A Mead Project source page

Originally published as:

Sophonisba Breckinridge and Edith Abbott. "The Child of the Immigrant: The Problem of Adjustment" Chapter 2 in The Delinquent Child and the Home. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Charities Publication Committee. (1912): 21-54.

The Delinquent Child and the Home

Chapter 2: The Wards of the Court

Sophonisba Breckinridge and Edith Abbott

Table of Contents | Next | Previous

OF first importance in this study is the question: Who are the delinquent wards of the court? The number of children who are or have been under its supervision, their ages and their offenses, are facts which must be ascertained as a necessary preliminary to any discussion of the relation of the juvenile court to the delinquent children under its care. The following table shows the number of delinquent children brought to court each year during the first ten years of its existence.

TABLE I. - NUMBER OF DELINQUENT BOYS AND GIRLS BROUGHT TO COURT EACH YEAR FROM JULY 1, 1899 TO JUNE 30, 1909
Year	NUMBER OF CHILDREN
Year	Boys	Girls	Total
1899-1900	1350	116	1466
1900-1901	1093	158	1251
1901-1902	1105	177	1282
1902-1903	1152	273	1425
1903-1904	1087	229	1316
1904-1905	987	317	1304
1905-1906	1571	415	1986
1906-1907	1180	398	1578
1907-1908	930	321	1251
1908-1909	958	366	1324
Total	11,413	2770	14,183

According to this table the number of children brought to court reached a high water mark in 1905-06. But there had not been a steady increase each year up to this point nor was there a steady decline in the years following. A disproportionately large number of children seem to have been brought in during the first year of the court, a circumstance explained no doubt in part

(22) by the eager hopes which centered upon the new method of treatment for delinquent children. The number declined during the two following years, increased substantially during the fourth year, declined again in the fifth and sixth years, and increased very markedly during the seventh year because of a change in the law which will be explained later. This increase was not maintained, however, and the number fell off during the next year and declined again in the following year, so that the number of children brought in during the ninth year exactly equalled the number brought in during the second year; and although there was a slight increase during the tenth year, the total number of children brought in during this last year of the decade was smaller by 142 than the number brought in during the first year of the court's existence.

While it is impossible to account for all these fluctuations in the number of children brought to court from year to year, some of the changes are not difficult to explain. The decline after the first year was due in part to the establishment of the Chicago Parental School for truant boys, which was opened in 1901 by the board of education and which had been authorized by the legislature two years earlier. During the first year of the court there was no special institution for the care of truants, and it was necessary to bring in as delinquent and send to delinquent institutions all boys who were seriously truant. The parental school was only for boys; and no similar provision was made for truant girls. The table shows that the number of girls increased slightly during the second and third years and, with the number of boys, substantially during the fourth year. This increase in the number of delinquent girls, however, had no connection with the failure to provide for truant girls; it was due in part at least to the growing knowledge of conditions responsible for delinquency among girls and to increasing skill on the part of the officers of the court in seeking out girls who had fallen under the influence of these conditions. The decline during the fifth year affected both boys and girls, but in the sixth year the decline was due to a falling off in the number of boys alone. The number of girls had increased during the latter year from 229 to 317.

The increase in the number both of girls and of boys, but especially marked in the case of buys, during the seventh year (1905-

(23) -06) is directly traceable to the change in the juvenile court law which was made in 1905, and which extended the juvenile court age to seventeen for boys and eighteen for girls. Before this time only children under sixteen years of age could become wards of the court, and this change in the law was responsible, as the following tables show, for an increase in the number of older children brought in after this time. A study of these tables, however, which give the ages of the children brought in each year, makes it clear that the increase of 59 per cent in the number of boys during this year, an increase which seems to have been general in all ages, was by no means due entirely to the change in the law; for the influx of sixteen-year-old boys does not account for more than half of the increase.

A further explanation seems to be found in the feeling of special confidence in the judge then sitting[1] and a growing feeling of dependence upon the court. A common belief seems to have been spreading through the community that any child, more especially any boy, whose conduct demanded supervision or

(24)

TABLE 2. - DELINQUENT BOYS BROUGHT TO COURT EACH YEAR FROM JULY 1, 1899 TO JUNE 30, 1990. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES. - BY AGE
Age	Number of Boys Brought to Court During the Year										Total	Per Cent
Age	1899-1900	1900-1901	1901-1902	1902-1903	1903-1904	1904-1905	1905-1906	1906-1907	1907-1908	1908-1909	Total	Per Cent
7	5	11	9	6	3	5	8	..	2	..	49a	0.4
8	8	14	10	12	6	11	20	13	4	2	100	0.9
9	37	48	41	58	30	38	54	34	18	7	365	3.2
10	103	83	89	87	75	78	82	47	43	32	719	6.8
11	145	142	98	124	95	94	140	112	70	70	1090	9.6
12	207	145	175	153	136	153	208	124	99	85	1485	13.0
13	209	152	154	174	193	162	218	163	109	132	1666	14.6
14	274	225	230	222	253	186	238	166	159	166	2119	18.6
15	298	251	282	258	267	220	286	229	187	238	2516	22.0
16	27	9	8	35	21	19	290	264	215	206	1094	9.6
17	..	..	..	1	1	2	6	4	5	7	26	0.2
18	1	..	..	1	1	..	..	..	1	..	4	0.0
not reported	36	13	9	21	6	19	21	24	18	13	180	1.6
Total	1350	1093	1105	1152	1087	987	1571	1180	930	958	11.413	100.0

TABLE 3. - DELINQUENT GIRLS BROUGHT TO COURT EACH YEAR FROM JULY 1, 1899 TO JUNE 30, 1090. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES. - BY AGE
Age	Number of Girls Brought to Court During the Year										Total	Per Cent
Age	1899-1900	1900-1901	1901-1902	1902-1903	1903-1904	1904-1905	1905-1906	1906-1907	1907-1908	1908-1909	Total	Per Cent
7	..	3	1	..	..	..	1	1	..	..	6a	0.2
8	..	..	..	1	..	4	5	1	..	2	13	0.5
9	1	4	..	3	1	7	4	4	1	2	27	0.9
10	2	5	7	10	3	4	7	5	3	5	51	1.8
11	3	8	3	9	5	12	10	5	7	8	70	2.5
12	6	6	7	17	9	17	20	16	11	13	122	4.4
13	17	15	19	25	21	27	30	16	9	23	202	7.3
14	31	33	35	31	41	48	66	58	34	53	430	15.5
15	37	63	67	73	56	86	98	76	77	94	727	26.3
16	13	13	24	71	60	60	99	134	94	90	658	23.8
17	1	5	11	23	28	46	65	72	77	64	392	14.2
18	2	..	1	7	1	1	..	1	2	..	15	0.5
not reported	3	3	2	3	4	5	10	9	6	12	57	0.2
Total	116	158	177	273	229	317	415	398	321	366	2770	100.0

(25) discipline would be benefited by coming under the care of the court and the influence of the judge. The error of this view was, of course, apparent to the judge, who urged in every way and at every opportunity the adoption of preventive measures, the importance of exhausting other methods of treatment before bringing the child to court, and the use of the court only as a last resort. The very substantial decline in the number of children brought in during the two following years, a decline which was, like the increase during the preceding year, much more marked in the case of boys than of girls, can no doubt be attributed in large measure to the change of policy advocated by the judge. Although this decline did not continue, the increase during the succeeding year was so slight that it seems to demand no special explanation. Attention has already been called to the significant fact with regard to the number of children brought in during this year,-that the number was smaller than it had been during the first year of the court's existence. This was true in spite of the increase in population during the decade and in spite of the change in the law which had brought a larger number of children under the jurisdiction of the court.

