.POLITICS IN PENAL AND PAUPER INSTITUTIONS.

(8.) Are appointments of wardens, superintendents, etc., made, avowedly, on political grounds?

Massachusetts — Neither avowedly nor really. All are annually elected by trustees.

Rhode Island — They are not. The secretary adds: "During my connection with the Board for over ten years, I do not recollect to have heard a question asked as to the politics of an appointee of the Board."

Wisconsin — No; that does not enter into the question, except very incidentally, if at all. No charges have ever been made by the opposition that any of the present superintendents were appointed on political grounds, except the warden of the state prison. The superintendent of the Blind Institute is a woman, and the others as well as she, were appointed because of their qualifications, in two cases being,brought in from other states. The warden is a competent officer, but the charge was made some years ago that his predecessor was turned out because he was a Democrat, and he appointed because he was a Republican.

Ohio — Yes.

Minnesota — Republicans are appointed, but there has been no change of wardens for eight years; none of superintendent of St. Peter's Hospital for several years, and none, I believe, in any other state institution since its establishment.

Michigan — The party in the minority is usually represented on the boards of the institutions, but the wardens, superintendents, etc., are of the party in power.

Pennsylvania — Not avowedly, but practically they are so made.

(This statement, the representatives of Pennsylvania in the Conference suggested, should be modified so as not to apply to the state institutions.)

The last question suggested is a delicate one, and wocan scarcely expect the answers to fully reveal the animus of appointment.

The grand points as we conceive are, that suitable persons should be selected, and that length of service shall depend on efficiency. Now these may be secured while appointments are confined to the political party in power. Any party will furnish wardens, superintendents, and other officials from its ranks, provided they are honestly sought. And so in a State that is so party ridden, that it is well understood that there is no admission for the best man if in the unhappy minority, there may be no ground of complaint of right men in the right place. Yet it is politics overriding common sense and justice, when fitness for paid or unpaid service has no opportunity until it can pronounce the shibboleth of party. Some States have very wisely, in their Law of State Boards, required appointments from at least two political parties.

We have the evil of politics when a good man is ejected purely for the reason that the election has left him out in the cold, and when the political slate is drawn up simply to satisfy the aspirants and their friends.

Especially as regards our State Institutions their interests demand that the wardenship or superintendency shall be permanent and well paid positions for fit men. We cannot expect men to sacrifice their interests for places when they are poorly sustained or when they may be hastily ejected. A man in such a position should be as firmly secured as an able college professor in his chair. Such positions need study and experience.

A point which has not been fully covered by the questions is of importance, viz.: how the State Boards may reach the general public in the interests of their work:. This is not a work to be done in a corner. These are Institutions of the people in the sense of being controlled by public sentiment. They liv^e by the people's money that may be freely tendered or withdrawn. A narrowminded and prejudiced public will seriously affect them, while a generous intelligent public will build them up to the honor and blessing of the state.

In Wisconsin and Michigan, and probably in other states, an annual Convention of the Board of Charities, our National Conference m miniature, has been found useful. Wider influence may be secured through the Press. An admirable suggestion came from the Conference of 1881: "Let the Board issue little leaflets pertaining to different departments of the work under their care, and distribute them to the press, and they would have the inside track." The bulky reports reach but few, and are rarely read by those to whom they come. We believe that there is a work here for the pulpit, and that penal and pauper matters are in the commission of those who are sent by him who uttered his benediction on all who ministered to the sinner and the sufferer.

The Committee have received the advance sheets of the report of the New York Board, but they have been unable to give the time necessary to present answers to the questions. They regret that no response has been received from the Boards of Connecticut and Kansas. All of which is respectfully submitted,

GEO. D. GILLESPIE,
Chairman.

Mr. Ingersoll, of Minnesota: Did I understand the gentleman to say that he advocates the separation of the bad boys in the Eeform School from the better class?

Bishop Gillespie: Yes, sir; I said I -thought it became a necessity in a large institution.

Mr. Ingersoll: That is a very important matter, and I hope to hear it discussed.

