The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
CHILDREN’S BUREAU
-
-
-
PUBLICATION No. 212
JUVENILE-COURT
STATISTICS : 193
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
W. N. DOAK, Secretary
CHILDREN’S BUREAU
GRACE ABBOTT. Chief
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS
1930
BASED ON INFORMATION SUPPLIED
BY 92 COURTS
FOURTH ANNUAL REPORT
Bureau Publication No. 212
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1932
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. >
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Price 10 cents
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
\
-,
M- "1
I
CONTENTS
Plan of the report_________________ _________ _ _
Part I.— General discussion and summary tables___________I I I I I I I I I I I
The courts cooperating______________________________
Delinquency cases________________________________
Children involved in the cases_____________________________”
Sources of reference to court_______________________
Places of care pending hearing or disposition_______
Reasons for reference to court__________________ ______
Dispositions__________________________________
Dependency and neglect cases_____________________________
Children involved in the cases__________________ I I I I I I I I . I I I
Sources of reference to court and reasons for reference_________
Places of care pending hearing or disposition_________ ___I I I ”
Dispositions_______________ ______________________________ .__
Part II.— Comparative delinquency rates for 1930 and the 3-year period
1927-1929______________________________________________
Part III.— Source tables__________________________________
Appendix.— Courts furnishing statistical material for ~193~0~_~” IIIIIII_ _ I
hi
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Page
1
2
2
5
5
9
10
12
15
22
22
25
26
27
30
34
67
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
PLAN OF THE REPORT
This report, which is the fourth annual report based on data sup
plied by courts cooperating with the Children’s Bureau in the plan
for obtaining uniform statistics of delinquency, dependency and
neglect, and other children’s cases dealt with by juvenile courts, is
arranged in three parts: I. General discussion and summary tables
based upon figures received from all courts reporting in 1930; II.
Discussion of juvenile-court delinquency rates for courts reporting in
1927, 1928, 1929, and 1930, including a table comparing rates for
boys and girls in 1930, with similar rates based upon figures for the
3-year period 1927—1929; and III. Source tables giving figures for
individual courts reporting in 1930. The courts as shown in the
source tables comprising Part III fall into three groups, according to
the census of 1930: (1) Those serving populations of 100,000 or more,
(2) those serving populations of 25,000 to 100,000, and (3) those
serving populations of less than 25,000. The tables dealing with
what seem to be the more significant items show figures for individual
courts in the first and second groups, but figures for all the courts in
the third group have been consolidated; the remaining tables show
figures for individual courts in the first group, but only totals are
given for the second and the third group. The number of cases of
each type reported by individual courts serving areas with popula
tions of less than 25,000 for which totals only appear in the source
tables is shown in the first of the summary tables (p. 3).
1
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
PART I.— GENERAL DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY TABLES
THE COURTS COOPERATING
Ninety-two courts sent in statistical data for the entire calendar
year 1930, as compared with 96 courts for 1929, 65 for 1928, and 43
for 1927.1 The names of the 92 courts reporting for 1930, with the
largest city or town in the area served by each court, are given in the
appendix (p. 67). For convenience each court will be designated in
all other places only by the territory over which it has jurisdiction.
The cooperating courts reported 53,757 delinquency cases, 20,711
dependency and neglect cases, 933 cases of special proceedings,2 and
7,562 cases of children discharged from supervision.3 The number of
cases reported by each court for the year is shown in Table 1.
Although all the courts have jurisdiction over delinquency cases and
also over dependency and neglect cases, 8 courts reported delinquency
cases only and 4 reported dependency and neglect cases only. There
fore 88 of the courts reported cases of delinquency and 84 reported
cases of dependency and neglect. Cases of special proceedings were
reported by 33 courts, and 62 courts (exclusive of New York C ity 3)
reported cases of children discharged from supervision. These figures
representing the number of courts reporting each type of case will be
used in the summary tables and discussion in this report.
The work of the court, as to both number and types of cases, was
reported more completely by some courts than by others. Incomplete
records or divided responsibility in checking cards was reponsible for
many of the failures to report.4 All the courts were asked to report
unofficial cases, but no such cases were reported by 30 courts,6
1Juvenile-Court Statistics, 1927,1928, and 1929, United States Children’s Bureau Publications No. 195
(Washington, 1929), No. 200 (Washington, 1930), and No. 207 (Washington, 1931).
* Children’s cases other than those of delinquency and of dependency and neglect over which some
courts have jurisdiction, such as formal adoption proceedings, commitment of mentally defective, holding
of a material witness, application for consent to m arry or to enlist in the Army or Navy, etc. The year
1930 is the first in which these cases have been reported. Figures for cases of special proceedings are shown
only in Table 1.
8 The number of supervision cases reported was actually larger. Cases for New York City are not
included because cards from l of the 5 counties comprising New York City were lost in transit. On
January 1, 1930, revised statistical cards replaced those in use during 1927, 1928, and 1929. The new super
vision card has a broader application than the old card and will increase the number of supervision cases
reported. The old supervision card was used only for a child placed under the supervision of the probation
officer to live in his own home or other family home by the reporting court at the time of first disposition.
The new card is used for every child for whom the court assumes responsibility whether the child is super
vised directly by the probation officer or by an agency or individual to whom the court has delegated the
task of supervision, or is placed temporarily in an institution. The new card is used also for a child received
for supervision from another court, another probation office, or an institution because of a change in court
order. A number of courts reported on both old and new cards during 1930. In order to keep the base
uniform, it was necessary therefore to include in these tabulations only cards of the original type and such
new cards as were checked on the same base as the original cards, namely, cards for children placed under
supervision of the probation officer in their own or other family home by the reporting court at the time
of first disposition. Figures for supervision cases are shown only in Table 1. Because of changes in the
classification of the reasons for discharge from supervision, this report does not include discussion of these
cases similar to th at which appeared in earlier reports.
4 The organization of the probation office associated with the court, from which most of the cards were
received, and its relation to the court differ from place to place. In some localities this office is an integral
part of the court; in others it is a separate organization. The office may function as a unit or, especially in
the larger courts, be divided into separate departments. In some communities the court receives case
work service from another agency; for example, a county child-welfare department.
8 Alabama—Cleburne, Elmore, Etowah, Escambia, and Mobile Counties; Indiana—Steuben and
Vanderburgh Counties; Maryland—Baltimore; Michigan—Wayne County; Minnesota—Hennepin and
Ramsey Counties; New Jersey—Hudson and Mercer Counties; New York—Buffalo, Chemung, Columbia,
Erie and Monroe Counties, New York City, Ontario and Rensselaer Counties; North Dakota—Fourth
judicial district; Ohio—Allen County; Pennsylvania—Allegheny, Lycoming, and Montgomery Counties;
Virginia—Danville, Lynchburg, Norfolk; Washington—Pierce County.
2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
although it is probable that in some of these courts a number of com
plaints were adjusted unofficially. In some courts records are not
kept of unofficial work.
The failure of 29 courts (exclusive of New York City) to report cases
of children discharged from supervision may be due to incomplete
probation records or to the practice of allowing cases to become
inactive without dismissal or removal from the list or index of active
cases.
Table 1 shows wide variation among the courts in the relative num
ber of delinquency and of dependency and neglect cases reported for
the year. This variation is due in part to the extent to which local
agencies other than the court are caring for dependent and neglected
children in the different communities.
T able 1.— Number of boys’ and of girls’ delinquency, dependency and neglect, and
special-proceedings cases disposed of, and number of cases of children discharged
from supervision by 92 specified courts during 1930
Delinquency
cases
Dependency and
neglect cases
Cases of children
discharged from
supervision
Special-proceed
ings cases
Court
Total Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total Boys Girls
Total cases____ ____ 53,757 45, 374 8,383 20,711 10,673 10,038
Alabama:
Bullock County______
Chambers County____
Clarke County_______
Cleburne County____
Coosa County...............
Dallas County_______
Elmore County______
Greene County______
Henry County_______
Jackson County______
Lauderdale County___
Lee County_________
Marion County______
Mobile County______
Perry C o u n ty ......___
Pike County_________
Sumter County______
9
2
6
1
3
1
11
1
2
27
9
1
2
15
2
1
10
2
2
5
43
2
2
3
8
27
1
6
2
2
5
42
1
1
2
5
21
3
5
177
5
10
4
3
3
152
3
10
3
12
4
1
1
1
1
3
6
2
25
2
23
32
4
2
19
2
35
â
10
14
22
3
2
3
40
5
7
128
4
12
13
1
33
56
12
15
24
39
2
4
16
1
58
4
1
1
1
12
4
132
1
13
12
3
33
51
9
13
1
1
13
7
U
15
15
3
12
19
10
9
7
13
8
i
12
5
10
4
i
6
55
2
1
14
25
14
33
2
1
11
15
2
3
27
24
22
1
1
1
4
9
25
9
8
22
1
5
5
1
1
California:
San Diego
County..........................
1,640 1,449
191 395 192 203
32
21
11 207 183
24
Connecticut: Bridgeport
(city)________________
24
470 402
68
51
27
123 n o
13
District of Columbia_____ 1,893 1,642 251 315 163 152
Georgia: Fulton C o u n ty ...
338 1,110 228 440 219 221 ! 12
8
4 130
94
36
Illin o is : R ock Is la n d
11 154
County______ ________
35
24
76
78
48
17
31
Indiana:
Lake County________
477 262 215 326 160
16e
4
7
3 177 117
60
Marion County______
818
617 301 282 144 138
214 122
92
Steuben County...........
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
Vanderburgh C ounty..
84
72
12
Wayne County______
44
61
17
Iowa:
Johnson County_____
92
25
7
73
19
43
18
5
12
Polk County________
610 463 147 559 282 277|
58
23
35
73
54
19
1 Exclusive of Philadelphia which did not report sex of children in special-pro jeedings cases.
* Exclusive of New York City, because the report cards for 1 of the counties comprising the city were lost
in transit.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1
47
71
6
6
35
3
93
9
19
25
37
3
4
6
67
12
19
4
260
5
25
25
4
66
107
21
28
933 1189 « 266 »7,562 »5,651 »1,911
4
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 1.— Number of boys' and of girls’ delinquency, dependency and neglect, and
special-proceedings cases disposed of, and number of cases of children discharged
from supervision by 92 specified courts during 1930— Continued
Delinquency
cases
Dependency and
neglect cases
Cases of children
discharged from
supervision
Special-proceed
ings cases
Court
Total Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total Boys Girls
Louisiana:
M a ry la n d : B a ltim o re
Ocit.yl
Michigan:
Minnesota:
New Jersey:
New York:
Erie County (exclusive
53
93
29
34
24
59
262
466
236
230
70
373
338
927
178
482
160
445
853
437
45
200
80
6
349
115
18
190
61
9
159
54
9
L 974 1,736
449 '425
238
24
1,094 1,005
' 112
72
87
82
79
65
89
40
5
14
291
232
251
198
40
34
2,540 2,278
520 450
3,235 2,862
1,053
517
51
78
107
14
158
40
46
6
74
38
61
8
84
212 191
21
70
44
26
32 228 109 119
170 138
New York (city)_____ 7,867 6,857 1,010 3,890 2,026 1,864
68
17
86
51
45
41
414 329
85 161
83
78
Westchester County._.
597 493
104 394 204 190
N orth Carolina: Buncombe
134 112
42
22
65
23
North Dakota:
Third judicial district
12
(in part)__________
3
9
30
18
12
11
Fourth judicial district.
7
4
Ohio:
Allen County
. _ .
25
18
7
60
30
30
81
10
2
8
65
16
303 254
49
60
35
25
Franklin County_____ 1,206 921 285 721 348 373
Hamilton County......... 2,072 1,486
586 442 230 212
Lake County________
85
72
13
33
14
19
Mahoning County___ 2,151 1,802 349 214 102 112
Montgomery C ounty..
598, 368 230 321
158 163
73
42
Sandusky County____
55
18
25
17
O re g o n : M u l t n o m a h
County_______________ 1,172 1,024
148 475 232 243
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County____ 1,128 955 173 970 522 448
Lycoming County____
26
16
10
59
30
29
Montgomery C ounty..
11
96
85
10
8
2
Philadelphia (city and
county)... ________ 7,517 6,629
888 4,060 2,166 1,894
South Carolina: Greenville
County______ ________
106
21
74
27
85
47
Utah:
First district
. ..
7
6
290 251
39
13
Second district. _ .
11
506 430
76
6
5
Third district................
972 732 240 175
84
91
Fourth district
443 394
49
11
6
5
476 440
36
1
1
122 119
3
Seventh district______
127 123
4
Other counties_______
25
23
2
Virginia:
Danville (city).
339 283
55
28
56
27
Lynchburg (city)_____
178 152
4
4
26
Norfolk (city)..'.......... .
774 644 130 152
69
83
Rockbridge County___
23
29
a
6
7
4
Washington:
Pierce County_______
165 135
49
30
29
20
Spokane County_____
653 561
92 164
82
82
Wisconsin:
Milwaukee County___ 2,419 1,934 485 1,304 686 618
*Not reported.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1
3
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
84
2
4
66
32
2
3
22
20
8
7
7
127
85
42
426
255
171
822
400
30
599
326
17
223
74
13
219
398
176
388
43
10
161
144
17
5
37
5
24
13
8
146
138
220 194
26
52 (0
(0
(0
1
6
5
1
44 183 156
27
12
3
3
4
1
2
1
2
27
54
1
6
12
12
10
51
49
2
236
3
235
3
i
3
5
15
44
1
3
7
133
10
111
3
22
7
3
1
2
259
119
140
2
478
7
9
(0
1,446 1,025
(0
a
8
421
4
38
27
11
1
15
51
69
10
75
14
43
46
8
74
1
8
23
2
1
21
21
30
23
297
5
25
21
239
1
5
2
58
4
375
226
149
2
1
1
4
21
2
10
2
11
2
5
7
2
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
5
Most of the courts reporting have county-wide jurisdiction, but a
few serve a city only.6 In most of the State of Utah the juvenile
courts are organized on a district basis, each district including several
counties.7 Utah is the only State in which all the juvenile courts
reported.
The populations of the areas served by the courts shown in Table
1 varied from less than 25,000 to 500,000 or more in 1930. Eleven
of the courts served populations of 500,000 or more; 26, populations
of 100,000 to 500,000; 42, populations of 25,000 to 100,000; and 13,
populations of less than 25,000. Ninety-two per cent of the delin
quency cases and 90 per cent of the dependency and neglect cases
were reported by courts coming within the first two groups.
The maximum age of original jurisdiction of the 92 courts varied
from 16 to 21 years. Forty-eight courts had jurisdiction over children
under 16 years of age;8 5 had jurisdiction under 17 years;9 31 had
jurisdiction under 18 years;10 and 1 (San Diego County, Calif.) had
jurisdiction under 21 years. Of the remaining 7 courts, 5 (in Indiana)
had jurisdiction over delinquent and dependent and neglected boys
under 16 years, delinquent girls under 18 years, and dependent and
neglected girls under 17 years; 1 (Rock Island County, 111.) had juris
diction over boys under 17 years and girls under 18 years; and 1
(Milwaukee County, Wis.) had jurisdiction over delinquent and neg
lected children under 18 years and dependent children under 16 years.
DELINQUENCY CASES
C H IL D R E N IN V O LV E D IN T H E C A S E S «
Age.
The extent to which the age limitation of original jurisdiction of
the court affected the number of cases dealt with is shown in Table 2.12
In courts having jurisdiction over children up to 18 years of age, the
cases of 16 and 17 year old children constituted more than one-third
of the boys’ cases and two-fifths of the girls’ cases for which the age of
the child was reported. In the one court having jurisdiction over
children up to 21 years of age almost two-fifths of the boys’ cases and
two-fifths of the girls’ cases were those of 16 and 17 year old children.
Cases of 14 and 15 year old children constituted the largest group in
the courts having jurisdiction under 17 years and those having juris
diction under 16 years.
6 New York City includes 5 boroughs or counties, each of which has a subdivision of the court.
i The courts for each of the remaining counties, although not organized on a district plan, have been dealt
with in 1 group, “ Other Counties,” for statistical purposes.
8 27 in Alabama, 1 in Connecticut, 1 in Georgia, 1 in Maryland, 2 in New Jersey, 10 in New York, 1 in
North Carolina, 4 in Pennsylvania, and 1 in South Carolina.
“ 1 in the District of Columbia, 2 in Louisiana, and 2 in Michigan.
10 2 in Iowa, 3 in Minnesota, 2 in North Dakota, 9 in Ohio, 1 in Oregon, 8 in Utah, 4 in Virginia, and 2 in
Washington.
11 As a number of the children were dealt with more than once, the 53,757 delinquency cases reported for
1930 represented 47,633 children—39,773 boys and 7,860 girls. In 1927 and 1928, tables showing age and social
characteristics of the children involved in the cases were based on “ children ” not “ cases,” the information
about the child contained in the record of the first case disposed of during the year being used. A com
parison of tables relating to social data based on “ children” and on “ cases” revealed no significant differ
ences in per cent distribution. All tables for 1929 and 1930 are therefore based on “ cases” each child being
counted as m any times during a year as he was referred on a new complaint.
