 1 village and 11 county courts. The growth of the system during the next fourteen years has lead to its use in 54 of the 59 cities of the State, in over 38 towns and villages, and in 51 of the 62 county courts besides in the Supreme Courts in a number of counties. The first appropriation for a publicly salaried probation officer was made in 1904. In 1907 the number of publicly salaried pro- bation officers was 35. In 1921 this number had increased to 249. Not until 1908 was it permissible for counties to make appropriations for probation service, and in that year there were 8 publicly salaried county probation officers appointed. In 1921, 35 counties had provisions for salaries of officers who served not only in the County and Supreme Courts but in the courts of third class cities and in the Justices’ courts. In 1908 (the first year complete statistics were compiled) 8,762 individuals were placed on probation. In 1921, 22,297 were released on probation. During the past fourteen years (October 1, 1907, to September 30, 1921), a total of 233,100 persons, 72,003 or 30.9 per cent children, and 161,097 or 69.1 per cent adults, have been placed on probation. Of the 161,097 adults placed on probation during this period 146,316 or approximately 91 per cent were convicted of misde- meanors or lesser offenses. Of the 146,316 placed on probation for misdemeanors or lesser offenses, 42,640 or 29 per cent of this number were placed on probation for non-support. It is inter- esting to note the increasing use of probation in the treatment of non-supporting and deserting husbands. In 1908, 679 or 15.1 per cent of all adults placed on probation for misdemeanors were guilty of this charge, and in 1921, the number and percentage had increased to 6,336 or 44.8 per cent. If 1915 is taken as a normal year and compared with 1921, when the so-called ‘‘ crime wave ’’ was at its crest, it will be found that the numbers of offenders placed on probation for misdemeanors and lesser offenses against the person or property, — assault, disorderly conduct, petit larceny and violation of local ordinances,— actually decreased by approximately 700. While in the opinion of the Commission probation in its appli- cation should not be limited to those who have been convicted of minor offenses (misdemeanors), the fact remains that the largest number of felons placed on probation in any one year was 1,409. Only 14,781 offenders, or 9 per cent of the total number of adults placed on probation in fourteen years were convicted of offenses 11 technically termed felonies. If the years 1915 and 1921 are again compared it will be found that the number placed on probation convicted of crimes against the person and property,— assault, burglary, forgery and grand lareeny,— increased by only 52. The total number of felons placed on probation in 1915 was 1,365 and in 1921, 1,398, and of this 1,398, 156 were convicted of abandonment. Omitting the cases where the final results are unknown, 206,298 persons were discharged from probation during the fourteen-year period. In 159,939 cases, or 78.5 per cent, the results of probation were satisfactory and the offenders were discharged as improved. Only 22,560 probationers, or 10.9 per cent, were rearrested and committed, and 11,703 probationers, or 5.7 per cent, were discharged unimproved ; 10,096, or 4.9 per cent, absconded. While 233,100 persons were placed on probation during the fourteen-year