Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

on probation for a year or more and each had received thorough supervision and assistance by the probation officers during this period.

In all cases placed on probation during the given month which had completed their probation satisfactorily and had been regularly discharged from probation, 21 in number, the following results were shown:

[blocks in formation]

Of the total number (28) placed on probation during the given month results could not be judged in three cases. Of the remaining 25, 17, or 68 per cent. were found permanently improved and re-established in society. Two others, or 8 per cent., showed fair improvement. Four were rearrested and committed during the probation period and only one after discharge from probation; one had absconded during the probation period.

In this investigation, probation was subjected to a severe and critical test. The cases were difficult, but had received thorough supervision. The probation period in most cases was adequate and the final investigation was made long enough after the discharge from probation to show real results.

A history of each case and a full report of the investigation is given in Appendix F.

THE COLLECTION OF MONEY BY PROBATION OFFICERS

The collection and disbursement of money has become one of the most important features of the work of nearly all probation officers handling adults. The mis-use of money and time is one causative factor of a great deal of crime and delinquency. It is the probation officer's task to correct this, so far as possible, through helpful advice, securing of employment, and when the court so orders, by requiring regular payments for family support, fines or restitution.

A total of $149,403.09 passed through the hands of probation officers in the State last year. This amount has increased rapidly

each year due to the employment of more salaried officers. Obviously, the responsibility of handling this money should be entrusted only to regular salaried officers of the court. Probation officers of the State have generally adopted the thorough-going system of books and records recommended by the Commission for keeping accurate and detailed accounts of moneys handled. In most courts the accounts of probation officers are subject to audit. Both features are essential to guard the system from critic ́ and abuse.

The probation office should not be made a collection agency. The mere collection of money for fines, restitution and family support without the necessity for helpful oversight of the offender or of his family should not be imposed upon the probation officer, as is done in some courts. This should be done by a clerk of the court, leaving the probation officer free for his more important duties. In most cases, however, where the court orders the payment of regular instalments for any of the above purposes, it is done, in part, for its disciplinary value to the offender, or, in the case of fines and restitution, to satisfy the ends of justice. In that case it has a very real disciplinary and educational value which a tactful probation officer finds not only not inconsistent with his friendly and helpful relations with the offender under his care, but finds of assistance to him in his work by making probation a serious and practical matter.

During the past year the collection of money for restitution to complainants or others who had been injured or who had suffered loss through the act of the probationer increased 44 per cent. and was considerably larger than in any previous year. The Commission has always recommended this form of doing justice. It teaches the probationer a lesson while at the same time it offers some degree of reparation to the complainant. Probation has sometimes been criticised as satisfying all parties except the complainant. Very naturally, he feels the smart of a defendant's wrongful act. Rightly or not, he seeks reparation. Under the system of restitution or reparation for actual loss or damages on the part of the probationer, the complainant is almost always better pleased than by the imposition of the maximum penalty. Restitution, however, should be ordered with a view chiefly to teach the offender a lesson rather than to satisfy the complainant in order to make

« EdellinenJatka »