In the _first place_ it is essential that there be agencies at work to stimulate the public to measure up to its responsibility for delinquency and the delinquent. Experience teaches that men as a rule are likely to be content with present attainment. Our organizations are composed largely of men who are interpreters of conditions. The careful study then of facts and conditions that relate to crime and the criminal, the discovery of the forces at work, which develop delinquency, and wrongdoing, and the faithful presentation of these facts and forces to the public, are some of the important functions of a local organization. In the _second place_ there should be agencies at work to encourage the State to do all it can through proper official agencies. In former days the State did little. The needed work, however, was too great for private agencies. Gradually the State has been encouraged to assume the burdens that rightfully belong to her, until we have great institutions, splendidly equipped and manned. But officials are only men and a very large percentage of them become set in their habits. A few have kept young and have made progress, but it has seemed necessary that a stick of dynamite such as Thomas Mott Osborne, should occasionally be thrown into the machine, to break the crust of fixed methods and start a new line of progress. The progress made thus far by the State is commendable, but more encouragement along this line seems essential. The present interest in sanitation, employment, probation and parole is encouragement, but should not the State do more to develop the man while in the institution, so that he will be better fitted for a successful life when released? What is the present state of mind on this subject? During the past year the University of California, at the suggestion of Calvin Derrick, an active member of this congress, sent out a questionnaire to all classes of institutions in the country, on the general subject of “Control and Correction.” The fundamental purpose of this study was to learn what institutional heads thought of the possibility of developing in boys and men the power of self-government that is so necessary for a man when released from custody. One hundred answers were received, and when they had been carefully digested by thoughtful professors and Mr. Derrick, the following conclusions were reached: 1. “That there are a few people in institutions who thoroughly believe in the principles of democracy and their application to populations in custody.” 2. “That almost all the people in institutions are ignorant of the manner in which these principles should be applied, or could be applied.” 3. “That the rank and file of institution people are so prejudiced against the plan that they can not be induced to examine into it with an open mind.”