period, probation officers made a total of 306,942 preliminary investigations, and since 1915, when the first records were kept, have made 797,160 home and other visits. The number of preliminary investigations made is an indication that the judges made use of the services of probation officers to investigate the previous record and character of offenders before placing them on probation, and that probation officers frequently recommend that certain offenders are unsuitable for probation treatment. The number of home and other visits is an index to the constructive supervision given to probationers and a blow at the theory that probation consists merely of having offenders report to a probation officer once or twice a month. They also collected from probationers a total of $5,504,212.39. Of this amout, $4,726,388.52 was collected from non-supporting and deserting husbands for family support; $268,780.59 for fines paid in installments, and $509,043.28 for restitution. Probation officers also supervised the additional payment under court orders of $2,816,900.71 direct to beneficiaries. The tables which follow show by years the total number placed on probation; the classification of charges against children and adults; the reported results of probation; the number of prelim- inary investigations and home visits made and money collections. Table I shows the gradual development of the use of probation as a constructive method of treating offenders in New York State. During the past four years (1918 to 1921) the total number placed on probation each year has remained approximately the same. However, the number of boys placed on probation has decreased each year for the past four year period while the number of girls and women has remained approximately the same. The large inerease in the number of men placed on probation in 1921 over 1920 is due not to offenders placed on probation for felonies but to persons charged with either non-support or public intoxication. 12 TABLE I Number Placed on Probation from October 1, 1907, to September 30, 1921 Boys Girls Men Women Total *1907 (3 mo.), Oct., Nov., Dec.. 521 45 784 678 2,028 TQ08 i ene sih irae gids wee an me ee ae 2,026 162 4,555 2,019 8,762 WQOO) 2525-8 auals hcremauny wwid duawed aa o 1,890 175 5,693 1,248 9,006 WS TO sidioc or shlnas- tare & agen ar taysrasiah toe tt 2,084 182 5,359 1,009 8,634 VOU. iam wary songs ead meee shay 2,187 435 6,811 1,236 10,669 "1912: (9) MOL): ccc nec oa ee 3,347 571 6,405 1,430 11,753 OTS! 205 se eeeaneweuat eae es Ree 4,811 594 =9,002 1,737 16,144 DOTA snecca ce vietieced ses RUA bul a iiss ay nae 5,014 700 11,197 1,638 18,549 VOUS garg eee gre Dga-gine a Bc decane 5,108 614 11,281 1,705 18,708 VOT GS tesa ad wonale-e hab tctateey avd ors athens 4,891 848 12,271 1,676 19,686 PLO (9: WO e)) sanies gigs eta ohare es 4,501 878 10,344 1,268 16,991 LOLS: vvae oe ee WOME Ea eRe AS 6,576 1,300 12,630 1,732 22,238 aL QI 5b scees se seicubaucaunia tase avincgeache NOC a 6,319 1,170 13,448 1,909 22,846 VO 20. cavaince cps auth cane sendy ssernye nee 5,463 1,399 11,119 1,656 19,637 TOD: & disses ays ciate aceon aie Ripa nae 5,397 1,354 13,785 1,761 22,297 *1921 (3 mo.), July, Aug. Sept.. 1,166 275 = =3,, 284 427 5,152 Total cysahexecavgunecy sees 61,301 10,702 187,968 23,129 233,100 _ * Since the creation of the Commission the statistical year has been changed three times. In compiling statistics for the period from October 1, 