censured or modified in any way and for this purpose the inmate shall be furnished, on request, writing materials including a stamped envelope with the Board's address written thereon, and send such letter without it being read by anyone but himself. Such letter shall be immediately deposited in the mail. (11) "No other instrument shall be used for administering corporal punishment than a leather paddle which shall be not less than three and one-half inches (32) wide, not more than sixteen (16) inches long and not more than one-twelfth (1-12) of an inch thick. All edges and corners shall be carefully rounded to guard against injury.

(12) "Every precaution shall be used to guard against injury from the punishment or from scuffing incidental thereto.

(13) "Corporal punishment as understood by these rules is defined as a method by which punishment is administered on the buttocks.

(14) "In the absence of the Superintendent for more than two consecutive days, the Assistant Superintendent may act for him under the above rules.

(16) "In confinement, metal handcuffs shall 'not be used for holding the hands, but some device of leather or cloth must be used which will accomplish the result desired without injury."

Rules like the above are beneficial to the institution for they protect the boys and at

the same time the Superintendent for it still gives him the power to use some stringent method of punishment when it becomes absolutely necessary. At the same time, however, the rules would act as a deterrent in that, on account of the proceedings, records and reports necessary in such cases, it would not be used unless really necessary. In such cases the inmates would be amply safeguarded against maltreatment and abuse while at the same time they would know that when persuasion fails they could be subjected to punishment. Therefore, when reading in the daily papers articles of how an institution should be run we should remember that it is one thing to be miles away from such institution and build theories and a vastly different proposition to be in the actual work and manage criminally inclined boys in a practical way. Two weeks of practical experience in one of these State Reform Schools will shatter a good many beautiful theories. Theory and practice do not always agree. When a boy is committed to a State School he should be treated absolutely fairly, he should be made to feel that every officer with whom he comes in contact wants to be his friend, as long as he is trying to show the proper disposition, but he should also very clearly understand that "the way of the transgressor is hard" and that punishment should follow deliberate violations of rules.

In no way of criticism whatever to the spirit which prompted Judge DeLacey of the Washington Juvenile Court and Judge Wilkin of the Children's Court of Brooklyn to write of their understanding of the purposes of the Juvenile Courts, I do not believe that either article gave any logical conclusions relative to Juvenile Court fundamentals as found in the laws under which they operate.

The Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia is a juvenile police court. Children are arraigned and tried as law violators committing acts against the "peace and dignity of the United States." Every complaint which brings a child before the Juvenile court in Washington recites, "The United States vs. the Child."

Judge DeLacey makes his argument solely on the dependent child's care. Chancery courts in Washington performed the same work before there was any Juvenile Court. Because an enactment has given a juvenile criminal court judge also equity jurisdiction hitherto enjoyed only by a higher court argues nothing for the existence of the separate Juvenile Court for dependents. The Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia was primarily organized for the separation of the youthful criminal-so-called-from the adult. The chancery proceedings mentioned by Judge DeLacey for the dependents were an afterthought and only incident to the real purpose.

The real fortunate condition about the Washington Juvenile Court is Judge DeLacey, and the success of this court is not because of a good law but because of a good judge, who in spite of, rather than because of, the law saved children. Judge DeLacey, in his modesty, attributed too much to the enactment which institutes his court and overlooks the fact that he is the court.

Judge Wilkin of the Brooklyn court, is evidently ignorant of the organization of the Chicago Juvenile Court, which, in the trial of delinquents is identical with the Washington Juvenile Court and also with his views that criminal law should be the basis.

Judge Wilkin's argument and illustration of the child's misdeed in the home as applied to

common or criminal law overlooks the fact that in the home the child is a ward of that home at the time the proceedings to discover the extent of the offense commences. That is, it is an investigation of the acts of an infant child belonging to the parents who are in undisputed possession of their child. If fault is found then any correction is not in the nature of detention, denying possessed liberty, or an order transferring custody, but this parental punishment is for the child's education and is not punishment as understood by criminal-law.