The effect of this change in the law which was made in 1 905 can be better understood after a study of Tables 2 and 3, which show the ages of the boys and girls brought to court during each year of the period studied, and which indicate a marked increase in the relative numbers of older children brought in during 1905-o6 and the years following.

In 1899-1900, the first year of the court, 153 boys, 77 percent of the total number, were ten years old or younger; in 1908-09, the tenth year of the court, 41 boys, only 4 per cent, were of these ages. I n 1899- 1900, on the other hand, 326 boys, only 24 per cent, were fifteen or older, while in 1908-09, 451 boys, 47 per cent, were fifteen or older. While the change in the law is no doubt largely responsible for the relative increase in the number of older boys, the decrease in the number of younger boys is certainly to be explained in part by a tendency to call such young children dependent rather than delinquent. The table for girls (Table 3) shows a corresponding increase in the number of older girls brought in during the

( 26) latter part of the decade. In 1899-1900, 53 girls, 46 per cent, were fifteen or older, and in 1908-09 the number had increased to 248 girls, 68 per cent. The number of girls ten years old or younger was of course very small, 3 in the first year and 9 in the last year of the decade. Throughout the whole period the number of girls ten or under was never more than 8 per cent of the total number brought in during the year.

TABLE 4. - DELINQUENT BOYS AND GIRLS BROUGHT TO COURT DURING THE TEN-YEAR PERIOD FROM JULY 1, 1899 TO JUNE 30, 1909. TOTALS AND PERCENTAGES. - BY AGE
Age	Number			Per Cent
Age	Boys	Girls	Total	Boys	Girls
7 or under	49	6	55	0.4	0.2
8	100	13	113	0.9	0.5
9	365	27	392	3.2	0.9
10	719	51	770	6.3	1.8
11	1090	70	1160	9.6	2.5
12	1485	122	1607	13.0	4.4
13	1666	202	1868	14.6	7.3
14	2119	430	2549	18.6	15.5
15	2516	727	3243	22.0	26.3
16	1094	658	1752	9.6	23.8
17	26	392	418	0.2	14.2
18	4	15	19	0.0	0.5
Not reported	180	57	237	1.6	2.1
Total	11,413	2,770	14,183	100.0	100.0

If the ages of boys and girls be examined together an interesting contrast will be observed. Table 4, which for convenience presents only the totals from the two preceding tables, shows that more than two-thirds of all the delinquent boys brought into court are from twelve to fifteen years of age. Relatively few sixteen-year-old boys are brought in, and boys who are seventeen or over are not under the jurisdiction of the court. On the other hand, a relatively large number of girls, 1050, or 38 per cent, are brought in at the ages of sixteen and seventeen. This difference is in part due to the fact that signs of waywardness in the girl do

(27) not appear until she is older, since, as later tables of offenses will show, this waywardness almost invariably takes the form of immorality. With the boy, there is more hope that he will "settle down" when he goes to work; with the girl, work often means the beginning of temptation. Moreover, the treatment of the court is as yet less adapted to the older boy than to the younger boy, whereas for the girl whose whole future life is imperiled, the only hope is to remove her entirely from influences that threaten destruction and to place her in an institution until the critical years are past.

Next in importance to the question of the age of these delinquent children is that of the offenses which have been the cause of their being brought to court. Tables of offenses are given separately for boys and girls,[4] and, although the relative numbers brought in on the different charges do not vary much from year to year, it has seemed best to present the separate totals for each year.

It appears from Table 5 that the offenses of more than half of the delinquent boys who were brought into court during the decade were violations of the rights of property. Incorrigibility is the offense next in importance to stealing; and these two offenses, together with disorderly conduct and malicious mischief, constitute the "charges" upon which 95 per cent of the delinquent boys are brought into court. In attempting to ascertain the precise "acts or facts" included under these blanket terms, an examination of the court records showed that the terms stealing, burglary, larceny, attempted burglary, or attempted larceny, all of which are grouped together under stealing, covered a great many different offenses connected with the taking of property. For example, the property taken varied greatly in form and value, from the newspaper at the door to merchandise worth several hundred dollars from a store. One hundred dollars taken from a house, merchandise from a candy store, twenty-five dollars' worth of wood from a basement, lead pipe cut from a building, coal and grain from cars, zinc and copper valued at $200 from a railroad shanty, are among the offenses classified under the head of stealing as involving a violation of property rights. In order

(28) to understand more correctly the precise offense of the boy who is brought to court for stealing, a more careful study was made

TABLE 5.-DELINQUENT BOYS BROUGHT TO COURT EACH YEAR FROM JULY 1, 1899, TO JUNE 30, 1909. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES.-BY OFFENSE
Offense	Number of Boys Brought to Court During the Year										Total	Per Cent
Offense	1899-1900	1900-1901	1901-1902	1902-1903	1903-1904	1904-1905	1905-1906	1906-1907	1907-1908	1908-1909	Total	Per Cent
Stealing [5]	645	528	522	596	555	549	801	691	544	364	5795	50.8
Incorrigiblity	261	205	220	234	220	196	307	205	147	483	2487	21.7
Disorderly conduct	274	241	247	163	172	189	281	153	64	67	1851	16.2
Malicious Mischeif	61	58	67	105	82	32	134	84	92	25	740	6.5
Vagracy	33	28	18	22	31	20	20	31	53	9	265	2.3
Immorality	11	3	7	8	14	14	30	31	25	35	178	1.6
Dependant charges [6]	18	7	7	21	4	9	10	3	9	2	90	0.8
Truancy [7]	53	13	3	5	2	4	5	8	0	0	85	0.7
Miscellaneous offences [8]	37	10	14	16	19	11	20	8	16	8	159	1.4
Total	1393	1093	1105	1170	1099	1024	1608	1206	950	993	11,641	102.0
Counted twice	43	..	..	18	12	37	37	26	20	35	228	2.0
Total	1350	1093	1105	1153	1087	987	1571	1180	930	958	11,413	100.0

of the charges for the last two years of the period studied, and Table 6 was prepared to show the kinds of stealing which were most common among these juvenile court boys.

(29)

TABLE 6. - SPECIFIED OFFENSE OF 908 DELINQUENT BOYS BROUGHT TO COURT ON THE CHARGE OF STEALING, BETWEEN JULY 1, 1907 AND JUNE 30, 1909.
Offense	Number of boys
Stealing from railroad	258
Stealing money	193
Stealing "junk"	134
Shoplifting	55
Breaking into empty buildings	54
Stealing from parents	45
Stealing, i.e., driving away, a horse, motor, or bicycle	58
Stealing candy, fruit, gum, or tobacco	58
Stealing pigeons, ducks, chickens, etc	25
Stealing newspapers	19
Miscellaneous thefts	9
Total	908

The first two items in this table, "stealing from the railroad" and "stealing money," cover a great variety of acts performed under widely different conditions, and fail therefore to give a very definite idea of the child's real delinquency. Comment will be made later upon "stealing from the railroad" as one of the many kinds of acts suggested by the proximity of a crowded tenement district to unfenced and often inadequately guarded railroad property. Stealing money cannot be reduced to definite terms, but covers the taking of any sum, from a small amount, perhaps appropriated while employed as a messenger, to sums of considerable value taken from the tills in shops and offices into which the boys have broken. Stealing junk or finding something which can be sold as junk is the boy's easiest way of obtaining spending money. While this often means only a judicious hunt through alleys and garbage cans, yet when this hunt fails, depredations frequently result. In this way boys are brought in for stealing bicycles and selling them as junk; and still more common is the raid on the empty house from which the lead pipe can be cut to be sold as junk, or the cutting of a telephone cable under the sidewalk. It should be noted, too, that the empty house offers an especially tempting field for the exploits of the "gang." Breaking into empty buildings is closely related in its adventurous aspect to "driving away" the horse or the vehicle left standing in the street.