18 The inclusion in the tables of a few eases of children beyond the age of original jurisdiction m ay be
explained by the fact th at some courts have jurisdiction beyond the age of original jurisdiction in certain
situations; for example, a case in which the offense was committed before the age limit was reached, even
though the case did not come to the attention of the court until afterward; and a case in which a child,
made a ward before reaching the age limit, was brought before the court on a new charge. Occasionally
courts deal informally with children who are just beyond the age of juvenile-court jurisdiction.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
6
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 2.— Age limitation of original court jurisdiction and age of boys and of girls
dealt with in delinquency cases disposed of by 88 courts during 1980 1
Delinquency cases
Age limitation of original court jurisdiction
Age and sex of child
Total
Under 16 years 3 Under 17 years
Under 18 years
Under 21 years3
cent
Per cent Num Per cent Num Per cent
Num Per
distri
distri
distri Num
distri
ber
ber
ber
ber
bution
bution
bution
bution
1,640
53,757
27,735
6,195
18,187
45,374
24,308
5,427
14,190
Age reported__________ 44,943
24,065
100
5,399
100
14,030
100
1,449
100
Under 10 years.......... 2,881
10 years, under 12__ 5.710
12 years, under 14— 11,102
14 years, under 16__ 17,796
7,263
16 years, under 18—
191
18 years and over___
1,899
3,760
7,148
10,855
392
11
8
16
30
45
2
173
611
1,250
2,102
1,253
10
3
11
23
40
23
712
1,266
2,507
4,387
5,063
95
5
9
18
31
36
1
97
73
197
452
555
75
7
5
14
31
38
5
431
243
28
160
8,383
3,427
768
3,997
Age reported__________
8,340
3,411
100
763
100
3,975
100
191
100
Under 10 years..........
10 years, under 12__
12 years, under 14__
14 years, under 16__
16 years, under 18__
18 years and oyer___
264
450
1,484
4,038
2,019
85
135
243
787
2,092
144
10
4
7
23
61
4
8
33
132
418
170
2
1
4
17
55
22
106
167
539
1,482
1,626
55
3
4
14
37
41
1
15
7
26
46
79
18
8
4
14
24
41
9
43
16
0
0
5
0
0
1,449
191
22
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
1 Includes truancy cases in Westchester and Rensselaer Counties, N. Y. (where jurisdiction is exercised
to 17 years as authorized by the state-wide education law).
* Includes only San Diego County, Calif.
* Less than 1 per cent.
Color and nativity.
Colored boys were involved in almost one-fifth and colored girls
in slightly more than one-fifth of the delinquency cases. (See Table
3a, P- 7-)
.
.
Few children of foreign birth are reported to the courts in .delin
quency cases. This is doubtless due, at least in part, to the fact that
a smaller proportion of the foreign-born white population than of
the native-born white population is of juvenile-court age.
Table 3 b shows information obtained in 36,766 cases regarding the
nativity of the parents of the native-born white children. These
cases constituted the largest proportion of the delinquency cases.
In nearly two-fifths of the delinquency cases of native-born white
girls one or both parents were foreign born. The proportion was
somewhat larger in cases of native-born white boys who became
delinquent, as Table 3 b reveals. In almost one-half of the boys’ cases
one or both parents were foreign born.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 3 a.— Color and nativity of boys and of girls dealt with in delinquency cases
disposed of by 88 courts during 1980 1
Delinquency cases
Total
Color and nativity of child
Boys
Girls
Per cent
Per cent
Per cent
Number distribu Number distribu Number distribu
tion
tion
tion
53,757
45,374
8,383
Color reported.___________ ____—..........
53,750
100
45,367
100
8,383
100
W hite.................. ...................................
43,898
82
37,361
82
6,537
78
N ative.......................... ........ ........—
Foreign born................... . ...............
N ativity not re p o rte d ..................
38,786
919
4,193
72
2
8
32,671
765
3,925
72
2
9
6,115
154
268
73
2
3
Colored__________________________
9,852
18
8,006
18
1,846
22
7
7
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
T able 3b .— Parent nativity of native white boys and girls 1 dealt with in delinquency
cases disposed of by 88 courts during 1930 2
Delinquency cases of native white children
Parent nativity
Total
Boys
Girls
Per cent
Per cent
Per cent
Number distribu Number distribu Number distribu
tion
tion
tion
Total cases_____________________
36,766
100
30,853
100
5,913
100
Native parentage_____________________
Foreign or mixed parentage____________
19,395
17,371
53
47
15,698
15,155
51
49
3,697
2,216
63
37
i Excludes cases of children for whom parent nativity was not reported.
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
Place child was living when referred to court and marital status of parents.
The figures relating to home conditions of delinquent children sho w
a rather striking différence between the cases of boys and those of
girls.
. In two-thirds of the boys’ cases, but in less than one-half of the
girls’ cases for which this information was reported, the children were
living with both their own parents when they were referred to court.
(Table 4a.) This difference between boys and girls is probably due
to several factors. In slightly more than one-fifth of the boys’ cases,
but in nearly one-third of the girls’ cases for which the information
was reported, one or both parents were dead. (Table 4b .) The lack
of normal family life may play a more significant part in the delin
quency of girls than of boys. I t is generally conceded that the diffi
culties which bring girls into court are usually more serious in character
and probably more clearly related to home conditions than the
difficulties of boys.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 4a.— Place boys and girls were living when referred to court in delinquency
cases disposed of by 88 courts during 1980 1
Delinquency cases
Total
Place child was living when referred to
court
Girls
Boys
Per cent
Per cent
Per cent
Number distribu Number distribu Number distribu
tion
tion
tion
45,374
53,757
8,383
Place reported____________ __________
50,633
100
42,748
100
7,885
100
In own home_____________________
46,474
92
39,870
93
6,604
84
W ith both own parents..................
W ith mother and stepfather..........
W ith father and stepmother_____
W ith mother only...........................
W ith father only_______________
32,130
2,849
1,241
7,387
2,867
63
6
2
15
6
28,385
2,218
956
6,032
2,279
66
5
2
14
5
3,745
631
285
1,355
588
47
8
4
17
7
In other family home.............................
In institution...... ...................................
In other place_______ ____ _________
3,213
477
469
6
1
1
2,265
317
296
5
1
1
948
160
173
12
2
2
3,124
2,626
498
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
T able 4 b . —Marital status of parents of boys and of girls dealt with in delinquency
cases disposed of by 88 courts during 1980 1
Delinquency cases
Total
Boys
Girls
M arital status of parents
Per cent
Per cent
Per cent
Number distribu Number distribu Number distribu
tion
tion
tion
45,374
53,757
8,383
Status reported----------------------- . ----------
49,483
100
41,864
100
7,819
100
Married and living together......... ........
Separated or divorced_____________
32,627
4,817
66
10
28,701
3,629
69
9
3,926
1,188
52
16
Divorced....... .............. ...................
Father deserting m o th e r...............
Mother deserting father________
Other reasons________ _________
2,030
1,112
220
1,455
4
2
4
2
3
.531
224
44
389
7
3
1,499
888
176
1,066
Parents dead________________ _____
11,541
23
9,195
22
2,346
31
Both..................................................
Mother........................................... .
Father_____________________
1,175
3,827
6,539
2
8
13
914
2,913
5,368
2
7
13
261
914
1,171
“3
12
15
Parents not married to each other____
Other status__________ ________ ___
411
87
1
272
67
1
139
20
Status not reported ________________
(?)
(’)
4,274
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases. •
3,510
(?)
(J)
3
1
5
2
(*)
764
>Less than 1 per cent.
Table 4c shows the relation between the place where the child was
living and the marital status of his parents at the time his case was
referred to court. Of the cases of children whose mothers were dead,
about three-fifths of the boys and about one-half of the girls were
living with the father only; in one-eighth of the boys’ cases, as com
pared with one-fifth of the girls’ cases, the child was living in another
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
9
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
family home; the proportion of cases in which the child lived with
the father and a stepmother was the same for both boys and girls.
In the cases of children whose fathers were dead, about two-thirds
of the boys and slightly more than one-half of the'girls were living
with the mother only; m slightly more than one-fourth of the boys’
cases and in one-third of the girls’ cases the child was living with the
mother and a stepfather.
T able 4c. —Per cent distribution of marital status of 'parents, according to place
child was living when referred to court,\in boys’ and in girls’ delinquency cases
disposed of by 88 courts during 1980 1
Per cent distribution of delinquency cases
M other dead
F a th e r dead
Not m a rrie d
to each other
Other status
100 100
100
100 100
100
g
84
86
62
3
g
1
0
67
16
25
3
23
12
13
5
81
13
3
36
7
4
100 100 100
100 100
99
89
94
89
99
0
32
8
39
10
2
0
92
0
1
1
12
75
93
5
2
14
5
8
1
2
In other family home.................. ..........
In institution_____________________
In other place____________________
5
1
1
Girls’ cases_________________
100
100
84
95
82
47
8
4
17
7
95
0
32
7
35
9
12
2
2
2
1
2
0
0
0
100 100
13
3
2
9
1
1
5
1
1
93
1
92
0
6
1
0
0
14
1
1
61
90
6
4
12
1
1
100 100 100
76
75
1
0
61
14
17
3
4
25
49
87
8
5
20
3
2
96
28
68
3
0
1
6
10
1
43
1
37
1
0
100 100
88
33
55
8
1
2
0
Status not reported
Father desert
ing mother
M o th e r d e
serting father
Separated for
other reasons
Both parents
dead
Boys’ cases........................... ........
Divorced
T otal
Married and
Irving together
M arital status of parents
Place child was living when referred
to court
100
56
36
4
11
1
38
1
21
5
8
1
39
1
4
49
10
6
—-
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
* Less than 1 per cent.
>Not shown because number of cases was less than 50.
SO U RCES OF R EFE R EN C E TO COURT
Some indication of the relation of a court to the community may
be gained from data on cases of delinquent children showing the pro
portions brought to the court by parents and relatives, other indi
viduals, and social agencies. These proportions differ from one court
to another because one court may be regarded as a general agency to
deal with all conduct problems whereas another court is considered
as an agency to deal only with cases of marked conflict with public
authority. Three-fifths of the cases shown in Table 5 were reported
by the police. Parents and relatives or other individuals referred
one-fifth of the cases. Probation officers were reported as source of
reference in a small percentage of the cases.13
11 Some courts may have reported the person signing the petition rather than the person maMng the
original complaint, thus reporting “ probation officer” as the source in cases actually referred by others.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
10
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 5.— Source of reference to court of delinquency cases disposed of by 88 courts
during 1930
Delinquency cases
Source of reference to court
Per cent
Number distribu
tion
53,757
53,720
100
32,428
5,338
2,724
388
919
4,442
7,214
267
60
10
5
1
2
8
13
0)
37
i Less than 1 per cent.
PL A C E S O F C A S E P E N D IN G H E A R IN G O R D IS P O S IT IO N
Table 6 a shows the places in which delinquent children were cared
for pending the hearing or disposition of their cases. In three-fifths
of the cases for which this information was given, children were not
detained but were allowed to remain in their own homes, or their cases
were disposed of on the day the complaint was made. For the 19,569
children who were detained, the type of care given varied according to
the facilities available in the local community, detention homes or
other institutions and jails or police stations being the places most
frequently used. Detention homes were used in almost two-thirds of
the cases of children whom it was considered necessary to hold pending
hearing or disposition of their cases. Most of the courts reporting
care in detention homes are serving cities or counties of 100,000 or
more population. Although a number of courts reported the use of
institutions other than detention homes, including the institutional
resources of private agencies, the majority of the cases in which chil
dren were so cared for were reported by the New York City court,
where a cooperative arrangement exists with the Society for the Pre
vention of Cruelty to Children. (See Table VII, p. 56.) Of the
delinquency cases in which detention care was reported, the place of
care was a jail or police station in 9 per cent (or 1,486) of the boys’
cases and in 2 per cent (or 95) of the girls’ cases. Of these 1,581
children who were detained in a jail or police station, 532 were under
16 years of age.^
A difference is showm in the type of detention care given children
over 16 years of age and that given younger children. Older children
were less frequently cared for in detention homes and other institu
tions and more frequently held in jails or police stations.14
Table 6 b shows that white boys were less frequently detained than
colored boys in the cases for which information was given regarding
detention care. Of those detained, slightly larger proportions of the
colored than of the white boys were cared for in detention homes, jails,
u A few courts stated that a “ detention room” for children was located in the courthouse or in the jail.
Detention in a special room of the courthouse was classified as “ Other,” b ut detention in the same building
as the jail was classified as detention in jail.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
11
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
or police stations. Other institutions such as receiving homes or
shelters of private agencies were less frequently used for colored than
for white boys. Detention care was given in a slightly larger propor
tion of the cases of white girls than of colored girls. Detention
homes were used in a larger proportion of the cases of colored girls
than of white girls who were detained, while other institutions and
boarding or other family homes were used in a larger proportion of
the cases of white than of colored girls.
T
able
6 a .— Place of care pending hearing or disposition and age of boys and of girls
dealt with in delinquency cases disposed of by 88 courts during 1930 1
Delinquency cases
Age of child
Total
Under 14
years
Place of detention care, and
sex of child
14 years,
under 16
16 years,
under 18
18 years
and over
Per
Per
Per
Per
Per
cent Num cent Num cent Num cent Num cent
Num distri
distri
distri
distri
distri
ber bu ber bu ber bu ber bu ber bu
tion
tion
tion
tion
tion
Age
not
re
port
ed
53, 757
21,891
21,834
9,282
276
45,374
19,693
17,796
7,263
191
431
25, 531
Detention care overnight or longer. 15i 747
11,810
5,771
9,264
6j 754
4,134
3j 104
101
90
222
28
Place of care reported_______ 15, 746
100 5,771
100 6,753
100 3,104
100
90
100
28
Boarding home or other
98
family home_________
Detention hom e3_______ 10,194
3,814
Jail or police statio n3___ l’486
154
1
30
65 3,956
24 1,638
9 ' 110
1
37
1
44
69 4,225
28 2,040
2 392
1
52
22
1
63 1,959
30 132
6 926
1
1
63
4
30
2
1
38
1
42
51
57
1
16
4
1
N ot reported whether detention
474
7
1
4, 096
2,112
1,778
25
8,383
2,198
4,038
2,019
85
43
4,333
Detention care overnight or longer. 3' 822
1,293
' 824
1,838
2 , 062
1,133
' 885
41
43
28
8
Place of care______________
Boarding home or other
Not reported whether detention
181
3,822
100
824
100 2,062
100
885
100
43
96
2,458
l’ 112
95
61
3
64
29
2
2
16
516
279
5
8
44
2
63 1,222
34 ' 736
1
25
1
35
2
59
36
1
2
34
685
90
58
18
4
77
10
7
2
2
30
4
7
5
3
81
138
1
7
228
1
(5)
8
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
>Includes cases of children cared for part of the time in detention homes and part of the time elsewhere
but excludes cases of children also held in jails or police stations.
3 Includes a few cases of children cared for part of the time in jails or police stations and part of the time
elsewhere.
4 Includes a few cases of children held in more than 1 place of care but in places other than detention
homes, jails, or police stations.
* Per cent distribution not shown because number of cases was less than 50.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
12
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 6b .— Place of care pending hearing or disposition and color of boys and of
girls dealt with in delinquency cases disposed of by 88 courts during 1980 1
Delinquency cases
White children
•Colored children Children
whose
Per cent
Per cent color was
Number distri Number distri not re
bution ported
bution
Place of detention care, and sex of child
Total
Total cases__________ ________________
63,757
43,898
9,852
7
Boys’ cases_______________________ ___
45,374
37,361
8,006
7
No detention care_____ ____________________
Detention care overnight or longer___________
25, 531
15, 747
21,602
12; 507
3,925
3,237
4
3
Place of care reported___________________
15,746
12,506
100
3,237
Boarding home or other family home__
Detention hom e8___________________
Other institution____________________
Jail or police station4__ _____________
Other place of care 8_________________
98
10,194
3,814
1,486
154
86
8,002
3,121
1,158
139
1
64
25
9
1
12
2,192
693
325
15
Place of care not reported________________
1
1
N ot reported whether detention care was given..
4,096
3,252
844
Girls’ cases__________________________
8,383
6,537
1,846
No detention care_________ . . . _____________
Detention care overnight or longer___________
4,333
3Î822
3,322
3; 040
1,011
'782
Place of care______ __________ _________
3,822
3,040
Boarding home or other family home__
Detention home 8___________________
Other institution___________________
Jail or police station4________________
Other place of care8__________ .___
96
2,458
1,112
95
61
90
1,910
921
75
44
Not reported whether detention care was given..
228
175
100
(2)
68
21
10
3
3
(*)
100
782
100
3
63
30
2
1
6
548
191
20
17
1
70
24
3
2
53
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
2 Less than 1 per cent.
8Includes cases of children cared for part of the time in detention homes and part of the time elsewhere
but excludes cases of children also held in jails or police stations.
4Includes a few cases of children held part of the time in jails or police stations and part of the time
elsewhere.
8 Includes a few cases of children held in more than 1 place of care but in places other than detention
homes, jails, or police stations.
REASONS FOR REFERENCE TO COURT 48
Although an attempt is being made to secure uniformity in the use
of terms, the reasons reported for referring children to courts as
delinquents give a very incomplete picture of their behavior problems.