In the home law it is the parents in the interests of the child. In the state law with its criminal foundation it is the State vs. the Child. In the home law punishment is for the child's good. In the criminal law punishment is for the public good. Law was never instituted to save the individual but to protect society. Any saving proceedings are incidental to the real purpose, and if such saving interferes with the common good of all, it is unconstitutional.

There is surely a wrong conception of the status of a child, when there is an acknowledgement of the "person capable of violation of law." For common law proceedings in the case makes that child a responsible citizen denied his liberty without "due process of law" -which due process seems to hinder many in the clear conception of the whole matter.

The coming Juvenile Court is to be a compulsory system of Moral education. It is unfortunate that such splendid child loving men like Judges DeLacey and Wilkin permit a sort of legal orthodoxy to prejudice them against the educational basis alone, which basis gives the child no rights other than to be protected from all harm, cared for and educated.

(Editor's Note.-Judge Brown, in the above article, refers to other articles recently published in THE JUVENILE COURT RECORD. Those who are sufficiently interested in this particular issue are respectfully invited to contribute their personal views for publication. We request that such communications be as brief as possible.)

At a recent republican meeting the speaker and audience were very much disturbed by a man who constantly called for Mr. Henry. Whenever a new speaker came on, this man bawled out, "Mr. Henry! Henry! Henry! I call for Mr. Henry!"

After several interruptions of this kind at each speech, a young man ascended the platform, and was soon airing his eloquence in magnificent style, striking out powerfully in his gestures, when the old cry was heard for Mr. Henry.

Putting his hand to his mouth like a speaking-trumpet, this man was bawling out at the top of his voice, "Mr. Henry! Henry! Henry! I call for Mr. Henry to make a speech!"

The chairman now arose, and remarked that it would oblige the audience if the gentleman would refrain from any further calling for Mr. Henry, as that gentleman was now speaking.

"Is that Mr. Henry?" said the disturber of the meeting. "Thunder! that can't be Mr. Henry! Why that's the little cuss that told me to holler."

Slang is tabooed in the home of a Philadelphia family, principally because there is a bright little girl who displays a persistent aptitude in retaining expressive but uncultured phrases.

The other evening at dinner the mother, father and daughter drifted into the vernacular and a fresh start was necessary. "I'm not stuck on this bread," she remarked.

"Margie," said her mother, "you want to cut that slang out."

"That's a peach of a way of correcting the child," commented the father.

"I know," said her mother, "but I just want to put her wise."

Boss-"There's $10 gone from my cash drawer, Johnny; you and I were the only people who had the keys to that drawer."

Office boy-"Well, s'pose we each pay $5 and say no more about it."

Fussy lady patient-"I was suffering so much, doctor, that I wanted to die." Doctor-"You did right to call me in, dear

lady."

There were some questions in geography required in the preliminary examinations for law students who aspired to admission to the bar. Among them was-"Name ten animals that live in the Arctic zone." One young man wrote: "Five polar bears and five seals. N. B.-Permit me to call your attention to the fact that the question does not specify that the animals should be of different varieties."

At a meeting of a State Medical Society, the secretary read a letter from one of our far-away possessions urging the need of a resident physician in his district. In the moment of silence that followed the reading, a young man in the hall arose and said modestly: "I wish you would put me down for that place, sir. It sounds good to me. My practice here died last night."

"You'd better fumigate these bills before you go home. They may be covered with microbes," said the druggist one Saturday evening as he handed a few faded, worn, and soiled silver certificates to his clerk.

"No danger from that source," responded the latter, "a microbe could not live on a drugclerk's salary."

A teacher was reading to her class and came across the word "unaware." She asked if anyone knew its meaning. One small girl timidly raised her hand, and gave the following definition:

"Unaware is what you take off the last thing before you put your nightie on."

Physician-"Have you any aches or pains this morning?"

Patient-"Yes, Doctor. It hurts me to breathe. In fact the only trouble now seems to be with my breath."

Physician-"All right. I'll soon give you something to stop that."

Pospective tenant-"I like the house, but I don't like that huge building in front. It's such a dreary outlook."

Agent-"Oh, but that's only a gunpowder factory. It might blow up any day."