The taking of candy, gum, pigeons, and similar articles of special value to the small boy, is of course much less serious than those

(30) acts described as shoplifting, and is, in fact, closely related to the long tolerated privilege which the country boy enjoys of "swiping" melons and pumpkins in neighboring gardens. Without minimizing the dangers into which the boy may be led, it seems clear that a considerable number of these acts are not vicious, but are performed in a spirit of harmless adventure and without adequate realization of their possibly serious consequences.

Passing on to a description of the other terms which appear in the table of charges, it appears that "malicious mischief " is used in the court records to designate such offenses as destroying a railroad switch, throwing stones at a man and calling him obscene names, cutting the top of a grocery wagon, throwing stones at a teamster on his wagon, pulling up planks from the sidewalk, beating down the door of a house with a hatchet, "cutting rope from a flag pole and tying it across the street so that a man was knocked from his wheel," breaking into a basement but not stealing anything, throwing stones at trains, setting fire to barrels of crockery in a business place, and other acts which seem equally miscellaneous and equally difficult to classify.

"Incorrigibility," a word apparently coined of despair, is used to cover such misdemeanors as loitering about the streets and using vulgar language, receiving money embezzled by another boy and running away with it, refusing either to work or to go to school, roaming the street late at night, going upon the roof of a building and throwing stones at passers-by, riding on railroad trains, keeping bad company, refusing to obey parents, and staying away from home. In many instances in which the child is classed as incorrigible or disorderly, appeal is made to the court to support a parental authority[9] which should rest on early dis-

(31) -cipline and essential justice; and sometimes the court is asked to maintain standards of filial duty which, while possibly still in accord with the law of parental right, are adhered to with difficulty where the industrial organization of which the child becomes a part deals with children as individuals and not as members of the family group.[10] Nor can one escape the opinion, when the child is young and the parents confess or complain that they cannot control him, that in the absence of such mitigating circumstances as will be later referred to, they, not he, deserve to be disciplined and possibly placed on probation as delinquent parents.

The offense described as "disorderly conduct" in the court records covers such acts as climbing the structures of the elevated railroad, starting a fight with another boy on a street car, loafing on the street corner, shooting bullets from a revolver on the street the day before the Fourth, "attempting to strike his mother and threatening to shoot his brother for interfering, besides smashing a window," assaulting a boy and creating a disturbance, earning money and then running away and spending it, staying away from home five weeks without parents' consent, wandering about downtown streets without lawful occupation, being afraid to go home, "refusing to obey his mother, giving her only what he pleases from his pay, and when she refuses him spending money, taking it from her by force," throwing stones at the actors in a West Side music hall, calling a neighbor names, and a large number of other offenses varying greatly in seriousness of character.

And, finally, among the delinquent wards of the court there are the children charged with "vagrancy," or running away. The vagrant child is one who stays away from home without the mother's consent, sleeps under the station platform several nights, or sleeps in a wagon; he may also be found sleeping in a hallway,

( 32) in a basement, or in an empty house several nights, and then is too afraid of his father's whipping to go home. While an offense of this character is most frequently called "vagrancy" in the court records, it may also constitute a "disorderly conduct" charge, or even incorrigibility.

It should be noted with regard to the act of misconduct recorded against the child in court, that the terms used are often quite misleading, for it is not at all uncommon to find a series of different terms applied to precisely the same act. For example, in the case of four boys who broke a till and divided the money found in it, the ten-year-old boy who broke the till was charged with larceny, two of those who received a share of the spoil were called incorrigible (they were ten and thirteen) while the fourth (a fourteen-year-old boy) was called disorderly. The disposition, however, was the same in each case; all four boys were put on probation.

This detailed statement of the offenses charged against the delinquent boys of the court is necessarily brief, for, although their acts may be classified into a small number of groups, there is found throughout the eleven thousand and more cases an endless variety in the actual offenses committed. It is believed, however, that a sufficient number of examples has been given to show the nature of the charge that has brought the dishonest or incorrigible or disorderly or vagrant boy into court.[11] One other point should be noticed in connection with this discussion of offenses-the responsibility of the railroads for delinquency among boys. Careful analysis of the charges against the boys brought in during the last two years of the period studied showed that 326 were charged with various offenses against the railroads, 48 were brought in for stealing grain, 56 for stealing fuel, 154 for taking various forms of merchandise from freight cars, and 68 for such miscellaneous offenses as loitering on the railroad tracks, throwing a switch, destroying a switch, throwing stones at trains, setting fire to freight cars, breaking into cars, putting cartridges on the tracks, breaking signal lights, tearing down a fence in a railroad yard, loafing in the railroad station, "flipping trains," and a few other similar charges.

( 33)

Getting on and off trains while they are in motion becomes a fine art, denoted by the term "flipping," a word now well established in the vocabulary of delinquency. It is an art practiced by boys and girls alike in neighborhoods in which parallel bars are scarce, and girls with long and eager legs may become adept at it. In the process of acquiring the art, however, the child endangers his own life and limb and incidentally threatens an inconvenient accident on railroad property. There is no question of the serious danger involved in using railroad tracks as a public playground, and the community has the right to demand that, in the interests of safety, railroad tracks should be elevated, fenced, and adequately guarded. The process of elevating the tracks has gone on slowly in Chicago, and the court records indicate not only that the tracks are not properly guarded, but that there is no settled policy on the part of the roads in regard to the children who are tempted by the presence of this unguarded property in their neighborhood. Great laxity at one time is followed by undue severity at another, and the effect cannot fail to be demoralizing. After a period of indifference, a change of policy is inaugurated which means the arrest of many restless boys in the neighborhood. With reference to the irregular attempts at discipline on the part of railroad guards, comments by probation officers are sometimes illuminating; as, " J was not really a delinquent; he was merely one of the large number of boys brought in from district when the railroad detectives suddenly determined to enforce the law."

One factor of obvious importance which presents itself here is the problem of the gang, for many of these delinquent boys have offended in groups. Upon this subject the court records throw very little light. They show that the word "gang" is used without any definite significance to describe combinations of many kinds, varying from the loosely formed or even accidental group to the well knit organization. The so-called gang also varies greatly in size, and the records seldom give any definite idea either of its real size or of its personnel.

Sometimes the gang is cosmopolitan in membership and includes boys of several different nationalities, but more often its members are of the same nationality, or the same race, prob-

(34) -ably because from the same neighborhood. Thus, eight Polish boys are brought in for placing ties across the railroad tracks; five Bohemians are caught breaking into a house; and three little colored boys aged nine, ten, and eleven are brought in for making a raid on a candy store. The gang is sometimes organized under the rule of a "king" who is usually described by resentful mothers, whose boys are suffering from his control, as a "big, bullying boy who tries to run everybody on the street."

The presence of a gang in any neighborhood is always offered as an adequate explanation of the delinquency of any one of its members; and it becomes customary for the mother of every member to blame her own boy's badness upon the badness of the other mothers' sons. Sometimes, however, the blame can be fairly well determined. In the case of one gang nearly all the boys came from good homes and fairly favorable conditions and every mother blamed the "bad boy" of the neighborhood; and all the boys found one appearance in court quite enough except one poor fellow who is now in the state penitentiary serving a life sentence. This boy had no mother and only a nine-year-old sister to care for him; his father beat him, and his home was so degraded that he had never had a chance to do well. He had been the "king of the gang" in the neighborhood, had persistently avoided going to school, and did not learn to read until after he went to Joliet. The resentment of the mothers of the other boys in this instance was evidently justified.

The gang is a local institution,[12] and is usually designated by the name of a street, or a neighborhood, or a district; as, the Halsted Street gang, or the Englewood gang. It does not migrate from its habitat, and so there is always the possibility of

( 35) escaping from its influence and control by flight. A frequent remark made to the investigator by the mother of a delinquent boy who had come back to the fold was, "after he was in court we moved to a new neighborhood to get him away from the gang, and he settled down all right."

