A REPORT ON CHARITABLE and CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS BY JAMES W. GARNER PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS PREPARED FOR THE EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE STATE OF ILLINOIS 1914 Return this book on or before the Latest Date stamped below. A charge is made on all overdue books. TT , T T ., U. of I. Library 2 2 MW DUG . W V. C 1 2 1966 17625-S A REPORT ON CHARITABLE and CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS W: G JAMES W: GARNER l\ PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE . UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS PREPARED FOR THE EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE CREATED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE FORTY-EIGHTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY STATE OF ILLINOIS SENATORS WALTER I. MANNY, CHAIRMAN - MT. STERLING W. DUFF PIERCY - - - - MOUNT VERNON LOGAN HAY SPRINGFIELD CHARLES F. HURBURGH - - - GALESBURG REPRESENTATIVES CHARLES F. CLYNE, SECRETARY - - AURORA SPEAKER WILLIAM McKINLEY - - CHICAGO JOHN M. RAPP - - - - - FAIRFIELD EDWARD J. SMEJKAL - - - - CHICAGO JOHN A. FAIRLIE, DIRECTOR - URBANA - THE WINDERMERE PRESS, CHICAGO CONTENTS. I. CHARITABLE AND PENAL ADMINISTRATION IN ILLINOIS. Page A. General Observations 5 B. Charitable Institutions 6 1. Organization and Administration before 1910 7 The State Board of Public Charities 8 2. Present Organization 11 Thef Board of Administration 11 Fiscal Supervisor 13 The Charities Commission 14 Boards of Visitors 15 Appropriations 16 C. Penal and Reformatory Institutions 17 1. Separate Boards 17 2. The Board of Prison Industries 19 3. Board of Classification 19 4. The Penitentiary Commission 19 5. The State Board of Pardons 20 D. Comparison of the Charitable and Penal Systems 22 Advantages of the Central Board System 23 Criticism of the Central Board System 31 II. CHARITABLE AND PENAL ADMINISTRATION IN OTHER STATES AND COUNTRIES. COUNTRIES. A. In Other States'. 32 1. Central Boards of Control 32 2. State Boards of Charity ". 41 3. Boards of Pardon and Parole 42 4. Opinions on the Central Board System 43 Success in Other States 43 Expert Opinion in Favor of Centralized Control of Penal Institutions 46 Criticism of Centralized Administration 48 B. In Foreign Countries 51 1. In England For Relief .51 Care of the Insane 51 Penal Institutions 52 2. In France Charity Administration 53 Prison Administration 54 3. In Germany Charitable Institutions 55 Penal Institutions 55 III. SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. A. Charitable Institutions 56 B. Penal and Reformatory Institutions . 57 Comparative Expense 61 96204 I A REPORT ON CHARITABLE and CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS By PROFESSOR JAMES W. GARNER, University of Illinois. I. CHARITABLE AND PENAL ADMINISTRATION IN ILLINOIS. A. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS. For the care and maintenance of the defective, delinquent and other dependent classes and for the confinement of convicted criminals, the State of Illinois maintains twenty-five institutions, counting three that have been authorized but which have not yet been established, namely, the Alton State Hospital, the Epileptic Colony, and the Surgical Insti- tute for Crippled Children. Administratively speaking, they fall into two classes : First, the twenty-two charitable institutions which are under the control and management of a central body known as the Board of Administration and which are subject to the visitation and inspection of the State Charities Commission ; second, the two State penitentiaries at Joliet and Menard and the State reformatory at Pontiac, each of which is under the control and management of a separate board. There is also another board which has charge of the construction of a new penitentiary, a board of prison industries, a board of classification, and a board of pardons. None of the seven last named boards are under the juris- diction of the Board of Administration or the Charities Commission* The following table contains a list of the charitable, penal and reformatory institutions of the State, with the date of their establish- ment, the place of location, the value of their property (1910-1912), the number of their employees, and the per capita cost of maintenance. EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. STATISTICS RELATING TO ILLINOIS STATE CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS Date Established. Location. Number of Buildings. "3 $-d W eS JJ Value of Property. o -4s Us No. of Inmates, 1911-12. a -3 '3/3 fcU.S-i Hospital, Elgin State Kankakee .. Jacksonville Anna . . .. 1869 1877 1847 1869 1895 1895 1889 1912 1865 1839 1849 1887 1885 1895 1865 1871 1893 1901 Elgin 29 61 32 22 47 43 11 42 34 22 17 2 56 3 20 1 22 47 510 840 343 449 593 576 17 234 529 158 40 7a 222 15 96 4a 240 921 $ 1,247,603 1,914,833 1,237,527 1,300,465 1,020,010 1,283,942 125,388 1,519,128 1.009.937 432,243 361.244 110,171 871,328 67,075 281,916 290.747 499,991 753,921 277 450 246 222 180 294 29 306 185 124 67 14 73 22 52 50 84 70 1,475 2,653 1,599 1,572 1.401 2,034 220 674 1,357 398 190 100 1.417 71 271 169 448 522 $140.00 138.71 130.12 142.03 121.73 139.59 188.90 170.32 149.08 297.41 308.25 295.46 151.98 360.25 248.08 279.63 208.91 237.03 Kankakee .. Jacksonville Anna Watertown.. Peoria Watertown. Peoria.. . Chester Chicago Lincoln State School and Colony Menard Dunning Lincoln Jacksonville Jacksonville Chicago Quincy. School for Deaf School for Blind Industrial Home for the Blind Soldiers' and Sailors' Home Soldier's Widows' Home.... Wilmington Normal Chicago Geneva.. St. Charles.. Kankakee Soldier's Orphans' Home.... Charitable Eye and Ear Infirmary Training School for Girls St. Charles School for Boys Alton St. Hospital.... Epileptic Colony 1911 1913 Alton Surgical Institute Totals, Charitable Institutions 1911 511 5,783 $14,327,472 2,751 16,578 $156.87 CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS Illinois State Pen'ry South. 111. Pen'ry Illinois State Reformatory Totals, Correctional Institutions 1857 1877 1867 Joliet $ 1,887,279 1.602,401 1,022,661 116 109 107 19 1,376 1,185 681 0-12 $ 175.20 197.10 255.50 Menard Pontiac $ 4,512,341 332 3,242 $208.05 Grand Total $18,839.813 3,083 19,820 a City Lots. From the standpoint of the classes of dependents for the care and maintenance of whom these institutions have been established, the charitable institutions may be grouped into four divisions: (a) those for mental defectives, including the criminal insane and feeble minded children; (b) those for physical defectives, such as the blind, the deaf, the dumb, crippled children, and those afflicted with diseases of the eye or ear; (c) those for honorably discharged soldiers and sailors and their dependent orphans and widows ; and (d) those for delinquent boys and girls. The law denominates as "charitable" all the institu- tions created for the care of these several classes of persons, although strictly speaking some of them, like the training schools for delinquent children and the asylum for insane criminals, are not in reality charit- CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 7 able institutions, and they were not so designated by law prior to 1909. The Act of June 15, 1909, however, includes them in the category of "charitable" institutions and subjects them to the inspection and inves- tigation of the State Charities Commission, along with the other more strictly charitable institutions. It will be seen from the accompanying statistical tables that the total number of inmates in all these institutions is about 20,000, that they embrace an aggregate of more than 500 buildings, and that the total valuation of their property is about $19,000,000. The total legis- lative appropriations for 1913-15 amount to $12,775,993. B. CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS. 1. Organization and Administration Before 1910. The first State charitable institution to be established in Illinois was the asylum for the education of the deaf and dumb, which was located at Jacksonville in 1839. It was placed under the control of a board of directors appointed by the Governor, the immediate man- agement being vested in the hands of a superintendent chosen by the board. In 1847 a hospital for the insane was established, and it, too, was located at Jacksonville. It was placed under the control of a board of trustees appointed by the Governor for a term of three years. The board was empowered to choose a superintendent for a term of two years and to remove him for unfaithfulness or incompetency. The in- mates of the asylum were required to pay the cost of their maintenance wherever possible ; in case they were unable, the expense was borne by the counties from which they came. In 1851 the expense of main- taining insane paupers was transferred from the counties to the State, thus making the asylum more definitely a State institution. The num- ber of persons received from each county was based upon the popu- lation of the county. The third of the State charitable institutions to be established was the institution for the blind, also located at Jackson- ville (1849). It was placed under the control of a board of five trustees appointed by the Governor for a term of four years. In 1851 the term was reduced to two years. By an act of 1853 the government of the three institutions was somewhat modified with a view to uniformity. The number of mem- bers of the boards of trustees of the asylum for the insane and the institution for the deaf and dumb was fixed at six and their terms of service at four years. The size and term of the board of trustees of the institution for the education of the blind was unaffected by the act. None of the trustees had received any compensation for their serv- ices or an allowance for their expenses. The Act of 1853, however, provided that henceforth their travelling and personal expenses in- curred in the performance of their official duties should be paid out of the funds of the institution. Accounts of each institution were required to be kept and reported so as to show the kind, quality and cost of every article purchased for the institution and the name of the person of whom bought. The law contained other provisions which indicated a centralizing tendency and a desire to secure greater uni- formity in the organization and management of the institutions. 8 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. In 1865 provision was made for two other institutions. These were the Soldiers' Orphans' Home, located at Normal, and the school for the instruction and training of idiots and feeble minded children, located at Lincoln, and now known as the Lincoln State School and Colony. The former was placed under the control of a board of nine trustees appointed by the Governor for a term of two years ; the latter was placed under the control of the directors of the asylum for the deaf and dumb, so far as the expenditures of its funds were concerned. In 1869 two additional hospitals for the insane were created, one being located at Elgin, the other at Anna. Like the other charitable insti- tutions each was put under the control of a board of trustees. At the time of the adoption of the present constitution, therefore, seven State charitable institutions had been established, each under the control of a separate board of trustees of varying size and terms of office. There was no correlation among the different institutions and but little uniformity of policy. Each purchased its own supplies and managed its own affairs without respect to the others. The boards of trustees were required to make reports to the Legislature and the in- stitutions were biennially visited by committees of the Legislature, but further than this there was no machinery of inspection, no unifying agency, no legally recognized body of experts with the power to inves- tigate the conditions of the institutions and recommend legislative or administrative measures for their improvement. The State Board of Public Chanties. Some degree of central supervision over these institutions was provided by the creation, in 1869, of the Board of State Commissioners of Public Charities, popularly known as the State Board of Charities. The board was composed of five members appointed by the Gov- ernor, with the consent of the Senate, for a term of five years. The members received no compensation other than an allowance for their expenses and for any necessary outlay incurred in making investiga- tions. They were authorized to employ a salaried secretary. It was made their duty, or that of some one of their number, to visit all the charitable and correctional institutions, except prisons receiving State aid, 1 twice a year and to ascertain whether the funds appropriated for their aid had been economically and judiciously expended, whether the laws had been complied with and whether the institution had "accom- plished its purpose." They were required to report the results of their investigations to the Governor annually and to make any special investigations which he might direct them to make. They were also required to visit at least once a year and examine into the condition .of each county and city alms house and other places where the insane were confined and to report thereon in writing to the Legislature. They were empowered to appoint a board of auxiliary visitors in each county, consisting of three persons, to visit all county alms houses, jails and other places (other than State institutions or licensed private insti- tutions for the care of the insane), in which any person of unsound mind was confined. 1. There were then two correctional institutions: the Penitentiary at Joliet, created In 1857, and the Reformatory at Pontiac, created in 1867. Th Southern IlllnoU Penitentiary at Menard was not established until 1877. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 9 The trustees and directors of each institution were required to make a full and detailed biennial report to the board concerning their financial and other transactions, which report, if found correct by the board of charities, was to be delivered by them to the Governor. The creation of the State Board of Charities was an important step in a slow movement toward a more centralized system of administra- tion for the charitable institutions, a movement which finally resulted in the creation of the Board of Administration in 1909. The Act of 1869 also made certain changes in the administrative organization of the charitable institutions. The number of trustees on the governing boards of most of the institutions was reduced to three, a measure designed to secure a more effective responsibility and efficiency of management; and the Governor was given power to remove any trustee or director whenever in his judgment the best interests of the institution required, the only limitation being that he was required to communicate to the General Assembly the reasons for his action. The first State Board of Charities was organized in April, 1869. It divided the State' into five districts and assigned one member of the board to each district. During the first year of its existence 43 alms houses and 60 jails were inspected. One of its first acts was to take a census of idiots and insane persons, and, upon its recommendation, the Legislature, in 1872, gave it full authority to collect and tabulate statistical and other information regarding the number of persons in the State who were receiving charitable relief and the methods by which this relief was distributed. Upon the urgent recommendation of the State Board of Charities the Legislature in 1875 enacted an important law "to regulate the State charitable institutions (then eight in number) and the State reform school (at Pontiac) and to improve their organization and increase their efficiency." The act provided that each institution should be under the control of a board* of three trustees appointed by the Gov- ernor for a term of six years, no county to be represented by more than one trustee on any board; the Governor was given the power to remove any trustee for good cause ; the superintendents of the insane asylums and the institution for the feeble minded were required to be "educated and competent physicians;" the principal executive officer of each institution was to be a superintendent appointed by the board of trustees and he was to be the financial agent of the trustees ; each institution was to have a treasurer whose books and papers were to be open to the inspection of the trustees at all times; the trustees were to receive no compensation other than their actual expenses and they were required to hold meetings at the institution at least once every three months; they were required to purchase supplies wherever they could obtain the best quality at the lowest price, and in so far as practicable in large rather than in small quantities ; each institution was required to keep a record of the number of officers, employees, and inmates pres- ent each day; also records of the amount of stores and supplies re- ceived and issued ; and finally the board of trustees of each institution 10 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. was required to make biennial reports to the State Board of Charities concerning the administration of the institution during the two preced- ing years. From time to time new institutions were established, as shown below : 1871 Charitable Eye and Ear Infirmary, Chicago. 2 1877 Eastern Hospital for the Insane, Kankakee. 1885 Soldiers' and Sailors' Home, Quincy. 1887 Industrial Home for the Blind, Chicago. 1889 Asylum for Insane Criminals, Chester. 1893 Home for Juvenile Female Offenders, Geneva. 3 1895 Western Hospital for the Insane, Watertown. General Hospital for the Insane, South Bartonville. Soldiers' Widows' Home, Wilmington. 1901 St. Charles School for Boys, St. Charles. The Act of 1875 was the organic law for the government of all the charitable institutions until 1910, although it was amended in unimportant particulars in 1887, 1905 and 1907. The State Board of Charities commended the law as one of the best on the statute books ; but it complained that its own powers were insufficient, its functions including merely the power to investigate and recommend. In its report for the year 1900 (p. 42) the Board thus described the situation: "These fifteen charitable institutions have forty-nine trustees and there are five members of the board of commissioners of public charities, making in all fifty- four persons who are charged with the duty of seeing that these institutions are properly managed under the law. In addition they have fifteen local treasurers. All of the institutions are under the supervision of this board. Our duties, how- ever, are merely advisory, we having no real executive or controlling power. Under the law we are required to visit each of them at least twice a year to see that the moneys appropriated for their support are economically and judiciously expended, to see whether their purposes are accomplished and whether the laws in relation to them are complied with. It also requires us to inquire and examine into their methods of government and management, the conduct of their trustees, officers and employees, the condition of the property and into all matters pertaining to their usefulness and management. In addition to this the law re- quires us to approve their accounts. Notwithstanding all these require- ments this board as constituted has no such executive power to enforce any of its recommendations as should be lodged in a central governing body." As stated in the above quotation each institution had its own treasurer and each purchased its own supplies, the result being a wide variation of prices and sometimes of quality as between the different institutions. The trustees being unpaid gave only a small portion of their time to the performance of their duties, which tended to become merely 2. Founded as a private institution in 1858; aided by State appropriations be- ginning in 1867, and organized as a State institution in 1871. 3. Name changed to the State Training School for Girls, in 1901. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 11 perfunctory. Attendance upon the meetings (ordinarily there was one meeting a quarter) was irregular; and instances were not wanting in which the control over a particular institution was in fact exercised for a considerable period of time by a single trustee. The natural result of such a system was want of uniformity of policy, loss of efficiency and unnecessary financial waste. As time passed the dissatis- faction with the system increased. The State Board of Charities, the State Conference of Charities and Corrections and other interested organizations inaugurated a campaign for a reorganization of the exist- ing system. This movement was supported by the press and by public sentiment generally and a radical reorganization was advocated by sev- eral legislative committees of investigation. The State Civil Service law of 1905 was enacted to eliminate political influences in the management of these institutions, and at the same time centralized the selection of subordinate employees, by pro- viding for their appointment on the basis of competitive examinations under the State Civil Service Commission. Finally by an Act approved June 15, 1909, the former system of administration for these institu- tions was abolished, and the present centralized system was established. 