A child may have committed several offenses at or about the same
time and yet be referred to the court for only one of them. The
specific offense for which he is referred may be much less serious than
offenses discovered in the course of the social investigation. When the
case is investigated before the filing of a petition instead of afterward,
the formal charge is usually more accurate, but even in such cases the
offense stated in the complaint may reflect the desire of the court to
protect the child.16 These differences in the attitudes and practices
of the court are apparent in the proportion of cases referred for the
various reasons by the different courts. (See Tables III a and I I I b ,
pp. 41 and 43.)
It is generally accepted that the reasons for which boys are referred
to court represent delinquency problems different from those which
18 The term “ charge” was used in earlier reports.
. . .
u A girl may be charged with incorrigibility instead of a sex offense, a boy with mischief instead of
stealing, or a charge of burglary and entry be reduced to trespassing and taking the property of another.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
13
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
bring girls into court. Table 7a shows that stealing 17 and acts of
carelessness or mischief were the most usual offenses reported in boys’
cases, whereas the closely related offenses of running away, being
ungovernable, and sex offense were reported more often in girls’ cases.
Larger proportions of white boys than of colored boys were referred
to court for automobile stealing, burglary or unlawful entry, truancy,
sex offenses, acts of carelessness or mischief, traffic violations, and a
miscellaneous group of offenses classed as “ other,” whereas larger
proportions of colored boys than of white boys were referred for
holdups, other stealing, being ungovernable, and injuries to persons.
White girls were referred in larger proportions than colored for
truancy, running away, sex offenses, and traffic violations, whereas
the colored girls were referred in larger proportions for burglary or
unlawful entry, other stealing, being ungovernable, injuries to persons,
and acts of carelessness or mischief.
T able 7a. — Reason for reference to court and color of boys and of girls dealt with in
delinquency cases disposed of by 88 courts during 1980 °
Delinquency cases
Reason for reference to court and
sex of child
Total
Number
Total cases____________________
White children
Per
cent
distribution
Number
Per
cent
distribution
Colored children
Number
Children
whose
Per
color
cent
was
not
distribution reported
7
53,757
43,898
9,852
Boys’ cases____________________ 45,374
Reason reported_____________________ 45,321
Automobile stealing______________
2,609
Burglary or unlawful entry________
5,095
Holdup............ .................. ..................
348
Other stealing___________________ 11,606
Truancy.......................................... .....
3,563
Running away___________________
2,441
Ungovernable........ .......................... .
2,769
Sex offense______________________
823
Injury to person_____ ____ ________ 1,085
Act of carelessness or mischief______ 12,066
Traffic violation__________________ 1,355
Use, possession, or sale of liquor or
drugs...................................................
333
Other reason_____________________
1,228
100
6
11
1
26
8
5
6
2
2
27
3
37,361
37,327
2,341
4,290
213
8,937
3,082
2,017
2,195
706
783
10,157
1,266
100
6
11
1
24
8
5
6
2
2
27
3
8,006
7,987
268
805
135
2,666
481
422
574
116
302
1,908
89
100
3
10
2
33
6
5
7
1
4
24
1
1
3
269
1,071
1
3
64
157
1
2
Reason not reported__________________
53
34
19
Girls’ cases____________________
Reason reported_____________ ________
Automobile stealing_______________
Burglary or unlawful entry________
H oldup...................................................
Other stealing____________________
Truancy__ - _____________________
Running away________ __________
Ungovernable____________________
Sex offense_______________________
Injury to person............................... .
Act of carelessness or mischief_______
Traffic violation_________ _____ _
Use, possession, or sale of liquor or
drugs................ ..................................
Other reason_____________________
8,383
8,365
30
40
5
1,017
1,085
1,230
2,115
1,796
167
667
44
12
13
15
25
21
2
8
1
6,537
6,525
26
26
4
731
975
986
1,607
1,458
77
465
41
100
( ‘)
(*)
( ”)
11
15
15
25
22
1
7
1
1,846
1,840
4
14
1
286
110
244
508
338
90
202
3
1
1
60
69
1
1
22
18
Reason not reported__________________
18
82
87
100
(*)
m
(")
12
7
7
3
2
1
1
100
(<-)
1
(<■)
16
6
13
28
18
5
11
( k)
1 ——*._fi&e?
1
6
° Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
b Less than 1 per cent.
17 Subdivided on the tables into “ automobile stealing,” “ burglary or unlawful entry,” “ holdup,’
and “ other stealing.”
118478°— 32----- 2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
14
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 7b .— Per cent distribution, according to reason for reference to court, of cases
of boys and of girls of each age 'period dealt with in delinquency cases disposed of
by 88 courts during 1980 1
Per cent distribution of delinquency cases
Age of child
Reason for reference to court and sex of child
14
Total U nder 10
12
16
18
Age
years, years, years, years not
10 years,
re
under under under and ported
years under
14
12
over
16
18
Boys’ cases____________________
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Automobile stealing_________________
Burglary or unlawful e n tr y .._________
Holdup____________ _______________
Other stealing______________________
T ru a n c y ..................................................
Running away_______________. . . . ___
Ungovernable__________________ ____
Sex offense____________ ______ ______
Injury to person____________________
Act of carelessness or mischief-. . . ______
Traffic violation_____________________
Use, possession, or sale of liquor or drugs.
Other reason________________________
6
11
1
26
8
5
6
2
2
27
3
1
3
1
11
1
25
5
5
7
2
3
40
(2)
(2)
1
1
14
1
29
6
5
6
1
2
34
(2)
(2)
1
3
12
1
29
6
5
6
1
2
30
(2)
(2)
2
8
11
1
25
9
5
7
2
3
24
2
(2)
4
9
.9
1
21
10
5
5
3
2
16
13
3
3
13
17
2
20
2
5
7
6
3
9
10
2
5
Girls’ cases____________________
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Automobile stealing_________________
Burglary or unlawful entry................ .....
Holdup................ ...................................... .
Other stealing______________________
Truancy__________________ ________
Running away______________________
Ungovernable................... ......................... .
Sex offense_________________________
Injury to person............. ...... .................... .
Act of carelessness or mischief___ _____
Traffic violation..... ............. ......................
Use, possession, or sale of liquor or drugs.
Other reason________________________
(2)
12
13
15
25
21
2
8
1
1
1
(5)
(S)
(2)
(S)
2
2
27
13
4
15
11
3
24
28
7
10
21
9
4
17
(2)
(2)
1
1
1
(2)
18
10
16
24
15
3
12
(2)
1
1
(2)
(J)
(2)
10
13
17
29
22
2
6
(2)
1
1
(2)
(2)
8
17
12
22
30
1
5
1
2
1
100
1
4
(2)
16
1
20
3
1
3
48
1
1
(?)
2
7
5
15
18
33
2
7
4
7
i Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
*Less than 1 per cent.
»Not shown because number of cases was less than 60.
The types of offenses committed by children vary with their age,
reflecting changing interests and pursuits. Table 7b shows that the
offenses committed by girls in the age groups under 12 years corre
sponded more closely to those committed by boys of those age groups
than did the offenses of older girls to those of older boys. In boys’
cases stealing and acts of carelessness or mischief were the major
offenses in each age group under 18 years, although the type of
stealing changed as the boys grew older. The proportion referred for
traffic violation was almost as large as for act of carelessness or
mischief in the group between 16 and 18.18 For the group 18 years
and over, of which almost two-fifths of the cases were reported by
San Diego County, Calif., stealing was still one of the major offenses,
but the percentage referred for traffic violations was slightly greater
than that referred for acts of carelessness or mischief. (In California
courts have only concurrent jurisdiction between the ages of 18 and
21 years, and many cases of young people in this age group are dealt
with by adult courts.) In girls’ cases the percentages referred for
running away, being ungovernable, and sex offenses were larger for
the older than for the younger age groups with the exception of those
11 In 1927, 1928, and 1929 “ traffic violation” was Included under “ act of carelessness or mischief.1
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
15
in the group 18 years of age and over who were referred for being
ungovernable. In both boys’ and girls’ cases the percentages referred
for acts of carelessness or mischief decreased as the age of the children
increased, except in the cases of girls 18 years and over, while the
percentages referred for sex offenses and offenses having to do with
liquor or drug laws rose w ith. slight variations as the age of the
children increased.
D IS P O S IT IO N S 1»
The dispositions of the different types of cases varied greatly in
the individual courts. Such variations are due in many instances to
differences in court procedure and practice. For instance, the
number of cases dismissed or held open without further disposition
is likely to be small if trivial complaints are not accepted and if the
courts investigate complaints before the filing of a petition, dropping
those that are of minor importance or adjusting them unofficially,
and report only those handled officially. The proportion of cases in
which the child is officially placed under supervision in his own or
some other family home is influenced by several factors. The number
of cases dismissed or held open without further disposition upon first
hearing, the extent to which unofficial supervision is used, and the
local institutions available for short-time commitments very definitely
affect the proportion of cases in which the child is officially placed
under supervision in his own or some other family home. Another
factor is the care with which children are selected for supervision and
treatment both as to those likely to profit by it and as to the court’s
facilities for giving adequate supervision.
The nature of the dispositions shown in Table 8 a indicates that in
one-third of the cases the court or probation office assumed respon
sibility for the continued care and treatment of the child. In threefifths of the cases the court or probation office did not assume this
responsibility but either dismissed the case, usually after warning
or adjustment; committed the child to an institution, agency, or
individual; referred the case elsewhere; or made some other disposition
such as ordering restitution, the payment of fine or costs, or the return
of a runaway. A small percentage of the cases were held open with
out any action being taken or supervision given so that they might be
reconsidered if further complaints were received. In most of the cases
in which the court assumed responsibility for care, the child was super
vised by the probation officer in his own or some other family home;
but in a small percentage of cases, although the court continued to
keep in touch with the situation, actual supervision was delegated to
an agency or individual, or the child was placed in the temporary care
of an institution. The proportion of temporary commitments to
institutions with the court retaining j urisdiction was slightly larger in
girls’ cases than in boys’ cases. Dismissals, either with or without
warning or adjustment, and orders of restitution, fine, or costs were
proportionately more frequent in boys’ cases than in girls’ cases, while
commitments to institutions were more frequent in girls’ cases.
Dispositions in unofficial cases, reported by 51 courts, constituted
almost one-third of the total number of dispositions. As might be
11 The classification of dispositions in this section differs from that used in earlier reports. Reclassification
of dispositions constituted the major part of the revision of statistical cards effective January 1,1930. On
the original card different classifications were used for official and unofficial cases; on the revised card the
same classification is used for both types of dispositions. This revised classification is divided into three
major groups: “ Child remaining under supervision of court,” “ Child not remaining under supervision
of court,” and “ Case held open, but no further disposition anticipated.”
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
16
JUYENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
expected, the dispositions of official and of unofficial cases were quite
different. Seven-tenths of the unofficial cases as compared with
slightly more than one-fourth of the official cases were disposed of by
dismissal, warning, or adjustment. In only one-eighth of the unoffi
cial cases as compared with more than two-fifths of the official cases
did the court or probation office assume the supervision of the child.
T a b l e 8 a . — Disposition
and manner of handling boys’ and girls’ delinquency cases
disposed of by 88 courts during 1980 1
Delinquency cases
Disposition of case and sex of child
Total
Official
Unofficial *
Percent
Per cent
Per cent
Num ber distri N um ber distri N um ber distri
bution
bution
bution
53,757
Disposition reported_______________________
36,431
17,326
53,748
100
36,423
100
17,325
100
Child remaining under supervision of court..-
17,583
33
15,576
43
2,007
12
Probation officer supervising in own or
other family home........... .................
Agency or individual supervising______
Under temporary care of an institution..
15,862
713
1,008
30
1
2
14,006
621
949
38
2
3
1,856
92
59
11
1
Child not remaining under supervision of
court_______________________________
32,855
61
18,174
50
14,681
85
21,636
41
9,655
27
12,281
71
2,129
4
2,129
6
2,611
94
226
121
142
110
5
2,611
94
226
121
142
110
7
Dismissed, or dismissed after warning
or adjustment____________________
Committed to:
State institution for delinquent
children______________________
Other institution for delinquent
children..______ ______________
Penal institution________________
Other institution________________
Public department . . . . .
Other agency___________________
Individual........................ ..................
Referred without commitment to:
Institution_______ ______ _______
Agency or individual
Referred to other court______________
Restitution________________________
Fine or costs_______________________
Runaway returned__________________
Other disposition___________________
254
1,002
422
976
1,330
1,392
110
Case held open b u t no further disposition
anticipated__________________________
3,310
Disposition not reported____________________
9
Roys’ cases
....
....
(3)
(3)
( 3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
2
1
2
2
3
0
6
105
419
274
677
1,325
226
60
2,673
( 3)
1
( 3)
( 3)
(3)
(3)
1
1
2
4
1
(3)
7
149
583
148
299
5
1,166
50
1
3
1
2
0
7
0
637
4
1
8
45,374
0
30,875
14,499
Disposition reported____________ __________
45,368
100
30,870
100
14,498
100
Child remaining under supervision of court. .
14,572
32
12,944
42
1,628
11
Probation officer supervising in own or
other family h o m e...._____ ________
Agency or individual supervising______
Under temporary care of an institution...
13,285
610
677
29
1
1
11,769
538
637
38
2
2
1,516
72
40
Child not remaining under supervision of
court____________________ _______ ___
28,126
62
15,631
51
12,495
86
19,367
43
8,682
28
10,685
74
Dismissed, or dismissed after warning or
adjustment_______________________
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
151 courts reported unofficial cases.
1Less than 1 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
10
0
0
17
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T
able
8 a .— Disposition
and manner of handling hoys’ and girls’ delinquency cases
disposed of by 88 courts during 1980— Continued
Delinquency cases
Disposition of case and sex of child
Official
Total
Unofficial
Per cent
Per cent
Per cent
N um ber distri N um ber distri N um ber distri
bution
bution
bution
Disposition reported—Continued.
Child not remaining under supervision of
court—C ontinued.
Committed to:
State institution for delinquent
children._____________________
Other institution for delinquent
children______________________
Other institution________________
Public department ...
_ ........
Other agency___________________
Individual_________________ ____
Referred without commitment to:
Institution___________ _________
Agency or individual_____________
Referred to other court__________ ____
Restitution..______ ________________
Fine or costs______ _________________
Runaway returned__________________
Other disposition______________
Case held open but no further disposition
anticipated_____ ______________ ______
Disposition not reported _
Girls’ cases
_ _ .....
1,635
4
1,635
5
2,029
82
137
85
87
65
4
2,029
82
137
85
87
65
7
183
729
350
940
1,295
1,082
60
(s)
( 3)
(»)
(3)
0
0
2
1
2
3
2
0
2,670
6
6
93
352
251
657
1,290
149
37
( 3)
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
4
0
0
2,295
7
90
377
99
283
5
933
23
375
1
3
1
2
0
6
0
3
1
5
.. ..
8,383
Disposition reported_______________________
8,380
100
5,553
100
2,827
100
Child remaining under supervision of c o u rt..
3,011
36
2,632
47
379
13
Probation officer supervising in own or
other family home.____ ___________
Agency or individual supervising....... . .
Under temporary care of an institution..
2,577
103
331
31
1
4
2,237
83
312
40
1
6
340
20
19
12
1
1
Child not remaining under supervision of
court_______________________ ________
4,729
56
2,543
46
2,186
77
2,569
31
973
18
1,596
56
59
206
49
16
2
7
2
1
233
27
8
1
262
9
Dismissed, or dismissed after warning or
adjustment_____ ________________
Committed to:
State institution for delinquent
children_________________
Other institution for delinquent
children______ ___________ ____
Penal institution .........
Other institution . . . .
... . .
Public department __ ___
Other agency
Individual............................... ...........
Referred without commitment to:
Institution_____________________
Agency or individual.........................
Referred to other court
Restitution.___ __________________
Fine or costs............................... ...............
Runaway returned _.......
Other disposition_____________
Case held open but no further disposition
anticipated_____ ____ ____ _______
Disposition not reported_________________
Less than 1 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5,556
2,827
494
6
494
9
582
12
89
36
55
45
7
582
12
89
36
55
45
10
71
273
72
36
35
310
50
640
3
0
0
1
1
1
1
3
1
4
1
12
67
23
20
35
77
23
8
378
0
0
3
0
(3)
0
0
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
7
18
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Several factors are taken into consideration in making disposition
of a child ’s case. Tables 8 b , 8 c , and 8 d show dispositions in relation
to color, age, and reason for reference. Although not brought out in
these tables, the previous court history of the child also has a bearing
upon disposition. For example, the disposition of a case involving a
minor offense may seem more severe than the nature of the offense
would warrant, but the present offense may be only the latest of
several offenses, some of which were even more serious. Similarly a
new case may be dismissed because the child is already on probation
and will be continued on probation. The courts were instructed to
classify as another probation order a dismissal granted because the
child was already on probation, but not all of the courts followed
this instruction. In order to simplify Tables 8 b , 8 c , and 8 d , the
major groupings of the dispositions of cases “ Child remaining under
supervision of court,” “ Child not remaining under supervision of
court,” and “ Case held open but no further disposition anticipated”
were not used, but similar types of dispositions were combined under
the following headings: “ Dismissed, warned, adjusted or held open
without further disposition,” “ Supervised by probation officer,”
“ Committed or referred to an agency or individual,” “ Committed or
referred to an institution,” “ Restitution, fine, costs,” and “ Other
disposition. ”
Some differences in the types of dispositions reported in cases of
white and of colored children are shown in Table 8 b . Cases of white
boys were more frequently disposed of by dismissal or indefinite con
tinuance than those of colored boys, and reference or commitment to
the care of an agency or individual was more frequent in the cases of
colored boys. No outstanding differences are apparent in the dispo
sitions of the cases of white and of colored girls.
