ABSTRACT
Progressives brought to criminal justice had more significant consequences than the system of parole under an indeterminate sentence. With impressive rapidity, discretion replaced fixity both in courtroom dispositions and prison releases. Practically every crime commission and investigatory body in the 1920's and 1930's began its examination of parole with a statement conceding massive public opposition, really disgust. One has only to glance at the newspaper coverage of crime stories to confirm parole's dismal public image. Press accounts of crime incidents reiterated the lesson. No sooner does one plunge into the realities of parole than the question of its persistence is further complicated, for one uncovers almost everywhere a dismal record of performance. Neither of the two essential tasks of the parole, the fixing of prison release time or post-sentence supervision, was carried out with any degree of competence or skill.