2. Present Organization. With a view to standardizing the administration of the charitable institutions, increasing the efficiency of their management and securing greater economy of their expenditures, the Act of 1909 abolished the separate boards of trustees and managers and created a single central authority called the Board of Administration, in whose hands were con- centrated the management and control of all the charitable institutions, though not tire penal and reformatory institutions. The latter were left untouched by the act of 1909 and are still under the management of separate boards. The treasurers of the several institutions were like- wise abolished and the funds of each were required to be transferred to the State Treasurer, who was declared to be henceforth the custodian of the funds of all institutions subject to the control of the Board of Administration, with the exception of the monthly salary and contingent funds which were to be left in the hands of the superintendent or other managing officers. The act directed that all moneys collected by the institutional heads from the sale of products or from other sources should be transmitted to the State Treasurer each month, together with a detailed statement to the fiscal supervisor. In addition the Act of 1909 abolished the State Board of Charities and created in its place a Charities Commission to be described here- after. It also conferred a legal status on the State Conference of Charities and Corrections by permitting various bodies to pay the ex- penses of delegates to attend its sessions. The Board of Administration, created by the Act of 1909, is composed of five members appointed by the Governor, with the consent of the Senate, and removable by him for incompetency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office. Not more than three members of the board may belong to the same political party ; one member must be qualified by experience to advise the board regarding the care and treatment of 12 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. the insane, the feeble minded and epileptics ; one member must be designated by the Governor as president of the board ; the other three members must be reputable citizens. The board is required to elect one of its members as fiscal supervisor and one as secretary; and it is empowered to employ such other officers, agents and employes as it may deem necessary for the efficient conduct of its business. The term of the members of the Board of Administration is fixed at six years and the salary of each member at $6,000 per year plus an allowance for the necessary travelling expenses incurred while in the discharge of their duties. Each member is required to devote his entire time to the duties of his office. The principal powers and duties of the Board of Administration may be grouped in the following divisions : 1. To exercise executive and administrative supervision over all State charitable institutions, succeeding to all the property, rights, powers and duties of the former boards of trustees, managers or commissioners, and with power to accept and hold grants, gifts and bequests; To appoint and remove the superintendents or managing officers of the State charitable institutions, and (subject to the civil service laws) all other employees of the several institutions as well as its own employ- ees, and with the approval of the civil service commission to determine the salaries of all institutional employees (except the superintendent and managing officers), which shall be as nearly uniform as practicable for like services; To regulate the admission of inmates into the State hospitals, and to cause the removal to the State hospitals of all insane persons confined in the county almshouses, and of feeble minded women and children from such houses to the Lincoln school and colony; To cause one of its members to visit each institution under its con- trol at least once each quarter, and in addition as often as may be 'deemed necessary, and to make an inspection of every part thereof, in- cluding an examination of the records, stores, and methods of admin- istration ; _To make contracts for the purchase of material and supplies for all institutions subject to its control. 2. To inspect and investigate county jails, city prisons, houses of correction, workhouses, and all places in which persons convicted or suspected of crime are confined, to ascertain their sanitary condition and how the insane are treated ; no county, city or village may erect, add to or remodel a jail, almshouse (or similar institution) without submitting plans and specifications to the board for criticism and suggestions. 3. To exercise supervision over private charities, by inspecting, on complaint of at least two reputable citizens, any charitable association which appeals to the public for aid or is supported by trust funds; by licensing and inspecting all institutions or houses in which persons are detained for care or treatment for mental or nervous diseases ; by licens- ing (and revoking licenses), and supervising home finding associations and orphanages, and examining and reporting to the Secretary of State upon the merits of all associations for the care of dependent or delinquent children which seek incorporation ; by the visitation of children who have been placed in family homes ; and by the visitation and instruction of the adult blind. 4. The board is to report to the Governor each year its acts, proceedings and conclusions, which report must contain a complete financial statement of the several institutions, and state whether the moneys appropriated for their aid have been economically and judiciously expended, whether the laws have been complied with, and such other information and recom- mendations as it may deem proper. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 13 From this summary it will be seen that the powers of the Board of Administration are extensive and varied. They include the powers of visitation, inspection and investigation over both State and local institutions and over those which are private as well as those which are public ; in some cases it includes the power of licensing and of revoking licenses for certain reasons. Over the twenty-two State institutions under its jurisdiction its power of control is practically absolute. The Fiscal Supervisor is elected by the board from among its members. He is charged, under the supervision of the board, with examining into the condition of all property belonging to the charit- able institutions, with inquiring into the methods of bookkeeping, store- keeping and all financial and business operations generally of the sev- eral institutions, and with receiving, examining and presenting with this opinion to the board all plans and specifications for the construc- tion of new buildings. He is empowered to require of the managing officers of the institutions the presentation of estimates of their needs, which estimates he is required to tabulate and present to the board with his recommendation. It is then the duty of the board, with the approval of the Governor, to present the needs of the institutions to the Legislature. At least once a year the fiscal supervisor is required to call the managing officers of the several institutions to a joint meeting with a committee of the board for the purpose of classifying the supplies and estimating the requirements of each "institution so as to provide for their most practical and economical purchase. This body is known as the Board of Joint Estimate whose duty it is to provide for the purchase of supplies in large quantities on contracts for periods not exceeding fifteen months. The law declares that the purchase of all supplies shall be on the basis of competitive bidding after an advertisement of proposals in one or more newspapers in each of the seven largest cities of the State. The managing officer of each institution is required to present to the fiscal supervisor a detailed monthly estimate of needed supplies, materials, salaries, etc., which estimates may be altered by the fiscal supervisor for reasons which he is required to give in writing. Upon the filing by him of a copy of the estimates with the State auditor, it is made the duty of the latter official to draw warrents on the State Treasurer for the amounts. The salary and contingent funds for each institution are placed in the hands of the managing officer. An Act of 1911 provides for a supervising engineer to be appointed by the Board of Administration, to advise the boafd and the General Assembly in matters relating to the construction, repair and economical management of the State institutions, and to prepare plans and speci- fications. An Act of 1913 creates the office of State Deportation Agent and an assistant, to be appointed by the Board of Administration, to arrange for the deportation of alien inmates in the State hospitals and other charitable institutions. 14 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. The staff of the Board of Administration in October, 1913, and salaries and appropriations in 1913 were as follows: Per Year. Five members of Board of Administration at $6,000 $30,000 Supervising engineer ' State Agent, Home Visitation Deportation Agent Assistant Deportation Agent ". Total statutory positions $42,000 Chief clerk - $2,500 Statistician 2,100 Bookkeeper 1,80* Storekeeper and assistant bookkeeper 1,80< Two reimbursing clerks at $1,500 3,000 Two male clerks at $1,800 3,600 Two- male clerks and stenographers at $1,200 , 2,40( One female stenographer 1,200 Two female stenographers at $1,000 2,000 Filing clerk 1,200 Messenger 900 Two assistant Home visitors at $1,200 2,400 One assistant Home visitor 1,000 One stenographer 1,000 One superintendent adult blind 1,40( Seven instructors adult blind 3,500 31,800 Total salaries (36 positions) $73,800 Annual appropriations for expenses Office and traveling expenses $14,000 Office and traveling expenses Home Visitors 5,000 Clerk hire and tabulating 1,750 Total administrative expenses 20,750 Total salaries and expenses $94,550 The Charities Commission. This takes the place of the old board of charities, and is com- posed of five persons, not more than three of whom may belong to the same political party. They are appointed by the Governor, with the consent of the Senate, for a term of five years ; and the law contains no provision in regard to the right of the Governor to remove them for cause or otherwise. They receive no compensation other than an allowance for necessary travelling expenses incurred in the perform- ance of their duties. The commission is authorized to employ an executive secretary at a salary of $3,600 per year, and such other officers, agents and employees as it may deem necessary. The powers of the commission are merely visitorial, investigational and recom- mendatory in character ; but they extend to both State and local, public and private institutions. They include the investigation of all State charitable institutions, especially the State hospitals, and certain local institutions, such as county jails and alms nouses, with particular reference to their condition and management ; and the commission may at its discretion inquire into the equipment, management and policies of all other institutions subject to the supervision and inspection of the CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 15 Board of Administration, such as orphanages, lying-in hospitals, home- finding associations and the like. It also has supervision over the local boards of visitors to charitable institutions, to be described later. The commission is required to collect and publish criminal statistics and to make an annual report to the Governor, which report shall con- tain such suggestions and recommendations as it deems necessary and pertinent. The inspectional duties of the commission are* for the most part carried out by the executive secretary. He also edits the Institutional Quarterly, a publication dealing with the conditions and progress of the charitable institutions, conducts investigations of accidents, pre- pares reports, arranges the program of the annual meeting of the State Conference of Charities and Corrections, and, in general, watches over the execution of the laws relating to the charitable institutions. The staff of the charities commission and annual salaries and appropriations in 191,3 were as follows: Five members, no salary but expenses paid : - Per Year. Executive secretary * $ 3,600 Assistant secretary and stenographer 1,200 Stenographer 900 Inspector of institutions . . . . 1,200 Messenger and janitor 800 Total salaries ' $ 7,700 Office and traveling expenses $5,000 Expenses of auxiliary visitors 1,500 Expenses conference of charity 750 Purchase of books for library 500 7,750 Total salaries and appropriations $15,450 Boards of Visitors. The Act of 1909 further provides for a Board of Visitors for each of the several institutions under the control of the Board of Administration. Each board of visitors consists of three members appointed by the Governor, with the consent of the Senate, for a term of six years. They receive no compensation for their services, but the law authorizes an allowance for the payment of their expenses. It is made their duty to visit and inspect the institution for which they are appointed at least once each quarter in the case of institutions having the whole State for a district, and at least once a month in the case of institutions whose districts are fractional parts of the State. They are required to make a written report to the charities commission within ten days after such inspection, which report shall state in detail the condition of the institution and of its inmates, and shall include such other matters pertaining to the management and affairs thereof as it may deem proper. It is further made the duty of each board to make an annual report to the charities commission in regard to the results of its visits and inspections. So far, this provision of the law has remained practically a dead letter, since only one or two such boards have in fact been appointed since the enactment of the law. 16 KI'I'ICIKNCY AM) KCoNOMY COMMITTEE. Appropriations. The appropriations made in 1913 for the administration and sup- port of State charities for two years, including salaries paid out of the general salary appropriations, are shown below : Board of Administration : Salaries $147,600.00 Expenses 41,500.00 $ 189,100.00 Charities Commission : Salaries $ 15,400.00 Expenses 15,500.00 $ 30,900.00 Charitable Institutions : Ordinary operating expenses $7,123,337.42 Ordinary repairs and improvements 716,900.00 Ordinary care of grounds 64,400.00 Total ordinary expenses $7,904,637.42 Special appropriations 3,441,814.04 $11,34^,451.46 Special Appropriations : Cherry mine sufferers $43,025.18 Secretary Cherry mine relief committee 600.00 Relief of William Baker 10,000.00 Aid of B. C. B. Jorgensen 6,540.00 Aid of Henry Pryor . 2,000.00 $ 62,165.18 Grand total $11,628,616.64 ESTIMATES 'FOR ORDINARY EXPENSES AND SPECIAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR STATE CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS, Estimates for Ordinary Institutions. Expenses. Elgin State Hospital $ 606,771.32 Kankakee State Hospital 1,090,659.00 Kankakee Psychopathic Institute 34,600.00 Jacksonville State Hospital 580,586.10 Anna State Hospital 599,354.00 Watertown State Hospital 477,896.20 Peoria State Hospital 890,101.30 Chester State Hospital 96,324.00 Chicago State Hospital 1,081,240.00 Lincoln State School and Colony 506,722 00 The Illinois School for the Deaf 271,007.00 The Illinois School for the Blind 144,726.80 The Illinois Industrial Home for Blind 64,488.00 The Illinois Soldiers' and Sailors Home 482,180.40 The Soldiers' Widows' Home of Illinois 97,165.00 The Illinois Soldiers' Orphans' Home. . 170,192.30 The Illinois Charitable Eye and Ear In- firmary 110,004.00 110,004.00 State Training School for Girls 225,860.00 65,935.47 291,795.47 St. Charles School for Boys 374,760.00 206,500.00 581,260.00 Alton State Hospital 500,119.19 *500,119.19 State Colony for Epileptics 500,000.00 500,000.00 1913-1915. Special Appro- priations. Totals. $ 151,500.00 $ 758,271.32 289,898.90 *tU80,557.90 34,600.00 21,190.00 601,776.10 200,674.27 *800,028.27 217,300.00 *695. 196.20 165,700.00 1,055,801.30 500.00 96,824.00 830,966.21 *1,912,206.21 102,000.00 608,722.00 2,000.00 273,007.00 12,700.00 157,426.80 135,750.00 200,238.00 15,780.00 487,960.40 1,000.00 98,165.00 22,300.00 192,492.30 Totals $7,904,637.42 $3,441,814.04 $11,346,451.46 *Includes re-appropriations as follows : Kankakee State Hospital Anna State Hospital Watertown State Hospital Chicago State Hospital Alton State Hospital fKankakee (emergency) .$ 23,348.90 . 145,274.27 . 75,000.00 . 76,666.21 . 295,119.19 . 15,000.00 CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 17 C. PENAL AND REFORMATORY INSTITUTIONS. 1. Separate Boards. The first State Penitentiary was authorized in 1827, and was established at Alton. The site and buildings were sold by the State when the new penitentiary at Joliet was provided. The Illinois State Penitentiary at Joliet was authorized in 1857. The Southern Illinois Penitentiary at Chester was created by Act of 1877. The General Assembly in 1867 provided for a State Reform School, which was located at Pontiac, and this institution was reorganized in 1891, and its name changed to the Illinois State Reformatory. The bill to establish the Board of Administration, as originally drafted and reported, included the two penitentiaries and the reform- atory among the institutions placed under its control ; but they were stricken out during the discussion on the bill. As finally passed, the bill did not apply to these three institutions ; the system under which they are managed and controlled remained as before. Instead of being subject to the administration of a common board, as are the charitable institutions, each remains under the control of a separate board appointed by the Governor, with the consent of the Senate. In the case of the penitentiaries, there is a board of commissioners for each institution, composed of three members appointed for a term of six years ; in the case of the reformatory, there is a board of man- agers composed of five members appointed for a term of ten years, not more than three of whom shall belong to the same political party. The Governor is empowered to remove the penitentiary commissioners at his discretion ; he may remove the members of the board of managers of the reformatory for misconduct, incompetency or neglect of duty and after opportunity shall have been given for a hearing upon written charges. The penitentiary commissioners are each required to furnish a bond for the sum of $25,000, which may be increased by the Governor and Auditor in certain contingencies ; the members of the board of managers of the reformatory are each required to furnish bonds to the amount of $5,000. The compensation of members of these boards is fixed by law; for the penitentiary commissioners it is $1,500 per annum; for the members of the reformatory board it is $1,200 per annum. They are not required to give their whole time to their official duties. The powers and duties of the three boards are in general the same. They have full control, management and supervision of their respective institutions. They may appoint the chief officers thereof, such as wardens, superintendents, chaplains, physicians, etc., and may remove them ; in the case of the penitentiary, at their discretion ; in the case of the reformatory, only after an opportunity has been given the accused to be heard upon written charges. They may make and enforce disciplinary regulations, examine accounts and expenditures, and exer- cise general supervision over the financial and business affairs of the institution. The board of managers of the reformatory are required to certify jto the Governor, with their approval or disapproval, the accounts of 18 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. the institution; to provide a thorough system of training for every inmate in the "common branches of an English education" and in such trades and handicrafts as will enable him, upon his release, to earn his support; and to this end they are required to establish schools in the reformatory; they are empowered to transfer incorrigible inmates to the penitentiary 4 ; to establish rules and regulations for the release of prisoners on parole ; and it is made their duty to adopt such methods as shall prevent prisoners from returning to criminal habits. Finally, they are required to report biennially to the Legislature, through the Governor, concerning the condition of the reformatory, which report shall contain such recommendations as the board may deem fit, together with a detailed statement of all moneys expended. The penitentiary commissioners are required to meet at the peni- tentiary at least once a month, to keep minutes of their meetings and proceedings, make regulations concerning the quality and quantity of food for prisoners, and the number of hours of labor required of them per day, and to enter into contracts for the purchase of provisions, clothing, medicine, forage, fuel, and other supplies for any period not exceeding one year. They are required to make an annual inventory and appraisement of all property of the institution, and to report to the Governor biennially concerning the condition of their respective institutions, particularly with respect to all moneys received and ex- pended, and of all contracts entered into. Unlike the board of man- agers of the reformatory, they do not have the power to release prisoners on parole, that power being conferred upon the Board of Pardons. It will be observed that while the administrative organizations of the two penitentiaries are identical, the laws which apply to one apply- ing at the same time to the other, there are some differences between their organization and that of the reformatory. These differences relate principally to the organization, size, name, term and compensa- tion of the two classes of boards. The reformatory board is larger in size, the salaries of its members are smaller, and it is bipartisan in organization ; its members have terms almost twice as long as those of the penitentiary commissioners, and they may be removed by the Gov- ernor only for cause and after a hearing upon written charges, whereas he may remove the penitentiary commissioners at his discretion and without^ hearing; the bond required of the penitentiary commissioners is five times as large as that required of members of the reformatory board; the wardens of the penitentiary may be removed by the com- missioners at their discretion, whereas the superintendent of the re- formatory ^can only be removed for cause and after a hearing ; the Governor is required to visit the penitentiaries twice a year and examine into their condition, but no such duty is imposed upon him in respect to the reformatory ; and, finally, the board of managers of the reformatory is required to report to the Legislature, whereas the penitentiary commissioners report to the Governor. 4. Held unconstitutional in the case of People v. Mallary 195 111 582 on the pound that the transferring of inmates from the reformatory to the' penitentiary involves the exercise of Judicial powr, which the Legislature cannot confer upon an Xlnlnntratlya body. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 19 In general, the law defines the duties of the penitentiary commis- sioners with much more detail than those of the board of managers of the reformatory. Whether, in view of the very similar character of the reformatory and the penitentiaries, the more important of these differences in the organization by which they are controlled and man- aged are justified, is a question which is worthy of consideration. 