Page images

I want to direct your attention to the two bills before us. Are you gentlemen familiar with the provisions of those two bills?


Mr. HURLEY. Yes, sir.

Senator CLARK. I wonder if you would give us the benefit of your thinking as to what the subcommittee should do with respect to reporting one or the other of these bills, or a combination, or perhaps a clean bill of our own.

Mr. WHITLATCH. I would favor the bill that came out of the House, Senator Clark. I like the plan which leaves it up to the States to allocate this money. I believe that a considerable number of States presently have an authority, a youth commission, or some other like authority, where they have done considerable planning, and where they have many plans that they would like to go forward with. However, they are thwarted in this by lack of State financing.

I think particularly in respect to our correctional facilities, our training schools, institutions, and so on, these have been historically a State obligation. And even where we make provision for an attractive subsidy to local communities, they will be reluctant to take this on. For example, we have had such a program in Ohio. The State offered to pay $3,000 per bed for-toward rehabilitation centers, and correctional facilities, and a further subsidy of a hundred dollars per month per capita for operating expenses.

But inasmuch as this would entail an expenditure of about $10,000 to $12,000 per bed on the county's part, as well as about perhaps $250 per month per capita for operating costs, and this would be entirely a new expenditure for most counties coming from what they always contend of course is their limited tax resources, they have been reluctant to take this program on. The State appropriated $3 million for this purpose, and there was only one county in the State which took advantage of it, and I believe that county would have built their own center even if there hadn't been a subsidy.

Senator CLARK. I am interested in your reaction, Judge-it is very useful to us, because you represent in terms of the witnesses who have been here so far a rather small minority view. Most of the witnesses have felt the administration bill, the Senate bill, was better. They were particularly critical of the failure of the House bill to have anything in there for planning, and rather skeptical of the ability of many of the States, or even the interest in many of the States, to pick up this juvenile delinquency problem. These other witnesses felt that I don't know if they are right at all-I want the benefit of your experiencethat juvenile delinquency is primarily a big-city problem, and that the States have been notoriously unwilling to give the big cities adequate State assistance to solve their problems.

Now, this may be historically true to the extent we did not have a one-man one-vote rule until rather recently. I make these rather desultory comments in the light of my own experience, which is probably different in Ohio. We have two big cities, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, and they are notoriously the whipping boys of the legislature and we

feel we do not get a fair shake. Ohio is different, isn't it? You have so many good-sized cities.

I wonder if you would comment on what I just said.

Mr. WHITLATCH. We have had, notoriously for years, what we call the Cornstalk Brigade, just as you have in Pennsylvania. And they sometimes think that Cuyahoga County, Cleveland, Ohio, should secede that we ought to have a separate existence. However, the oneman one-vote ruling has helped somewhat in this direction. And we have, through the efforts of our judges' association, in establishing this youth commission, obtained some real forward movement from the State.

In other words, we have the organization and the governmental structure there, but we still have the same reluctance to appropriate funds.

Now, it has been estimated in our State, our youth authority, our youth commission, has asked for $30 million in State funds to build the necessary schools and facilities that we need. We have one school, Fairfield School for Boys, formerly the Boys' Industrial School, which is a monstrosity, and an inhuman operation--not that we do not have dedicated people there trying their best, but they have 1,100 boys from the same cultural background, who have the same tendencies, habits, and social attitudes, and so forth, in one school, in a school that should not be serving probably at the maximum maybe 350. We have 75 or 80 boys, 85 boys in a cottage which should house 25 or 35.

Senator CLARK. That is certainly true in Pennsylvania and all over the country. In other words, not to interrupt you, but to make the suggestion-we are short on bricks and mortar, and short on trained personnel. And how are we going to remedy this? Where is the money coming from?

Mr. WHITLACH. I think the Federal Government for the first time, in this legislation, is considering the needs of the juvenile court.

We did have the advantage of the 1961 act in Cleveland. This was our Community Action Youth. We spent some $3 million there in our notorious Hough area. I do not believe it was considered a great success. This is why I say that extensive demonstration projects are not what is needed. Our program was devoted entirely to this and I do not think we learned a great deal from it.