Table 8c shows that a larger percentage of cases of boys under 10
years of age were dismissed or held open indefinitely, and a smaller
percentage were disposed of by the placement of the child in an in
stitution, through commitment or reference, than in any of the
higher age groups. Although the percentage of such placements
was about the same in each of the older age groups, further analysis
of the figures reveals that the proportion placed in State institutions
increased steadily as the age of the boys increased. The decrease
in the proportion placed under supervision of the probation officer
in the age group 18 years and over is due largely to the reference of
such cases to courts for adults. These cases were included under
“ Other disposition.”
More than seven-tenths of the dispositions in cases of girls under
10 years of age were dismissals or indefinite continuances. Supervision
by a probation officer and placement in an institution constituted
much smaller percentages of the dispositions in this younger group
than in each of the older age groups. Institutional care played a
much larger part in the dispositions in the older than in the younger
age groups. The decrease in the proportion of cases in which girls
18 years and over were placed under the supervision of the probation
officer is due chiefly to the increase in the proportion placed in the
care of an agency or individual, and in the proportion referred to other
courts, which is included under “ Other disposition.”
Table 8 d shows the treatment for different types of offenses in
boys’ and in girls’ cases. Dismissal or indefinite continuance was the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
19
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
disposition most often used in both boys’ and girls’ cases when the
offense or reason for reference was truancy; injury to person; act of
carelessness or mischief; use, possession, or sale of liquor or drugs; or
one of a miscellaneous group of offenses classed as “ Other.” Super
vision by the probation officer was the most usual disposition in cases
of both boys and girls referred for being ungovernable. In cases of
stealing, boys were most frequently given supervision by the proba
tion officer while girls were discharged or their cases indefinitely
continued. Most of the cases of boys referred to the court for
running away were disposed of by the return of the runaway, which
constituted the majority of the dispositions classified as “ Other,”
whereas girls referred for the same reason were most frequently placed
under the supervision of the probation officer. The contrast in
methods of dealing with boys and with girls committing sex offenses
is striking, dismissal or indefinite continuance being ordered most
often in boys’ cases and placement in an institution most often in
girls’ cases. Dismissal or indefinite continuance was most often used
in the cases of boys referred for traffic violations. The number of
girls dealt with for this offense was very small.
T
able
8 b .—
Disposition of case and color of boys and of girls dealt with in delin
quency cases disposed of by 88 courts during 1980 1
Delinquency cases
Disposition of case and sex of child
White children
Total
Colored children
Children
whose
color
cent Num Per cent Num Per cent was
not
Num Per
distri
distri
distri
reported
ber
ber
ber
bution
bution
bution
Total cases_____________________ 53,757
43,898
9,852
7
45, 374
37,361
8,006
7
Disposition reported__________________ 45,368
100 37, 356
Boys ’ cases____________________
Dismissed, warned, adjusted, or held
open without further disposition__ 22,037
Supervised by probation officer_____ 13,285
Committed or referred to an agency
or individual___________________ 1,576
Committed or referred to an institu
tion___________________________ 4,743
Restitution, fine, or costs___________ 2,235
Other disposition______ ________ . . . 1,492
49
29
8,005
100
7
50
29
3,426
2,366
43
30
5
3
888
2
688
9
10
5
3
3,727
1,967
1,249
10
5
3
1,016
268
241
13
3
3
6
Disposition not reported______________
18,606
10, 919
100
1
5
6,537
Girls ’ cases_____________________
8,383
Disposition reported__________________
8,380
100
6,534
100
1,846
100
3,209
2,577
38
31
2,527
1,967
39
30
682
610
37
33
Dismissed, warned, adjusted, or held
open without further disposition...
Supervised by probation officer-------Committed or referred to an agency
or individual______________ _____
Committed or referred to an institu
tion___________________________
Restitution, fine, or costs.....................
Other disposition.................................
512
6
376
6
136
7
1,579
71
432
19
1
5
1,263
54
347
19
1
5
316
17
85
17
1
5
Disposition not reported............ ................
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1,846
3
3
2
20
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 8c.— Per cent distribution, according to disposition, of cases of boys and of
girls of each age period dealt with in delinquency cases disposed of by 88 courts
during 1980 1
Per cent distribution of delinquency cases
Age of child
Disposition of case and sex of child
18
Age
12
14
16
T otal U nder 10
10 years, years, years, years, years not re
years under under under under and ported
over
18
12
14
16
Boys’ cases.
Dismissed, warned, adjusted, or held open
without further disposition.............................
Supervised by probation officer----------- . — ...
Committed or referred to an agency or indi
vidual_________________ ______________
Committed or referred to an institution-------Restitution, fine, or costs--------------------------Other disposition________________________
Girls’ cases.
Dismissed, warned, adjusted, or held open
without further disposition............................
Supervised by probation officer-----------------Committed or referred to an agency or indi
vidual___________________ -___________
Committed or referred to an institution-------Restitution, fine, or costs-------------------------Other disposition....................... — ...................
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
49
29
60
21
52
27
48
30
46
32
47
28
45
18
65
3
3
10
5
3
4
7
5
2
4
10
5
2
3
11
5
2
3
11
4
3
4
10
6
6
3
10
5
19
2
4
5
20
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
38
31
72
15
49
29
37
33
32
35
44
23
34
19
IQ
1
5
6
5
1
1
6
12
1
3
7
18
1
4
6
21
1
5
5
20
1
8
16
16
1
13
l Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases,
i N ot shown because number of cases was less than 50.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(’)
T able 8 d .— Per cent distribution according to disposition for each type of reason for reference to court of boys’ and of girls’ delinquency cases
disposed of by 88 courts during 1980 1
Per cent distribution of delinquency cases
Reason for reference to court
Disposition of case and sex of child
Stealing Truancy Running
away
Ungov
ernable
Sex of
fense
Use, pos
Act of
Injury to careless Traffic session, Other Reason
or sale of reason not re
person
ness or violation liquor
or
ported
mischief
drugs
Boys’ cases______________________________ _____
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Dismissed, warned, adjusted, or held open without fuither
disposition________________________________i ______
Supervised by probation officer............................................I!
Committed or refened to an agency or individual_______
Committed or referred to an institution________________
Restitution, fine, or costs_____________________________
Other disposition___________________________________
49
29
3
10
6
3
35
41
4
14
4
1
46
32
3
17
1
1
20
19
5
13
35
37
7
20
56
28
2
6
6
1
74
14
2
2
s
77
8
1
1
9
4
45
32
6
6
10
2
74
8
3
2
U
2
57
25
2
17
43
40
38
3
14
2
3
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
38
31
6
19
1
6
41
39
5
11
3
2
63
25
4
6
1
1
19
30
7
20
34
36
7
23
24
31
8
33
56
26
5
6
7
1
72
18
3
5
2
61
22
2
9
2
4
55
18
7
15
Girls’ cases___________________________________
Dismissed, warned, adjusted, or held open without further
disposition_______________________________________
Supervised by probation officer.................. ........... ...............
Committed oi refeired to an agency or individual________
Committed or referred to an institution________________
Restitution, fine, or costs______________ ______ _______
Other disposition___________________________________
1 Only 80 of the 88 courts reported girls’ cases.
0
1 Less than 1 per cent.
25
(s)
0
0
1
0
4
0
0
0
5
(3)
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Total
* N ot shown because number of cases was less than 60.
to
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
22
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
DEPENDENCY AND NEGLECT CASES
Although the proportions of dependency and neglect and of delin
quency cases reported by the different courts showed much variation,20
dependency and neglect cases generally constituted a smaller part of
the work of the courts than delinquency cases.21 Eight courts22 deal
ing with delinquent children did not report dependency and neglect
cases.
C H IL D R E N IN V O LV E D IN T H E C A SES 22
Tables 9, 1 0 a , 1 0 b , 1 1 a , 1 1 b , and 11c show the age, sex, race,
nativity, nativity of parents, place where living when referred to
court, and marital status of parents of children dealt with in de
pendency and neglect cases. Nearly as many girls as boys were
dealt with in these cases and the children were distributed fairly
evenly in the age groups under 14 years. The number who were 14
and 15 years of age was slightly smaller than the number in the lower
age groups, and the number 16 years of age or older was very small.
A comparison of Tables 1 0 a and 3a shows some difference in the
frequency with which white and colored children were referred to
court in dependency and neglect cases as compared with delinquency
cases. A greater proportion of children dealt with in delinquency
cases than in dependency and neglect cases were colored. There is
also a significant difference in the percentages of native and foreignborn children dealt with in these two types of cases. However,
there is a much more marked difference when parent nativity of the
native-white group is considered. A much larger proportion of the
children dealt with for dependency and neglect than for delinquency
were of native parentage. (See Tables 1 0 b and 3b .)
In about one-fourth of the dependency and neglect cases (Table
1 1 a ) the children were living with both their own parents when re
ferred to court. Table 1 1 b shows that death of one or both parents
was a factor in one-fourth of the dependency and neglect cases but
that separation of the parents through desertion, divorce, or other
causes was a factor in more than one-third. The percentage of
cases in which parents were not married was small. Table 11c
shows the relation between the place where the child was living and
the status of his parents when the case was brought to court. In
one-fourth of the cases in which parents were divorced and in more
than one-fifth of the cases in which parents were living apart for
reasons other than desertion or divorce the children were living in
20 This variation in the proportions of dependency and neglect and of delinquency cases is due to several
factors, among them the practice in some courts of filing the complaint against the adult responsible for the
dependency or neglect instead of bringing the children into court as dependent or neglected. Another
factor is the policy in some localities of bringing to the attention of the court only those dependency and
neglect cases which require commitment or legal decision as to custody or parental obligation. In other
localities the court is the principal or only local agency caring for such children. Cases of mothers’ allow
ances, which frequently are administered by courts, are not included in the tabulations.
21 In 25 of the courts reporting both delinquency and dependency and neglect cases, the number of
dependency and neglect cases was greater than the number of delinquency cases. Most of these were
small courts in Alabama in which the county superintendent of child welfare is also probation officer of
the juvenile court. In such situations it is frequently difficult for the worker to distinguish between un
official juvenile-court cases and other child-welfare cases. Four Alabama courts reported dependency and
neglect cases b u t no delinquency cases.
22 Vanderburgh and Wayne Counties, Ind; Hudson and Mercer Counties, N. J.; fourth judicial district,
N. Dak.; and fourth and seventh districts, and other counties, Utah.
23 Because a number of the children were dealt with more than once, the 20,711 dependency and neglect
cases represent only 20,078 children.
The tables for 1927 and 1928 showing age and social characteristics of the children involved in the cases
were based on “ children” not on “ cases,” and they gave the information about the child contained in
the record of the first case disposed of during the year. A comparison of tables relating to social data based
on “ children” and on “ cases” revealed no significant differences in per cent distribution. All tables for
1929 and 1930 were therefore based on “ cases” each child being counted as many times during a year as he
was referred on a new complaint.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
23
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
foster homes, institutions, or in places other than with the parents.
In less than 10 per cent of the cases in which tüe father had deserted
the mother, and also of those in which the mother had deserted the
father, were the children separated from both parents.
T able 9.— Ages of children dealt with in dependency and neglect cases disposed of
by 84 courts during 1930
Dependency and
neglect cases
Age of child
Number
Per cent
distri
bution
20,711
20,441
100
2,616
2,482
2,629
2,808
2,949
2,544
2,284
1,786
343
13
12
13
14
14
12
11
9
2
270
T able 10a. —Color and nativity of boys and of girls dealt with in dependency and
neglect cases disposed of by 84 courts during 1930 1
Dependency and neglect cases
Color and nativity of child
Boys
Total
Number
Girls
Per cent
Per cent
Per cent
distri Number distri Number distri
bution
bution
bution
Total cases...........................................
20,711
100
10,673
100
10,038
White______________________________
17,704
85
9,131
86
8,573
85
N ative___ _______________________
Foreign born____ ________________
N ativity not reported____ _________
17,221
230
253
83
1
1
8,853
129
149
83
1
1
8,368
101
104
83
1
1
Colored_________________ ___________
3,007
15
1,542
14
1,465
15
100
183 of the 84 courts reported boys’ cases and 81 reported girls’ cases.
T able 10b . —Parent nativity of native white boys and girls 1 dealt with in dependency
and neglect cases disposed of by 84 courts during 1930 2
Dependency and neglect cases of native white children
Parent nativity
Boys
Total
Number
Girls
Per cent
Per cent
Per cent
distri Number distri Number distri
bution
bution
bution
Total cases...........................................
16,578
100
8,526
100
8,052
100
Native parentage__ . ________ - ________
Foreign or mixed parentage____________
11,246
5,332
68
32
5,671
2,855
67
33
5,575
2,477
69
31
i Excludes cases of children for whom parent nativity was not reported.
183 of the 84 courts reported boys’ cases and 81 reported girls’ cases.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
24
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 11a .'— Place child was living when referred to court in dependency and
neglect cases disposed of by 84 courts during 1930
Dependency and
neglect cases
Place child was living when referred to court
Per cent
Number distribu
tion
20,711
19,045
100
14,745
77
5,122
419
311
5,886
3,007
27
2
2
31
16
3,326
831
143
17
4
1
1,666
T able 11b .— M arital status of parents of children dealt with in dependency and
neglect cases disposed of by 84 courts during 1930
Dependency and
neglect cases
M arital status of parents
Per cent
Number distribu
tion
20,711
18,403
100
5,231
6,633
28
36
862
1,847
710
3,214
5
10
4
17
4,762
26
546
2,510
1,706
3
14
9
1,513
264
8
1
2,308
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
25
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T
1 1 c .— Per cent distribution of marital status of parents, according to place
child was living when referred to court, in dependency and neglect cases disposed
of by 84 courts during 1930
able
Per cent distribution of dependency and neglect cases
M arital status of parents
Place child was living when referred
to court
Total
8§
83
öS öS
e
3 m 3o.S&
s.S
S
T3 O
s i
Total cases_____________
100
100
In own home________________
77
97
With both own parents___
With mother and stepfather
With father and stepmother
With mother only________
W ith father only_________
S3
P «Ö
02 ©
100
100
77
100
62
97
0)
15
C1)
In other family home_________
In institution_______________
In other place...............................
1Less than 1 per cent.
SOURCES OF REFERENCE TO COURT AND REASONS FOR REFERENCE
Several children in a family may be referred to court at the same
time and for the same reason. The families represented as well as
the children’s cases are shown in Tables 12 and 13, each family being
counted only once for each time it was dealt with by the court on a
new complaint involving one or more of the children.
It is to be expected that social agencies and parents or relatives
would refer most of the dependency and neglect cases. In some
localities the court prefers to have such cases investigated first by a
social agency so that only those actually needing court action are
brought to court. In other localities the court undertakes the initial
work and receives complaints from any interested persons including
parents and relatives. Table 12 shows that the largest group of
families was referred by parents and relatives and the next largest
by social agencies, these two groups accounting for almost threefourths of the families brought to court.
Situations involving dependency primarily,24 and some form of
neglect on the part of parents or guardians were the two major rea
sons for bringing families to court. Almost three-fourths of the fami
lies were referred for dependency and almost one-fourth for neglect.25
The percentage of families brought to court in order to obtain care
of physically handicapped children was small.
MThe courts were asked to interpret the term “without adequate care or support from parent or guard
ian, ” as inability rather than as neglect to provide for children.
MThese figures can not be compared with corresponding items in earlier reports, because the revised sta
tistical cards use a new classification of reasons for reference. It is believed that in earlier years, contrary to
instructions, a number of courts reported cases involving only dependency as cases of “improper conditions
in home.” On the revised cards this item now reads “ living under conditions injurious to morals.”
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
26
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 12.— Source of reference to court and fam ilies represented in dependency
and neglect cases disposed of by 84 courts during 1980
Dependency and neglect cases
Source of reference to court
Total cases
Per cent
distri
bution
Number
20,708
100
10,400
100
7,870
7,327
1,914
1,260
1,499
72
710
66
38
35
9
6
7
3,584
3,763
1,065
798
728
42
389
31
34
36
10
8
7
Number
Total cases____ _______________________________
Source reported_____ ______ ______ ______ _
Social agency.......... . ............................. ...... ..........
Parents or relatives........................ ...... ........
Other individual__________________
Police.................................................
Probation officer..................................... ..........
Other court______ _____ ___________
School departm ent___ ____________________
Other source_______ ___________________
Source not reported____________ ______ ______
Families represented
20,711
Per cent
distri
bution
10,403
0
3
0
3
0
4
0
3
i Less than 1 per cent.
T able 13.— Reason for reference to court and fam ilies represented in dependency
and neglect cases disposed of by 84 courts during 1980
Dependency and neglect cases
Reason for reference to court
Total cases
Per cent
distri
bution
Number
20,694
100
10,390
100
15,346
1,818
483
2,400
629
18
74
9
2
12
3
7,459
976
300
1,131
518
6
72
9
3
11
5
Number
Total cases___ __________________
Reason reported..___ ________ _____
W ithout adequate care or support from parent or
guardian................... ...... ..................
Abandonment or desertion___ _
Abuse or cruel treatm ent......................
Living under conditions injurious to m orals...
Physically handicapped and in need of public care..
