But admitting all this, the management of prisons must consider reform as the ultimate service to be performed in all penal institutions. The new prison law of New York has admitted that reform is the ultimate end of all confinement. But it views reformation as the only radical means of protection to society. Reformation consists in “the reasonable probability that the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating the law.”[3] In this the law rests on the political basis of protecting society rather than upon the moral basis of converting and improving the qualities of the individual for his own sake. Much progress has been made in the past fifty years in the treatment of prisoners respecting discipline and reform. Indeed, an entirely new light has been thrown upon the subject of penology. A careful inquiry has been made into the question of what men are confined for, how they are to be managed while under confinement, and what is to be done with them after confinement. Although the fundamental principles of penology are quite well established concerning the object and nature of discipline, yet there are many questions of detail respecting the methods to be pursued in carrying out these principles of punitive and reformatory measures. In other words, the practical application of theory, in spite of all the progress that has been made, leaves serious difficulties to be met and mastered. It is generally considered by all right-thinking persons versed in prison science that the following objects of confinement are essential in every case: First, the protection of society; second, punishment of the offender; third, prevention of crime; and fourth, reform of criminals. Doubtless no theory of prison discipline may be considered complete which lacks any one of these four great fundamental principles. Yet it is true that we shall find, even at this day, one, two, and even three of these four fundamental principles violated in the practice of the imprisonment of our fellow beings. The practice of hurrying one, who does commit a crime, away from the sight and contact of his fellow beings, is indicative of a universal sentiment in modern society. Society demands at least this protection, and its request and privilege should never be denied in this respect. But the old idea of punishment for revenge has nearly died out of modern penalties of the law. There was a time when, coupled with the desire to shut one away from society, doubtless for its own protection, was a desire to take revenge upon the individual who had outraged society. Sometimes a desire for revenge precipitated an immediate punishment regardless of law and order. Sometimes it was studiously and systematically cruel in all its plans for punishment as well as in their execution. But in a large measure this has been eradicated from the spirit of our laws and institutions. We see some evidence of it in our modern process of lynching when anger and revenge