It is clear that the larger offenses of burglary and larceny and the other more serious depredations are committed by boys in groups, but often the purely mischievous acts are likewise manifestations of the spirit of the gang. In fact, there is scarcely a type of delinquent boy who is not associated with others in his wrongdoing. The little vagrant may sometimes sleep alone, but we are sure that he does not pass the days alone. The twelve-year-old beggars may beg alone, but the begging child is really dependent rather than delinquent. The boy who is brought in because he will not give in all his wages undoubtedly wants to spend them in social ways. The impression made by a study of the actual reasons for bringing boys into court is that the delinquency is in many instances distinctly one of a social character and is due to the organization of a little group whose purpose may be harmless enough but whose social effort is misdirected.

Turning from the offenses of the delinquent boy to the question of the delinquent girl, some quite different problems present themselves. In Table 7, the terms which are used in classifying the girls' offenses are the same as those which were used in the corresponding table of boys' offenses, but the offenses covered by these terms are very different. Stealing, of course, continues to indicate the taking of property; but the forms of stealing change. The girl is most frequently charged with shoplifting or stealing from the person by whom she is employed. She seldom makes stealing a form of recreation, as the boy does who breaks into empty houses or attempts a raid on a store or a freight car.

Examples of the kind of offenses which are called "disorderly" or "incorrigible" in the case of the boys have already been given. These words, however, have an entirely different meaning when applied to the girls. Perhaps the most frequent charge against the incorrigible girl is that she has been "staying away from home or going out at night in company with vicious people." Sometimes she refuses to stay at home and keeps a room in a disreputable

(36) quarter of the city; she attends tough dances and does not come home until two or three o'clock in the morning; she associates with vicious persons, refuses to work and brings money home without working; goes away and stays for days, is strongly suspected of being immoral, uses vulgar and obscene language; she is on the streets day and night, stays out with a rough crowd of boys until

TABLE 7. - DELINQUENT GIRLS BROUGHT TO COURT EACH YEAR FROM JULY 1 1899 TO JUNE 30 1909, NUMBER AND PERCENTAGES. - BY OFFENSE
Offense	Number of Girls Brought to Court During the Year										Total	Per Cent
Offense	1899-1900	1900-1901	1901-1902	1902-1903	1903-1904	1904-1905	1905-1906	1906-1907	1907-1908	1908-1909	Total	Per Cent
Stealing	19	26	43	46	40	41	67	63	46	26	417	15.0
Incorrigiblity	39	55	50	99	98	123	154	142	191	235	1186	42.8
Disorderly conduct	25	21	15	17	24	18	27	19	12	6	184	6.7
Malicious Mischeif	..	..	2	..	..	..	..	1	..	1	4	0.2
Vagracy	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	3	3	0.1
Immorality	24	42	59	100	61	124	151	160	58	92	871	31.4
Dependant charges a	9	10	8	10	6	11	12	8	13	3	90	3.3
Truancy	..	1	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	1	0.0
Miscellaneous offences d	..	..	..	..	..	..	2	..	1	..	3	0.1
Offenses not given	..	3	..	1	..	..	2	5	..	..	11	0.4
Total	116	158	177	273	229	317	415	398	321	366	2770	100.0

three o'clock in the morning; or she stays out all night and "admits that one night she stayed at a hotel with a young man."[14] In general, the incorrigible or disorderly girl is one who "has a bad

(37) reputation in the neighborhood," one who has been going with bad company and staying away at night.

No explanation of the term "immorality" is necessary. Every effort is made to protect the good name of such girls as are brought to court, and in consequence they are, for the most part, charged with being "incorrigible" or "disorderly." The word "immorality" is never used in the petition or the statement of the case if it can be avoided, and when it is used it is probable that the experience of the girl has not been either an isolated or an accidental one. A careful study of the case histories of the girls brought into court during the first ten years showed that 209 girls had frequented or had been inmates of houses of prostitution, and 117 others had already resorted to the use of rooming houses of a low, immoral character.[15] It has already been explained that the offenses disguised in the court records under the terms "incorrigibility" or "disorderly conduct" are in substance much the same as those plainly described as immoral. If we add to the 871 girls charged with immorality the 1370 who were called disorderly or incorrigible, we have a total of 2241 girls whose delinquency is in substance actual or threatened immorality.

That is, more than 8o per cent of the delinquent girls are

(38) brought to court because their virtue is in peril, if it has not been already lost. To put it another way, in less than 20 per cent of the cases is there a first charge not involving imminent moral danger. Moreover, even such incomplete reports of home conditions as are contained in the court records show that in a large number of these cases when the girl is charged with some offense like stealing or running away, which is apparently free from moral peril, there is in reality grave moral danger in the conditions under which she lives.[16] The subsequent treatment of these girls who have become familiar with irregular relationships if they have not actually experienced them, is a very difficult problem. For it is obvious that even if, because of the conditions surrounding her home life or the failure of the school or of the city to guard her, the girl herself should be held blameless, yet if she has had intimate knowledge of vice or of vicious persons and of vicious conditions, she is not a safe companion for the child who is still ignorant and innocent. If she has, because of vicious inheritance and low suggestion, become a source of temptation, as in the case of twelve-year-old Annie who had already "lived the life of a prostitute," not only is there slight hope of so rebuilding the body and spirit that they may follow clean ways' of living and thinking, but there must be recognized the possibility of both spiritual contagion and physical infection.

With the understanding then that the terms describing the charge may bear a different meaning when applied to boys and to girls, the following table, which presents a summary of the charges upon which the two groups of children were brought into court during the first ten years, may be interesting and not misleading.

From this table it appears again that while more than half, 51 per cent, of the boys are brought in for the violation of property rights, only 15 per cent of the girls are brought to court for similar offenses. On the other hand, 31 per cent of the girls, in contrast with a per cent of the boys, are brought in for actual immorality, while if those girls who have been in real danger are

(39) grouped together, the immoral with the incorrigible and the disorderly, they constitute 81 per cent of the whole number.[17]

TABLE 8. - DELINQUENT BOYS AND GIRLS BROUGHT TO COURT DURING THE TEN-YEAR PERIOD FROM JULY 1, 1899 TO JUNE 30, 1909. TOTALS AND PERCENTAGES. - BY OFFENSE
Offenses	Number		Per Cent
Offenses	Boys	Girls	Boys	Girls
Stealing	5795	471	50.8	15.0
Incorrigibility	2478	1186	21.7	42.8
Disorderly conduct	1851	184	16.2	6.7
Malicious mischief	740	4	6.5	0.2
Vagrancy	265	3	2.3	0.1
Immorality	178	871	1.6	31.4
Dependant charges	90	90	0.8	3.3
Truancy	85	1	0.7	0.0
Miscellaneous offenses	159	3	1.4	0.1
Offense not given	..	11	0.0	0.4
Total	11,641	2770	102.0	100.0
Two offenses	228	..	2.0	..
Total[18]	11,413	2770	100.0	100.0

Evidently such differences in offense must lead to differences in treatment. The following table has therefore been prepared

(40) in order to show what disposition was made of the cases of all the delinquent children brought in during the decade.