Other reason......... ............................
Reason not reported_____________
Families represented
20,711
Per cent
distri
bution
10,403
0
17
0
13
1 Less than 1 per cent.
PLACES OF CARE PENDING HEARING OR DISPOSITION
The detention of dependent and neglected children presents prob
lems different from those involved in the detention of delinquent
children. A comparison of Tables 6 a and 14 shows that boarding
and other family homes and other institutions were used more fre
quently for the detention of dependent and neglected than for delin
quent children. The large number of cases in which children are
described as detained in “ other institutions” is due primarily to the
inclusion of figures for New York and Philadelphia. Slightly more
than three-fourths of the cases of children detained in “ other institu
tions” were reported by these two courts. (See Table XII, p. 66.)
The proportion of cases in which detention care was considered un
necessary was slightly larger in dependency and neglect cases than
m delinquency cases.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
27
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T
able
14.— Place of care of child pending hearing or disposition in dependency
and neglect cases disposed of by 84 courts during 1930
Dependency and
neglect cases
Place of detention care of child
Number
Per cent
distri
bution
20,711
13,023
7.319
7.319
904
1,975
4,400
3
37
Not reported whether detention care was given--------------------------- ------ ----------
100
12
27
60
(3)
1
369
i Includes cases oi cnnaren carea ior pait uj u «
^ .7 '“ —— ~----------- --------U
?
d
u
d
S
y
t o
° a
0
! or polio. .» U o n . and part ot f t . a m .
elsewhere.
! includes^ tew S
of children held in more than 1 place of care but in places other than detention homes,
jails, or police stations.
DISPOSITIONS
In less than two-fifths of the dependency and neglect cases, as shown
by Table 15 a , the court assumed responsibility for the continued care
and supervision of the child; in almost three-fifths of the cases the
court came to the conclusion that dismissal or indefinite continuance,
commitment or reference to institutions, agencies, or individuals, or
some other disposition was in the interest of the child. In a very small
proportion cases were merely held open to be reconsidered it further
complaint were received. In three-fifths of the cases for which the
court or probation office assumed responsibility for carrying out
treatment, supervision was given by the probation officer; m onefifth the actual supervision was delegated to an agency or individual;
and in another fifth of the cases the child was temporarily placed in
an institution. In the group for which the court did not assume
responsibility, about two-fifths of the cases were disposed of by dis
missal, with or without warning or adjustment; more than two-mtns
by the commitment of the child to an institution or an agency, the
proportion receiving each type of care being practically the same, and
the remaining cases were decided in various ways, including commit
ment of the child to an individual and reference without commitment
to institutions, agencies, individuals, and other courts.
Unofficial cases were reported by 53 of the 84 courts which reported
dependency and neglect cases. These unofficial cases constitute
slightly more than one-fifth of the dependency and neglect cases
reported Table 15 a shows that the types of dispositions difler
greatly in official and in unofficial cases. In slightly more than onefifth of the unofficial cases as compared with two-filths ot the omciai
cases the court assumed responsibility for supervision. Cases were
dismissed with or without warning or adjustment m three-fifths ot
the unofficial cases but in only one-seventh of the official cases.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
28
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able
15a .— Disposition and manner of handling dependency and neglect cases
disposed of by 84 courts during 1980
Dependency and neglect cases
Total
Disposition of case
Number
Official
Unofficial1
Per cent
Per cent
Per cent
distri Number distri Number distri
bution
bution
bution
Total cases_____________________
20,711
Disposition reported__________________
20,706
100
16,151
100
4,555
100
Child remaining under supervision of
court___ ______________________
7,682
37
6,622
41
1,060
23
16,155
4,556
Probation officer supervising in
own or other family home_____
Agency or individual supervising..
Under temporary care of an institution_____ _________________
4,650
1,455
22
7
3,779
1,337
23
8
871
118
19
3
1,577
8
1,506
9
71
2
Child not remaining under supervision
of court...............................................
12,148
59
8,806
55
3,342
73
5,085
25
2,316
14
2,769
61
306
2,461
664
2,028
512
1
12
3
10
2
306
2,461
'664
2,028
512
2
lip
4
13
3
1
3
1
66
216
36
201
i
53
430
65
25
1
9
1
1
4
723
4
153
3
Dismissed, or dismissed after warning or adjustm ent______ _____
Committed to:
State institution.... __ __
Other institution___________
Public department ......... .
Other agency______________
Individual________________
Referred without commitment to:
Institution.................... ...........
Agency or individual
____
Referred to other co u rt.................
Other disposition.............................
119
646
101
226
Case held open but no further disposition anticipated . . .
876
Disposition not reported_______ _______
5
153 courts reported unofficial cases.
(s)
«
0
i
4
1
4 Less than 1 per cent.
The nature of the disposition in dependency and neglect cases
varies according to the reason for reference to court. In order to
simplify Table 15b similar types of dispositions have been combined.
Nearly half of the cases brought to court because of abuse or cruel
treatment were dismissed or continued indefinitely, either with or
without warning or adjustment. A much smaller percentage of the
cases dealt with because of physical handicap were so dismissed or
continued. With the exception of cases dealt with because of abuse
or cruel treatment, placement in the care of institutions, agencies, or
individuals was the disposition most frequently used, and varied from
slightly less to slightly more than half of the dispositions in the dif
ferent types of cases. Of those cases brought because of abandonment
or desertion, about the same proportion was dismissed or indefinitely
continued as was given care by an agency or individual. Institu
tional care was the disposition most frequently used in cases of physi
cally handicapped children brought before the courts.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
29
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able 15b .— Per cent distribution according to disposition for each type of reason
for reference to court of dependency and neglect cases disposed of by 84 courts
during 1980
Per cent distribution of dependency and
neglect cases
Reason for reference to co u rt1
Disposition of case
W ith
out ade
quate
Total care or
support
from
parent
or
guard
ian
Living
Aban Abuse under
don or cruel condi
tions in
ment
or de treat jurious
sertion ment
to
morals
Physi
cally
handi
capped
and in
need of
public
care
Total cases.................................... ................ ..........
100
100
100
100
100
100
Dismissed, warned, adjusted, or held open without
further disposition__ __________________________
Supervised by probation officer...................................
Committed or referred to an agency or individual........
Committed or referred to an institution____________
Other disposition_______________________________
29
22
26
22
2
28
24
25
22
1
32
14
32
21
1
49
20
21
10
1
30
22
29
17
2
17
11
13
39
20
1 Cases referred to court for other reasons and cases in which the reason was not reported are not shown
because number of cases in each instance was less than 60.
118478°— 32------ 3
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
PART II.— COMPARATIVE DELINQUENCY RATES FOR 1930
AND THE 3-YEAR PERIOD 1927-1929
In comparing juvenile court delinquency rates it should be borne
in mind that the delinquent children who come to the attention of
the juvenile court are only a part of the total number in the com
munity who might be so classified. The recorded number of delin
quents is our only index of the volume of delinquency in one city
as compared with another. Several factors may affect both the
number of cases brought to the juvenile court and the number accepted
and reported by the court and so influence the rates in given localities.
The differences in the age jurisdiction of the courts have a definite
bearing on rates even though they are computed on the number of
children of juvenile-court age in the communities compared. In the
average community there are fewer children of 16 and 17 years than
of 14 and 15 and there are more delinquency cases in the older age
group than in the younger. Cases of 16 and 17 year old children
constitute more than one-third of the boys’ cases and two-fifths of
the girls’ cases in courts having jurisdiction up to 18 years. To con
sider only children under 16 years would materially reduce the rate.
That community factors are also significant is shown by the wide
variations in rates of courts in cities or counties having the same
age limit on the jurisdiction of the juvenile courts.
The position that the court occupies in the community’s plan for
dealing with conduct problems of children, its relationship to other
agencies, and the extent to which these agencies refer cases to it,
as well as variation in the amount of delinquency, affect the delin
quency rates. In some communities the court is the only agency
dealing with delinquency problems; in others there are available a
number of other agencies doing case work with problem children
and their families. The extent to which the police deal with children
also varies greatly in the different localities.. In some cities all
children coming to the attention of the police and apparently requiring
more than a warning are referred to the juvenile court; in others
the police handle many cases involving minor offenses by such methods
as unofficial probation and reporting children to parents. Occasion
ally special police are assigned to deal only with juvenile offenders.
Some school departments may be sufficiently well staffed and well
equipped to handle nearly all truancy cases and many behavior
problems other than truancy, but others, because of lack of person
nel and other facilities, may refer most of the children presenting
conduct problems to the juvenile court.
The policy of the courts in the acceptance of complaints, in handling
all or certain cases officially, and in the reporting of unofficial work
also materially affects the delinquency rates. Although all courts
were asked to report both official and unofficial cases, some courts
reported only official cases, even though they dealt with some
unofficially.
In spite of all these possible sources of error in comparing the
delinquency rates for different cities or counties or for different
years in the same city or in the same county, Table A, which gives
30
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
JUVENILE-COTJRT STATISTICS, 1930
31
the juvenile-delinquency rate for 1930 and for the 3-year period
1927-1929 for 18 courts, is interesting and useful to students of the
subject. These 18 courts were the only ones serving areas having
populations of more than 100,000 which reported comparable figures
for the 4-year period.1 The rate for 1930 is compared with the
average rate for the 3-year period because a 3-year period affords a
better basis of comparison than a single year and because the methods
of reporting were not sufficiently stabilized in some of the courts
during the earlier years to make comparisons of individual years
significant. The delinquency rate, it will be recalled, is the number
of cases of delinquency reported per 1,000 boys and girls of juvenilecourt age in the city or county.
In 5 of these 18 cities and counties the delinquency rate for the
boys was lower in 1930 than for the 3-year period 1927-1929, but
the decrease was statistically significant2 in only 2, Marion County,
Ind. (from 17 to 15), and Westchester County, N. Y. (from 17 to 10).
The decrease in the rate for Westchester County may have been
associated with changes in organization and personnel which came
about when the Westchester County Department of Probation was
created in 1930. The probation staff serving the children’s court is
now part of this department of probation. The rate for boys was
higher in 11 cities or counties, and in 9 of these the increase was
significant; namely, Ramsey County, Minn.; Hudson and Mercer
Counties, N. J.; Buffalo and New York, N. Y.; Hamilton County,
Ohio; Montgomery County and Philadelphia, Pa.; and Pierce County,
Wash. The probable reason for the increase is known in only one
of these communities—Mercer County, N. J. In this county the
increase in rate was associated with a change in policy by which
more minor offenses were brought before the court than formerly.
The rates in Erie County, N. Y., and in the city of Norfolk, Va.,
were the same for 1930 as for the 3-year period 1927-1929.
The number of girls brought before the juvenile courts is much
smaller than the number of boys, and the recorded delinquency is
probably a less reliable index of the actual amount of delinquency
among the girls in the community than among the boys. At any
rate they furnish a better index than any other available figures and
are therefore of interest. Of the 18 cities or counties for which rates
are given in Table A, comparative rates for the years 1927-1929 are
not available for Hamilton County, Ohio, and the rate was less than
one per thousand in Montgomery County, Pa. Of the remaining 16
the rates for 1930 and for 1927-1929 were the same in 10 cities or
counties; in 2—the District of Columbia and Westchester County,
N. Y.—the rate was significantly lower in 1930; in 3—Lake County,
Ind.; Buffalo, N. Y.; and Philadelphia, Pa.—it was significantly
higher.
There was wide variation in the delinquency rates of these commu
nities. In 1930 the rates for boys varied from 49 in Mahoning
County, Ohio; 47 in Norfolk, Va.; and 41 in the District of Columbia
i Franklin County, Ohio, reported for all 4 years, b ut for the period 1927-1929 it reported official cases
only, whereas in 1930 it reported both official and unofficial cases, and the figures are hence not comparable.
I t has been excluded from the group under consideration.
«Although the difference in the rates of one community m ay be numerically as great as that of another,
the significance is affected by the size of the population under consideration because in places w ith relatively
ftmnii populations a small change in the number of cases would materially affect the rates.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
32
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
to 4 in Montgomery County, P a.; 8 in Pierce County, Wash.; and 10 in
Erie and Westchester Counties, N. Y., and Lake County, Ind. The
high rate in Mahoning County, Ohio, which deals unofficially with a
large proportion of its cases, is to a great extent due to the reporting
of all complaints. The marked difference between the rates for
New York (12) and Philadelphia (34) may be due partly to the large
number of cases handled unofficially by the Philadelphia court.
Separate rates for white and for colored children are shown in
Table A for courts serving areas in which either 10 per cent or at least
10,000 of the population were colored. In each court the rates for
colored children were higher than for white children. Among the
colored boys the 1930 rates were as high as 101 in Mahoning County,
Ohio, 86 in the District of Columbia, 78 in Philadelphia, Pa., and 75
in Norfolk, Va., and as low as 38 in New York, N. Y., 27 in West
chester County, N. Y., and 19 in Montgomery County, Pa. The
rate for 1930 among colored boys was lower than the rate for the
3-year period 1927-1929 in 4 of the 9 cities and counties for which
comparable rates were available, but in only 1, Westchester County,
N. Y., was this decrease significant. Although the rate for 1930 was
higher in 4 cities or counties than the rate for the 3 years 1927-1929,
this increase was significant in only 2, New York, N. Y., and Mont
gomery County, Pa. It is to be expected that delinquency fates will
increase during a period of depression because of widespread un
employment and the lack of adequate food and clothes.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
33
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T
A.— Total population according to the 1930 census and number of delin
quency cases of boys and of girls per 1,000 estimated population of juvenile-court
age 1 of the same sex and color in 1930 and in the 3-year period 1927—1929 for 18
specified courts reporting for each year
a ble
Court and color of child8
Num ber of delinquency cases of boys
and of girls per 1,000 estimated
population of juvenile-court age of
Total pop
the same sex and color
ulation
according
to 1930
Girls
Boys
census
1930
New Jersey:
27
43
26
87
5
6
2
16
261,310
422,666
10
15
11
42
11
17
14
48
7
8
7
16
5
8
7
21
517,785
286,721
16
14
17
10
4
3
4
3
690,730
23
23
62
21
21
21
65
16
4
4
10
1
4
3
10
1
18
10
12
11
38
10
9
27
16
10
11
10
29
17
16
44
2
1
2
2
9
2
2
9
1
1
2
2
7
3
3
15
25
20
68
49
46
101
22
18
66
47
44
101
11
7
38
11
10
32
4
3
19
34
29
78
47
33
75
8
2
2
7
30
187,143
New York:
W
573,076
189,332
6,930,446
h i t e . .......................................................
520,947
W hite.............. ....................................................
Ohio:
589,356
W hite......... .'.......................................................
236,142
W hite...........I......................................................
Pennsylvania:
265,804
W h ite ....'...'................... '.1..........................
1,950,961
129, 710
“White
. ‘
1927-1929
28
41
23
86
W h ite.. _!_____________________________
Minnesota:
1930
146,716
486,869
W h ite ...................................... .................................
Indiana:
1927-1929
...................................................
163,842
m
(•)
47
34
72
6
(<)
m
3
5
4
16
10
7
14
2
.
5
8
3
17
(*)
m
0
h
9
30
0
0
0
(*>
2
4
11
7
17
2
1 The ages of jurisdiction over delinquent children in the States in which the 18 courts are located are as
follows: Under 16 years in Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania; under 17 years in the
District of Columbia; under 18 years in Minnesota, Ohio, Virginia, and Washington; and under 16 for boys
and under 18 for girls in Indiana.
a Includes courts serving cities or counties with 100,000 or more population in 1930 reporting for each year
of the 4-year period 1927-1930. Color is shown for courts serving cities or counties of this size with at least
10,000 or 10 per cent colored population.
8 Girls not reported in 1927 and 1928.
*Less than 1 per thousand.
* Color not reported in 1927 and 1928.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
PART III.— SOURCE TABLES
T
able
eo
I .— Number of white and of colored boys’ and girls’ delinquency and dependency and neglect cases disposed of by 79 specified courts
and 13 other courts during 1930
Delinquency cases
White children
Dependency and neglect cases
Colored children
Court
Total cases_________ ___________
C o u r t s S e r v in g
P o p u l a t io n in
A r e a s w i t h 1 0 0 .0 0 0
1 9 3 0 .............. ..........................
o r
Boys
Girls
Total
Boys
Girls
5 3 ,7 5 7
4 3 ,8 9 8
3 7 ,3 6 1
6 ,5 3 7
9 ,8 5 2
8 ,0 0 6
1,8 4 6
4 9 ,4 6 9
4 0 ,15 4
3 4 ,1 7 3
5 ,9 8 1
9 ,3 0 8
7 ,5 5 5
177
1,6 4 0
87
1,5 7 8
12
90
62
470
1,8 9 3
447
679
543
75
1,3 9 8
385
628
23
1, 2 14
77
51
17
1,0 1 4
6
200
'7 9 5
644
78
240
10
37
17 3
Colored children
Total
Boys
Girls
Total
Boys
2 0 ,7 11
17 ,7 0 4
9 ,13 1
8 ,5 7 3
3 ,0 0 7
1, 542
1,4 6 5
1,7 5 3
18 ,5 7 2
15 ,6 7 0
8 ,12 4
7 ,5 4 6
2 ,9 0 2
1 ,4 8 6
1,4 16
13
11
4
4
1
3
395
51
315
367
48
17 9
21
18 8
27
28
3
13
15
18 9
94
15 1
440
395
19 7
57
19 8
45
22
95
23
41
326
282
255
12 5
71
236
12 0
130
116
35
24
36
22
51
9
13 1
20
31
62
69
78
67
Girls
M o re
Alabama: Mobile County___
California: San Diego County
Connecticut: Bridgeport (city )...