I think we know what needs to be done. We know what it takes to make a good school. We know that this needs a warm. secure, wellsupervised, well-controlled placement, where the child will be educated, where he will be removed from the dissocial environment of his own home, and the disruptive familial situation.

These we need in a considerable number of cases.

Of course, we can use good probation services. We know what good probation services are. And with the wherewithal-in our county I suppose we lack 50 probation officers that we could use to a great advantage-we would have a good probation program.

Senator CLARK. Do you think you could get them if you paid them more money, or is the problem you just cannot get people to go into probation service?

Mr. WHITLACH. Well, there are a lot of people motivated in this direction. We have been paying more money lately. We have had to. We came from a beginning salary for people with a bachelor's degree 2 years ago of $4,800, to $6,400, which we are paying now.

Senator CLARK. I am interested to note that the earlier witnesses from Fairfax County said their probation officers were getting $7,000. Of course, that is a relatively suburban county. But it rather startles me they should pay more for a probation officer in Fairfax County, Va., than you do in Cleveland, Ohio.

Mr. WHITLATCH. Well, there is certainly no reason why we shouldn't be paying that much. I think we could attract and keep-this is the main think and keep the proper kind of personnel if we had the proper salary scale. This is what we have to do.

We have a considerable turnover. And while, of course, coming from this ridiculous figure of $4,800 per year to $6,400 has helped us appreciably, we are still experiencing this turnover. You get a good man, the kind of a person we need, a person with feeling, sensitivity, intelligence he does not have to work today for $6,400. Somebody is going to be looking for him.

Senator CLARK. You are absolutely right.

Now, how much money do you think, Judge, you could usefully spend in Cuyahoga County on your juvenile courts and the allied areas of police and probation officers, custodial institutions, and the like?

Mr. WHITLATCH. Senator, I consider that when you put the question to the police chief here, and again, as you suggested, this would be right off the top of my head. But I would say we could take the entire appropriation for this Federal bill, and we would not waste a penny, because these school problems that you mentioned, they are particularly significant.

We have hundreds of emotionally disturbed children in our school systems which cannot educate these kids. We have other kids who are uneducable in the public schools as now constituted. And I agree with you that this is something that the public schools have to take a hard look at.

I am not critical of them. We are talking about the traditional school where you have 30 to 35 kids in a classroom.

Well, if you have five or six boys or girls in there who are devoted to keeping that place in an uproar, you cannot operate. So we have to find-this is what public school people have to apply themselves to— we have to find ways of educating these kids. And this is why, as of right now, we need these good schools, where we can take these aggressive, hyperactive kids out of the school setting, where they are so disruptive, and put them in the kind of an environment where they can respond and be educated.

Senator CLARK. We had a witness here yesterday, a very articulate and brilliant young man, who told us about corporal punishment and whipping in the public schools of Boston, Mass.

Do you happen to know whether they use corporal punishment to any extent in the public school system in Cleveland, too?

Mr. WHITLATCH. To a limited extent. Of course, it is lawful. The schoolteacher is in loco parentis, as we say, and has the same authority for corporal punishment as the parent. However, the great concern in the Cleveland schools has been the other way around-that pupils are administering the corporal punishment. We have many assault cases brought into our courts.

Senator CLARK. To what extent, Judge, in Cleveland, is this a racial problem?

Mr. WHITLATCH. Well, I would not call it a racial problem, Senator. It is more a cultural problem.

Now, in Cleveland I think we have about a third of the population of the city proper-this would be in the neighbrohood of 300,000, 350,000 Negroes-and a lot of these people are newcomers to our community. If they are not newcomers exactly, their parents were newcomers. And the same problems are there culturally with some of the poor white families-though of course it is intensified with the Negroes, because they have lagged culturally of necessity.

Senator CLARK. I remember very vividly Judge Celebrezze, who as you know, used to be mayor of Cleveland, Secretary of HEW, coming before the Labor Committee some years ago and making a plea for something in the nature of what has turned out to be the poverty program, sayings that he came from a home where his parents were immigrants, there were no books in the home. He went into the first grade, and had to compete with the sons of doctors and lawyers and businessmen and the like. He made a very strong plea for remedying those conditions-which was quite dramatic.