2. Board of Prison Industries. In addition to the above mentioned powers and duties, the members of the three boards of control collectively constitute the Board of Prison Industries of Illinois, although they receive no extra compensa- tion on account of this additional duty. This board, created by an Act approved May 11, 1903 (amended by an Act of May 18, 1905, and by an Act of June 16, 1909) was charged with putting into effect the laws relating to prison industries. It was made their duty to establish a system ot prison industry in each institution, mainly for the manufac- ture of supplies for the State and its institutions; to attend to the disposition and distribution of the products of convict labor; to see that no such products should be sold in the open market, except where the demands of the State, its institutions and school and road districts for such products shall not be sufficient to furnish employment to all the prisoners. In the latter case the Board of Prison Industries may em- ploy not more than 40 per cent of the convicts in the manufacture of products for sale in the open market, except that under the direction of the Governor the board may employ not more than 40 per cent of said prisoners for the improvement of the channels of the Okaw, Cache, Little Wabash, Big Muddy, Saline and Sangamon rivers. This board is also required to furnish crushed rock and other manufactured road material produced by convicts to the State Highway Commission. The aggregate value of products manufactured during the year 1912 was $577,943, of which $290,601 represented the output of the penitentiary at Joliet, $216,601 that of the penitentiary at Chester, and $70,437 that of the reformatory at Pontiac. In January, 1905, the board established a central office in Springfield and appointed a sales manager to take charge of it. 3. Board of Classification. The president of the board of prison industries, the president of the State Board of Public Charities (Board of Administration) and the Auditor of Public Accounts constitute a board of classification which is authorized to fix and determine the schedule of prices of all labor performed and of all articles manufactured and furnished to the State or the institutions thereof. 4. Penitentiary Commission. In addition to the three boards for the management of the existing correctional institutions, there was created, by Act of 1907, another commission known as the penitentiary commission. This commission consists of three members, appointed by the Governor, no definite term being named. This commission is authorized to acquire land for a 20 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. new penitentiary and hospital for the insane criminals, to prepare plans and specifications for all necessary buildings, and to control the con- struction of said buildings. 5. State Board of Pardons. Another State board whose functions relate to the inmates of cor- rectional institutions is the State Board of Pardons, established in 1897. This board consists of three members, appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, for terms of three years, one member retiring each year. Not more than two members may belong to the same political party. The Governor may remove any member for misconduct, incompetency or neglect of duty. The State Board of Pardons gives hearings on applications for pardons, reprieves and commutations addressed to the Governor, and makes a report upon each case to the Governor. The rejports and recommendations of the board are advisory only, to aid the Governor in exercising his constitutional power of pardon. Regular meetings of the board are required by law to be held on the second Tuesday of January, April, July and October of each year. Special meetings may be called by the Governor or the chairman of the board. In practice, monthly meetings are held at Joliet and Menard. By Act of 1899, the Board of Pardons was given power to establish rules and regulations under which prisoners in the penitentiaries might be allowed on parole outside the penitentiary buildings, and also to grant parole leave to such prisoners. The board of managers of the State reformatory has similar powers in regard to prisoners in that institution. Thus the work of the Board of Pardons embraces two separate and distinct functions : that of examining applications for executive clemency, and that of passing upon cases of prisoners who desire to be released on parole or to have their sentences definitely fixed. The parole work occupies the attention of the board about two weeks of every month. The original act creating the Board of Pardons fixed their salaries at $2,000 per year and an allowance of 5 cents per mile to cover their traveling expenses. The Act of 1899 relating to parole provided that the members should receive $1,500 for each year for services performed in pursuance thereof, making their total salary $3,500 per year, plus traveling expenses. A clerk is appointed by the board, at an annual salary of $2,000, whose duty it is to receive, file and safely keep all papers and docu- ments and a record of the proceedings and recommendations of the board. The board also employs a stenographer at a salary of $1,200 per annum. The total expenses for the two years 1910-12 were $31,923.27. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 21 The following table shows the number of parole cases acted upon by the Board t>f Pardons during the year 1913 at the Joliet and Chester penitentiaries : PAROLE CASES: STATE BOARD OF PARDONS, 1913. Month. Joliet. Chester. Cases on docket. Ordered paroled. Sentences fixed or otherwise handled. Totals. Cases on docket. Ordered paroled. Sentences fixed or otherwise handled. Totals. January 76 65 59 67 65 44 67 70 83 74 84 78 25 25 36 23 29 22 26 31 41 41 43 31 51 40 23 44 36 22 41 39 42 33 41 47 76 65 59 67 65 44 67 70 83 74 84 78 21 128 72 27 74 82 21 64 99 63 43 50 21 41 48 27 33 .35 21 17 66 34 23 23 87 24 41 47 47 33 29 20 27 21 128 72 27 74 82 21 64 99 63 43 50 ' February . . A . March April May June July August September .... October . . November .... December .... . Totals. . 832 373 459 832 II 744 389 355 744 The following table shows the number of final discharges under the parole law ordered by the board of pardons during the year 1913 at the two penitentiaries and the reformatory: FINAL DISCHARGES UNDER THE PAROLE LAW, 1913. Months. Joliet. Chester. Pontiac. Totals. January 19 8 9 36 February 12 16 20 48 March 19 34 16 69 April , 10 8 25 43 May 14 17 23 54 June 27 21 15 63 July . 19 13 36 68 Augu st 6 19 15 40 September 36 28 17 81 October 23 34 20 77 November 22 17 22 61 December 16 16 24 56 Totals. 223 231 242 696 The following table is a summary of all cases handled by the State board of pardons under the parole law (not including pardon cases) for the year 1913: 22 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. ALL CASES: STATE BOARD OF PARDONS, 1913. ;- Joliet. Chester. Pontiac. Totals. Paroled 373 389 762 Sentences fixed or other- wise handled 459 355 814 Final discharges 223 231 242 696 Specials, estimated 300 225 525 Total number of cases handled, 2,797. D. COMPARISON OF THE CHARITABLE AND PENAL SYSTEMS OF ADMINIS- TRATION. Although the two classes of institutions (charitable and penal)' are in many respects similar, and in any strictly scientific or logical scheme of administrative organization would be subject to the same system of management and control, they have in fact very different organizations based upon opposite principles of government. The management and control of the charitable institutions, and these, as has been said, include some 'that are in a sense not strictly charitable, but in a sense correctional, reformatory and educational, are concentrated in a single central body which gives all its time to the service with which it is charged; while the management and control of the penal and reformatory institutions proper are divided between different boards, one for each institution, the members of which are paid small salaries and are not required to devote their entire time to the discharge of their official duties. Furthermore, while the law requires that one member of the Board of Administration of the char- itable institutions shall be a trained specialist in the care and treatment of those committed to the institutions under its management, there is no such requirement in respect to the boards of control of the penal and reformatory institutions, and in fact these boards are generally composed of persons who have no special qualifications, either from experience or training, for penological administration. For the charitable institutions there is a single central treasurer (the State Treasurer), whereas each of the penal and reformatory institutions has its own local treasurer (the warden or superintendent). In the fiscal supervisor the charitable institutions have. a financial and business manager, and provision is made for estimating the aggregate amount of the necessary supplies for all the institutions, and these are required to be purchased, as far as practicable, in large quantities upon the basis of competitive bids. They are then allotted to the various institutions on the basis of monthly estimates. In the case of the penal and reformatory institutions, there is no common business or financial agent, no joint purchase of supplies in fact, the law scarcely deals with the subject of financial management, the purchase of supplies and the like, except to declare that the wardens of the penitentiaries shall attend to the fiscal concerns under the direction of the commissioners, and shall act under their direction in making contracts for the purchase of supplies. The law relating to the reformatory deals still less with CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 23 these matters. It is, therefore, left to each institution to adopt such business and financial methods as it may see fit. Consequently there is no uniformity of accounting, of keeping institution records or of purchasing supplies. For the charitable institutions an elaborate system of visitation, inspection and investigation has been provided, with a view to insuring efficient and economical management and the keeping of the institutions up to a high standard of efficiency. This inspectional machinery is triple in character. 1. The Board of Administration itself is required by the law to visit and inspect the institutions under its control, it being made the duty of one member to visit each institution at least four times a year and as many other times as the board may deem necessary. 2. With a view to securing the benefit of criticism and suggestion by those who are not active administrative officers the need of which is important, since the Board of Administration is primarily an admin- istrative body, and may be disposed to emphasize considerations of economy and business management to the neglect of the proper care and treatment of the inmates of the institutions the law created the Charities Commission and charged it especially with the duty of inves- tigating the condition and management of all the institutions under the authority of the board, and of reporting to the Governor the results of its investigations, with such recommendations and sugges- tions as it might deem necessary and pertinent. 3. Finally, provision is made for the inspection of each charitable institution, by a local board of visitors, at least four times a year in the case of state-wide institutions, and at least once a month in the case of those whose districts are fractional parts of the State. But in the case of the penal and reformatory institutions, no visitorial and inspection machinery has been provided other than that of the boards of managers. The Charities Commission has no power to visit and inspect either the penitentiaries or the reformatory ; and no provision has been made for their inspection by local boards of visitors, as in the case with the charitable institutions. Thus, whereas the administrative methods and policies of the board which manages and controls the charitable institutions are subject to the inspection and investigation of two entirely separate and independent bodies, those of the penitentiary and reformatory boards are subject to the inspection of no authority but themselves. Advantages of the Central Board System. In favor of the single central board system the following advan- tages are claimed: 1. It is a system by which uniformity in the organization and admin- istration of the various institutions may be secured. Under such a system the central board may be made a clearing house of statistical information relating to the condition of inmates, admissions, discharges, releases on parole, accidents, deaths, etc. It makes possible the standardization ot services and as a result conduces to economy and efficiency. Under it uniformity of policies and methods, uniformity of financial accounting, uniformity of records and reports generally, uniformity of salaries, wages, 24 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. DIAGRAM I. CO o cr> s 3 UJ CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 25 DIAGRAM II. 26 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. and prices, uniformity of standards of diet quality and quantity of food and other supplies may be secured as between the various institutions. Justice requires that there should be equality of treatment as between the different institutions, which it is difficult to secure where each institution is treated as a separate unit and is under the management and control of a separate board. There is always a possibility that some of them will get more than they really need, while others will get less. The central board system also affords the means of eliminating rivalry among local boards for appropriations. In some states where the separate board system pre- vails there is a tendency to regard the State institutions as local, and a strong local pressure is brought to bear upon the Legislature for large appropriations, because the larger they are the more money will be avail- able for expenditures in the community interested. Instances are alleged in which local boards with stronger political influences have been able to obtain from the Legislature larger appropriations than the actual needs of the institution required, while others suffered from inadequate appropria- tions. [See letter from C. C. Aspinwall, Secretary, State Board of Control of the State of Washington in the special report of the Illinois State Board of Charities to Governor Deneen, 1908, p. 57.] 2. The central board system conduces to economy through the elim- ination of duplicate local institutional officials, such as commissioners, treasurers, bookkeepers, etc. ; it makes possible a more rigorous super- vision of financial expenditures and through the centralization of the pur- chase of supplies for all the institutions, it is possible to purchase in larger quantities and at lower rates. These supplies may then be distributed among the institutions from time to time on the basis of their actuab needs. It is the experience in other states where the separate board system pre- vails, and it was true in this State under the former system of administer- ing the charitable institutions, that there is a wide variation as between the different institutions in respect to the prices paid for supplies and a varia- tion in the quality as well. Sometimes the supplies for each institution are purchased from local dealers (in obedience to the pressure of local de- mand) at retail prices as they are needed, sometimes without weighing, measuring or testing. A committee of the Illinois Legislature in 1908 criticised the boards of two of the State institutions for purchasing most of their supplies from local dealers in small quantities' instead of by contract at wholesale prices. The secretary of the New York Commission in Lunacy recently testified that the prices paid for coffee by the different institutions, before the system of joint purchase was introduced, ranged from 16 cents a pound for coffee that was two-thirds chicory, to 22 cents a pound, whereas now good coffee is purchased for all the institutions at 10 cents a' pound. When the hospitals bought carbon paper, pens, tooth brushes, typewriter ribbons, etc., separately, he says, the prices paid varied from $6.00 to $9.00 per dozen in the case of ribbons, whereas they are now purchased in large lots and furnished to the institutions at $4.25 per dozen. Pens which formerly cost $1.50 per box now cost $1.00, and a better quality of supplies is now obtained. (See report Illinois State Board of Charities, 1908, pp. 207-208.) In Illinois the same conditions prevailed in respect to the purchase of sup- plies for the charitable institutions when each was governed by a separate board. It was found in 1908 that the average prices paid for coal at the seventeen charitable institutions varied from $1.24 a ton at the Southern Hospital for the Insane at Anna to $4.20 a ton at the Eye and Ear Infirmary at Chicago. (See Diagram I.) A committee of the Legislature in 1908 reported that at several of the institutions there were no scales for the weighing of coal or other methods for determining whether the institu- tion was receiving the amount for which it paid. Where it was weighed, and checked, as at Kankakee, there was found a marked difference be- tween the institution weights and those of the contractors. Likewise the prices paid for flour ranged from $1.95 per 100 pounds at Anna to $2.78 at CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 27 the Home for the Blind in Chicago. (Report Illinois State Board of Charities, pp. 29-31, 1908. See Diagram II.) These inequalities have been eliminated since the introduction of the system of joint purchase for all the institutions and by means of purchases in large quantities lower prices are secured. For example, cpal is now purchased for all the institutions upon contract, the award being given to the lowest bidder after an advertisement of proposals. Samples are re- quired to be submitted by the contractor and these are analyzed at the State University, and the price paid is determined on the basis of these analyses, whereas formerly the institutions paid for cojil regardless of dirt and cleanings from the mines. If the coal delivered shows a heat-pro- ducing capacity in excess of the standard, the contractor is paid accordingly and vice versa. (Institution Quarterly, March, 1913, p. 156.) So in regard to the purchase of other supplies. The board specifies a uniform quality for articles used by all the institutions and the quality specified is quite different from that required before 1910. For example, beef must weigh not less than 575 pounds to the carcass, and a uniform weight is required in the case of bacon and hams. One grade of flour is now purchased for all the institutions, whereas formerly many different grades were fur- nished. The same is true in respect to tea, coffee, sugar and potatoes. Formerly an inferior grade of butterine was purchased by many of the charitable institutions (and is still done by one of the penitentiaries and the reformatory) ; now a uniform quality is purchased for all the institutions, so that there is no discrimination in this respect against inmates of any institution. The abolition of the separate boards of trustees of the charitable institutions and the consolidation of control in a single central board made it possible to establish uniformity among the various institutions in respect to salaries, wages, number of employees, accounting, prices of supplies and materials, and, in general, to standardize the services, diets, quality of food and supplies, methods of keeping records, etc. Among the penal and reformatory institutions, however, differences in respect to most of these matters still exist and will continue to exist so long as the insti- tutions are managed by separate boards. Some of these differences may be noted. First, in respect to salaries : The compensation of the peniten- tiary commissioners is $1,500 per year; that of the reformatory manager is $1,200 per year. The salary of the warden of the penitentiary at Joliet is $5,000 per year, that at Chester $4,000 per year and that of the superin- tendent of the reformatory $4,000. The deputy warden at Joliet receives a salary of $2,200 per year; that of Chester $1,500. The physician at the Joliet penitentiary receives $2,300 per year; at the Southern penitentiary he receives $1,500. There are five parole agents at Joliet, while at Chester, with about the same number of prisoners, there are only two. In respect to certain items of expenditure, the differences among the three institutions are in some instances very great. Thus for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1912, the disbursements for salaries at the Chester penitentiary, with an average of 1,088 inmates, amounted to $55,977, while those at Pontiac, with only 690 inmates, amounted to $77,126. The number of employees at the Joliet penitentiary was 116; at Chester 109, and at Pontiac 107. The disbursements for bedding and clothing at the Joliet penitentiary, with an average of 1,394 prisoners, amounted to a trifle more than those at Pontiac, with half the number of inmates. The expenses on account of motive power, light and steam amounted to $53,380 at Joliet and $9,523 at Chester; the office expenses of the two institutions were $3,461 and $1,891, respectively (for the year ending September 30, 1911, they were $9,119 and $1,068, respectively) ; traveling expenses, $2,498 and $1,040, respectively. For the year ending September 30, 1911, the expenditures on account of laundry amounted to $334 at Chester and $1,285 at Pontiac; in the following year the amounts were $225 and $1,462, respectively. 