District of Columbia........ ................
Georgia: Pulton County_______
Indiana:
Lake County_____ ___________
Marion County............................
Vanderburgh County_______
Iowa: Polk County____________
Louisiana: Caddo Parish_____
Maryland: Baltimore (c ity )...................
Michigan:
Kent County_________________
Wayne County___________ _______
Minnesota:
Hennepin County______ _______________
Ramsey County________________ ______
New Jersey:
Hudson C o u n ty .._____ _________ _____
Mercer County____________ _________ _
New York:
Buffalo (city)____ ____________
Erie County (exclusive o f B u f f a l o ) _____________
Monroe C o u n ty ............ ............. ..................
New York (city)________ ____
Rensselaer County_____________________
Westchester County ___ _______
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Total
White children
18 0
62
466
61
77
225
344
17 4
234
6 10
291
2 ,5 4 0
399
578
74
545
16 8
65
420
15 1
9
12 5
1,6 11
1 ,4 8 6
17
12 5
520
50 3
433
70
3 ,2 3 5
2 ,7 8 3
2 ,4 5 6
327
1,0 5 3
1,0 0 7
50 1
8 14
19 3
421
80
1,8 7 6
363
1,6 5 1
342
1,0 4 3
205
17 0
6 ,9 6 2
li 3 38
477
8 18
84
517
1,9 7 4
449
1,0 9 4
2 12
170
7 ,8 6 7
4 14
597
929
7
43
10 0
792
17
452
65
12 3
67
3
22
559
12 6
46
23
53
50 8
44
466
335
262
27
17 4
246
17
13 7
17
406
333
782
17 3
404
16 0
46
338
927
378
14 5
46
16
39
7
349
339
112
15 6
52
10
115
18 3
60
225
21
98
85
83
13
86
9 59
18 7
84
51
7
46
4
5
3
32
408
13 8
6 ,12 0
324
842
84
537
450
87
18
905
6
60
16
16 1
3
3
737
5
16 8
1
43
17
78
78
70
228
65
227
3 ,4 2 6
15 4
3 ,8 9 0
16 1
394
363
40
41
38
24
10 9
118
1,7 6 0
79
18 8
1,6 6 6
75
17 5
1
464
266
19 8
3
31
16
16
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Total
Children
whose
color Total
was not
re
ported
O h io :
1 ,2 0 6
2 ,0 7 2
M a h o n i n g C o u n t y . ____________________________________
2, 1 5
1
598
1,17 2
958
1,4 5 7
1, 8 7 1
492
1,15 1
732
1,0 9 0
1,5 8 4
226
367
287
248
18 9
6 15
273
306
1,0 0 9
18 6
14 2
10 6
21
396
2 11
62
15
16 1
19
1,9 2 0
59
2 19
62
44
6
7
721
442
2 14
321
542
331
17 9
232
475
463
9 70
855
10
3 ,0 6 2
277
16 3
17 9
111
35
89
12
83
62
12
96
49
23
43
8
46
4
265
16 8
90
115
224
89
117
239
387
2
115
54
61
65
17 5
468
8
1,6 6 3
22
84
1,3 9 9
43
91
998
9
50 3
5
495
4
116
50
66
36
19
17
19
78
2
1
1
1
40
27
36
37
P e n n s y lv a n ia :
1,12 8
96
7 ,5 17
833
69
134
8
4 ,9 9 6
54
601
729
295
12 2
16
238
36
5
16
1,6 3 3
31
3
60
4 19
349
39
3
287
5
2
70
10
4 ,0 6 0
74
17 5
152
W a s h in g to n :
C o u rts
S e r v in g
P o p u l a t io n
in
A r e a s
w it h
2 5 ,0 0 0
to
4
16 5
653
2 ,4 19
15 9
645
2 ,3 2 1
555
1,8 5 2
28
90
469
6
8
98
6
82
3 ,8 7 1
3 ,5 2 7
3 ,0 0 7
520
344
288
9
11
9
ii
6
9
3
2
131
16
49
16 4
1,3 0 4
47
15 9
1,2 3 7
646
59 1
5
67
56
1,8 2 5
1,7 5 2
866
886
73
2
2
28
81
4
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 9 3 0 ................................................................................
A la b a m a :
1
27
ii
12
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
4
4
43
8
25
g
24
5
3
1
27
24
20
4
3
0
2
5
2
5
2
2
3
2
1
4
4
1
1
18
18
3
1
1
1
2
3
1
2
5
4
5
3
4
1
5
16
13
23
2
24
4
18
30
5
22
3
2
13
47
4
5
4
3
2
4
1
1
260
258
130
1
2
2
5
25
25
12 8
4
13
12
1
1
25
66
10 7
21
66
10 3
21
4
2
2
15 4
151
3
1
2
43
93
18
42
92
1
1
I
47
47
6
35
93
9
37
3
4
6
31
77
9
37
3
4
6
4
5
24
10
4
5
5
35
30
45
20
31
10
14
73
15 4
51
92
18 1
51
45
19
27
6
112
87
10 8
87
68
82
40
5
4
4
79
68
13 4
76
68
63
51
13
3
2
1
10 7
14
15 8
15 3
76
60
17
16
58
52
6
86
65
86
58
61
92
232
N ew
23
1
51
44
1
3
7
18
11
13
33
54
4
16
1,
5
3
11
15
2
12
77
33
49
9
74
18
24
33
9
59
9
45
6
72
45
60
8
2
1
1
81
41
5
2
3
38
20
7
4
3
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
10 6
972
774
967
77
5 ,5 9 7
70
967
355
1
Y o rk :
N o rth
C a ro lin a :
B u n c o m b e C o u n t y ______ __________
1 I n c l u d e s a ll c o u r t s r e p o r t i n g t h a t s e r v e d a r e a s w i t h 2 6 ,0 0 0 o r m o r e p o p u l a t i o n i n 1 9 3 0 .
10 5
14
00
C7I
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T
able
00
I .— N u m b e r o f w h ite a n d o f colored b o y s’ a n d g ir ls ’ d e lin q u e n c y a n d d e p e n d e n c y a n d n eglect ca ses d is p o s e d o f b y 7 9 sp e c ified co u rts
a n d I S oth er c o u rts d u r in g 1 9 S 0 — Continued
Delinquency cases
White children
Dependency and neglect cases
Colored children
Court
Total
Boys
Girls
Total
Boys
Girls
Children
whose
color Total
was not
White children
Total
Boys
Colored children
Girls
Total
Boys
Girls
ported
A r e a s
w it h
25,000 t o 100,000
1930—Continued.
North Dakota:
Third judicial district (in part)__________
Fourth judicial district_____________ ___
Ohio:
Allen County____ ______ ______________
Auglaize County______________________
Clark County_________________________
Lake County_________________________
Sandusky County________ _____________
Pennsylvania: Lycoming County.......................
Utah:
First district............_......................................
Second district______ ______________ ____
Fourth district______ _________________
Fifth district_______ _______ __________
Sixth district...... .............................................
Seventh district_____________________ . ..
Virginia: Lynchburg (city).................................
C o u r t s S e r v in g
P o p u l a t io n in
C o u r t s S e r v in g
P o p u l a t io n in
A r e a s
w it h
L e ss
T h an
12
11
3
7
9
4
25
81
303
85
73
26
24
80
236
81
70
26
18
64
200
69
53
16
6
16
36
12
17
10
290
506
443
476
122
127
178
290
493
441
476
122
127
102
251
419
393
440
119
123
90
39
74
48
36
3
4
12
417
217
181
36
1
30
30
18
12
60
10
60
33
42
59
53
10
53
32
35
56
25
2
30
14
21
27
28
8
23
18
14
29
13
11
13
11
7
6
6
5
11
1
11
1
6
1
5
1
1
67
4
3
1
54
3
2
13
I
1
13
2
11
1
2
1
76
62
14
4
3
3
200
163
37
314
282
141
7
5
2
7
1
7
3
5
4
3
2
1
3
1
1
32
20
2 5 ,0 0 0
1930.................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
12
11
141
12
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Total
Ci
37
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able I I a .— Age limitation of original court jurisdiction and age of boys dealt with
in delinquency cases disposed of by 77 specified courts 1 and 11 other courts during
1980
Boys’ delinquency cases
Age limi
tation of
original
court
jurisdic
tion
Court
Total cases_____________
C o u rts
S e r v in g
A r e a s
Age of boy
Total Under
12
10
14
16
18
Age
years, years, years, years, years not
10 under
under
under under and
re
years
12
14
16
18
over ported
45,374
2,881
5,710 11,102 17,796
7,283
191
431
41,735
2,650
5,305 10,354 16,615
6,261
167
383
152
1,44Ç
19
97
13
555
75
1
...........
2
4
5
w it h
100,000 o r M o r e P o p u l a t i o n
1930......................................
in
Alabama: Mobile C o u n ty... Under 16..
C a lif o r n ia : S a n D ie g o Under 21..
County.
Connecticut: B r i d g e p o r t Under 16..
(city).
District of Columbia______ Under 17..
Georgia: Fulton County___ Under 16..
Indiana:
Lake Conntv__ __ __do_____
Marion County_______ ___do_____
Vanderburgh County__ —.do _____
Iowa: Polk County............... Under 18..
Louisiana: Caddo Paris___ Under 17..
Maryland: Baltimore (citv). Under 16..
Michigan:
Kent County
. _ .. Under 17..
Wayne County________
Minnesota:
Hennepin County .. _ Under 18..
Ramsey County_______
New Jersey:
Hudson County
___ Under 16..
Mercer County________
New York:
Buffalo (city)................. . ...d o _____
Erie County (exclusive —-do_____
of Buffalo).
Monroe County_______ ...d o _____
New York (c ity )........... ...d o _____
Rensselaer County_____ —.do_____
Westchester County....... --.d o _____
Ohio:
Franklin Conntv. _
Under 18..
Hamilton County__
- - d o _____
Mahoning County.......... ...d o _____
Montgomery County__ ---do_____
Oregon: Multnomah County. —-do_____
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County........... Under 16
Montgomery County__ —.do_____
Philadelphia (city and ...d o _____
county).
South Carolina: Greenville - - d o _____
County.
Utah: Third district____
Under 18..
Virginia: Norfolk (city)____ ---do_____
Washington:
Pierce County________ -.-d o _____
Spokane County_______ ...d o _____
W isco n sin : M ilw a u k e e ...d o _____
County.
402
15
73
45
197
59
452
3i
80
128
154
2
1,642
1,110
93
11C
215
177
365
376
599
402
363
41
262
517
72
463
251
2,278
16
33
4
5C
7
278
33
78
18
57
26
498
87
148
25
87
45
650
123
256
19
130
88
781
3
2
4
12«
711
58
450
2,862
32
19
51
290
76
718
155
1,176
131
651
853
437
21
6
70
28
133
74
303
149
318
167
1,736
425
123
52
345
95
527
129
730
148
11
1
1,005
191
56
14
155
23
333
60
455
93
6
138
6,857
329
493
4
334
23
35
10
40
838 2,081
17
54
42
99
83
3,572
' 141
255
1
19
94
62
lj
12
921
1,486
1,802
368
1,024
68
73
79
44
48
280
420
566
110
318
321
590
549
100
333
4
16
10
3
5
2
3
49
2
60
955
85
6,629
41
128
2
1,096
239
511
24
50
1,890 2,753
34
669
26
1
85
9
22
25
22
4
732
644
36
69
48
133
109
277
157
213
293
4
4
13
32
149
19
94
302
43
180
605
231
799
56
1
II
135
561
1,934
3
33
3
11
69
82
127
177
37
83
8
164
257
372
72
177
5
g
13
i __ . . .
1
1Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 25,000 or more population in 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2
14
13
194
3
ft
J
12
4
38
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able I I a .— Age limitation of original court jurisdiction and age of boys dealt with
in delinquency cases disposed of by 77 specified courts and 11 other courts during
1980— Continued
Boys ’ delinquency cases
Age limi
tation of
original
court
jurisdic
tion
Court
C o u rts
S e r v in g
A r e a s
12
14
Total Under 10
16
18
Age
years, years, years, years not
10 years,
under
under
and
under
under
re
years
14
over ported
12
16
18
w it h
25,000 t o 100,000 P o p u l a t i o n
1930....................................-
3,295
in
Alabama:
Under 16..
Indiana: Wayne C o u n ty ..I. Under 16..
Under 18
Louisiana: Ouachita Parish.. Under 17..
New York:
Clinton County.'______
Under 16..
North Carolina: Buncombe ___do_____
County.
N orth Dakota:
Under 18..
(in part).
Ohio:
Under 16
County.
Utah:
First district__________ Under 18..
Fourth district________ ...d o _____
Fifth district__________
Sixth district____ _____
Seventh district_______ —_do_____
C o u r t s S e r v in g A r e a s w it h
L e s s T h a n 2 5 ,0 0 0 P o p u l a t i o n
in
Age of boy
1930........................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
215
375
695
1,066
878
1
6
4
1
6
1
6
9
1
1
15
2
2
5
42
4
5
1
2?
1
3
3
3
10
3
24l_____
44
2
7
73
198
22
45
9
1
2
1
1
12
2
6
2
17
29
5
1
1
5
1
11
15
15
35
15
1
4
16
2
12
2
1
2
5
2
5
25
23
79
14
7
2
9
6
5
10
17
12
11
11
22
28
23
13
47
31
24
21
21
45
72
82
65
51
112
3
1
........
4
'l l .
3
1
7
1
2
2
1
2
17
90
1ft,
13
9
fi
21
45
3
1
1
* 1
2
3
_
1
1
8
10
29
9
2
11
1
3
2
S
25
1
78
22
21!____
3 ____
1
IS
65
254
72
55
16
3
17
2
6
6
27
4
3
3
13
42
8
12
4
251
43C
394
44C
119
123
155
11
4C
26
IS
6
10
£
25
53
34
35
15
22
1£
3S
74
60
93
16
36
3i
7fi
144
108
13C
34
25
41
97
US
165
158
46
27
4S
2
1
1
4
2
3
2
344
16
30
53
115
124
3
3
20
2
39
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able I I b .— Age limitation of original court jurisdiction and age of girls dealt
with in delinquency cases disposed of by 71 specified courts1 and 9 other courts
during 1980
Girls' delinquency cases
Court
Age lim
itation of
original
court jur
isdiction
Total cases_____________
Age of girl
Total
10
12
14
16
18
Un
Age
years, years, years, years not
der 10 years,
re
and
under
under
under
under
years
ported
12
over
14
16
18
8,383
264
450
1,484
4,038
2,019
85
43
7,734
235
406
1,366
3,778
1,828
81
40
15
4
7
8
26
10
46
3
79
18
9
9
16
33
1
4
13
15
22
62
75
116
109
54
6
107
140
5
54
18
108
70
106
4
46
12
32
C o u r t s S e r v i n g A r e a s w it h
1 0 0 ,0 0 0 o r M o r e P o p u l a t i o n
in
1930___ _________________
Under 16..
Under 21..
25
191
Under 16..
68
Under 17..
Under 16..
251
228
Under 18..
__do_____
__do_____
Iowa: Polk County............. . ___do_____
Louisiana: Caddo Parish___ Under 17..
Maryland: Baltimore (city). Under 16..
Michigan:
Kent County_________ Under 17..
__do_____
Minnesota:
Hennepin County_____ Under 18..
215
301
12
147
40
262
1
2
9
6
13
16
12
2
23
28
48
2
22
6
77
70
373
3
1
7
6
8
45
31
241
200
1
8
4
21
8
12
15
4
Alabama: Mobile C o unty...
C a l i f o r n i a : S a n D ie g o
County.
C o n n e ctic u t: B rid g ep o rt
(city).
District of Columbia______
Georgia: Fulton County___
Indiana:
Lake County_________
Marion County_______
New Jersey:
Hudson County_______ Under 16..
___do_____
New York:
Under 16..
*
__do_____
___do_____
Westchester County___ ...d o _____
Ohio:
17
80
1
3
70
32
98
35
2
1
41
6
168
14
2
12
1
18
4
58
16
1
20
3
2
1
62
2
3
2
221
5
15
702
33
58
3
42
25
1
7
4
18
13
1
10
22
16
12
3
36
80
37
44
19
118
198
143
86
50
111
247
129
73
65
3
30
5
1
3
1
3
1
64
40
3
109
6
541
18
3
228
4
7
20
65
37
89
Hamilton County...........
Mahoning County_____
Montgomery County__
Oregon: Multnomah County
Pennsylvania:
— do_____
-—do_____
— do_____
...d o _____
__do_____
Philadelphia (city and ...d o ------South Carolina: Greenville ...d o _____
County.
Utah: Third district....... ...... Under 18..
Virginia: Norfolk (city)____ ...d o _____
Washington:
32
1,0 1 0
85
104
285
586
349
230
148
173
11
888
44
21
5
4
240
130
8
7
7
3
28
29
2
1
5
1
1
7
10
1
138
53
2
8
16
1
44
Spokane C o u n ty ............ ...d o _____
33
10
12
W isco n sin : M ilw a u k e e -__do_____
23
51
171
225
County.
