A disorderly boy at school, and an habitual truant, coming up for commitment asked me to try him on parole. He came back a month later with a school certificate of 100 per cent. in attendance and deportment. A father brought his boy of fourteen to Court for commitment because of prolonged disobedience, which could not be corrected by chastening; he was a nuisance in the neighborhood and the complaints sent to the house had utterly destroyed paternal confidence. He was put on parole against the father’s protest. A month later the father reported a satisfactory change, which, as the parole officer’s report stated, had been noticed by the neighbors. On request the parole was continued for a month, when the report of father and parole officer showed almost perfect conduct. On the father’s special request the parole period was extended two months. While these are exceptional cases they are by no means rare. From this extreme there is a gradual shading downward to the point of absolute hopelessness, when the subject is turned over to the disciplinary methods of a reformatory. During the year 1904 out of 1,098 paroles 170, or 15½ per cent., were subsequently committed, which shows satisfactory results of 84½ per cent. Nineteen hundred and three was a trifle better with its 1,117 paroles, of which 13⅕ per cent. refused to be benefited. But if one-half of the lads can be redeemed or kept within reasonable bounds during character formative period, the Court will prove a success, and intelligent citizens will regard the parole system as worthy of continuance and extension. It is harmful to none and gives each a fair chance to test self-reliance and manhood; it does not injure the boy past redemption, but simply postpones commitment, and is a wholesome demonstration to him that his misfortune is of his own choosing. The boys generally understand that but one chance can be expected, and coming back a second time on a serious charge the benefit of parole will be withheld. This is not an inflexible rule. If there are good prospects a second or even a third parole would not be refused. But there must be more than mere possibility to secure a second and exceedingly strong assurances for a third parole. One good test of its beneficence is the frequency with which parents ask that it be extended rather than terminated; always on the same ground that the boy is better behaved at home and at school, and is more careful of his associations.