28 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. With regard to the amount and quality of food consumed, there are striking differences among the institutions. Thus, during the year ending September 30, 1911, the number of pounds of coffee purchased at Chester was 11,235, whereas at Joliet, with nearly 30 per cent more prisoners, the amount was 6,282. During the year 1912 Chester purchased 20,874 pounds of sugar, Joliet 11.663 pounds; on the other hand, Joliet purchased 8,909 bushels of potatoes and Chester but 4,475 ; Joliet consumed 10,079 pounds of rice and Chester 4,414 pounds. The expenditure for meats amounted to $31,346 at Joliet and $25,941 at Pontiac, ^with about half the number of inmates. At Chester the prisoners were fed on butter costing 33 cents per pound; at Jolu* on "butter" costing 12 cents per pound (evidently butter- ine), and at Pontiac on "butter" costing 13 cents per pound. Chester used 14,058 pounds of lard and Joliet only 120 pounds, butterine apparently being used instead. At Chester the price paid for beef ranged from 11 to 1&/2 cents per pound; at Pontiac 11 cents, and at Joliet 9.7 cents. It is evident, therefore, that there is no standard of subsistence, no uniformity in respect to rations in the several institutions. In one, meat constitutes a much larger proportion of the ration than in the others; in one, syrup is served the prisoners much more extensively than in others; in one, a much higher grade of meat is served than in the others; and in some the prisoners are fed on butterine, while in others they are served butter. Whether such varying standards of diet involving, as they do, unequal treatment of the inmates of the several institutions, should be permitted, is a question which deserves consideration. They do not exist in the charitable institutions, and have not existed since these institutions came under the control of the Board of Administration. It naturally fol- lows from these facts that the per capita cost of subsistence in the several institutions varies more or less widely. At Joliet, the per capita total expenditures for the year ending September 30, 1912, amounted to $179.84 ; at Chester, $201.26, and at Pontiac $255.35. The estimated per capita net cost of maintenance per day is 48 cents at Joliet, 54 cents at Chester (this includes an estimated charge for food supplies from the prison farm), and 70 cents at Pontiac. The lowest of these figures (that for the Joliet peni- tentiary) is considerably higher than the per capita cost in the insane hospitals (with about the same number of inmates) under the Board of Administration, which ranged in 1910-12 from $130.12 at the Jacksonville hospital to $170.32 at the Chicago hospital, and averaged about $140.00. The average per capita cost in the correctional institutions for 1911-12 was $208.00. If the penitentiaries and reformatories were maintained at the same per capita cost as the insane hospitals, there would be a saving of more than $200,000 a year. So far as can be ascertained, there has been a marked saving in the cost of maintaining the seventeen charitable institutions since they were placed under the control of the Board of Administration. On account of the increased cost of foodstuffs and other supplies during recent years, however, the reduction in the per capita cost of supplies has naturally not been considerable. During the past two years, for example, the price of beef in some instances has increased 40 per cent, and there has been a marked advance in the price of many other articles. From the following statement, prepared for the Efficiency and Economy Committee by Hon. F. D. Whipp, fiscal supervisor, in March, 1914, it appears that there has been a reduction in the ordinary operating expenses of the institutions during the four years since the creation of the board of $418,450.33. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 29 STATEMENT No. 1. SHOWING GROSS COST OF MAINTAINING THE INMATES OF THE ILLINOIS CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS FOR THE YEARS 1909, 1910, 1911, 1912 AND 1913, BASED ON THE ORDINARY OPER- ATING PER CAPITA COSTS, SHOWING EXPENDITURES OF THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION AND MAKING ALLOWANCES FOR THE CHANGE IN THE BASIS OF APPROPRIATIONS MADE BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. Gross cost of maintaining inmates based on 15,705.98, the average number present during the calendar year 1910 : Cost on Current Per Capita, Plus Additional Items. Total on 1909 Per Capita. 15,705.98, at $194.87 gross per capita, cost 1909 $ 3,060.624.32 15,705.98, at $175.35 gross per capita, cost 1910 $ 2,754,043.47 Expenditures of Board of Administration, 1910 58,400.68 Gross cost of maintaining inmates based on 15,860.40, the average number present during the calendar year 1911: 15,860.40, at $194.87 gross per capita, 1909 3,090,716.14 15,860.40, at $172.22 gross per capita, 1911 2,731,401.41 Expenditures of Board of Administration, 1911.... 67,145.70 Increase in bills incurred for repairs, improvements and grounds six months (basis of appropriation changed) 57,242.31 Gross cost of maintaining inmates based on 15,956.50, the average number present during the calendar year 1912: 15,956.50, at $194.87 gross per capita, 1909 3,109,443.15 *15,956.50, at $181.81 gross per capita, 1912 2,901,129.35 Expenditures Board of Administration, 1912 69,940.77 Increase in bills incurred for repairs, improvements and grounds, 1912 over 1909 185,073.90 Gross cost of maintaining inmates based on 16,801.85, the average number present during the calendar year 1913: 16,801.85, at $194.87 gross per capita, 1909 3,274,176.46 *16,801.85, at $182.82 gross per capita, 1913 3,071,754.48 Expenditures of Board of Administration, 1913 75,714.43 Increase in bills incurred for repairs, improvements and grounds, 1913 over 1909 144,663.24 Net reduction four years 418,450.33 $12,534,960.07 $12,534,960.07 A comparison of prices paid by the Board of Administration for standard articles like flour, sugar, tea, coffee, butter, etc., with those paid by the separate boards before 1910 is difficult because of the advance in prices and because, under the present system of purchasing supplies a uniform quality is specified and generally a superior quality is purchased. As has been said, many of the institu- tions formerly purchased an inferior grade of butterine, whereas the Board of Administration specifies that butterine furnished shall contain at least 20 per cent of pure creamery butter, with not over 10 per cent moisture and 3 per cent salt. It will be seen from the following table, prepared by the fiscal supervisor, that the prices paid in 1913 by the Kankakee hospital for beef, ham, coffee, tea, potatoes and butterine were perceptibly higher than in 1909, and that only on bacon, flour and sugar has there been a reduction. *Dunning excluded. 30 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. AVERAGE COST OF SUNDRY FOOD SUPPLIES AT THE KANKAKEE STATE HOSPITAL. Quarter ending Quarter ending Dec. 31, 1909. Dec. 31, 1913. Fresh beef carcass .................................... $ 6.00 Fore quarters ................ : ................ '.. . 9.75 Hindquarters .............................. . ..... 12.00 Bacon .......................................... $17.76 16.72 Ham ............................................ 12.93 15.45 Flour ......... > ................................. 4.98 3.79 Coffee ........................................... 13 .17& Tea .............................................. 20 1 / .23^ Sugar ........................................... 5.03 4.33 Potatoes ...................... , ............. .... .43 Butterine After this comparison of results under the central board and separate board systems in Illinois, we may now return to the general discussion of the merits and demerits of the two systems. 3. Finally, it is claimed that the single board system conduces to greater efficiency in the administration of the institutions, as a result of the centralization of power and responsibility. The doings of a single board may be more easily followed, as public opinion is focused upon its policies, than is possible where there are twenty or more boards. Unlike the separate boards which formerly controlled the charitable institutions and which now control the penal and reformatory institutions, the Board of Administration gives its whole time to the affairs of the institutions under its jurisdiction; it is permanently in session and, through an exten- sive system of reports required of the institutions (daily in respect to certain matters), it is enabled to keep in close touch with what is happen- ing in them and with the manner in which they are managed by the head officials. It is, therefore, able to compare results of each with those of the others and to enforce upon all the highest standard attained in any one. By reason of its close touch with all the institutions, it is in a position to recommend legislation for improving the conditions of all and for meeting their needs upon the basis of equal and uniform treatment. Being always in existence, such a board can develop systematic business methods and will acquire a familiarity with its duties such as local boards which meet only 'occasionally for the perfunctory performance of their duties and which, therefore, have no permanent organization, can never attain. By relieving the managing heads of the institutions from a mass of business and financial details, which consume their time and for which they are often unfitted, they are left free to devote their time to affairs which relate more immediately to the care and welfare of the inmates. The separate board system in effect requires them to be not only experts in charity administration, penology and the care of the insane, but business and financial managers as well a very difficult combination and one which is probably not often found. It is the testimony of the Board of Administration that there has been a marked increase in the efficiency of the institutions since the institution of central control in the place of local management. (See its report in 1910, ch. 2.) Governor Deneen declared, in his message of January 8, 1913, that "the general result has been a great increase of efficiency, accom- panied by greater economy and uniformity of service, placing all institu- tions upon a level with the best similar institutions in this country or in Europe." CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 31 Criticism of the Central Board System. Some objections have been urged against the system of adminis- tering a large number of institution by a single central board, even though they are similar in character and logically fall within the same category. 1. In the first place, it is sometimes claimed that such a board tends to emphasize the business side of the administration to the neglect of interests of the inmates of the institutions. It is apt to attach greater importance to considerations of economy and to purely adminisrative effi- ciency than to those affecting the immediate welfare of the persons for tvhose care the institutions have been created. It is a common complaint among specialists and experts in the field of charitable and penological administration that the members of administrative boards take little inter- est in the activities of organizations and movements for the advancement of the penological and philanthropic sciences. They are, therefore, non- progressive and little affected by the progress of enlightened sentiment concerning the best methods of dealing with the difficult problems of charity and penal administration. 2. In the second place, it is sometimes claimed that the single board system tends to develop expensive machinery and to become both autocra- tic in its powers and bureaucratic in its methods. 3. In the third place, it is contended by some that each institution, however much it may resemble others in its character and purpose, has its own peculiar problems and needs and its own individuality, and can, therefore, be more wisely managed by a local board than is possible where it is thrown into a class with perhaps a score of other institutions and governed by a central body which has no respect for local peculiarities and conditions. Conditions in the various institutions, it is said, are often widely different and do not lend themselves to the same treatment. Where there is a large number of institutions widely scattered throughout the state it is difficult for a single board sitting at the center to become familiar with the problems and conditions of them all. 4. Finally, it is contended that the local board system affords a means of enlisting the services of a large number of competent and public- spirited citizens who are not politicians by trade and whose interest in the welfare of the unfortunate classes committed to their care is a sufficient guarantee that they will devote their best efforts to the performance of the responsible duties of their offices. Where the central board system prevails, membership on the board tends to become a political prize and appointments are more apt to be given as rewards for political service than is the case where appointments to membership on local boards carry a small salary, if any at all. It is, therefore, said to be better to have a separate unpaid or nominally paid board for each institution (with possible provision for joint purchase of supplies), and over them all a central board of charities or similar authority, with the power of visitation, inspection and recommendation. 32 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. II. CHARITABLE AND PENAL ADMINISTRATION IN OTHER STATES AND COUNTRIES. A. IN OTHER STATES. 1. Central Boards of Control. In the majority of states the charitable and penal institutions are under the management and control of separate boards, one for each institution. There is, however, a marked tendency toward the abolition oi local boards and the substitution of a single central board for the control of all the institutions, or for the control of those of each class. This movement began about forty years ago, although it was not until recently that its progress became marked. The indications now are that this movement will continue and that the central board system is destined to become the general method of institutional administra- tion throughout the United States. Kansas (1873) was the first state to vest the management of its several state charitable institutions in the hands of a central board; and recently it has adopted the same system for the management of its penal institutions. New York, as early as 1877, consolidated the management of the state prisons and the hospitals for the insane crim- inals in a single authority the state superintendent of prisons in 1889 partial control of the other insane hospitals was entrusted to a com- mission in lunacy, and in 1902 this control was made more complete. In the latter year the office of fiscal supervisor was also created, and given an extensive control over the financial and business affairs of the charitable institutions. Wisconsin, in 1881, created a single central board of control for the management of its charitable and penal insti- tutions. Arizona followed its example in 1895, Iowa in 1898, Wash- ington in 1900, Minnesota in 1901, West Virginia in 1909, Ohio and North Dakota in 1911, Rhode Island in 1912, and' Nebraska and New Hampshire in 1913. Arkansas and Kentucky, in 1905, each created a single board for the control of its charitable institutions, and Illinois did likewise in 1909. In 1911, California created a central board with powers of inspection, supervision and a limited control over all the charitable, penal and other institutions of the state. In 1913, Vermont passed a law providing for the centralization in a single authority of the purchase of supplies for the various institutions of the state. Plans for a more centralized system of administration of charitable and correctional institutions have also been proposed in Massachusetts and New York. The various types of central control may be classified as follows : First, that under which all (or nearly all) the state charitable institu- tions are subject to the full management and control of a single board, CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 33 while the penal and reformatory institutions are under the management of a separate and distinct board. Second, that under which the man- agement of the penal and reformatory institutions, but not the char- itable institutions, is vested in a single central board. Third, that under which only the financial operations (such as the letting of contracts, the purchase of supplies, etc.) of the charitable and penal institutions are managed and controlled by a central authority. Fourth, a mixed system under which certain classes of institutions are subject to the control of a central board, while others are managed by separate boards or which are subject to the control of a single central authority only in respect to certain matters. Fifth, finally, there is the system under which the management and control of all the charitable, penal and reformatory institutions (and in some states even the higher educa- tional institutions, for certain purposes) is vested in a single central board, there being no separate board of managers for any institution. The states falling in the first group, that is, those in which the char- itable institutions (or certain of them) are under the management and control of a single state board, the penal institutions being placed under the control of another central board and under local boards are Ala- bama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Kansas and Virginia. This is also the class to which Illinois belongs. In Alabama the hospitals for the insane are under the management of a single board; but the other charitable institutions and also the penitentiary are each under the management of separate boards. In Arkansas the schools for the blind, the deaf and the dumb, together with the asylum for the insane, were all placed under the management and control of a single board of trustees in 1905, and in 1911 the Confederate Soldiers' Home was added to the list. The board consists of seven members, each of whom receives compensa- tion at the rate of $5 per day, plus traveling expenses. In Kentucky the three insane asylums and the asylum for the feeble-minded are under the management of a board entitled the board of control for the charitable institutions (created by an Act of 1908). The board consists of four members, appointed by the governor for a term of four years. Two members must be taken from the majority political party in the state. The salary of each member is $2,500 per year, plus an allowance for their traveling expenses. The board has "full and complete management and control" of the several institutions mentioned. In Kansas all the state charitable institutions, including the hos- pitals, schools for the deaf, the blind and the feeble-minded, the orphans' homes, etc., are under the "management, government and control" of a central board created in 1905, and consisting of three members appointed by the governor for a term of four years. Each member receives a salary of $2,500 per year. At present there are seven (7) institutions under the control of the board, and two others will soon be completed. The total number of inmates in the institutions is about 5,000. The board has also the power of visitation, inspection and supervision over private asylums, children's aid societies and all 34 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. charitable and all semi-charitable institutions receiving state aid. The penal and reformatory institutions were excluded from the control of the board, and were left under the management of separate boards until 1913, when the Legislature placed them under the management of the state board of corrections. At the same time the industrial schools for boys and girls, which had formerly been under the board of control, were placed with the penitentiaries under the state board of corrections. No institution of Kansas at the present time is under the management of a separate board. In Virginia each of the hospitals for the insane is under the man- agement of a separate board ; but the several boards together constitute a central board of control for the appointment of superintendents, the oversight of expenditures and certain other matters for all the hospitals. The states belonging to the second group those in which the penal institutions are put in a separate class from the charitable insti- tutions and are under the management of a single central board, are California, Kansas, Kentucky, Tennessee and Texas. In each of these states there is a board of prison commissioners which is charged with the management of the several state prisons and reformatories. In 1911 the legislature of California created a state board of control, with power to examine the books of the state prisons, reforma- tories, state hospitals and other institutions, commissions, bureaus and offices. It is required to visit at least once each year every public institution maintained wholly or in part by the state, and to ascertain the conditions prevailing therein and its needs ; to visit public buildings in course of constructon and to ascertain whether the provisions of the law and the contracts relating thereto are being complied with ; to exercise equal supervision over all the state institutions in respect to their financial and business policies ; to institute court proceedings to conserve the rights and interests of the state ; all contracts entered into by state officers, boards and commissions must be submitted for its approval ; reports of all supplies purchased by the state or any institution thereof must be made to it; no supplies may be purchased in the open market without its approval; it performs the duties of a court of claims and its approval is necessary before any claim against the state may be paid ; it is charged with investing school funds ; bond sales by cities, counties and other local authorities must be notified to it ; it is empowered to sell or exchange property belonging to the state ; it is required to establish a system of uniform accounting and of keeping records in all institutions and offices; and it performs all duties formerly exercised by the various state boards of examiners. With all its varied powers it is not, however, a board of control in the sense that it is charged with the actual management of the institutions ; it is rather an inspectional and supervisory authority. The board consists of three members appointed by the governor and they are required to give all their time to the discharge of their duties. Each member receives a salary of $4,000 per year. In the Third Group belongs Rhode Island, which has a board of control and supply composed of five (5) persons, appointed for a term of five years (salary $3,000 per year for the chairman and secretary, CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 35 $2,000 for the other members) with control over purchases and sup- plies. It makes all contracts for the state charitable and penal insti- tutions ; it oversees the construction and equipment of buildings, and is charged with establishing a uniform system of accounting among the various institutions subject to its control. In 1914 the Governor recom- mended that the entire administrative and financial management of the institutions be placed under the board. In this group might also be placed the state of Vermont, which in 1913 created the office of pur- chasing agent for the various institutions (except for the soldiers' home). In the Fourth Group are New York and Massachusetts, where there is a combination of the local and central board systems. The institutions of New York are divided into three classes : First, the charitable institutions ; second, the hospitals for the insane ; and third, the state prisons. 