1 Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 25,000 or more population in 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
30
92
485
2
3
21
of Buffalo).
1
3
80
238
24
3
1
2
1
1
3
3
4
40
T
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
I I b .— Age limitation of original court jurisdiction and age of girls dealt
with in delinquency cases disposed of by 71 specified courts and 9 other courts
during 1930—Continued
able
Girls’ delinquency cases
Age lim
itation of
court Jur
isdiction
Courts Serving A reas with
26,000 to 100,000 P opulation
Alabama:
Baldwin County______
Chambers County_____
Colbert County_____. . .
Etowah County_______
Jackson County_______
Lauderdale County____
Marion C ounty. .1 ____
Perry County_________
Sumter County_______
Illinois: Rock Island County.
Indiana: Wayne County___
Iowa: Johnson County____
Louisiana: Ouachita P arish.
Minnesota: Winona County.
New York:
Chemung County_____
Clinton C o u n ty ____
Columbia County_____
Ontario C o u n ty .'...........
North Carolina: Buncombe
County.
North Dakota:
Third judicial district
(in part).
Fourth judicial district..
Ohio:
Allen County................
Auglaize County______
Clark C ounty..'............
Lake County...................
Sandusky County_____
Pennsylvania:
Lycoming
County.
Utah:
First district.................. .
Second district________
Fourth district________
Fifth district....................
Sixth district_________
Seventh district..............
Virginia: Lynchburg (city)..
C o u rts
S e r v in g
A r e a s
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Total
576
Under 16..
...d o _____
___do_____
___do_____
...d o ..........
...d o _____
...d o ..........
...d o ..........
__do_____
Under 18..
...d o _____
...d o _____
Under 17..
Under 18..
3
2
12
1
3
6
*2
2
1
11
17
19
34
6
Under 16..
do_____
...d o _____
__do_____
...d o ..........
40
5
14
17
22
Under 18..
9
__do_____
4
__do_____
...d o _____
7
16
49
13
18
10
...d o _____
...d o _____
Under 16..
Under 18..
...d o _____
__do_____
...d o _____
...d o _____
10
12
14
16
18
Un years,
Age
years, years, years, years notre
der 10 under
under
under
and
under
years
ported
12
14
16
18
over
26
39
104
3
1
1
2
2
1
2
7
2
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
1
3
5
3
1
1
4
2
3
73
3
6
3
3
10
1
2
8
1
2
3
1
2
159
6
11
2
3
1
2
4
2
28
3
10
10
10
3
3
6
1
2:
1
7
6
2
4
3
7
16
8
7
8
6
2
12
11
10
1
i
i
1
1
21
22
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
4
7
3
8
23
6
2
4
2
3
10
5
12
1
1
1
39
76
49
36
3
4
26
243
i
3
2
23
2
6
13
19
19
24
2
1
1
1
4
w it h
26,000 P o p u l a t i o n
1930______ ___________
L e ss T h a n
IN
Age of girl
14
17
32
2
41
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T
able
Reason for reference to Qourt in boys’ delinquency cases disposed
of by 77 specified courts 1 and 11 other courts during 19S0
I I I a .—
Boys' delinquency cases
Total cases............................. ........
C o urts
o r
S e r v in g
A r e a s w it h
4 5 ,3 7 4 19 ,6 5 8 3 ,5 6 3 2 ,4 4 1 2 ,7 6 9
8 2 3 1 ,0 8 5 12 ,0 6 6 1 , 3 5 5
3 3 3 1,2 2 8
M o r e P o p u l a t i o n i n 1 9 3 0 __________ 4 1 , 7 3 5 1 8 , 2 1 4 3 , 1 3 8 2 , 2 9 7 2 , 6 2 6
15 2
1,4 4 9
402
1,6 4 2
1,11 0
75
50 7
18 1
8 11
594
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
21
94
15
14 4
763
4
2
14 6
49
11
21
49
23
16
16 3
32
70
73
969 11,0 0 4 1,2 8 6
228 1,16 3
13
2
14 2
13 2
288
6
4
5
61
19
6
14
39
24
447
274
86
3
5
13
4
22
12 6
63
5
15
3ß|
1
308
57
1
5
57
2
18
14
1
3
517
72
6
46
9
2
463
12
15
43
10
11
16 2
251
16 6
10 8
1
23
16
792
18 4
37
9
12 1
3
2 ,2 7 8
14
57
68
1,0 1 3
450
16
3
28
9
U
69
2 ,8 6 2
237
1,8 7 2
307
25
17 3
81
65
258
69
10
2
853
561
4
8
52
12
118
44
437
300
2
5
20
35
11
9
50
19
7
3
12
18
1,7 3 6
425
628
272
517
29
31
4
12 4
30
7
45
11
349
14
1
1
11
4
1,0 0 5
663
26
58
3
23
228
19 1
2
1
11
8
13
7
1
6
5
64
22
7
1
4
138
83
94
6 ,8 5 7
329
2 ,3 5 3
65
70
468
61
47
5
529
493
19 6
13
16
229
3
2 ,5 6 4
19 7
13 1
519
22
30
14
15
76
14
921
405
664
82
12
12
13
244
53
13 2
53
16
296
18
14 2
42
63
18
46
33
10
481
18
52
35
9
479
368
1 ,0 2 4
291
116
56
201
13 2
31
578
115
29
22
249
9 55
532
18 3
59
85
6 ,6 2 9
75
2 ,3 0 3
63
82
3
20
2
17
1
58
4
16 7
2
16 1
637
2
32
321
85
15 8
2 ,6 7 3
403
6
21
21
7
3
5
73
240
34
24
68
8
44
12 8
1,4 8 6
1,8 0 2
85
732
644
135
561
1,9 3 4
59
10 3
221
4
3
12
980
2 10
33
72
2 5 ,0 0 0
6
1
47
1
19
14
11
262
1Includes all courts reporting that served areas with
118478°— 32------4
53
—
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
Alabama: Mobile County_______
California: San Diego County____
Connecticut: Bridgeport (city)___
District of Columbia____________
Georgia: Fulton County_________
Indiana:
Lake County_______________
Marion County.............. ...........
Vanderburgh County................
Iowa: Polk County_____________
Louisiana: Caddo Parish________
Maryland: Baltimore (city)______
Michigan:
Kent County..............................
Wayne County...........................
Minnesota:
Hennepin County___________
Ramsey County........ ................
New Jersey:
Hudson County.....................
Mercer County_______ ______
New York:
Buffalo (city).................. ...........
Erie County (exclusive of
Buffalo)..................... ...........
Monroe County_____________
New York (city)____ ______
Rensselaer County__________
Westchester County____________
Ohio:
Franklin County........................
Hamilton County......................
Mahoning County_____ _____
Montgomery County...... ..........
Oregon: Multnomah C ounty.
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County___________
Montgomery County.................
Philadelphia (city and county).
South Carolina: Greenville County.
Utah: Third district____________
Virginia: Norfolk (city)
. .
Washington:
Pierce County______________
Spokane County____________
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County___
Reason not reported
Other reason
Use, possession, or sale
of liquor or drugs
Injury to person
5
Eh
j Sex offense
O
Pi
cd
Ungovernable
Running away
Stealing
Total
Court
Traffic violation
Act of carelessness or
mischief
Reason for reference to court
7
3
36
12
14
2 1
19
83
1
1
&
27
12
28
1
76
1
35
9
10
8
4
5
81
76
35
h
2
1
27
35
223
3
11
3
68
29
1
12
8
3
13
17 2
83
13
4
118
87
17
283
136
27
2
or more population in
19 30
1
1
1
1
2
42
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able I I I a .— Reason for reference to court in boys’ delinquency cases disposed
of by 77 specified courts and 11 other courts during 1980— Continued
Boys’ delinquency cases
Reason not reported |
Other reason
Traffic violation
1 Use, possession, or sale
1 of liquor or drugs
Injury to person
Sex offense
1,3 17
I
Stealing
3 ,2 9 5
Ungovernable
Total
Truancy
Running away
Court
Act of carelessness or
mischief
Reason for reference to court
C o urts
to
S e r v in g
A r e a s
w it h
1 0 0 ,0 0 0 P o p u l a t i o n i n
2 5 ,0 0 0
1 9 3 0 _________
Alabama:
6
9
2
2
3
6
1
5
2
1
5
4
42
24
5
21
1
11
384
13 9
1
7
1
1
2
10
8
3
24
Indiana: Wayne County-------------
New York:
Chemung County.....................-
1
5
21
1
2
4
75
17
45
38
1
72
82
39
10
4
3
25
2
65
IF
5
6
51
25
54
3
3
19
5
3
2
7
7
1
2
1
1
1
2
3
18
1
60
1
10
87
65
3
1
g
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
2
1
964
1
1
2
2
1
9
10
1
1
9
1
39
44
1
93
1
73
19 8
112
North Dakota:
3
14
53
1
3
3
3
130
6
1
6
3
2
2
1
1
4
1
7
62
2
1
10
52
6
3
26
5
28
17
1
1
1
1
1
4
7
3
1 __
2 __
1
1
1
Ohio:
18
15
65
254
17
10 8
22
55
34
7
16
10
4
251
Fourth district______________
4 3C
394
440
119
C o urts
T h a n
S e r v in g
2 5 ,0 0 0
A r e a s
w it h
P o p u l a t io n
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
in
47
3
72
Pennsylvania: Lycoming County..
Utah:
First district________________
Virginia: Lynchburg (city).............
1
91
15 2
33
55
13 7
15 7
56
32
4
12 3
50
55
15 2
41
51
344
12 7
41
1
1
14
6
1
1
6
4
18
5
7
5
5
4
3
4
4
6
6
45
14
27
2
12
2
2
11
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
17
8
18
1
9
13
50
12
26
4
5
2
1
78
114
9
9
117
9
9
21
6
8
18 S
47
8
17
15
5
60
1
10
5
45
1
3
98
9
L ess
1 9 3 0 ...
5
13
7
23
10
1
1
18
15
1
3
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able I I I b .
43
Reason for reference to court in girls' delinquency cases disposed of
by 71 specified courts 1 and 9 other courts during 1930
Girls’ delinquency cases
Reason for reference to court
!h
CO
03
Court
'Ö
uO §
Ö
B
çA
co
03
Ih
>
O
to
ö
©
u
o
>»
S
w
J*
Act of c
m
>»
03
0£3
tuO
.g
‘ö
§
Sex offens
Truancy
Stealing
Total
Ih
o
Total cases_______________________ 8,383 1,092 1,085 1,230 2,115 1,796 167 667
C o urts
M o re
S e r v in g A r e a s w it h
1 0 0 ,0 0 0 o r
P o p u l a t i o n i n 1 9 3 0 ..........................................
7,734 1,000 933 1,186 2,001 1,654 145 617
Alabama: Mobile County____________
25
2
4
3
2 14
California: San Diego County_________ 191 22 21 28
4£ 41 1 11
Connecticut: Bridgeport (city)________
68 28
5
4
8 22
4
District of Columbia...........
251 46 10
14
99
6 15 47
Georgia: Fulton County.......................
228
87 11 29 44 10 2 37
Indiana:
Lake County____________________ 215 18 20 19 53 95
7
Marion County____________ .”” "1.1! 301 29 32 22 138 62 5 1
Vanderburgh C o u n ty .................I ...
12
3
3
6
Iowa: Polk County____________
147 13
3 19 63 19 2 25
Louisiana: Caddo P a r is h ....I I I ! .“ " ! ! !
40
2
4 14
Maryland: Baltimore (city)............ .
262 62
9 21 86 22 10 31
Michigan:
Kent County_______ ____ ______
70 13
9
23 20
1
Wayne County............................. I
373 11 97 18 79 163 1 1
Minnesota:
Hennepin County_______________
200 36
23 43 80
Ramsey County................... .I ..! ! ! ! .
80 19
1
2 27 29 " Ï
New Jersey:
Hudson County_________________
238
8 109 14 60 35 7 4
Mercer County______________
24
6
3
5
6 1 2
New York:
Buffalo (city)______________ _____
89 35
14 22 12
6
Erie County (exclusive of Buffalo)” !
21
1
5
4
6
4
Monroe County___ _____ _____ _
32
4
4 24
New York (city)_________ I!!!!!!! 1,010 148
8 254 375 101 24 91
Rensselaer County.......................
85
2 66
2 14
1
Westchester County...........
104
9 49
16 25 1 4
Ohio:
..............
Franklin C o u n ty .................... ..........
285 24 49 30 37 114 1 19
Hamilton County..................... !!!!""’ 586 60 19 120 146 152 22 55
Mahoning County....................... I!!!! 349 27 70 34 71 86 12 43
Montgomery C o u n ty .............!!!!!!! 230 17 40 40 25 82 1 23
Oregon: Multnomah County____ !!!!
148 19
7 17 40 50 —
10
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County................................ 173 25 26 50 42 25 1 3
Montgomery C o u n ty .......................”
11
3
1
3
4
Philadelphia (city and county)_____ 888 89 25 302 228 78 6 144
South Carolina: Greenville County____
21
6
1
5
3 2 2
Utah: Third district____________ ! !..! ! 240 43 132
8 15 36 2
Virginia: Norfolk (city)__________
130 14 10 16 41 18 15 13
Washington:
Pierce County........... ..........................
30
6
3
7
3 11
Spokane County_____________ H ill
92
7
8 17 21 28
3
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County___
485 65 87 47 103 155 2 17
>Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 25,000 or more population in 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
J}
Qi
©
o
co ¿3 03 fl
V
©
O 0.2
0
O.S
O
ë
®O
a©
£ ►
S .0 çA
44
I
82
87
18
42 67
73
16
18
1
5
1
8
1
1
2
2
1
Ï
’ "Î5
2
2
1—
5
—
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
6
3
3
2
1
4
8
3
1
3 _____
1
1 14
3
3
1
6
4
ï
1 ....
2
ï
1
4L
44
T
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
able
I I I b .— Reason
for reference to court in girls’ delinquency cases disposed of
by 71 specified courts and 9 other courts during 1980— Continued
Girls’ delinquency cases
Alabama:
Baldwin County....... ..........................
Chambers County_______________
Colbert County_____ ___________
Etowah County_________________
Jackson County_________________
Lauderdale County_______________
Marion County_________________
Perry County________ ________
Sumter County......... - ...... ........ ......
Illinois: Rock Island C ounty. ................
Indiana: Wayne C o u n ty ...___ ______
Iowa: Johnson County....... .....................
Louisiana: Ouachita Parish....... ...........
Minnesota: Winona County_____
New York:
Chemung County___________ ____
Clinton County______________
Columbia County............. ...............
Ontario County....... .....................
N orth Carolina: Buncombe County____
N orth Dakota:
Third judicial district (in p art). . ...
Fourth judicial district____________
Ohio:
Allen County________________
Auglaize County........................ ......
Clark County....... ........ ..................
Lake County________________
Sandusky County____________
Pennsylvania: Lycoming County__
Utah:
First district................... .................
Second district..................... ........
Fourth district.............. ........... ........
Fifth district_____ ___________
Sixth district...................................
Seventh district............ .............
Virginia: Lynchburg (city).....................
C o u r t s S e r v in g A r e a s w it h L e s s T h a n
2 5 , 0 0 0 P o p u l a t i o n i n 1 9 3 0 ____________________
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3
2
12
1
3
6
2
2
1
11
17
19
34
6
40
5
14
17
22
9
4
79
41
3
1
2
1
2
1
4
6
2
8
1
4
5
1
1
2
1
2
2
4
15
3
1
1
2
1
2
3
32
2
1
2
3
4
3
3
1
3
1
8
6
4
3
2
2
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
6
6
4
2
U
9
4
17
36
13
2
1
3
4
2
5
5
8
7
Reason not reported
Other reason
14
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
3
1
1
1
7
2
1
3
7
1
s
7
16
7
1
3
1
1
22
7
?
1
1
1
7
7
9
1
3
26
73
1 10
2
7
4
7
9
7
3
10
76
49
17 42
Use, possession, or sale
of liquor or drugs
126
10
10
39
1 Injury to person
100
1
7
16
49
13
18
10
145
Sex offense
576
Ungovernable
Truancy
Stealing
Total
C ourts Serving Areas with 25,000 to
100,000 P opulation in 1930........ ............. _.
Running away
Court
Act of carelessness or
mischief
Traffic violation
.Reason for reference to court
17
13
7
3
1
1
3
3
3
5
8
14
16
1
5 —
1
45
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T
able
IV
a .—
Manner of handling delinquency cases disposed of by 77 specified
courts 1 and 11 other courts during 1930
Delinquency cases
Court
Total
Total cases
_________________
C o u r t s S e r v in g A r e a s w it h
1 9 3 0 ..................................................
1 0 0 ,0 0 0 o r
M o re
P o p u l a t io n
Official
5 3 ,7 5 7
3 6 ,4 3 1
17 ,3 2 6
4 9 ,4 6 9
3 3 ,9 8 9
1 5 ,4 8 0
in
Alabama: Mobile County_____
17 7
17 7
California: San Diego County________ _
1,6 4 0
623
Connecticut: Bridgeport (city)..................
470
10 4
District of Colum bia--..................
1,8 9 3
1 ,4 8 5
Georgia: Fulton County_______ __________
1,3 3 8
1,3 13
Indiana:
Lake County........................................
477
325
Marion County__________
8 18
573
Vanderburgh C o u n ty ..................