1907 to September 30, 1921, it simplified the task of the compiler to adjust the time period as indicated above. TABLE II. Classification of Charges in Cases of 72,003 Children Placed on Probation From October 1, 1907 to September 30, 1921. i av SEE S52 Ags 1907 (3 mo.), Oct., Nov., Dec.. 51 W008: vaca na 4 Biee ahi mee enews 571 LI os uke aaa Oe wane eae ee 509 TOL yn wea eae one a Ray Sees 540 TOU 6 ope 4-40 ee Sk Vee Ra eee 676 1912) (9 ANG) sii cc ches cea 974 ATS cc: cakes valance Heed at adie Fup la Sewseypa oeTe 1,837 WO) cic eee cael keh ea RSE ER 1, 809 LOUD: gigs eile tains tat shah a cca necay nade etasnvans 1, 657 VOle cag he deu da eek ae pewe eee ns 1,584 L917 (9I0.)) ocdaseedaewe ee ed 1, 496 LOMB Hats. 4. ein aa acayeiedenanntncreeiet 2,038 QO stator eh ee ev ahees tells astse acta 1, 525 VOD vives Pee a ce RRSs BEAR ROS 1,491 NOCD oda e Heh 6 ieee nee ed 1, 453 1921 (3 mo.), July, Aug., Sept. 302 :, Per cent Improper eo guardian- = ship 42 wm > ins} bo wows on a w PTR ON WH aH — = & = a Hee ey SH aAneae OHORRAND AHA OM oy Per cent as ~ ao wo a B ef + =) a ge © bo by 5S hk 178 31.4 1,007 45.9 971 47.1 1,087 47.9 1,066 40.6 1,406 35.8 1,956 36.2 2,207 38.6 2,527 44.2 2,384 41.5 2,046 39.0 3,526 44.9 4,610 61.4 3,547 51.7 3,577 53.2 728 50.8 46.9 Bg 3 § 3 a g B to g = 8 5 3 os 3S 6 8 & a (ok) Aa aH A 1907 (3 mo.), Oct., Nov., Dec. . 142 25.1 64 11.3 566 100 TOOS a ceck tates Aan stonudinde sacetved 330 15.5 238 10.7 2,188 100 WOOO a ccsimigu sonny a9 4 tau alesnees 377 18.2 186 6.6 2,065 100 VIO ons oe es gee sea wie exes 424 18.7 149 6.7 2,266 100 TTD ce cas elect Sece ie state ise eo 346 13.2 289 11.0 2,622 100 T912: (9 THO) adie see ee scdiie 226 «65.6 470 12.2 3,918 100 WOVBS che cette & bea Set acnetints ademas 257 394.7 540 10.0 5,405 100 DOV 2 en sues & wiatore 4s eign weet 254 4.4 618 10.8 5,714 100 VOUS pete excep sna ante ie Bare ed aa © 1783.1 604 10.5 5,722 100 VAG § gies 5.2 apeeics stad Sea ge sta auctetw’s 172 3.1 649 11.3 5,739 100 1917 (9 mo.)............200- 161 3.0 535 10.0 5,379 100 VOUS) aod eae a eke hak eth Oe BOS 256 3.3 597 7.5 7,876 100 OTD ee sedis anes easteiess Gye Goan Aen ae 8 242 3.2 74 1.0 7,489 100 1920 uojvi eae é hates aay ares 347 5.0 32 .5 6,862 100 NODA seine d ute te sein Gaede ceed 264 3.9 121 1.1 6,751 100 1921 (3 mo.), July, Aug., Sept. 30 «2.1 32 2.1 1,441 100 otal: peters cere eee e .. 4,006 5.6 5,148 7.1 72,003 100 The number of adults placed on probation for misdemeanors that technically can be termed offenses against the persons,— assault, and disorderly conduct, shows no abnormal increase in any year. In fact the number placed on probation for assault in a normal year like 1915 was greater than the number placed on probation during any year from 1918 to 1921. This statement is equally true regarding the number placed on probation for dis- orderly conduct. In 1915, 2,257 adults were placed on probation for this offense while in 1921, 1,789, a decrease of 468 over the year 1915. The number placed on probation for offenses against property,— petty larcency, in 1921, also shows a decrease over the figures of 1915. The largest number placed on probation for this offense occurred during the year 1918, when 2,866 persons were placed on probation. In 1920 the number decreased to 1,974 and in 1921 another decrease occurred and only 1,862 adults were placed on probation for petit larceny. As has been previously stated and as the statistics indicate, the increased use of probation for adults guilty of misdemeanors or lesser offenses is due primarily to the use of probation for offenders charged with deserting or failing to properly provide for their families. September 30, 1921 1 Seg 2h Bes 458 1907 (3 mo.), Oct., Nov., Dee. ...... 