1. In New York each of the nineteen charitable institutions is in charge of a board of local managers appointed by the governor, and there is a state board of charities with powers of visitation and super- vision over the several charitable institutions (now twenty- four in num- ber) and with power to inspect, supervise and license certain private institutions. The board is composed of twelve members, appointed by the governor, and they receive a salary of ten dollars a day for attend- ance at the meetings, provided that the total allowance for each member shall not exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00) per year. The financial and business affairs of the charitable institutions, including the approval of estimates for supplies, are in the hands of an officer called the Fiscal Supervisor. He is appointed by the governor for a term of five years and receives a salary of six thousand dollars a year. 2. Each of the state hospitals for the insane (with fourteen in number, 6,000 employees and over 32,000 patients) is under the control of a board of managers appointed by. the governor, but there is also a commission in lunacy, which has power to appoint and discharge superintendents subject to the approval of the local boards of managers. The two hospitals for the criminal insane are under the jurisdiction of the superintendent of state prisons. The commission also visits and inspects the insane hopital, formulates policies regarding their manage- ment, and controls their business and financial operations. 3. The state prisons and the two state hospitals for insane crim- inals, including the state farm for women eight institutions altogether, with a total population of about 6,000, are under the control of a state superintendent of prisons, who has power to appoint and remove wardens and has control of the financial and business operations of the several institutions under his jurisdiction. The reformatories are under separate boards of managers. There is also a commission of prisons of seven members, with powers of inspection and advice ; a board of parole of three members, two of whom are appointed by the governor, and the commission on new prisons, consisting of five members. Finally, there is a board of classification, consisting of the fiscal supervisor of state charities, the state commission of prisons, the state 36 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. superintendent of prisons, and the lunacy commission in all, twelve members. This New York system has been criticized for its cumbersomeness and expensiveness. The machinery of administration seems needlessly complicated, and those who have studied its workings are of the opinion that it does not work smoothly and expeditiously. A committee of inquiry appointed by Governor Sulzer in 1913 recommended that all of the boards and offices having to do with penal institutions be abolished except the state superintendent of prisons and the commission of prisons, the latter, however, to consist of three members instead of seven and to be given all the powers now exercised by the bodies proposed to be abolished. This committee also urged that the state charitable institutions ought, in some way, to be con- solidated. The Massachusetts system is also mixed and complicated. 1. There is a local board of managers for each institution. 2. There is a state board of insanity having supervisory, visitorial and directorial power aver the institutions for the insane. 3. There is a state board of charities with essentially the same powers over the charitable institutions. 4. There is a board of prison commissioners with complete control over me four reformatories and state prisons, but not the state farm, except as to its industries, and general supervision and inspection of jails and houses of correction. The board consists of five members, two of whom must be women. They are appointed by the governor for for a term of five, years. The chairman receives a salary of $4,000 per year in addition to traveling expenses. The other members receive only their necessary expenses. The number of inmates of the state prisons, reformatories and prison hospitals is about 3,000 and the county jails and houses of correction contain about the same number. The Massachusetts Economy and Efficiency Commission in 1914 recommended a radical reorganization of the machinery of control for the charitable, penal and reformatory institutions. It proposed two alternative schemes for the consideration of the legislature and accom- panied its proposals with drafts of bills for carrying out its recom- mendations. The first of the two plans proposed to vest in a single board of five commissioners, paid $1,000 a year each, general super- vision and direction of all the state hospitals, asylums, colonies, sana- toria, industrial schools for delinquent boys and girls, the school for the feeble-minded, the state prisons and reformatories, and the state farm altogether twenty-nine institutions, with a population of over 20,000 inmates. This commission should be charged with the promo- tion of general policies and plans in regard to the management of the institutions and with the general oversight of their administration. The proposed plan contemplates that the active administration of the institutions shall be vested in a director appointed for an indefinite term by the commission, to whom he is to be held responsible. He is to have authority to appoint executive secretaries (one for each of the three groups of institutions), superintendents and other subordinate CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 37 officers, to see that all inmates are properly cared for, to organize a central purchasing agency for all the institutions, to install a uniform system of accounting, etc. Provision is also to be made for the appointment of a business agent, one of whose duties is to purchase supplies for the institution, and for an unpaid board of three visitors for each institution. The second plan proposed by the Economy and Efficiency Com- mission vests the supervision and administration of the institutions in a board of five commissioners, to be chosen with particular reference to the nature of the several problems involved, the members of the board to give all their time to the discharge of the duties of their offices. The first of the proposed plans is preferred by the Economy and Efficiency Commission as the one which best provides the means for determining the responsibility necessary for the successful administra- tion of the institutions, although it admitted that each plan has certain advantages over the other. Of one thing the commission was con- vinced, namely, that under the present system of divided authority (the total number of trustees and commissioners who are concerned with the administration of the institutions is 136) economy and efficiency in the management of the institutions is impossible and that the remedy lies in the abolition of a large number of the existing separate boards and commissions and the substitution of a central authority having full power and responsibility. The commission found that there appeared to be no standard in the various institutions for determining the number of employees to do the work required, the amount of the salaries paid and the official titles which they bore. In one hospital there was one employee to 3.38 patients ; in another, one to 5.75 patients, while in the asylums the ratio ranged from 1 to 4.20 to 1 to 5.45. Salaries of superintendents ranged from $2,500 to $5,000 per year among the different institutions, and so with the salaries of subordinate officers and employees. In regard to financial methods, including the purchase of supplies, the commission found the same lack of uniformity and want of system; and it ex- pressed its conviction that under the present method it was impossible to control the affairs of the institutions from the accounting standpoint so that an accurate record could be presented of the actual expenditures for any particular purpose. One of the most important advantages to be derived from the proposed reorganization, said the Commission, might come through the installation of uniform and proper accounting methods, so that the state might have an accurate record of its per- manent investment, a better knowledge of its maintenance and cost, a more efficient management of its purchases through a central agent and a more business like handling of - finances by the state treasurer's department. In the fifth group, that is to say the group of states in which all the charitable, penal and reformatory institutions are under the control and management of a single central board are to be found the states of Arizona, Iowa, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming. If to these we add those states in which the penal institutions, though not under the management of the same authority as the charitable 38 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. institutions, yet are under the control of a single board of superin- tendence (California, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island and Tennessee), we have eighteen states at the present time in which the penal institutions (where there are more than one in a single state) are under centralized control. In Arizona all the charitable, penal and reformatory institutions are under the management and control of a board consisting of the governor, the auditor and one citizen appointed by the governor for a term of two years. In Iowa all the state hospitals, prisons, reformatories, soldiers' homes, schools for the deaf, industrial schools for boys and girls, etc. fifteen altogether, with a total population of about 9,000 inmates- are under the management, government and control of a bi-partisan boa p d of three persons appointed by the governor, with the consent of two-thirds of the senate, for a term of six years (salary $3,000 a year). This board has also power to investigate the state university, the normal school and the college of agriculture, and the power to inspect and regulate county and private institutions in which the insane are kept and homes for friendless children. In general, it has the same powers over all the charitable, penal and reformatory institutions that the Illinois Board of Administration has over the charitable institutions. Minnesota, since 1901, has had a state board of control consisting of three persons appointed by the governor for a term of six years (salary $3,500 each), charged with the management of all the char- itable, penal and reformatory institutions, including training schools, the industrial school for girls and the tuberculosis sanitarium sixteen altogether, with a total -population of about 6,500 inmates. It also has a certain authority over the educational institutions in respect to the erection of new buildings, the purchase of fuel and the placing of insur- ance. The board has charge of the financial and business affairs of all the charitable and penal institutions, selects superintendents, fixes the salaries of employees, prescribes the system of accounting and investigates local prisons, jails, hospitals and asylums. The members of the board are required to give their whole time to the discharge of their official duties. At the time this central board of control was created the state board of charities was abolished, but the need for some inspectional machinery, independent of the board whose work is to be inspected, led shortly afterwards (1907) to the creation of a state board of visitors, which is little more than the old board of char- ities under a different name. The board is bi-partisan in composition and is composed of six persons appointed by the governor for a term of six years. Its members receive no compensation other than traveling expenses. It is charged with the visitation and investigation of all charitable and correctional institutions. In New Hampshire there is a board of control (created in 1913) consisting of the governor, the secretary of the state board of charities, the purchasing agent, and two other persons appointed by the governor. The purchasing agent is appointed by the governor and receives a salary of $3,000 per annum. He has power to make contracts and to CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 39 purchase all supplies for the eleemosynary institutions and for the various departments of the state government. The board of control acts with him in the matter of constructing and repairing buildings. In North Dakota there is a board of control of state institutions (created in 1911) with "full power to manage, control and govern" the state hospitals for the insane, the state penitentiary, the asylums for the blind, the deaf and dumb and the feeble-minded, the state reform school and such other charitable and penal institutions as may be created in the future. The board is vested with all powers formerly exercised by the separate board of trustees which were abolished by the Act of 1911. It is required to inspect at least once every six months all institutions subject to its jurisdiction and to visit the hos- pitals for the insane once each month; to prescribe a uniform system of records and accounts for the several institutions to prepare plans and specifications for new buildings and improvements ; to appoint superintendents, wardens, and other institution officials and to fix their salaries ; to make a biennial report to the legislature and to recommend the enactment of such legislation as in its judgment is necessary or conducive to the improvement of the institutions. The board consists of three members, appointed by the governor for a term of two years, not more than two of whom shall be taken from the same political party. Each member receives an annual salary of $3,000. In Ohio, all the charitable, penal and reformatory institutions, nineteen (19) in number, with an aggregate number of inmates of over 20,000, are under the management and control of a board com- posed of four persons, not more than two of whom shall belong to the same political party. They are appointed by the governor, with the consent of the senate, for a term of four years, and they may be removed by the governor for cause after a hearing. They receive a salary of $5,000 per year and necessary traveling expenses. There is also a secretary who receives a salary of $3,000 per year, and a fiscal supervisor who receives a salary of $4,000 per year. The board suc- ceeded to all the rights and powers of the several boards by which the institutions were formerly managed. It appoints the superintendents or other chief officers of the several institutions, determines the num- ber and salary of employees, prescribes methods of accounting, pur- chases supplies for all the institutions (it is required to purchase by contract from the lowest bidder), visits and inspects the institutions and acts as a board of parole for the release of prisoners from the peni- tentiary and reformatory, and for the release of boys and girls from the industrial schools. The managing head of each institution is required to present to the board monthly estimates of needed supplies. These are reviewed by the fiscal supervisor, who then lays them before the board for its approval. The state treasurer is the custodian of all funds under the jurisdiction of the board, except that each institution is allowed to keep on hand a small contingent fund. In South Dakota, the management and control of the peniten- tiary, the insane hospital, the deaf and dumb school and the reform composed of five members, salary $3.00 per day, the total not to exceed 40 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. f $300.00 per year. The board is required to visit the institutions subject to its jurisdiction and it has charge of the financial management, the purchase of supplies, etc. Wisconsin, since 1891, has had a board of control for the char- itable, penal and reformatory institutions eleven (11) in number, having a total population of about 6,600 inmates with power to "main- tain, govern, supervise and direct" the same. It is composed of five persons appointed by the governor (salary $2,000 per year and ex- penses) and they are required to give their entire time to their official duties. They appoint superintendents and managers, purchase supplies, visit and inspect institutions and act as a board of parole and probation. In addition to their control over the regular state institutions, they are auhorized to "investigate and supervise" all charitable and correctional institutions aided in any way by the state, and all industrial schools and all county insane asylums, poor houses, jails, city prisons and houses of correction. They make annual visits to every county jail, quarterly visits to the county insane asylums and semi-annual visits to the sol- diers' home. They grant licenses for the erection of county asylums and approve plans for the same, as well as for jails, poor houses, and houses of correction. They also have, the power to audit the accounts of county insane asylums. Washington, since 1901, has had a state board of control of the charitable and penal institutions, with full power to manage and govern the same. It is required to purchase supplies for the twelve institutions nearly 4,000 inmates under its control, as well as for the five (5) state quarries and the state capitol, and whenever practicable to purchase the same by contract. The board consists of. three per- sons, appointed by the governor for a term of six years (salary $3,000 per year and expenses). With the warden, it acts as a prison board for twelve (12) in number, with about 5,000 inmates, are under the "man- agement, direction, control and government" of a board of control school are in the hands of the state board of charities and corrections, terminating sentences and releasing prisoners in pursuance of the inde- terminate sentence law. In West Virginia the charitable, penal and reformatory institutions, consisting of three persons, each of whom receives a salary of $5,000 per year. The board also has control of the financial and business affairs of the twelve (12) higher educational institutions and the appro- priations made for various boards, commissions, schools and associa- tions are expended at the discretion and upon the approval of the board. The purchase of supplies for all the institutions, including the educational institutions, is made by the board. In Wyoming the charitable, penal and reformatory institutions, except the poor farm, are under the management of a board consisting of the governor, secretary of state, the state treasurer, the auditor and the superintendent of education. The board appoints officers, fixes salaries and makes rules regarding the purchase of supplies and the care of the inmates. Michigan is the only state that, having once tried the central board CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 41 of control system, abolished it and returned to the separate board system. In 1891 the legislature abolished the separate boards of man- agers of the several institutions and established two central boards, one for the management of the prisons and the reformatories, the other for the charitable institutions. In 1893 the legislature abolished the two central boards and re-established the local boards. Of these several methods, the single board system is, of course, the simplest and, on the whole, seems to be the one best adapted for securing economical business management and efficiency generally. But the doings of a board with such large powers over so many widely separated institutions should be subject to the inspection and criticism of an independent body of experts or disinterested public-spirited citizens, as is the case in Illinois and Minnesota. In the states where this system is in force there is general satisfaction with the results and the indications are that it will be introduced into other states in the near future. 2. State Boards of Charities. In several of the states whose institutions are under the adminis- trative control of a central board, there is, in addition, a state board of charities, a state board of charities and corrections, or a state char- ities commission charged with the duty of visiting and inspecting the institutions and of making recommendations for their improvement. This is true of Illinois, Ohio and Minnesota; and it is also true of Massachusetts (state board of visitors) and New York, where there is a mixed system of central and local control. Likewise in a majority of the other states (that is to say, those which do not have a central board of administrative control, the charitable and sometimes the cor- rectional institutions are subject to the supervision and inspection of a state board of charities or similar body with a different name. The members of these boards are generally unpaid and they give only a small portion of their time to the discharge of their duties. They have few or no powers of administrative control over the institutions, their functions being mainly visitorial and advisory ; in short, they are super- visory bodies and not boards of control. The following states, In addition to those mentioned in the preceding paragraph, now have such boards : California (a paid board which has supervisory power and a limited power of control), Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Virginia. The District of Columbia also has a board of charities with similar powers. In the following states there is no state board of charities or state board of control : Alabama, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Maine, Mis- sissippi, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and Vermont (except for the insane). In Oklahoma there is a com- missioner of charities and corrections, and in New Jersey a commis- sioner of charities, who have the power to visit and inspect all state charitable and penal institutions and all other institutions that receive state aid. In addition to this power, the Oklahoma commissioner is authorized to inspect private hospitals, homes, orphanages, etc., and also county municipal institutions. 