TABLE 9. - DISPOSITION OF CASES OF ALL CHILDREN BROUGHT TO COURT BETWEEN JULY 1, 1899 AND JUNE 30, 1909
Disposition of Case	Number		Per Cent
Disposition of Case	Boys	Girls	Boys	Girls
Continued indefinitely or dismissed	1928	278	16.9	10.0
Put on probation	6770	1039	59.3	37.5
Committed to institutions[19]	2430	1416	21.3	51.1
Held to the Grand Jury or Municipal Court	95	2	0.8	0.1
Other disposition	34	..	0.3	0.0
Disposition of cases not recorded	156	35	1.4	1.3
Total	11,413	2770	100.00	100.0

This table shows interesting differences in the method of dealing with the boys and girls who are brought to court. In the first place, the proportion of boys whose cases are dismissed,[21] or con-

(41) -tinued indefinitely,[22] is larger than of girls. The reason has already been given in the less serious character of the offenses of the boys and in the greater unwillingness to bring the girls into court. In many instances the distracted parent or the vexed neighbor may feel that bringing the boy in will do him no harm and may "give him a good scare." The boy, too, suffers from his connection with a gang for whose really serious offenses he may be found not to be responsible. The girl, on the other hand, is not a member of a gang, and her family are reluctant to acknowledge or expose her waywardness. For similar reasons there is a striking difference between the proportion of boys and girls put on probation. While it appears that 59 per cent of the boys who come into court for the first time are returned to their homes under the care of a probation officer and only 21 per cent are sent to institutions, with the girls these proportions are almost exactly reversed-51 per cent are removed from their homes and committed to institutions and only 37 per cent are returned to their parents or guardians. The girl is not brought into court until her environment has been proved too dangerous to be rendered safe by the services of the probation officer. She is in peril which threatens the ruin of her whole life, and the situation demands immediate action; her only hope of rescue seems to lie in prompt removal from her old surroundings and associates. The delinquent boy, on the other hand, is frequently only a troublesome nuisance who needs discipline but who, as the probation officer so often says, is "not really a bad boy" and "with a little watching he is sure to come out all right."

With this difference in the seriousness of the first offense and in the method of treatment after their first appearance, it is not difficult to understand why the "repeaters" are more numerous among the boys than among the girls. A table is given showing the number of times each delinquent child was brought into court during the first eight years, from which it appears that while only 20 per cent of the girls appear before the court more than once, 32 per cent of the boys are "repeaters."

(41)

TABLE 10. - NUMBER OF TIMES DELINQUENT CHILDREN WERE BROUGHT TO COURT DURING THE EIGHT-YEAR PERIOD FROM JULY 1, 1899 TO JUNE 30, 1907[23]
Aggregate number of times in court	Number		Per Cent
Aggregate number of times in court	Boys	Girls	Boys	Girls
Once	6425	1660	67.9	79.7
Twice	1725	345	18.3	17.0
Three times	686	53	7.2	2.5
Four times	341	13	3.6	0.6
Five times	159	2	1.7	0.1
Six times	54	1	0.6	0.1
Seven times	28	..	0.3	..
Eight times	9	..	0.1	..
Nine times	4	..	0.0	..
Ten Times	..	..	..	..
Eleven times	1	..	0.0	..
Not specified	33	..	0.3	..
Total	9465	2083	100.0	100.0

In connection with the large proportion of girls who do not return--80 per cent as compared with the 68 per cent of boys who are never brought in after their first appearance-it should be remembered not only that their offenses are more serious and that they are more often sent to institutions, but that they are retained in these institutions for longer periods, and have no such chance as the boys have to "get into trouble again."

While we should not be too sanguine as to the meaning of the figures which indicate that in the cases of 68 per cent of the boys a second appearance in court is avoided, it is evident from the family and probation schedules that the experience in court was often a most salutary lesson which needed to be learned only once. Frequently we meet the statement, in substance if not in precise form, in the family schedules: " He was put on probation and was never in court again"; or "His mother says he has been a

(43) good boy ever since"; or, as in another case, "The boy was much humiliated by being taken into court. He didn't intend to steal, but his only way of getting spending money was by taking things to a junk dealer"; or, "His mother says that his experience in court frightened him badly and he has been very straight ever since."

While no attempt will be made in this volume to discuss the court from the institutional point of view, it seems important to note here certain obvious facts relating to its general policy. It appears, for example, that often when several children are brought in together for participating in a single experience, some of the members of the group will be put on probation, while others are at once committed to institutions, in spite of the fact that all alike seem to have been guilty of the same offense. Thus, when three boys were brought in for "breaking into a basement, though they did not steal," the eleven-year-old Polish boy was charged with attempted burglary and sent to the John Worthy School, while his twelve-year-old American and thirteen-year-old Polish companions were charged with malicious mischief and put on probation. Again, in many cases when several children are brought in separately charged in identical terms as delinquent, they receive wholly different treatment. In fact, the whole theory on which the court is established makes it clear that the act committed by the child is, from the point of view of the court in determining what is to be done with him, of slight importance. The weighty questions are, how did he or she happen to commit this offense; and, are the circumstances which lead to this wrongdoing such as to indicate the probability of a repetition; and if so, can the conditions unfavorable to the child be so altered as to give him a fair chance without removing him from his home, or must he be placed in a wholly different environment? If the latter course be necessary, few alternatives to the institution present themselves.

It is evident, too, that the judge is limited not only by the legal principles which must guide his decision but by the lack of material resources at his command.

When the detention home is full and the institutions are

(44) overcrowded,[24] the court is helpless before the problem of a girl brought in by a frightened mother who wants her sent away because she has been staying away nights and refusing to tell what she has been doing. In the absence of proper facilities for caring for her, the judge can only send her home under the promise that she will try to get back her old job in a department store and be more careful about her comings and goings, though he can see by the "smart way" in which the hair is done and by the angle at which the cheaply trimmed hat is placed, as well as by other unmistakable evidences, that the way of that girl through the department store is as plainly downward as if his own feet felt the beginning of the descent.[25]

If the parents wish to be rid of their boy or are evidently degraded and unworthy, an institution for delinquent boys may be better for him than his home, although he may have committed very slight offenses. At another time, when there is reason to believe that the institution is not wisely administered, it may seem best to leave him in the midst of the extremely unfavorable surroundings of his own home. Only on the supposition that the court must often select for the child the least harmful surroundings, can the disposition, in many cases, be understood. What is done may seem futile; the alternative, however, may have seemed positively harmful.

In no case, however, can the court act wisely except on the

(45) basis of adequate information regarding the child's home surroundings and the attitude of the parents to the child's delinquency. And as it is essential that the judge should have adequate knowledge of the physical and spiritual condition of the home before he can understand the problem of any individual child, so in attempting to understand the larger problem of delinquent childhood, it has seemed important to set forth such facts as could be learned regarding the home circumstances of the whole group of children who are called delinquent. In the following chapters an attempt has been made to set forth these facts; and it is believed that whatever judgment may be later formed as to the work which has been carried on by the, court, it will appear as an institution having incalculable value as a means of uncovering those misfortunes and wrongs of which our city children, big and little, good and bad, are the victims. In these chapters it will appear:

(1) That many of the children suffer from a lack of parental care and discipline because the parents are strangers in a strange land and cannot foresee the dangers to which the children will be exposed, nor train them to resist temptations which appear in novel guise, nor protect them in the hour of real trial.

(2) That many have suffered from neglect because of the poverty of the family, and that some have been sacrificed to undue family thrift.

(3) That many have been deprived of full parental care as a result of the death or illness of one or both parents, and that in the case of many children this misfortune of orphanage has brought other misfortunes in its train.

(4) That many delinquent children have been the victims of confused family situations or of degraded and brutalizing homes.

(5) That many have been neglected by the schools and have been allowed to grow toward maturity without any adequate equipment, either of a cultural or of an industrial character; and that in no small number of cases they are without even a fair knowledge of the English language.

