Dr. J. W. Milligan, Indiana State Prison, Michigan City, read a paper on “Mental Defectives Among Prisoners,” of which the following is a synopsis: Where reformation, not punishment, is the aim, a just estimate of the prisoner’s mental state is essential. Without this the indeterminate sentence cannot be successful. Communities as well as courts too frequently overlook mental defect as an important element in crime. Too many prisoners on admission are insane, epileptic, or feeble-minded. Epilepsy is not an infrequent factor, especially in atrocious crimes without motive, and overlooked because _not of the pronounced type_ popularly considered characteristic of this disease. Indiana prison records show among the defectives, a percentage for murder _three times_; for murder, manslaughter, and rape, _twice_; but for larceny, _two-thirds_ that of the average for all classes. On admission, forty-four per cent. admit mental defect or criminal record, in the personal or family history. This tainted influx, and the fact that defectives are not paroled, explains why twelve per cent. of our population is insane, epileptic, or feeble-minded. The psychosis are chiefly degenerative in type. Insane among prisoners are not especially difficult to manage; no harsh measures are ever justifiable. Indiana has as yet no institution for insane criminals; it needs one badly. A ward in the prison hospital gives good results, though far from ideal. Insane criminals should be judged in the light of modern psychiatry, and their rights and the safety of society carefully guarded. AFTERNOON Mr. C. W. Bowron, Superintendent of the Wisconsin State Reformatory, Green Bay, presented the Report of the Committee on Prevention and Reformatory Work, in a paper entitled, “Reformatory Sentences and Discharges,” which concluded with the following propositions: 1. That the authority to transfer prisoners from the reformatory to state prison is an essential safeguard to the successful management of a reformatory; and this power on the part of prison officials has been abundantly upheld by the courts. 2. That the so-called indeterminate sentence has been repeatedly held valid, but apparently upon the construction that it is a definite sentence for the maximum limit. It is therefore a misnomer. 3. That the fixing of a minimum period in the indeterminate sentence is illogical, and detrimental to reformatory purposes. 4. That the power of parole is purely an administrative function exercised in the establishment of a prison regulation, the validity of which has been upheld by the courts; and that the determination of parole should largely if not wholly rest with the principal officers of the institution. 5. That the parole system does not depend upon the so-called indeterminate sentence, or any other form of sentence, but stands apart from it as a separate and distinct reformatory element.