42 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. 3. Boards of Pardon or Parole. State boards of pardon are now found in about two-thirds of the states. From the point of view of their constitution, they, may be grouped into three classes : 1. Ex officio boards, that is, boards composed wholly of members who are at the same time state offi< ers. 2. Non ex officio boards, that is to say, boards composed of mem- bers who do not hold other state off <:es. 3. Mixed boards, or those composed partly of ex officio members and partly of members appointed from private life. In the first group are to be found the pardon boards of Alabama, California, Georgia, Massachusetts, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Wyoming. In Tennessee the governor is authorized to refer to the prison commissioners for inves- tigation and report applications for pardon ; and in Vermont the gov- ernor may request not more than three judges of the supreme court to sit with him and to advise him in the exercise of his pardoning power. Pardon boards in this group are usually composed of three or more state officers, among whom the attorney general and secretary of state are nearly always included. Occasionally, however, the auditor, the lieutenant governor, and in one state (Oklahoma) the superin- tendent of public instruction and the president of the state board of agriculture are members. Not infrequently the chief justice of the supreme court is a member, and occasionally all the supreme court judges are added. In Georgia the prison commission serves as a board of pardons ; and in California the board of prison directors are required to report to the governor the names of all prisoners who, in their judgment, ought to be pardoned. In Wyoming the state board of chari- ties serves as a board of pardons. In Maine and Massachusetts the executive council advises the governor in respect to the granting of pardons. In Missouri there is a pardon attorney who examines appli- cations for pardons and makes reports to the governor. In the United Slates government, applications for pardon are examined and reported en by a pardon attorney in the Department of Justice. The states which have "mixed" boards are Colorado, Connecticut and North Dakota. In Colorado the board is composed of the governor and three persons appointed by him ; in Connecticut it is composed of the governor, one judge of the supreme court, and four other persons appointed by him ; in North Dakota, of the attorney general, the chief justice and two other persons appointed by the governor. The states which have pardon boards composed wholly of non ex offkio members are : Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Ohio, South Carolina and Texas. The Illinois board is composed of three mem- bers, each of whom receives a salary of $3,500 a year. The Indiana board is composed of three members, each of whom receives a salary of $300 per year and in addition an allowance for traveling expenses. The Kansas board is composed of three members with salaries of $5 CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 43 per day and their expenses ; that of Michigan, four members at $5 per day and their expenses; that of Ohio, four members at $10 per day for time actually employed, the total amount not to exceed $75 per year; that of South Carolina, three members at $4 per day, the total not to exceed $80 per year; and that of Texas two members at $2,000 per year. The functions of the boards of this class are advisory in character; that is to say, their powers are limited to the investigation of applications for pardons and the making of recommendations to the governor, in whom the -actual pardoning power belongs. Some of the boards composed of ex officio members, however, especially when the governor is a member, have the full power to grant pardons and not merely the power to recommend. Generally, where pardon boards exist, they have the same powers in respect to parole that they have in respect to pardons, but there are a good many exceptions. In Illinois the board of pardons is charged with investigating applications for release on parole from the two penitentiaries and with making recommendation? thereon; but the power to release on parole from the reformatory belongs to the board of managers thereof. In some states, like Kansas, Kentucky, Cali- fornia and Georgia, the board of commissioners or managers of the penitentiary serves as the board of parole. Several states have sepa- rate state boards of parole. This is true of New York, Indiana, Iow r a and Minnesota. In Indiana it consists of the warden of each peni- tentiary, the board of directors thereof, the chaplain and the physician. That of New York consists of the state superintendent of prisons and two other persons appointed by the governor, who receive salaries of $3,600 per year and their expenses. That of Iowa is composed of three members appointed by the governor, each of whom receives a salary of $10 per day 'for the time actually employed, the total amount not to exceed $1,000 per year and their expenses. That of Minnesota is composed of the senior members of the state board of control, the warden of the state prison at Stillwater, the superintendent of the state reformatory and one non-official member, who receives a salary of $10 per day. In several states where there is a central board of control of all charitable and penal institutions (as in Ohio, Wisconsin and Washington), this board serves as the board of parole. The United States parole board consists of the superintendent of prisons in the Department of Justice, together with the wardens and physicians of the several penitentiaries. 4. OPINIONS ON THE CENTRAL BOARD SYSTEM. Success in Other States. In the states where the central board system of managing the charitable and penal institutions prevails, the system, so far as can be ascertained, is regarded as a great improvement over the old system under which each institution was managed by a separate board, and there seems to be no sentiment in favor of reverting to the old system. 44 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. The secretary of the Arizona board of control, in a letter dated January 28, 1914, says : There is no desire in the state to return to the old system of a separate board for each institution. The board of control plan is so old in this state, dating back to 1895, that I have no information as to how it works as compared with the arrangement which preceded it. However, we find a great saving can be made by having a purchasing department for all state institutions and departments, and are inclined to believe that increased efficiency results from a central authority, and that experience gained in one institution can be used to advantage in the management of another. In other words, it provides a board of experts on institutional manage- ment and also is an advantage in that it is able to adjust differences, and arrange for cooperation among the institutions. The chairman of the Iowa board of control, in a letter of January 31, 1914, says: We are confident that the managing of state institutions by a central- ized body, such as our board, is preferable and more economical than under the old trustee system. Under the old plan there was more or less politics in the selection of trustees, while the law creating our board of control made it non-partisan. The board of control of Iowa is required to come in close contact with the inmates of the various institutions and with the prisoners in the reformatories and the penitentiaries. In this way we become students of character and it aids materially in knowing how to manage and control the wards of the state and, I think, enables us to take our place in the front rank of the progress that has been made in handling derelicts and dependents on the state. In a letter to a committee of the Illinois Legislature in 1908, the same gentleman said: We are in the office, when not visiting state institutions, every morning at 8 a. m., remaining until 5 p. m., and we have practically abandoned all our own private interests, with the result that all criticism in regard to the board of control has long since ceased, and I doubt if there is a single person in the State of Iowa who would advocate going back to the old trustee system. Instead of purchasing for each institution as formerly, under the trustee system, we make all our purchases for the fifteen institutions under our control at one time. We have a list of manufacturers and dealers in all the supplies required by our state institutions, and schedules with speci- fications are printed every quarter (of late semi-annually) and samples are submitted. All purchases for all of the institutions are made by us in our office in the capitol in Des Moines, and when making awards no bidder is allowed to be present. We examine the samples and note the prices, and in all our purchases goods are delivered f. o. b. the city nearest to where the institution is located, so that we have nothing what- ever to do with freight rates or claims for damages if any article is injured in transit, the shipper being responsible for the safe delivery of the goods. In purchasing articles as tea, coffee, canned fruit, etc., we have samples submitted, and when goods are delivered each institution sends us a sample of the article as received, and it is compared in our office with the sample on which the award was made. If the article is not equal to the sample on which the award was made, the shipper is notified that the goods ate subject to his order, as they will not be accepted. We have no friends in the business, and it is a cold-blooded business transaction from beginning to end, with careful attention to the most minute details and securing of the best that can be had at the least possible price. When the goods are received, the institution makes a voucher and this is forwarded to the shipper for execution, and after being certified to by the chief executive officer of the institution that the articles have been CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 45 received in good order, the voucher is forwarded to us and, when approved, an abstract is made and furnished the Auditor of the State, who makes his warrant on the State Treasurer, who sends check direct to the party furnishing the goods. We handle no money whatever, and no money is handled at the insti- tution except that provided for in the payroll and a small amount for contingent, not exceeding $250, which is left in the hands of the superin- tendent to provide against any emergency whereby loss to the property of the state might be sustained. Due reports of all expenditures from - this fund are made to our office every month and we also require a weekly statement of the disbursements of all articles at the state institutions, whether it is a paper of pins, a carload of flour, a carload of sugar, or a ton of coffee, our books being an exact duplicate of the books of the dis- bursing officers at the state institution. In an address before the National Conference of Charities and Corrections in 1902, the president of the Iowa board of control stated further that "When each institution had a separate board, the members met once a month or once a quarter to look after the affairs of the institution, taking their own business with them, and, of course, hurried home as soon as possible, the real management devolving upon the executive officers of the institution. Now there are three men in session every working day of the year from 8 o'clock until 5, and again in the evening, devoting their entire time to the interests of those entrusted to their care." Under this system, he adds, there was a saving of $175,000 during the first year and this, notwithstanding the fact that the inmates of the institution received better care and a higher qualiy of food and clothing. A member of the West Virginia board of control, in a letter of February 9, 1914, writes: Before 1909 each public institution of the state was under the manage- ment and control of a board of directors or of regents. The state board of control has full control and management of all the state institutions except the educational institutions, and of these it has control of the business management, while the state board of regents has control of the educational side. We find the change most beneficial. There have been very large reductions made in the cost of maintaining these institutions, while their efficiency has been increased. There is no desire whatever to return to the old system of separate boards for each institution. A member of the board of control of the state of Washington, in a letter of February 2, 1914, says : The state board of control, composed of three members, has entire charge of all reformatory institutions in the state, also insane hospitals, soldiers' home, school for the deaf, school for the blind, institution for the feeble-minded, and the state penitentiary. We feel that it is a general conclusion in this state that one central board is far superior to having individual boards for each of the institutions, and that it has been satis- factorily established that there has been an improvement in the efficiency with which the institutions 'are managed since this change took place, some fourteen years ago. The Secretary of the Wisconsin board of control writes January 29, 1914: The centralized board system has been in operation in this state since 1881, more than thirty years. All of the state, charitable, reformatory and penal institutions are managed by the centralized board system in Wiscon- sin, and all those institutions have been managed by a central board since 46 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. 1881. 1 assume that the reason why your penal institutions were not put under the management of the Board of Administration of Illinois was that it was thought by the Legislature that there would be too many institutions for one board to manage. I am of the opinion that your reformatory and penal institutions should also be managed by your State Board of Administration, but I think that the next best thing to do would be to create one board for the management of those institutions. The difficulty is that when institutions are managed by different boards of trustees or commissioners, there is a lack of uniformity in business methods and in accounting methods, and there is also a lack of uniformity in the policies which govern the institu- tions. I am a great believer in centralized power and centralized authority. If a board is to be created in your State to manage the reformatory and penal institutions, I believe that a centralized department should be created in the capitol and that the members of the board should be obliged to devote all their time to the management of the institutions. It may be argued that there will not be sufficient work for the members of the insti- tutions, but I believe that if efficiency is to be produced and better methods to be employed, that it will require the time of a board of at least three members. A centralized board ought not only to take care of the present needs of the institutions, but should also formulate policies for the future and things should be planned ahead. It would be difficult to show what reduction has been 'made in the cost of maintenance in Wisconsin by the state board of control. You under- stand that any comparison of cost in the last five or six years as compared with any previous period would not mean anything because the cost of the different supplies has so" materially advanced. We know to a certainty that the institutions under the control of this board are much more efficiently managed and that they are producing better results than when they were managed by the boards of trustees. There is no sentiment in Wisconsin to abolish the present board and go back to the old system. In fact I have never heard that advocated by anybody since I have been in this department and I have been here for more than eighteen years. "Under the old system," says another witness, "each institution [in Wisconsin] was the prey of local business men; there was little or no competition in the purchase of supplies ; there was a popular idea that the institution existed for the benefit of the locality. Under the present system the per capita cost of maintenance has been steadily reduced in spite of the increased price of supplies and the expense of improvements made through the use of a surplus acquired by economy." Expert Opinion in Favor of Centralised Control of Penal Institutions. In 1902 a committee of the National Prison Association, consisting of Professor Charles R. Henderson, Dr. F. H. Wines, Professor Francis Wayland and Eugene Smith, Esq., made an investigation of the methods of supervision and control of penal institutions in the United States and Europe. Among the questions considered was whether all the penal and reformatory institutions of a state should be placed under a single board of commissioners with powers of direction and control. The committee sent out a questionnaire to a number of penologists and officials of penal institutions, and of those who replied twenty-eight expressed an opinion in favor of a central board of control and ten were opposed. After an elaborate examination of the systems of penal administration in this country and Europe, the com- mittee expressed the conclusion that all penal and correctional institu- CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 47 tions should be placed under the control of a single administrative agency, which might be either a commissioner or a board of commis- sioners, or there might be a division of authority between the two. Central administrative control, said the committee, is the only method by which the people of the commonwealth can be assured of a unified system of equitable execution of penalties and it is the best way of securing a uniform system of purchases of supplies and a uniform and reliable system of records and accounts. As a permanent agency, it would accumulate information within the state and be able to learn the lesson of experience throughout the world. This is the system in the most enlightened countries of Europe, where the administration of the penal institutions has attained a high degree of efficiency. This recommendation is in line with present-day tendencies and it represents the views of a majority of penologists and administrative officials who have had practical experiences in the management of penal institutions. The state superintendent of prisons in New York, in a letter of January 29, 1914, to the Illinois Committee on Efficiency and Economy, says : "The four large prisons for men, the state prison for women and the two state hospitals for the criminal insane are under the jurisdiction of the superintendent of state prisons. They have always been under one central authority and I do not see how they could be otherwise operated without great loss to the state." Dr. William A. White, superintendent of the Government Hospital for the Insane, Washington, D. C, writes in reply to a request for his opinion in regard to the advisability of consolidating the management of the penal and reformatory institutions of Illinois in the hands of a single board: As to the general proposition of the advisability of placing the penal and reformatory institutions under the same board of control as head of the charities system of the State, on general principles it would seem to me a perfectly proper arrangement. I am a great believer in concentrating and centralizing both authority and responsibility. I can see objections, however, to such an arrangement, as from the present way of looking at things, these separate classes of institutions are doing separate kinds of work. However, from the broader humanistic standpoint they are all dealing with the inefficients in the community who have to be cared for, and if it is realized that so-called crime is as much a result of the inef- ficiency of the individual to measure up to the social standards as so- called insanity, and that the so-called criminal should be treated by the State with the object of returning him to good citizenship, just as the so-called insane person is treated by the institution with a similar end in view, then it would seem eminently proper and a step forward to group them all together under a single board of control. If that were to be done, however, I should want to feel that the moving principle back of the whole arrangement was one of progress making for higher ideals which were essentially humanistic and that the control would be in the hands of broad-minded, generously disposed men. If this can't be done it would perhaps be better to have the penal institutions separately con- ducted from either the charitable on the one hand or the hospitals for the insane on the other. In any event such a board would of course be a representative one, the representatives of each varying interest being present to look after- their separate needs. Of course I do not know from your letter what your problem is. Apparently your committee has been created to cure certain existing, or presumed to exist, evils and no intelligent advice can be given as to how 48 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. to proceed with the cure, unless the diagnosis has first been made, therefore feel at a loss to make any suggestions to you because 1 do not know what you are trying to do. From the standpoint purely of economic administration the consideration of building and the furnishing of supplies I should think it would be an eminently proper thing to group all the boards and have a central purchasing committee who would look a the supplying of all of the public institutions of the State from a central point. This could be made to have undoubted economic advantages al- though' naturally it would have its great dangers because the board would have in their control large sums of money with all the consequent pos sibilities of trouble that might ensue. Warden James B. Smith, of the Southern Illinois penitentiary at Chester, in a letter of April 4, 1908, addressed to Hon. J. W. Hill, chairman of a Legislative Committee appointed to investigate condi- tions in the State institutions, advocated the placing of the peniten- tiaries under the control of a single board. He said: I believe that the State should have a board of control and then the warden and superintendent should give their whole time, or as much as possible to look- ing after and making a study of every man who is confined in the institution of which they are the head. In regard to the board of control I will say that I am familiar with the systems used in the various states and am more favorably impressed with that adopted by the state of Ohio than any other. Criticism of the System of Centralized Administration. A comprehensive and careful investigation has recently been made by Mr. H. C. Wright for the state charities aid association of New York of the fiscal methods of institutional administration in the states of Iowa, Indiana and New York. In Iowa all the fifteen charitable, penal and reformatory institutions are under the management of a central board, which purchases supplies and controls the finances of the institutions. In Indiana each separate institution is under the control of a board of managers, which purchases the supplies for its own institution and controls the financial administration of the institu- tion without being subject to the control of any central authority. The Indiana and Iowa systems are, therefore, directly opposite in character. In New York the institutions are divided into three classes : (1) The prisons and hospitals for insane criminals are under the control of the state superintendent of prisons; (2) the other insane hdspitals, which are under the control of a state commission in lunacy, and (3) the charitable institutions, whose fiscal operations are subject to the control of the state fiscal supervisor. The managing officer of each institution is required to prepare estimates of the supplies needed by his institution and to transmit these to the central officer or author- ity (the state superintendent of prisons in the case of prisons ; the fiscal supervisor in the case of the charitable institutions), who has power to grant or refuse the supplies asked for, or to decrease or increase the amount of the estimated price. Nothing can be purchased by an institution except upon approval of the estimate by the supervising authority. In practice, the superintendent of prisons seldom refuses the estimates or alters the estimated prices. The fiscal supervisor, how- ever, frequently reduces the prices in the estimates of the charitable institutions. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 49 Mr. Wright calls attention to the advantages of the estimate system and the common purchase of supplies for all the institutions ; but at the same time he points out several disadvantages, one of which is to make the superintending office merely an administrative agent of the central department. The kind and quality of the supplies he uses are deter- mined at Albany. He is told how and where he may purchase them; and he may be told, and in some cases is, just how he shall dress the inmates. He is told how many teachers he may have in the school. The fiscal supervisor controls absolutely the finances of the charitable institutions and practically dictates every feature of their management. Even the medical department, we are told, which falls more directly under the supervision of the state board of charities, is practically controlled by the fiscal supervisor, since he can dictate the number of medical officers which the institution may have. He is, in short, the sole arbiter of the management of the charitable institutions. This dictation from Albany, says Mr. Wright, of minute details tends to destroy initiative on the part of the superintendents and to make them indifferent as to the results that they may attain. In the various institutions visited, there was an atmosphere of discouragement and a tendency to throw the responsibility of everything upon the con- trolling officials at Albany. The requirement that no articles may be purchased by the super- intendents or wardens except upon estimates approved by the proper authority often handicaps the managing officials and interferes with the good administration of the institutions. On one occasion, for example, the superintendent of one of the institutions wrote to the fiscal super- visor asking for the privilege of purchasing, in advance of estimating therefor, three lengths of stove pipe to replace a rusted-out one. The fiscal supervisor gave him permission to purchase the said stove pipe, but cautioned him against oversight of this kind in the future. On another occasion the fiscal supervisor refused to approve an estimate for a bottle of ink desired by one of the institutions on the ground that the estimate did not specify the size of the bottle. While in general the estimate system tends to prevent extravagance in the purchase of supplies, it does not permit superintendents to take advantage of a low local market. Thus local farmers often offer pota- toes, cabbage, fruits and other articles of this character at rates con- siderably below the market prices,, at which they could be purchased from wholesale market men. An example was afforded by the follow- ing case: One of the institutions desired to purchase a stack of hay from a neighboring farmer but it was necessary for the superintendent to get per- mission from the fiscal supervisor at Albany. As there was a delay in granting the permission, the superintendent took the liberty of purchasing the hay, trusting that his action would be approved. In fact, however, it was disapproved and severely criticised and it was only after considerable correspondence that the fiscal supervisor would permit payment for the hay. In regard to the joint purchase of supplies, Mr. Wright declares that under the New York system butter has cost more than when pur- SO EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. chased by separate institutions ; that ninety (90) per cent of the butter was below contract specifications; that the same was true of the beef supply and other articles. Mr. Wright criticizes the methods of the fiscal supervisor, who, he says, has so administered his office as to lessen the attention and strength which the superintendents would otherwise be able to give to the care of the inmates. The necessity of almost daily argument on the part of the superintendents with the fiscal supervisor's office by means of correspondence, telephone and telegraph, to secure small arti- cles of daily need has left little time to be devoted to the larger needs of the institutions. His policy seems to have been to appear to save by reducing the prices permitted for any and all articles wherever possible, regardless of the insignificance of the article or the amount of the reduction. The result has been that what in a great many cases appears to be a saving was an actual loss, due to the substitution of an inferior article or due to the necessity of paying an amount of freight or express. The New York estimate system, he says, is very expensive, amounting to about $30,000 a year in the fiscal supervisor's depart- ment and $19,000 a year in the lunacy commission. In fact, the cost of operating the supervising offices in New York is out of all proportion to the expense of maintaining the institutions. Thus the cost of oper- ating the offices of the superintendent of prisons, the lunacy commis- sion, the boards of managers, the fiscal supervisor, the board of char- ities and the state architect amounts to $238,488 per year, whereas in Indiana the cost of supervision amounts to only $30,000 and in Iowa $37,510. Mr. Wright defends the Indiana system, where each institution is under the management of a separate board. He finds that the insti- tutions there are economically administered and the welfare of the inmates carefully looked after. Supplies are purchased as cheaply under the Indiana system as under the New York or Ipwa system. But he admits that conditions in Indiana are somewhat exceptional, due to the fact that the state has had for many years men with very unusual qualifications upon its institutional boards. In conclusion, he makes the following suggestions : (a) An institution with an inmate population of 400 or over can ordinarily secure as low prices as can a central body with power to con- tract for larger quantities. (b) Superintendents and stewards and boards of managers exercise as discriminating and reliable judgment in the selecting and contracting for supplies as is now exercised by central bodies. (c) Institutions, whether operating independently without central control, or up to the present time with central control, do not meet as efficiently as seems desirable, some of the larger problems of institutional management which require expert knowledge. (d) In those institutions which seem to do the best work and' seem to care for the inmates most satisfactorily, the superintendent is given, under the general direction of the board of managers, a large degree of liberty with a corresponding responsibility. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 51 B. IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES. 1. In England. Poor Relief. In England the management of the charitable and penal insti- tutions, as well as the control of the poor relief generally, is more unified and centralized than in the United States. Control and super- vision of poor relief is centered in the local government board, whose president is a member of parliament and of the cabinet. The staff of the board includes a permanent secretary, a parliamentary secretary and a corps of inspectors. Its powers include the organization of poor law authorities, the issuing of orders and regulations, supervision of the administration of poor relief by the local authorities, the collection of the poor law information, the hearing of appeals from the local poor law authorities in respect to complaints against guardians, and the determination of disputes between poor law unions. The supervision of poor law administration by the local authorities is carried out through a system of rigid inspection by agents of the local government board, who make regular visits to the work houses, asylums, homes and other institutions for poor relief, and who attend meetings of the local poor law authorities. A strict control of tne financial operations of the local poor law authorities is exercised through the examinations of the auditors, of whom there is one for each of the fifty districts. The local poor law authorities are required to keep their accounts according to a uniform system prescribed by the Local Government Board. The administration of poor relief through private agencies is like- wise subject to the supervision of the state. The organization through which this supervision is exercised is the charities commission created by an act of parliament in 1853. It consists of four members appointed by the Crown, and its jurisdiction embraces all privately endowed charities, with a few exceptions. It is empowered to examine the accounts of private institutions and to compel their officers to make reports to it; to remove and appoint trustees of such institutions; to order changes in the administration of a particular charity, and to take measures looking toward the safe custody and investment of their funds. Cure of the Insane. The administration of the asylums for the insane has been defi- nitely centralized by a recent Act of Parliament (3 and 4, Geo. V., ch. 38, 1913). Prior to the enactment of this law the asylums were admin- istered by county councils committees, subject to some supervision by commissioners in lunacy, who are aided by local visiting committees. The act of 1913 substitutes a central board of control composed of fifteen commissioners appointed by the Crown, of whom not more than twelve are salaried, and of whom four must be barristers at law and four practitioners of medicine. At least one of the paid commissioners must be a woman. The staff of the board includes a secretary and a number of inspectors. In general, the powers of the board of control 52 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. embrace the functions of supervision, protection and control over de- fectives; supervision of the administration of the local authorities in so far as they are charged with duties in relation to defectives ; super- vision and inspection of homes and institutions for the care of defec- tives; and the establishment and maintenance of institutions for dan- gerous and violent defectives. The commissioners in lunacy, the Lord Chancellor, the judges or masters in lunacy, and the local authorities retain certain powers in relation to defectives which were not trans- ferred to the board of control by the. Act of 1913. Penal Institutions. Prior to 1898 the prison administration of England, although very definitely centralized, was nevertheless divided between two authorities, those in charge of the convict prisons and those in charge of the ordi- nary prisons. Both sets of authorities, however, were under the control of the Secretary of State for Home Affairs, which gave the system a unified and centralized character. By an Act of 1898, both bodies were consolidated and their powers vested in the Prison Commission. This commission is composed of not more than five members, appointed by the Crown upon the advice of the Secretary of State for Home Affairs. It is vested with the superintendence of prisons, appoints subordinate officers, makes contracts, releases offenders upon probation from the Borstal institutions, and performs such other acts as are necessary for the maintenance of the inmates of prisons subject to their control. The commission is required to visit and inspect all prisons within its jurisdiction, not only in respect to the welfare of the pris- oners, the state of the buildings, etc., but with reference to their finan- cial operations, earnings of prisoners, expenses and other like matters. In the discharge of these duties the commission is aided by a staff of inspectors and auditors, who make reports to the commission and keep it informed in regard to the condition of the several prisons. The financial supervision of the prisons is exercised by two officials of the commission, who bear the title of store accountants. In addition to the inspections made by the prison commission, the law provides for inspections by visiting committees of justices of the peace, one annually appointed for each prison. They are charged with hearing complaints from prisoners and they make reports to the Secretary of State con- cerning abuses which they find, and in regard to other matters which, in their opinion, need attention. Finally, any justice of the peace having jurisdiction in the locality in which a prison is situated or in the community where the offense for which a prisoner is confined was committed, may enter in the visitors' book any observation which he sees fit to make in respect to the condition of the prison or any abuses therein, and it is made the duty of the jailor to call the attention of the visiting committee at the time of their next visit to such entry. The Borstal institutions reformatories in which offenders be- tween the ages of 16 and 21 years and also incorrigible adults not guilty of any particular crime are confined are subject to the same adminis- tration as the other prisons and reformatories. The administration of CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 53 certain other institutions of a reformatory and industrial character, for the confinement of offenders under 16 years of age, is less central- ized, although they are under the supervision of the Secretary of State for Home Affairs, who exercises his powers through inspectors. 2. In France. Charity Administration. In France the administration of poor relief is divided among the communes, the departments and the state. But whether the adminis- tration is local or central, the state exercises supervision over all insti- tutions of public assistance and over their activities along certain lines. There are nine institutions, most of them asylums, which are under the direct and immediate control of the state. They are under the control of the minister of the interior, through whom also the state exercises supervision over local charitable institutions and activities. Two bureaus in the ministry are charged with these duties, namely, the "direction" of assistance and public health, and the service of general inspection, to which should be added the superior council of public assistance. The latter is an advisory board composed of ex officio members within the ministry and of non-official members having special qualifications with regard to the problems of poor relief. It holds meetings for the purpose of discussing policies, criticising pro- posed measures and for advising the administration. Every department into which France is divided (87 in number) is required to maintain a public asylum for the care of the insane or to enter into arrangements with a private asylum for the maintenance of its insane. Private asylums can be established only by authority of the government and they are subject to the supervision and inspection of the government. Although supported mainly by local taxation, the departmental asylums are under the control of the state. They are managed by directors appointed by the minister of the interior, the other officers being chosen by the prefect, who is himself an appointee of the minister of the interior and an agent of the central government. Communal hospitals and alms houses are managed by an adminis- trative commission in each commune, a portion of the members of which are appointed by the prefect of the department. Associations for private relief may now (since 1904) be organized without govern- mental authorization, except where they desire to receive gifts and legacies. They are still required, however, to make a "declaration of existence" to the government. They are subject to inspection by the state authorities and their methods of administration are subject to alteration by the state. In general, it may be said that poor relief in France, whether administered by public or private agency, is under the control and supervision of the central government. 54 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. Prison Administration. Until very recently the administration of all penal institutions was in the hands of the minister of the interior of the central government. In 1911, however, after long agitation, it was transferred to the min- istry of justice. The prisons are divided into three classes, (1) the departmental, or short sentence prisons, including houses of correc- tional justice and houses of detention; (2) the central houses of detention and correctional justice; (3) the colonies for juvenile delin- quents. The minister of justice stands at the head of the service for the administration of the prisons. Within the ministry is a department or "direction" of penal administration, and it is subdivided into three bureaus : (1) A bureau having charge of the execution of sentences; (2) A bureau which has charge of general matters, statistics, etc. ; and, (3) A bureau having charge of establishments for juvenile offend- ers, parole, etc. The inspection of prisons, however, remains with the authorities (in the ministry of the interior), which have charge of the inspection of the charitable institutions. Reports of the inspectional authorities are made to the minister of justice. In harmony with the well-estab- lished principle of French administration of associating a consultative council with each important administrative authority, there is a superior council of prisons created for the purpose of giving advice to the administrative authorities and for criticising proposed policies and measures. It is composed of thirty-six members, of whom twenty-four are ex officio members and twelve are non-official persons who are chosen because of their special knowledge of penological matters. It holds two meetings a year for the purpose of considering matters relating to the construction and repair of prisons, rules for the internal administration of prisons, the distribution of subventions, classifications of penal institutions, etc. In addition to the superior council of prisons, there are a number of committees and commissions created for the purpose of consultation in respect to various special and more or less technical matters relating to the administration of the prisons. Local prisons, detentions, reformatories and similar institutions, although locally administered, are under a more or less strict central control and supervision. Private institutions, which are partly educa- tional, partly industrial and partly reformatory in character, are under the general supervision of the state, which also appoints the director by which they are actually managed. Both public and private reforma- tories and penal colonies are under the surveillance and inspection of a council composed of various official and non-official members, one of whom is appointed by the prefect. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 55 3. In Germany. Poor relief in Germany is regulated by imperial laws which apply to all the states of the empire with the exception of Bavaria. For the purpose of local administration there are two sets of authorities: the local poor unions and the general poor unions, the greatest part of the relief being administered by the former. Unlike the English and French systems the administrative control of the state over poor relief is not very strict. Disputes between local poor unions are, however, settled by the judicial authorities and disputes between unions of dif- ferent states are determined by.the "deputation of home affairs," with the right of appeal to the Imperial Home Office. Charitable Institutions. The administration of charitable and reformatory institutions is, in Prussia, a part of the administration of poor relief. They include such institutions as workhouses, and asylums for the insane, for epilep- tics, for the blind, and for the feeble minded, all of which are under the supervision and control of the state. As a rule this control is actually exercised by the provincial and communal diets through super- intendents chosen by the diets. Regulations adopted by the local assemblies for the government of charitable and reformatory institu- tions, however, require the approval of the minister of the interior. It is by this means that the state is enabled to exercise an effective control over the institutions. In the other German states all such institutions are supported directly by the state and are therefore under the more immediate con- trol of the state. Penal Institutions. In Prussia the penal institutions are divided into three classes: (1) penitentiaries; (2) ordinary prisons; and (3) fortress prisons. Those of the first two classes are under the administration of the civil authorities; the fortress prisons are under the administration of the military authorities. Of those which are civilly administered, the peni- tentiaries and certain of the larger ordinary prisons, the sentences of whose inmates exceed three months, are under the ministry of the interior ; the others are under the ministry of justice. The official who exercises direct authority over the prisons of each province is the ober prdsident, an appointee of the king and the representative of the central government in the province. His acts require the approval of the minister, who appoints the chief administrative officials and issues regulations for the government of the prisons. The management of the prison is in the hands of a director or superintendent who is advised by a board though its advice is not binding upon him. Outside of Prussia the prisons are usually under the ministry of Justice and there is a rigid system of inspection of all prisons. 