In connection with this neglect by the schools, attention may be called to the fact that the church as an organization fails lamentably in what would seem to be its peculiar concern, the

( 46) moral well-being of the youth under its care. There are, of course, schools maintained for delinquent children by the Roman Catholic Church, such as the House of the Good Shepherd, and there are church homes for dependent children who in many cases are in danger of becoming delinquent-notably St. Mary's Training School at Desplaines (Feehanville) and the Angel Guardian Orphan Asylum. There are, too, a few clergymen to whom children have been paroled, and the Federation of Protestant Churches has supported, since January 1, 1910, an officer for the purpose of finding homes for semi-delinquent boys and girls who are brought under the notice of the court. It is significant, however, that in very few instances was improvement attributed by any one questioned during this inquiry to the effort of a representative of any church.

(6) And, finally, it will appear that throughout the whole story runs the thread of civic neglect by the city and of its lack of intelligent care for this priceless treasure of the youth in its midst-lack of clean, wholesome, upbuilding recreation, lack of supervision when supervision spells largest freedom, lack of adequate training, lack of provision for the separate instruction of those handicapped mentally or physically, the complaisant failure to prevent the exploitation of youth in employments which sap the moral and intellectual fiber, the presence of vicious amusements, and the handing over of this age when love of adventure is strong, this age of questioning and of emotional growth, to commercial interests hostile to youth as they are hostile to the best life of the community. In the following chapters many cases will be cited in which the court has been able to lift children out of such conditions and to counteract through the devoted watchfulness of its officers and agents the evil influences which had been at work. But obviously there must appear many cases in which no institution could restore to the child already demoralized the chance of sound living and the right to good citizenship of which he has been forever deprived.[26] The presentation of such cases would be overwhelming, were it not possible to point to a newly awakening realization of the omissions of the past and of the task which

( 47) lies before us in the immediate future. It is believed that the facts we give fully justify the creation of the court, since through them it is seen to be the great uncoverer of wrongs to childhood; and as the wrongs are uncovered, remedies inevitably suggest themselves, and such facts as may seem to be an evidence of weakness on the part of the court are in fact a plea for increasing its forces and strengthening its influence.

NOTES TO CHAPTER II

NOTE I.-This list, giving not only the court charges but the actual offense in a series of boys' cases taken just as they came, is offered in the hope that it may throw further light on the discussion in this chapter. (See footnote, p. 32.)

Nationality	Age	Charge	Real Offenses	Disposition
Norwegian .	12	Incorrigibility	Followed six-year-old boy home and took $1.00 from his pocket. Has stolen from parents.	Probation
Irish	13	Incorrigibility	Stole bicycle valued at $20 from a man's home. Said he bought it for $3.00 from a boy.	Continued*
German	15	Incorrigibility	Ran away; found sleeping in buildings down town at 2:30 a.m. Won't obey father.	Continued
English .	14	Assault	Struck a boy on head with a broom and killed him. Conflicting stories.	Probation
Italian .	13	Assault	Fought a boy, and after being separated by some one, drew a knife and stabbed boy in shoulder.	Probation
American	16	Incorrigibility	While engineer and porter in five-cent theater he blew top off boiler by turning on water. $30 damages.	John Worthy School
German	9	Incorrigibility	Stole two rugs valued at $9.00. Sold them for 50 cents. Not a normal boy.	Probation
American	12	Incorrigibility	Won't attend school. Expelted from two. Father cannot control him.	Continued
Bohemian	16	Incorrigibility	Entered bedroom and stole $25 watch. Stayed away from home five months.	John Worthy School
Polish .	15	Incorrigibility	Mother says he is disobedient, uses vulgar language. Stays away from home.	John Worthy School
Swedish	14	Stealing	Stole studs, pins, etc., from custodian with whom he had been one week.	Probation

* That is, held under the immediate jurisdiction of the court, subject at any time to a summons to reappear, but not placed on probation.

( 49)

Nationality	Age	Charge	Real Offenses	Disposition
German	14	Incorrigibility	Parents want him to be a baker. He wants to be an electrician. Parents said they could not control him. He says father is cruel to him.	Continued
Polish .	15	Incorrigibility	Has run away from home seven times. Parents say he is incorrigible.	John Worthy School
Colored .	14	Incorrigibility	Lazy, smokes cigarettes; impudent and a nuisance to himself and everyone else.	John Worthy School
German	15	Stealing	Broke into workshed used as a store room and stole clothes.	John Worthy School
Roumanian .	15	Incorrigibility	Stayed away from home two weeks. Found down town at 2:30 a.m.	Probation
American	15	Incorrigibility	Mother cannot control him. Won't work. Stays out nights.	Continued
Russian	10	Incorrigibility	Stole watch fob valued at 75 cents from department store.	Probation
American	t¢	Incorrigibility	Stays out nights and is wholly incorrigible.	John Worthy School
Italian .	16	Carrying concealed weapons	Carried concealed weapons.	Dismissed
Lithuanian .	15	Incorrigibility	Runs away, stays out nights, has stolen money from parents.	Continued
Polish .	14	Stealing	Broke seals on freight cars and stole grain.	Dismissed
German	14	Stealing	Stole coal from the railway.	Continued
Bohemian	t t	Stealing	Stole $10 from father and stayed away for several days. Bought friend pair of rubber boots, leggings and pair of trousers, and then went home.	Probation
Polish .	16	Incorrigibility	Answered to another boy's name and took his wages, $4.50, at N- Company. Boy sans he did not do it.	Probation

(50)

Nationality	Age	Charge	Real Offenses	Disposition

German	16	Immorality	Admits immoral relations with an eighteen-year-old girl.	Probation
German	14	Stealing	Stole eighteen-dollar harness and two bales of hay. Took $8.00 from a store.	Probation
Polish .	15	Incorrigibility	Abusive to mother and sister. Out late nights. Steals everything he can find.	Children's Hospital Society
Irish	15	Incorrigibility	Won't go to school. Has been staying out nights lately.	John Worthy School
German	13	Incorrigibility	Won't go to school or work. Father wants him sent to a home.	John Worthy School
American	16	Immorality and stealing	Came from Vermont in response to letter from a Chicago man, who abused him. Boy also stole $1.25 from a man's room.	Continued
French .	12	Incorrigibility	Accidentally shot in leg- was taking turns shooting at a hat in some water.	Dismissed
American	15	Incorrigibility and absence from home.	Mother cannot control him. Stays in basement with boys who gamble.	Probation
German	16	Incorrigibility	Stole coal from cars, loiters on tracks. Repeatedly warned to keep off.	John Worthy School
Italian	-	Incorrigibility	Charged with throwing a brick at a man.	Dismissed
Russian	-	Incorrigibility	Mother accused him of spending $5.00 which was his pay. Stays away from home.	Continued
Roumanian .	15	Incorrigibility	Stole things from his mother and brother and tried to sell them.	Probation
German	16	Incorrigibility	Charged with using profane language on street at 1:30 a. m.	Continued
Colored .	14	Stealing	Stole a watch from one of the other pupils at school.	Continued

(51)

Nationality	Age	Charge	Real Offenses	Disposition
Italian	13	Incorrigibility	Beyond control, loiters around school, annoys pupils. Truant one week.	Probation
Polish	15	Stealing	Broke seals on freight cars and stole grain.	Continued
Polish	15	Stealing	Broke grain doors from railway cars.	Continued
Irish	15	Burglary	Broke into a shed and stole 40 lbs. of zinc, three chickens, and four wash boilers.	Probation
Polish	16	Incorrigibility	Beyond parent's control. Away from home one month	Probation
Polish	15	Stealing	Stole nine coupling pins valued at $6.00 from the railway.	Probation
Irish	16	; Incorrigibility	Beyond control. Breaks furniture and calls mother bad names.	Probation
French	13	Incorrigibility	Mother cannot manage him and wants him sent away	John Worthy School
Colored	16	Stealing	Pulled a man off a newspaper wagon; also stole newspapers from doorways.	John Worthy School
Bohemian	16	Incorrigibility	Parents say he is incorrigible. Stays away a week at a time. Once stole $4.00 from mother.	Probation
Colored	15	Incorrigibility	Loiters around school talking to girls. Caught in bedroom with two girls and another boy in absence of any older person in house.	Probation
Polish	9	Stealing	Stole grain from freight cars of Wabash elevator.	Continued
German	14	Incorrigibility	Used a transfer for which he did not pay.	Dismissed
Irish	16	Incorrigibility	While order clerk in jewelry store stole two rings (value S1 1.5o) and one knife (value, 50 cents).	Probation