The Ch^ir: It will be.

Dr. Byers, of Ohio: Has there been any reduction made in the cost?

A. Yes; we have worked a great reduction in the cost.

Mr. Sanborn, of Massachusetts: It seems to me that the proper function of these Boards is advisory. I should like to call attention to the fact that there are, as in Kansas and Rhode Island, some Boards in existence whose functions are purely administrative. There are also Boards in New York, Massachusetts, and I think in one or two other states, whose functions are largely administrative as well as advisory. In the state of New York these functions have been added since the formation of the Board. While my own judgment is that Advisory Boards are always desirable, and while in some states no other-than advisory powers are given, yet the broad experience of each state will lead it to confer administrative powers now in one direction and now in another.

Mr. Llewellyn, of Iowa: I would like to inquire whether the appointment of State Boards have reduced the members of Boards of trustees. In Iowa we have numerous boards with members ranging from three to six. We seriously contemplate the creation of a State Board of Charities. I am informed that the Governor will recommend that to the legislature at its next meeting.

Mr. Wines: I can answer that in Illinois there has been a reduction of trustees.

Mr. Llewlllyn: Is it uniform?

Mr. Wines: We have only three trustees for each Board. I do not know how it is in other states.

Gen. Brinkerhoff: In regard to what Mr. Sanborn has said as to advisory or executive powers, I am inclined to the opinion that the report is in the main correct. I have had occasion to study the reports of the action of various Boards in different states, and I am quite sure that it is the general sentiment that the Boards should have only advisory powers. For myself and my Board, I have insisted that a State Board of Charity should have no executive power, for the moment they do they lose to a certain extent their usefulness. Mr. Sanborn mentions Kansas and Rhode Island. Now the Board of State Charities in Rhode Island is in fact nothing more or less than a Board of Trustees. They have entire control over all the charities in the state. There is no Board of State Charities with the functions which a Board of State Charities should have; that is, to look into what was doing and let the people know it. In Massachusetts, the fact that the Board have executive powers has given them trouble.

Mr. Garrett, of Philadelphia: In reference to what Mr. Sanborn said about Pennsylvania. Until within the last year the Board of Public Charities of Pennsylvania had no powers other than advisory powers. With reference to the Lunacy Act passed by the late Legislature, it is true only in a qualified sense that they have been given powers of administration. The Howe Commission which drew the Lunacy Act, provided for a lunacy commission entirely distinct and separate from the Bqard of State Charities. That was so modified in the Legislature as to make it a sub-committee of the State Board of Charities. This committee is separate and acts separately from the State Board, and it cannot be said that the State Board has administrative or executive powers. Dr. Hoyt: The New York Board was established in 1867 with advisory powers only. It exercised these powers from 1867 to 1871, when it had conferred upon it what might be called judicial powers. In the course of its early investigations it brought out the fearful condition of the chronic insane in the poor houses of the state, and the question arose how to compel their removal. The machinery of the Courts could probably have accomplished this, but the Legislature, from the fact that the Board in its investigation had become thoroughly acquainted with this subject, conferred upon the Commissioners of Charities this power to make an order "like a court. This power has never been exercised.

REPORT FOR THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA.

BY DILLER LUTHER, GENERAL AGENT.

I have no special changes to report in the general condition of the public institutions in the state of Pennsylvania. The statistics of crime and pauperism differ very little from those of the preceding year. Marked improvement is noticed in some, whilst in others not even the beginning of a change towards better methods has yet been made. In the latter class I have reference more particularly to many of our county jails. Of these I have little of a favorable character to mention, but much to condemn. The moral improvement of that portion of the criminals who are detained in them is entirely neglected. In some counties the buildings have been improved, whilst in others they remain without amendment in any particular. It may truly be stated of the latter that if one of the ends of justice is the prevention of crime, by deterring men from committing it through fear of the law consequences, they almost wholly fail to accomplish the desired result. .

In many of the old jails of the state a proper system of discipline we know to be impossible because of their im