08 iments, eases 1909: wine 'seey vane eh TOLO! eeccectiem bogee A eae TOM Me ceieitstns PAs. dt hendyd 1912 (9 mo.).. ...... 913 waxechades sees es LON ieee Eicuee > (Rate wa TONG caste sine. aeig: TOIG aisiecaney suas MOL? CF PW as ee VOUS cance dicta s 145 TONG ch ede ea ts 120 HO20 ashe ietien 113 YO2T sy saiew ares 138 1921 (3 mo.) July, Aug., Sep. 6 Total 522 fo a 1907 (3 mo.) Oct., Nov., Dec. .....- V908. stems cageegog anna 1909 wisesricee gacee LOLO: Sseevs Gastar Shoes DOW. sokawsa seoassee. cagieeaeess 1912 (9 mo.) TONG cA iaes cami Moauatn cet TON secreee ones 1915 aiecteaen ¢eeuse VQUVC: sisi d aectee ~ x honel hs 1917 (2 ma)... & » a - q & » eI 5 g as a 239 g Ge so OSC » gee x Ss ¢€ as <& &6 a Bes o€ 1907 (3 mo.), Oct., Nov., Dec. 108 7.5 ...... 2... 0 ceaeee 14 °=«21.0 L908 nate. pacpuine s coaee B86) 60) iialase nig aoa’ 114 «1.8 1909 ieigeaceses ACM use ae Sais = Goeedens. Yoeey ay eaettets es 1910) cee daxeeme © See Beae wRse eS cane SERRE WE Ye 23 WOU eae aww seis, Agha: — asaetit diaisie —“S5eiheap ar Hye, sumalaSee aes 1912 (9 mo.)..... eset 9 sglesm laws etd. Sasecnss ai 188 2.6 TODS xe aetna: Piafiede RCS La dienes), ASasdekes ee 326 «3.8 1914. oveneeekwee Yeos cen ver eed ge shite. o.9i5a ee 3 473 4.0 TOUS co ccduanaie eee 287 ee xeeRe Sout ‘pedaes 339 2.8 TOUG a sues sew tees 289) DEB oe caw. Glades Rakleee 510) 4.0 TORT (9 MO )icas “237° 2e8 acuam. vie: Gueees 415 3.9 1918 as cde vested 399) “3.0 og vee anes Xew ads 445 3.4 1919. 5 scncea esis ¥ 862 6.1 ...... Ss “seghresuane 468 3.5 WON: os caw aden dd 423 3.7 155 1.4 38 3 408 3.6 TO. sown swergn's < 489 3.5 123 re 73 5 362 2.5 1921 (3mo.), July Aug., Sept. .... 127 3.6 267 5 1 114. 3.2 Total i. vac 3,607 2.5 304 By 116 -1 4,176 2.8 Sow * 88 2 3 2 ' ggg y z 8 Anns m + a Cone a oO = OsAE a eH a 1907 (3 mo), Oct., Nov., Dec.... 117 8.0 1, 448 100.0 J908) cxce ers oe. be se nevaels Seu aisea RAN, tote ncne nastiness OOD) save. caecess Ata sitions & 68 ie aya abo $14,993.66 ............ $814.75 VOLO! coe: densa tng as De ee wide RY Ae 40, 378;:30 sxgevewanass 1,583.06 TORY! ee orcingy doce wine a ate ae 84,234.81 ............ 3,834.55 1912. 69) MOD) ce eadeceetawe veces Gis 994760) cs smb aeen dike 4,799.82 1913) se05 veka Wine tem a aK S Tig AVDCES eas ders hea oe 13,672.22 O14 aca cicsuis Mba SE ee eH 96,768.95 $128,559.25 17,567 .80 TOUS ae cackcanateh aan gees Bua ae abe aaa 102,988.85 157,340.69 18,598.53 TATE gi xeselo cess etsude Mie e% 139,155.01 206,645.49 31,318.54 TOUT (9 MO)iowcawes oh ese y ey 129,181.58 208,256.08 28,075.63 OD Go ahs Sd, bac Guecingaiiier heck Btpseh Hae 200,798.97 360,990.15 33,443.77 DVO ata ade geass aevins Sytgn SG ues SHERRI oat 228,750.70 341,133.50 37,630.78 1920s sche sthnceg ners teenage 1,432 ,631.93 539,186.40 32,069.61 DOM ist S.ceaeepacn santerehseseih tours Sreaserie 1,669,604.90 693,113.10 34,175.57 1921 (83 mo.). July, Aug., Sept. 441,790.62 181,676.05 11,195.96 TOG) “sas hg Hae Rael $4,726,388.52 $2,816,900.71 $268,780.59 Restitution Total T907 ¢3 mo.); Oets, Nov Deets secneenvcigdek ae 0088 cue be sudeen nasi ca TOO 8 cae me Gaautacnsterte eins tasked OA e D RK ais mam cmuedees