(52)

Nationality	Age	Charge	Real Offenses	Disposition
American	16	Incorrigibility	Bummed his way here from Missouri Valley and was found wandering streets at night. Went to store and bought cigars (one cent each); asked for two cents' trust. Boy and owner got into fight.	To be sent home to Iowa
Italian .	16	Incorrigibility	Others held a boy while he pounded him; judge couldn't tell who was truthful.	Dismissed
Hungarian .	15	Incorrigibility	Drinks, smokes cigarettes, and steals.	Continued
Irish	15	Incorrigibility	Mother cannot control him. Stays out nights and is untruthful.	St. Charles
Polish .	16	Incorrigibility	Mother has tried for eight months to get him to work. Annoys parents and steals from neighbors.	John Worthy School
Polish .	13	Incorrigibility	Stole $36 from a safe in a neighbor's house. Spent $11 of it.	Probation
Polish .	t¢	Incorrigibility	Stole father's watch (value, $12). Once before stole $5.00 from mother and tried to shoot peddler. (Father wants him sent to John Worthy School.)	John Worthy School
	16	Incorrigibility	Passed several worthless checks ($36 in all). Spent money for theater and drinks.	John Worthy School
Polish .	16	Incorrigibility	Hit a man's horse and called him a vile name.	Dismissed
Italian	12	Assault	Got his brother to help him in fight with another boy. Stabbed boy so that he was in hospital five days.	Continued

(53)

NOTE 2.-A LIST OF EXTRACTS FROM THE COURT RECORDS OF "INCORRIGIBLE" GIRLS. (See footnote, p. 36.)

1. "Incorrigible."-Girl has been living at G Hotel; has told her father she is going to marry the hotel proprietor. Her father thinks she is leading a criminal life. (Disposition: Sent to House of the Good Shepherd.)

2. "Incorrigible."-Father reports that girl stays away from home sometimes a week at a time. Physician's examination indicates immorality. (Disposition:-Sent to Geneva.)

3. "Disorderly and incorrigible."-Mother says girl is hard to control; associates with vicious persons; has been visiting a disreputable house in company with bad men. (Disposition: Probation.)

4. "Incorrigible."-Girl left home and was arrested in a house of ill-fame. (Disposition:-Sent to House of the Good Shepherd.)

5. "Disorderly."-This girl was arrested at 2:30 a. m., with a young man who claimed to be her cousin. When arrested the man was trying to take her into the railroad yards. The girl's mother is dead, her father works at night, and there is no one to care for her. (Disposition: Sent to the House of the Good Shepherd.)

6. "Incorrigible."-Girl left home one month ago and is said to have been living on L Street with a woman of questionable character. (Disposition: Probation. This girl was returned in four months again charged as "Incorrigible." Her mother said she was staying out all night and asked to have her sent to the House of the Good Shepherd. After release from this institution she came back on a third charge of incorrigibility. This time it was found necessary to send her to the Refuge.)

7. "Incorrigible."-Will not attend school; associates with a bad set of boys and girls and stays out late at night; visited a house of ill fame; grandparents refuse to keep her any longer. (Disposition:-Sent to Geneva.)

8. "Incorrigible."-Complaint of mother. Girl stays away from home and has bad associates. Admits that she was with two young men from Friday until Thursday. (Disposition: Sent to the House of the Good Shepherd.)

9. "Disorderly."-Mother says daughter will not obey; stays out late nights; keeps bad company and is going astray; stays away from home days at a time. (Disposition:-Sent to Erring Woman's Refuge. Released later to go to the country with her parents but within a year the family returned to Chicago. The girl was arrested for soliciting on the streets, returned to court, and was committed again t0 the Refine.)

(54)

10. "Incorrigible."-Mother says girl will not work, runs streets, stays out nights. Two years ago when the girl was fifteen, she married a man to keep from being sent away, but she has lived since with her mother who says she is incorrigible. (Disposition:-Probation.)

11. "Incorrigible."-Girl runs away from home. Has a room in disreputable district. (Disposition:-House of the Good Shepherd.)

12. "Incorrigible."-Stays away from home. Mother asks to have her sent to the House of the Good Shepherd.

13.1 "Incorrigible."-Father says he cannot control girl. She runs away from home and associates with vicious people. She ran away four weeks ago and has since been rooming in questionable places. (Disposition:-Probation. Within four months girl was arrested in house of ill-fame, returned to court, and sent to House of the Good Shepherd.)

14. "Incorrigible. "-Arrested on complaint of father who accuses her of keeping bad company. She was recently arrested for running away from home and staying in a rooming house. (Disposition:-Sent to House of Correction and House of Good Hope. Girl in court again one year later, and within two years arrested in house of ill-fame.)

15. "Incorrigible."-Girl continually out late at night in unfit company; beyond father's control. (Disposition:-Probation. Returned to court in a few months and "acknowledged she had been leading an immoral life".)

16. "Incorrigible."-Girl arrested on complaint of mother for running away from home and keeping bad company. (Disposition: Probation. Within less than a year sent to Refuge with a two-months-old baby.)

17. "Incorrigible."-Arrested in a questionable rooming house. (Disposition:-Probation. Returned to court following month, same charge, and three months later again arrested in questionable place, and finally sent to the House of the Good Shepherd on definite charge of " immorality.")

18. "Disorderly and Incorrigible."-Girl ran away from home last summer and has been beyond control of parents ever since; associates with vicious company and frequents a disorderly house. (Disposition: Probation.)