I wonder to what extent that type of condition results in children going into the public school system, falling behind, getting discouraged, feeling rejected, going out on the streets, and getting into trouble.

Is there some of that?

Mr. WHITLATCH. I am sure this is true.

I know Judge Celebrezze well. And I would say he has something in his home that so many of these homes significantly lack. This is motivation. He must have had parents who had some drive, who wanted to be somebody, and gave these children some feeling of selfesteem, that they were somebody.

Senator CLARK. He has a father as well as a mother.

Mr. WHITLATCH. Yes. I would say his whole family had this drive. And they may have had some tradition of education.

In so many of these families, this is entirely lacking, as well as having a couple of generations who have had some middle-class opportunities.

Mr. HURLEY. Senator

Senator CLARK. Yes this is a panel. You come in any time you want to.

Mr. HURLEY. This is the value of the Headstart program. I think this is perhaps the best thing that has come out of the Poverty Act. Senator CLARK. I am glad to hear that.

Mr. HURLEY. Right.

In conjunction with what Judge Whitlatch has said, I believe that the provision pertaining to the training facilities is absolutely essential to the act because, as a judge, when you sit there and you have a delinquent before you, this is the basic problem-what to do and where to place this boy? When you have facilities which are limited. which you know, are overcrowded, which you know they are not going to get the training or supervision, the policeman sometimes may be justified in saying "Well, the judge is too lenient," because over 50 percent of the time you know if you put the boy in a poor training center, he is going to come out worse than when he went in.

Senator CLARK. Are you familiar with our Youth Study Center in Philadelphia?

Mr. HURLEY. I have heard of it, Senator, but I am not intimately familiar with it.

Senator CLARK. What sort of an institution do you have in Newcastle County for dealing with these kids who are picked up, and have to have some sort of custodial care?

Mr. HURLEY. We have what is called the Training School for Boys, which I believe the normal capacity is around 150, and at times we have had as high as 260 boys in there, and when things get pretty rugged, we have a few problems. The supervisor will call me up and say "Judge, let's go slow a while; they are coming out of the woodwork; I have no place to put them."

I think that this act now under consideration-either the House bill or this bill-will certainly alleviate that phase of the problem that we have to face.

Senator CLARK. Off the record a moment.

(Discussion off the record.)

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts (presiding). Back on the record. You may proceed.

Mr. WHITLATCH. Senator Kennedy, we were discussing the need for schools and facilities generally to serve the juvenile courts, and we earlier remarked that we feel that we know a great deal that we can do to control delinquency, and through this, of course, prevent crime. We are particularly grateful for the opportunity to appear before this committee. This is the first time that the Congress has considered direct aid to the juvenile courts, to those of us who are in viable communication with this problem, who must face this responsibility every day, of deciding what to do with this child, what can we do to help him, what can we do to prevent him from becoming a member of the adult criminal population, what can we do to protect our citizens from the delinquent acts that he is perpetrating at this particular time?

We definitely need the facilities which this legislation provides. These training schools, these rehabilitative centers, these communitybased facilities that will take children-we need a great deal of probation services and good social workers in the juvenile court and in the community. There has definitely been a lag in services by the social agencies who over the years traditionally furnished these services.

We do not see them in enough quantity to meet the present-day problems. We desperately need help.

We think that the appropriation provided, $25 million, is indeed a modest start. I would say the figure that I have heard previously mentioned in connection with this legislation, $450 million, would not solve the problem. And I would say with this much or more money invested, the U.S. Government would be getting a very good return on this money-particularly this problem that concerns us so much teday-the matter of crime in the streets. These kids who are going to the juvenile court, if they are not attended, will become the adult criminal element-there is no question about that.

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. What sort of things do you envision with regards to the juvenile courts? What sort of ideas or suggestions do you have in this area?

Mr. WHITLATCH. I think the basic juvenile court system is sound. I think we need support. We need the things that we have always

86 260 - 67- 18

« PreviousContinue »