56 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. III. SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. A. THE CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS. At present the charitable and penal institutions of Illinois are ad- ministered according to two different systems, based upon opposite principles of administrative organization, although fundamentally the two classes of institutions are very similar, and no substantial reason exists why they should not be managed and controlled by the same sort of administrative machinery. A dual system of organization and ad- ministration for a group of institutions which, for administrative pur- poses, belong in the same class is anomalous. If reason and experience have shown, as they seem to have, that the charitable institutions can be more efficiently and economically administered by a single central board than by a series of separate boards, one for each institution, it is difficult to see why a similar system should not be adopted for the management and control of the penal and reformatory institutions. The results of five years experience with the system of centralized control of the char- itable institutions have undoubtedly demonstrated that it is both more efficient and economical than the old system of control by separate un- paid boards which gave only a small portion of their time to the dis- charge of their official duties. Apparently the new system has worked out satisfactorily in practice and there is no desire to return to the old system in force before 1910. The present system is certainly in harmony with the best tendencies of modern administrative organiza- tion and it represents the ideal toward which charity experts have been striving for some years. Finally, the adoption of this system of cen- tralized control by so many states during the last few years indicates that it is destined to become in the near future the prevailing system of institutional administration in this country. Under these circumstances it does not appear that any important changes in the present law for the management and control of the charitable institutions are desirable. The system of administration by a single board for all the charitable institutions should be retained sub- stantially as it is. 5 However, at least one minor change in the Act of 1909 is advisable, and there is another suggestion which perhaps de- serves some consideration. 6. If the Board of Administration were not already established and the charitable Institutions were now under separate boards, as before 1910, the question should be considered whether the board form of organization is the best method of centralized control. Much might be said in favor of a single director as the executive head of all the charitable and correctional Institutions, with deputies or subordinate com- missioners corresponding to the Fiscal Supervisor and the alienist member of the Board of Administration, with similar officers for the special problems of the cor- rectional and children's institutions; and all subject to the inspection of the State Charities Commission. But in view of the recent establishment of the Board of Administration and the decided improvement it makes on the former system, it seems Advisable not to propose radical changes in this field, when reorganization is so much more necessary in other directions. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 57 First of all it is worth considering whether the inspectional ma- chinery which the Act of 1909 provides for the charitable institutions is not more elaborate than considerations of efficiency require. As the law now stands three different authorities or sets of authorities are required to inspect the charitable institutions: (1) the Board of Administration itself; (2) the Charities Commission and (3)* local boards of visitors, one for each institution. The provision of the Act of 1909 authorizing the appointment of local boards of visitors to inspect the charitable institutions should be repealed. In practice the provision has until now been a dead letter, since with a single exception no local board of visitors has been appointed for any institution. The value of the service performed by such boards if they were appointed, would be very questionable. In all probability they would be composed of persons who would have no special qualifications, and unless they were given an opportunity to visit other institutions for the purpose of comparing the conditions and standards prevailing in them, their judg- ment of the standards of efficiency in the particular institution which they are commissioned to visit would be of doubtful value. The Chari- ties Commission with its inspectors, who are or should be experts in the field of charity administration, is the proper authority for inspecting the charitable institutions, for pointing out unsatisfactory conditions and recommending legislative and administrative measures for their improvement. A change which the Board of Administration favors is the with- drawal of the training school for girls at Geneva and the St. Charles school for boys from the jurisdiction of the Board of Administration and the placing of both institutions under the department of public instruction. The argument in favor of the proposed change is that both institutions are largely educational in purpose and that therefore they do not properly fall within the class of charitable institutions. But they are primarily correctional rather than educational institutions and do not properly constitute a part of the educational system of the State. In the other states where central boards of control for the state institutions have been established all such institutions as industrial and training schools for delinquent boys and girls are under the jurisdiction of such boards rather than under the educational authorities. B. THE PENAL AND REFORMATORY INSTITUTIONS. Turning to the penal and reformatory institutions, each of which is under the management and control of a separate board, the system would be improved by either of the following changes : They might be placed under the existing Board of Administration along with the charitable institutions, as is the case in the states of Arizona, Iowa, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming. The bill of 1909 as originally introduced so provided, and in this form it was favorably reported by the Senate committee to which it was referred. The inclusion of the penitentiaries and the reformatory under the Board of Administration was urged by the State Conference 58 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. of Charities and Corrections and was advocated by many charity and penological experts in and out of the State; but the provision was stricken from the bill on the floor of the Senate, chiefly on the ground that owing to the large number of institutions in the State the placing of them all under the management of a single board would impose upon it a task so large that it would be difficult if not impossible for the board to give proper attention to all the institutions. Since the board has now effected a permanent organization, devel- oped the necessary administrative machinery, and its staff has acquired more or less familiarity with the problems connected with the adminis- tration of the institutions, the objection has less force than it had in 1909. Members of the board have declared that the addition of another member to the board or a slight increase in its clerical staff would pro- vide it with the necessary machinery for managing the other three institutions. Undoubtedly the board could purchase supplies for twenty-two institutions as easily as it can purchase for nineteen, and there are other services which could be performed with equal ease and efficiency for both classes of institutions as for the one class. Nevertheless, it is obvious that the more the number of institutions under the juris- diction of the board is multiplied the less care and attention will it be able to give to each particular institution. The addition of the two penitentiaries and the reformatory to the institutions under the con- trol of the board will bring under its jurisdiction and control more than 300 additional employees and more than 3,000 inmates, to say nothing of the increased business and financial operations, due to the operation of extensive industries by these institutions. Other states, it is true, have consolidated the management of all their charitable and correctional institutions in the hands of a single board and with good results. But no one of these states has so large a number of institutions as has Illinois. If we add to the number of institutions already under the management of the board, the three institutions that have been provided for but which have not yet been constructed, and the penal and reformatory institutions we shall have a total of twenty- five, with an aggregate population of more than 20,000 inmates. In view of these facts the wiser plan would appear to be to create a separate commission, composed of three members, for the manage- ment and control of these three institutions. This was the solution proposed in Senator Manny's bill in 1909 and it is the plan that has been adopted in a number of states where there is more than one such institution. Among these states are California, Kansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Texas. Whichever of these two plans is adopted, whether the manage- ment of both groups of institutions shall be centralized in a single board or whether each group shall be under the control of a separate board, upon one point there can be little difference of opinion, namely the desirability of abolishing the existing separate boards by which each of the penal and reformatory institutions is managed and the con- solidation of the administration in a single authority. CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 59 It may be said that the duties of such a commission would not be sufficiently. numerous and important to occupy their entire time; but even if this be admitted, the objection has little weight since the aggregate salaries of the three proposed commissioners would be less than the amount now being paid in the form of salaries to the existing commissioners. There is little doubt that such a commis- sion would find its time fully occupied. In case the separate boards were abolished provision would have to be made for devolving the duties of the board of prison industries upon some other authority. This authority would naturally be the new board of prison commis- sioners. The duties of the board of prison industries in several other states are performed by the central board which has control of the penal institutions. Thus in California they are performed by the state board of prison directors, and in Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin (states which have a central board of control for all charitable and penal institutions, they are performed by the board of administration. Further the board of pardons should be abolished and its duties as well as the duties in respect to parole now performed by the board of managers of the reformatory devolvecf upon the proposed board of prison administration. The members of the present board of par- dons receive a salary of $3,500 per year and the total cost of main- taining the board and its clerical staff amounts to about $18,000 per annum. The actual work involved in the investigation of applica- tions for pardons and for releases in parole does not seem sufficiently large to justify the employment of a salaried board on full time. In most states which have boards of pardons such boards are wholly or largely ex officio, that is, they are composed of certain state officers who receive no extra compensation for their services. In but six states (Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, South Carolina, and Texas) besides Illinois, do we find salaried pardon boards composed of persons who are not at the same time holders of other state offices ; and in but few of them does the salary attached to the office exceed several hundred dollars a year (in Indiana, $300 a year; in Kansas and Michigan, $5 a day; Ohio, not more than $75 per year; South Carolina, not more than $80 per year; Texas, two members at $2,000 per year). In California, Georgia and Kentucky the board of prison commis- sioners serves as the board of pardons, while in Ohio, Wisconsin and Washington the board of control of state institutions performs the duties in relation to parole (but not in respect to pardons). With but three institutions under their control, the proposed board of prison commissioners would have ample time to perform all the duties now imposed by law on the board of pardons, and thus an economy of $18,000 per annum would be effected.. It is worth considering whether in case a separate board for the management of the penitentiaries and the reformatory is created, it would not be desirable to extend the authority of the fiscal super- visor of the charitable institutions over the penal institutions, so that the twenty-five charitable and penal institutions of the state, although under two separate boards for purposes of administration, would never- 60 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. theless be subject to the fiscal supervision of a single authority. This would be a means of securing uniformity of financial and business operations in respect to both classes of institutions which in our judg- ment is very much to be desired. Whether the penal and reformatory institutions are managed and controlled by a single board or by separate boards, as they now are, they should be subjected to the visitorial, inspectional and investigative jurisdiction of the State Charities Commission. The Hay, Manny and McKenzie bills, of 1909, all provided for the inspection of these insti- tutions by a board of charities and corrections. As has been said, the charitable institutions are subject to the inspection of three different bodies; but the penal and reformatory institutions are subject to no supervision or inspection other than that of their own local boards. That is, each board of managers and it alone, has power to inspect its own work. This is an anomalous situation. These boards have under their care more than 3,000 prisoners and they control the expenditure and disposition of more than two million dollars annually, yet their methods of dealing with prisoners and their financial oper- ations are not subject to the inspection or supervision of any authority. Before 1909 the reformatory was subject to inspection by the State Board of Charities, but this power was not given to the present chari- ties commission. Finally, there are two provisions in the act creating the reform- atory that need to be altered in the interest of more effective discipline and punishment. The first of these provisions is section 12 which authorizes the courts to sentence to the reformatory offenders between 16 and 21 years of age who have not been previously sentenced to the penitentiary. The supreme court has held, in the case of Hender- son vs. the People, 165 111., p. 607, that this section did not apply to a person under 21 years of age who had been previously sentenced to the reformatory. A reformatory, said the court, must be dis- tinguished from a penitentiary; that a sentence to the penitentiary implies infamous punishment and involves consequences to a convict of a much more serious character. It matters not therefore how many times an offender under 21 years of age may have been previ- ously sentenced to the reformatory he cannot be resentenced to the penitentiary. The result of this decision is to compel the reformatory to receive criminals who may have already served one or more terms in the reformatory, and whose presence therein is dangerous to the welfare of the institution, and who, ought properly to be confined in the penitentiary. The difficulty occasioned by the supreme court decision can be removed by inserting the words "or reformatory" after the word "penitentiary" in the fourth line of said section and by insert- ing the same words after the word "prison" in the eleventh line. In this form the section would be similar to the corresponding provision in the Minnesota law in respect to the reformatory. The other provision which needs amendment is section 15 author- izing the board of managers of the reformatory to transfer to the penitentiary incorrigible prisoners whose presence in the reformatory CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. 61 is deemed to be detrimental to the best interests of the institution and of its inmates. The supreme court, in the case of the People vs. Mallary, 195 111., p. 582, held this provision to be unconstitutional on the ground that it conferred judicial power on the board of managers. Such an act by the board of managers said the court is not merely a determination of the conditions of circumstances under which the prisoner may be committed to the penitentiary but it is the exercise of judicial power which the Legislature can not confer upon such a body. Nevertheless the court suggested that legislation might be so framed as to make the order of transfer from the reformatory to the penitentiary a mere determination of the conditions on which the prisoner could lawfully be transferred from the one institution to the other, but section fifteen (15) as it now stands, can not be so construed. The objection raised by the court might be removed by amending section 15 to read as follows: Whenever in the judgment of the board of managers or the' proposed board of prison commissioners, any inmates of the reformatory between the ages of 16 and 21 years persistently violates the rules of the institution in regard to the discipline and good conduct of the prisoners or otherwise becomes incorrigible, so that his presence therein is detrimental to the best interests of the institution and its inmates, the board of managers may file a petition before the circuit court in the district in which the . reformatory is located stating the causes upon which the application is based and asking that an order be issued for the transfer of the said offender to one of the penitentiaries. After notice has been duly served upon the said offender and after a hearing at which he shall have the right to be represented by counsel the court may, if satisfied of the truth of the charges alleged in the petiti'on issue an order for the transfer of such person to the penitentiary. Whenever, in the judgment of the board of commissioners of the penitentiary to which he has been transferred his return to the reformatory would not be detrimental to the best interests of the reformatory the board may in its discretion re-transfer him to the reformatory. This in substance is the procedure in New York for transferring incorrigibles from the reformatories to the penitentiary. Or the offender might be sentenced in alternative either to the penitentiary or the reformatory, it being understood that he would as a matter of course be committed to the reformatory, leaving the board of managers (or the board of prison commissioners in case such a board is created) to transfer him to the penitentiary upon the happening of certain con- ditions specified in the law. Comparative Expense. At present the aggregate salaries of the fourteen members of these boards is $25,000 per year, not including expenses and salaries for clerical assistance which amounts to about $5,000 per year, mak- ing a total cost for salaries and clerical help for the three boards $30,000 per year. This sum would provide a salary of $5,000 for each of three proposed commissioners and leave a balance of $15,000 a year for clerical and other expenses. With this salary the com- 62 EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY COMMITTEE. missioners could be required to give their whole time to the dis- charge of their official duties instead of a small portion as is now done by the members of the existing boards. In addition to securing uniformity in the administration of the several institutions the efficiency of the control exercised by such a board would undoubtedly be vastly increased ; and the cost of maintaining the institutions should be largely reduced. Below is given a summary of the salaries for administrative officers under the present and proposed organization of correctional institutions : Present Organization. Per Year 3 Commissioners Illinois State Penitentiary @ $1,500 $ 4,500 3 Commissioners Southern 111. Penitentiary @ 1,500 4,500 5 Managers Illinois State Reformatory.... @ 1,200 6,000 3 Members State Board of Pardons @ 3,500 10,500 1 Clerk to Board of Pardons @ 2,000 2,000 Total ' $27,500 Proposed Organisation. 3 Members Board of Prison Administration @ $5,000 $15,000 1 Pardon Clerk @ 2,000 2,000 Total $1'7,000 Reduction under proposed organization $10,500 There should also be a further direct saving in clerical and office expenses, by concentrating the purchase of supplies and business man- agement of the institutions in one office. But the direct saving in salaries and office expenses will be a small part of the total economy of the proposed organization. The most important results should appear in the reduced cost of maintenance and operation of the insti- tutions and the more efficient service. As already noted, if the pen- itentiaries and reformatory were maintained at the same per capita cost as in the institutions under the State Board of Administration there would be a saving in ordinary expenses of more than $200,000 a year. An equal or greater saving should also be possible in the opera- tion of the prison industries. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 30112070206070