Notes

It seems important at the beginning of this study to place certain facts regarding the personnel of the court at the service of the reader. During the first five years of the court's existence, that is, from July 5, 1899, to June 30, 1904, Richard S. Tuthill was the presiding judge. During the spring of 1904, Judge Julian W. Mack assisted judge Tuthill and later became Judge Tuthill's successor, sitting until June 30, 1907, when Judge Tuthill was returned to the court. He sat until September, 1908, and was succeeded by Judge Merritt W. Pinckney.
Timothy D. Hurley was chief probation officer from the time of the court's establishment until January, 1904. He was succeeded by J. J. McManaman, who served during the year 1905. Henry W. Thurston served from January 1, 1906, until September 3o, 1908, and was succeeded by John H. Witter.
Until the beginning of 1905, the staff of probation officers consisted of six policemen in plain clothes, assigned to juvenile court duty, 36 volunteer workers, 14 agents of societies interested in the care of children, 21 officers of the Compulsory Education Department, and six probation officers maintained by philanthropic organizations interested in the establishment of the court. The expense of a paid staff was assumed by the county at the beginning of 1905, and since that time there has been a staff of 37 probation officers in addition to 30 officers from the police department and a few volunteers.
It may also be of interest to know that during the first five years the court sat in the county building. For two years a temporary building was occupied, and the court was then moved (August 7, 1907) into the beautiful court building which includes a detention home administered by county officials and a school conducted under the auspices of the Chicago Board of Education. See Thurston Henry W.: Ten Years of the Juvenile Court of Chicago. The .Survey, Vol. XXIII, pp. 656666 (Feb. 5, 1910). See especially p. 657, "A Corps of Probation Officers" and pp. 661 664, "Some Successes Gained."
Of these 6 children, 2 were seven years old, 3 were six and 1 was five.
Of these 6 children, 2 were seven years old, 3 were six and 1 was five.
See Tables 5 and 7, pp. 28 and 36.
All offenses which involve either the taking or the attempt to take property are grouped together under the term "stealing" in this table.
These are the charges referred to on page 12; e.g. drunkenness of parents, lack of care, etc. the 90 boys brought in on these charges should not be confused with the boys who after having been dependent wards of the court are brought in on bona fide delinquent charges.
The marked decrease after 1900 in the number of boys brought to court as delinquent on a charge of truancy, is explained by the fact that a parental school for truant boys was established in 1901, and after that it was necessary only in exceptional cases to commit them to institutions for delinquent boys.
This total includes 65 offenses other than those specified and 94 offenses not reported
For example, the court records show that during the period 1907-09, 65 boys had been brought in for stealing from their parents or for different specific offenses (other than disobedience) against them. That is, while the common charge against the incorrigible whose mother or father brings him to court is that he "will not obey his parents and will not work," or "will not obey and go to school," or "loiters about the streets and will not obey"; in 65 cases, the parents asked the court to punish the boy for some specific act such as stealing money from them, being abusive to them or to some other member of the family, borrowing money in the father's name, and other similar offenses. There are, of course, cases in which the parents or relatives with whom the boy lives bring the boy to court without just cause end ask to have him sent to an institution in order that they may escape the burden of his support. It is scarcely necessary to say that the court is constantly on guard against this danger and ready to deal severely with those who attempt to use it in this way.
The right of the parents to the child's wages and its bearing on delinquency is discussed in a later chapter. Incidentally, it may be said, that the exercise of the parental right to claim the child's wages is of very doubtful industrial value, since it takes from the employer an effective means of inducing the child, through a prospective increase, to improve his industrial efficiency. There may be slight influence toward better work in the offer of an added dollar a week, if the dollar goes wholly toward meeting the many unsatisfied needs of a family such as is represented by the child worker.
For a list of cases which gives not only the court charges but the actual offenses of the boys, see Note t at end of this chapter, p. 48.
The daily newspapers recently contained a " gang" story so significant as to be worthy of record. In the history of the life of Eddie Fay, "king of burglars," on the occasion of his recent capture, the following facts were given among others: "Fay was born in 1876 at Thirty-third and Wallace Streets, where his father, now dead, ran a saloon. He attended the Healy school at Thirty-first and Wallace Streets. The boys at the school were divided into two crowds, the Twenty-ninth Street gang and the Thirty-first Street gang. With Fay in the latter gang were Willie Yaeger, who later shot a man in the Twenty-second Street district; Pat Flaherty, who was implicated with Fay in the Superior robbery; Micky Gleason, now serving a ten-year sentence in Munich, Germany, for bank robbery; Vincent Shevlin, serving a term for manslaughter in New Jersey; Johnny Shevlin, who is also ' wanted;' and others."
It has seemed worth while to give an additional list (see Note 2 at end of this chapter, p. 53) containing more detailed examples of the kinds of offenses included under the terms "incorrigible" and "disorderly." A studv of these extracts from the court records will make clear the necessity for grouping these girls with those who are more specifically described as "immoral."
The following table which shows the ages of these girls is of interest: [See Table A at end of notes]
Since in most instances the court records contain no detailed statement regarding home conditions, no complete list can he given. In 118 cases, however, the facts were given as stated here.
This will remind many readers of the case of "The Jukes," in which the women members of the family were harlots, while the men were thieves. That is, if the community be taken as the unit , the lines of sex delinquency are drawn in much the same way as in this family.
This is, of course, the correct total, after subtracting the number of cases counted twice because of the double charge. The number of cases in which the boy was charged with a double offence is an evidence of the inapplicability of the old criminal terms and ideas to the new conditions which the juvenile court was trying to create. In many cases the boy brought in as delinquent had committed an act which could be described by the term stealing or burglary, but this actual offense was perhaps only an occasion for getting hold of a boy whose associates and conduct in general were of such a character as to render it highly desirable that the boy should be brought under the care of the court. In such cases there would be the double charge of stealing and incorrigibility, or stealing and disorderly conduct, or immorality and incorrigibility.
With the girl, however, if a specific offence other than immorality could be named, no specific mention of the latter charge appears in the records. In general, it is true that in the court records the least possible is said with reference to the occasion for bringing the girl to court.
Number of boys committed to each institution (See Table B at end of notes)
Number of Girls committed to each Institution [See Table C at end of notes)
These institutions are nominally for dependent children. When the other institutions are crowded, however, if the child's delinquency is not so serious as to threaten the morals of the school, the apparently delinquent girl is committed to one of these. Such a disposition often occasions real ambiguity as to the proper classification of the child.
"Dismissed" means that neither the conduct of the child nor the home conditions justify the court in assuming jurisdiction.
While neither institutional care nor the services of a probation officer seem to be demanded by the seriousness of the case, the court retains jurisdiction and can exercise control at any time.
Since the children who have been more recently brought to court have had as yet little time to repeat, the figures for the first eight years seem more significant alone than with the data for the ninth and tenth years added. The question of the persistent "repeater" is obviously a very serious one, but a detailed discussion of it belongs more properly with th scope of the volume which deals with the delinquent child and the court.
The following is the list of institutions which are available to the court in disposing of delinquent children, together with the number that may be cared for at any one time:
Girls
Illinois Training School for Girls .......400
Chicago Refuge for Girls..................100
House of the Good Shepherd ..........500

Boys
St. Charles School for Boys . ..........400
John Worthy School . .....................400

In the case of the Illinois State Training School for Girls, Mrs. Ophelia L. Amigh, superintendent, informs us that there is no special rule as to the number that may be committed from any one county but usually more than one-third are wards of Cook County. Officer Peckham of the St. Charles School for Boys tells us that at the present time there are about 150 boys there from Cook County; and that, in general, 40 per cent of their number are from this county.
For a recent confirmation of this statement, see Judge Pinckney's Testimony, Appendix II, p. 222.
For a striking comment on this situation, see Judge Pinckney's Testimony, Appendix II, p. 208 ff.

Table A

Age	Number of Girls taken from
Age	Houses of prostitution	Low Rooming Houses	Total
9 years	1	1	2
10	1	1	2
11	..	1	1
12	4	2	6
13	6	3	9
14	36	19	55
15	58	39	97
16	53	34	87
17	45	16	61
18	3	1	4
Not reported	2	..	2
Total	209	117	326

Table B

John Worthy School	1957
Chicago Parental School	40
St. Mary's Home (Feehanville)	117
Glenwood	69
St. Charles School for Boys	123
Junior Business Club	83
Institutions for dependent boys	41
	2430

Table C

House of the Good Shepherd	609
Chicago Refuge for Girls	371
Illinois Training School for Girls (Geneva)	333
Illinois Industrial School[20]	45
Chicago Industrial School[20]	22
Societies, hospitals, and institutions for dependant girls	36
	1416

The original published version of this document is in the public domain. The Mead Project exercises no copyrights over the original text.

This page and related Mead Project pages constitute the personal web-site of Dr. Lloyd Gordon Ward (retired), who is responsible for its content. Although the Mead Project continues to be presented through the generosity of Brock University, the contents of this page do not reflect the opinion of Brock University. Brock University is not responsible for its content.

Fair Use Statement:

Scholars are permitted to reproduce this material for personal use. Instructors are permitted to reproduce this material for educational use by their students.

Otherwise, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, for the purpose of profit or personal benefit, without written permission from the Mead Project. Permission is granted for inclusion of the electronic text of these pages, and their related images in any index that provides free access to its listed documents.

The Mead Project, c/o Dr. Lloyd Gordon Ward, 44 Charles Street West, Apt. 4501, Toronto Ontario Canada M4Y 1R8