The International Prison Congress

in a military trial than in any criminal trial I have ever witnessed in our state courts. Before the witnesses have an opportunity to forget what was really done, before they have an opportunity to leave, and before other witnesses have an opportunity to make up evidence favorable to the defendant, the military tribunal try the defendant, and either acquit or punish him for his conduct.’ In Missouri, the defendant has the benefit of hearing the evidence produced before the coroner, and he has the benefit of hearing

the evidence produced before the justice of the peace some days later. He has the benefit of hearing the evidence produced by

693

the state at the trial in the circuit court,

some months and even years later. The defendant's attorney is and should be entitled to time in which to prepare for trial; and the defendant should have a continuance for good cause shown, but only for good cause. One noted criminal case, to which I might

refer, was delayed for seven years by reason of the absence of a witness who was alleged to have existed, but who was never seen

by any one, save the defendant.

At the final

trial, on account of the death of two important witnesses for the state, and the insanity of

a third witness, the state had great difliculty in proving that the deceased was ever killed."

The International Prison Congress HE three most important bodies, in the eyes of the American lawyer, which are assisting the progress of criminal law and science in this country and elsewhere, all held meetings at Washington, D. C., early in October. First came the annual meeting of the American Prison Association, which listened to many important addresses. This meeting,

can prisons were apt to be stronger in theory than in practice, and Attorney-General Wicker sham addressed the International Prison Con gress on its opening day. The delegates pres ent included many of the most eminent penologists and prison administrators of Europe. Professor Charles R. Henderson of the University of Chicago presided. The

held on Sept. 30 and Oct. 1, was followed by

most notable result, doubtless, of this year's

the second annual conference of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology, the important reports of which will be pub lished in the journal of that organization. The

Congress was the adoption of a resolution favoring the indeterminate sentence. This action was remarkable in view of the con servative attitude shown by the foreign dele

Institute elected as its new president, succeed

gates.

ing Professor Wigmore, Hon. Nathan William

The deliberations of the International Prison Congress covered a broad field, including theories of punishment in general, probation and parole, juvenile delinquency, prison 1 methods, convict labor, and other subjects of equal importance. Unusually stimulating and profitable discussion was elicited on these topics.’ While there was much to indicate a belief that this country has made much progress in penological methods, as shown, for example, at the New York State Reformatory at

MacChesney of Chicago, of the Commissioners

on Uniform State Laws.1 These two meetings were followed by the quinquennial meeting of the International Prison Congress, which is in a sense an off shoot of the American Prison Association. This body observed a more elaborate program than that of the preceding sessions, and as its resolutions are shaped in actual debate instead of being referred to committees the proceed ings are of particular interest. President Taft welcomed the delegates of the two prison associations at the White House, stating his impression that the Ameri 1 For reports of the meetings of these two bodies, see The Survey, v. 25, pp. 129, 132 (Oct. 22).

Elmyra, still, there was an evident disposition I For an excellent review of the roceedings of he Congress, see The Survey, v. 2, pp . 187-224 Nov. 5). This issue also contains the addresses delivered b Sir Evelyn Ruggles-Bnse and Dean George W. ' chwey. regal