84
84
Iowa: Polk County
6 10
253
Louisiana: Caddo Parish . .
291
204
Maryland: Baltimore (city)_________
2 ,5 4 0
2 ,5 4 0
Michigan:
Kent County ______ _____ __
520
518
Wayne County___________________
3 ,2 3 5
3 ,2 3 5
Minnesota:
Hennepin County_____________
1,0 5 3
1,0 5 3
Ramsey County____________
517
517
New Jersey:
Hudson County_______________ .
1,9 7 4
1,9 7 4
Mercer County___________________
449
449
New York:
Buffalo (city) ______ ___________ ____________________
1,0 9 4
1,0 9 4
Erie County (exclusive of Buffalo)______ ______
2 12
2 12
Monroe County________________
17 0
170
New York (city)____________________
7 ,8 6 7
7 ,8 6 7
Rensselaer C ounty____________ _______ ___
4 14
4 14
Westchester Conntv___________
597
517
Ohio:
Franklin County_________________
1,2 0 6
542
Hamilton County____________________
2 ,0 7 2
96
Mahoning County.......................................... .. ...........
2 ,15 1
514
Montgomery County_______________________
598
244
Oregon: Multnomah County ............ ........................................................
1,17 2
431
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County.....................................................
1,12 8
1,12 8
Montgomery County ..................................................................................
96
96
Philadelphia (city and county) ............................................................
7 ,5 17
2 ,8 0 7
South Carolina: Greenville County ____ ______________________
10 6
75
Utah: Third district ______ _________________________________________
972
340
Virginia: Norfolk (city ) ............................................................
774
774
Washington:
Pierce County ....................................................................................................
16 5
16 5
Spokane County________________________________
653
230
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County _________________________
2 ,4 19
846 I
‘ Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 25,000 or more population in 1930.
1 Unofficial cases were reported for part of the year only.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Unofficial
1,0 1 7
366
408
25
15 2
245
357
87
2
80
* 664
1,9 7 6
1,6 3 7
354
741
4 ,7 10
31
6 32
423
1,5 7 3
46
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T a b l e I V a .—
M anner of handling delinquency cases disposed of hy 77 specified
courts and 11 other courts during 1930'— Continued
Delinquency cases
Court
Total
C o u r t s S e r v i n g A r e a s w i t h 2 5 ,0 0 0 t o 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 P o p u l a t i o n i n 1 9 3 0
Alabama:
Baldwin County______________________ _____________
Chambers County__________________________________
Clarke County.......................... - ................ ................-...........
Colbert County----------------------------- -------------------------Dallas C o u n ty .............................. ........ ........—......................
Elmore County__________________________ __________
Escambia County............................. .......................... .........
Etowah County—------------ --------------------------------- ------Jackson County..................... ......................................... .........
Lauderdale County...................................................................
Macon County...........................................................................
Marion C o u n ty ....................... ........... ............ ..................
Perry County------- -------------------------------------------------Pike County.......................................................... ........ ...........
Sumter C ounty------ ------ ---------------------------------- -------Illinois: Rock Island County..................... ...................................
Indiana: Wayne County--------------------- ---------------------------Iowa: Johnson County___________ ______ ________________
Louisiana: Ouachita Parish--- ----------- -----------------------------Minnesota: Winona C o u n ty .................................................. —
New York:
Chemung County........—....................................................... .
Clinton County.........................................................................
Columbia County...................................................................
Ontario County--------------- -------------------------- ------------North Carolina: Buncombe County................... ..........................
North Dakota:
Third judicial district (in p art)................................................
Fourth judicial district..............................................................
Ohio:
Allen County.........—.................................................................
Auglaize C o u n ty ......................................................................
Clark County______________ _________ _______________
Lake C ounty........................... ................................ ........... .
Sandusky County................................................................... .
Pennsylvania: Lycoming C o u n ty .................................................
Utah:
First district........................... ...... ........ ....................................
Second d is tric t.........................................................................
Fourth district------- ----------------------------- -------------------Fifth district...............................................................................
Sixth district--------------- ------------------- ------------------------ Seventh d istric t........................................................................
Virginia: Lynchburg (city)........................................................—
C o u rts
S e r v in g
A r e a s
w it h
L e ss
T h a n
Unofficial
3,871
2,052
9
11
1
27
2
2
5
43
8
27
3
5
5
10
4
35
61
92
232
51
9
9
1
25
2
2
5
43
6
26
5
4
4
3
32
9
44
55
22
112
87
79
68
134
112
39
79
68
9
12
11
1
11
11
25
81
303
85
73
26
25
7
60
63
26
26
74
243
22
47
290
506
443
476
122
127
178
89
136
382
247
66
122
178
201
370
61
229
56
5
417
390
27
1.819
2
2
2
1
3
1
6
1
3
52
48
177
29
48
125
2 5 ,0 0 0 P o p u l a t i o n i n
1 9 3 0 . . .................................................................................................................................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Official
T able IV
b .—
Disposition of boys’ delinquency cases by 77 specified courts 1 and 11 other courts during 19S0
Boys’ delinquency cases
Child remaining under super
vision of court
Court
Total
S e r v in g A r e a s
P o p u l a t io n in
100,000 o r
1930_________
Dis
Referred without
Committed to—
commitment to— Restitu
Probation Agency or Under missed, or
dismissed
tempoofficer
individ rary care
tion,
after
supervis ual super of
or
an insti warning Institu Agency or
Agency or fine,
ing
vising
Institu
costs
tution or adjust tion
individ
individ
tion
ment
ual
ual
45,374
13,285
610
677
19,367
3,883
237
183
729
2,235
1,492
2,670
6
41,735
12,154
524
632
18,063
3,677
227
168
701
1,754
1,346
2,486
3
152
1,449
402
1,642
1,110
3
393
45
595
389
2
10
39
637
284
437
53
102
34
16
25
285
9
2
7
22
32
65
2
9
6
40
123
17
180
30
180
347
262
517
72
463
251
2,278
59
64
7
36
79
402
7
1
2
2
3
1
13
3
3
48
w it h
Alabama: Mobile C ounty.......... ..........
California: San Diego County_______
Connecticut: Bridgeport (city)______
District of Columbia. ........................
Georgia: Fulton County________
Indiana:
Lake County_______________ . .
Marion County__________
Vanderburgh County________
Iowa: Polk County____________
Louisiana: Caddo P a rish ....................
Maryland: Baltimore (city)..................
Michigan:
Kent County__ _______ ______
Wayne County....... ..................
Minnesota:
Hennepin C o u n ty .... ...........
Ramsey County_____________
New Jersey:
Hudson County_____________
Mercer County________
32
279
3
1
75
144
31
133
47
1
6
225
2
1
42
65
5
252
98
1,357
450
2,862
163
1,548
1
24
84
3
131
628
30
367
1
4
853
437
429
282
2
1
149
49
60
38
50
27
1
1,736
322
4
1
611
425
375
1 Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 25,000 or more population in 1930.
412
43
19
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Case held
open but
no further Disposi
tion not
disposi- reported
antic
disposi tion
ipated
tion
21
4
2
10
116
14
6
36
5
13
10
96
9
6
3
5
7
1
12
22
25
184
1
8
16
37
27
245
14
32
139
358
7
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Total cases _____________________
C o urts
M o re
Child not remaining under supervision of court
T a b l e I Y b .—
Disposition of boys’ delinquency cases by 77 specified courts and 11 other courts during 19SO— Continued
00
Boys’ delinquency cases
Child remaining under super
vision of court
Court
S e r v i n g A r e a s 'w i t h 100,000 or
M ore P opulation in 1930—Contd.
New York:
Buffalo (city).___ _____________
Erie County (exclusive of Buffalo).
Monroe County________________
New York (citv)_______________
Dis
Referred without
Under missed, or Committed to—
commitment to— Restitu
Probation Agency or tempo
dismissed
officer
individ rary care
tion,
after
supervis ual super of
or
an insti warning
Agency or Institu Agency or fine,
vising
ing
costs
tution or adjust Institu
individ
individ
tion
tion
ment
ual
ual
Case held
open but
no further Disposi
tion not
disposi reported
Other tion
antic
disposi ipated
tion
C o u rts
Westchester County____________
Ohio:
■Franklin Conntv
Hamilton County______________
Mahoning County_____________
Oregon: M ultnomah County________
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County______________
Montgomery County___________
U tah: Third district
Waihington:
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County______
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1,005
' 191
138
6,857
" 329
493
139
118
119
2,560
12
269
921
1,486
1,802
368
1,024
218
239
221
76
276
9
6
11
18
22
16
£55
85
6,629
85
732
644
815
61
749
41
213
270
135
561
1,934
65
37
497
2,715
' 222
159
108
20
19
392
30
11
6
3
17
19
476
687
1,122
' 181
531
120
25
98
57
38
3
4
1
1
10
21
10
1
9
4
90
2
1
8
34
4,488
14
399
121
1
2
91
2
3
11
6
2
41
22
404
11
54
24
10
16
1
3
11
285
1,200
41
41
83
7
1
5
15
680
44
3
1
122
63
1
4
15
4
1
534
12
10
8
12
26
522
40
8
10
183
27
5
10
5
4
137
5
9
35
184
106
9
39
19
112
66
16
75
1
1
421
5
20
33
81
11
3
39
1
18
105
1
160
229
1
13
29
99
6
14
51
15
92
1
7
2
1
1
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Total
Child not remaining under supervision of court
C o u rts
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
S e r v in g
A r e a s
P o p u l a t io n
in
w it h
2 5 ,0 0 0 t o
1 9 3 0 __________________
3 ,2 9 5
6
1,0 4 1
68
45
1,2 3 2
17 4
1
1
8
5
9
1
15
2
2
5
42
3
3
3
4
2
2
2
1
20
6
3
2
19 8
45
28
3
1
i
14
65
51
23
9
36
112
85
1
1
1
12
1
i
1
2
3
31
26
116
14
15
3
2
1
25
52
8
2
1
3
26
8
8
3
8
3
5
4
9
2
2
4
2
1
2
7
21
3
9
2
7
17
2
2
2
2
4
3
2
1
2
7
7
1
2
2
8
13
4
251
58
2 17
19 0
18 9
4
23
4
1
12
3
11
20
9
13
2
35
9
13
3
1
5
1
1
10
2
12 4
93
134
10
8
8
17 6
12
4
32
440
119
12 3
15 2
93
16
2
40
13
99
344
90
18
72
21
1
22
7
30
55
16
430
394
1
1
14
5
2
1
6
13
26
72
13
59
1
1
7
35
34
49
114
8
13
36
2
35
2
35
1
1
45
7
1
19
1
1
1
1
1
2
5
23
17
2
2
83
2
C o u r t s S e r v in g A r e a s w it h L e s s T h a n
2 5 ,0 0 0
P o p u l a t io n
in
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1 9 3 0 ..................................
2
1
1
1
21
18
65
254
16 5
2
5
3
12 7
6
15
3
3
24
44
72
82
398
2
10
73
26
13
i
10
5
21
4
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Alabama:
Baldwin County_______________
Chambers County______________
Clarke County________________
Colbert County________________
Dallas County____ . ___________
Elmore County________________
Escambia County______________
Etowah County_______________
Jackson County_______________
Lauderdale County____________
Macon County________________
Marion County________________
Perry County_________________
Pike County__________________
Sumter C ounty________________
Illinois: Rock Island County________
Indiana: Wayne C ounty___________
Iowa: Johnson County_____________
Louisiana: Ouachita Parish-------------Minnesota: Winona County________
New York:
Chemung County______________
Clinton County______________
Columbia County______________
Ontario County________________
N orth Carolina: Buncombe C o unty...
N orth Dakota:
Third judicial district (in p art)___
Fourth judicial district__________
Ohio:
Allen County__________________
Auglaize County..............................
Clark County_________________
Lake County__________________
Sandusky County..................... ......
Pennsylvania: Lycoming County-----Utah:
First district__________________
Second d is tr ic t...______________
Fourth district_________________
Fifth district__________________
Sixth district__________________
Seventh district________________
Virginia: Lynchburg (city)_________
6
19
2
T
able
IV c.— Disposition of girls’ delinquency cases by 71 specified courts 1 and 9 other courts during 1930
Oi
Girls’ delinquency cases
Child remaining under super
vision of court
Court
Total
w it h
19 30 .
1 0 0 ,0 0 0 o r
.............................
Alabama: Mobile County__________
California: San Diego County_______
Connecticut: Bridgeport (city)______
District of Columbia_______________
Georgia: Fulton County____________
Indiana:
Lake County__________________
Marion County__________ _____
Vanderburgh County..................
Iowa: Polk County. __________
Louisiana: Caddo Parish___________
Maryland: Baltimore (c ity )................
Michigan:
Kent County__________________
Wayne County________________
Minnesota:
Hennepin County....................... .
Ramsey County......... ............. ........
New Jersey:
Hudson County______ _________
Mercer County____________ ____
New York:
Buffalo (city)__ ____ ______ ____
Erie County (exclusive of Buffalo).
Monroe County________________
New York (city)........ ......................
Rensselaer County______ ______
Westchester County____________
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Dis
Committed to—
missed,
or dis
missed af
Agency
ter warn
or indi
ing or ad Institu
tion
vidual
justm ent
Referred without
commitment to—
Institu
tion
Agency
or indi
vidual
Restitu
tion,
fine, or
costs
Case held
open but
no further Disposi
tion not
disposi reported
Other
antic
disposi tion
ipated
tion
8 ,3 8 3
2 ,5 7 7
10 3
331
2 ,5 6 9
1,17 7
136
71
273
71
432
640
3
7 ,7 3 4
2 ,3 9 3
97
324
2 ,3 4 5
1,0 7 7
12 6
69
263
47
406
584
3
8
5
83
2
31
36
5
16
5
9
25
19 1
68
251
228
2 15
301
12
1
50
110
110
51
85
28
262
28
70
14
373
2 17
80
238
24
69
3
2
1
3
55
111
1
27
21
10
9
85
10 4
558
3
45
46
30
5
13
19
3
3
1
25
7
7
3
2
1
12
1
1
100
17
9
28
57
6
49
2
1
63
29
8
11
15
16
1
88
55
5
3
1
1
3
6
8
8
1
1
11
24
5
21
40
2 15
60
34
1
1
2
17 9
9
12
1
19
1
7
6
3
1
5
U
2
79
4
41
1
11
4
5
1
1
5
2
1
36
2
31
3
1
1
1
i
6
17
26
16
10
40
4
1
12
2
1
2
2
1
46
57
13
10 4
13
21
1,010
18
4
81
23
32
89
2
3
14 7
40
200
23
3
16
12
6
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Total cases___________ _________ _
C o u r t s S e r v in g A r e a s
M o r e P o p u l a t io n in
Under
Probation Agency
or indi tempo
officer
vidual rary care
super
super of an in
vising
vising stitution
Child not remaining under supervision of court
C o urts
100,000
S e r v in g
A r e a s
P o p u l a t io n
in
w it h
25,000 t o
1930..................
Alabama:
Baldwin County...... .......................
Chambers County_____________
Colbert County________ _______
Etowah County_______________
Jackson County_______________
Lauderdale County _ _________
Marion County____ ___________
Perry County ________________
Sumter County . _____________
Illinois: Rock Island C ounty.............
Indiana: Wayne County___________
Iowa: Johnson County______ ______
Louisiana: Ouachita Parish_________
Minnesota: Winona County. ____
New York:
Chemung County______________
Clinton County_________ _____
Columbia County______________
Ontario County__ _____________
North Carolina: Buncombe C ounty...
N orth Dakota:
Third judicial district (in part)___
Fourth judicial district......... ..........
Ohio:
Allen County. _ _______ ______
Auglaize County. _____________
Clark County_________ _____
Lake County_____________
Sandusky County...........................
285
586
349
230
148
90
58
34
33
38
3
12
3
2
17
10
4
13
40
173
11
888
21
240
130
136
7
187
8
58
38
1
16
11
30
92
485
5
1
172
1
5
i
576
171
4
3
2
12
1
3
6
2
2
1
11
17
19
34
6
40
58
140
189
80
41
79
16
23
24
10
3
1
390
3
160
30
20
4
92
1
7
10
57
3
1
2
17
22
186
23
23
43
2
1
7
211
79
6
2
2
1
5
3
2
1
8
5
2
1
1
1
1
3
4
5
21
1
3
12
1
11
9
4
7
1
9
1
1
2
6
3
3
23
80
27
24
131
31
29
18
126
15
5
5
i
23
2
2
3
3
13
i
12
58
2
10
23
48
22
3
1
--
-i
15
1
1
4
3
1
3
1
3
1
7
1
1
16
3
12
49
3
1
39
13
5
2
1
2
18
5
7
1Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 25,000 or more population in 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7
104
1
4
2
5
1
4
2
2
2
33
1
1
6
1
1
3
2
11
5
14
17
22
2
2
11
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Ohio:
Franklin County
Hamilton County............................
Mahoning C o unty.. __________
Montgomery C ounty..___ ______
Oregon: M ultnomah County ..... ..
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County_____________
Montgomery County___________
Philadelphia (city and county)___
South Carolina: Greenville County__
Utah: Third district_______________
Virginia: Norfolk (city).........
Washington:
Pierce County_________________
Spokane County_______________
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County______
1
3
1
1
5
1
5
1
1
i
Cn
T able
IV c.
Disposition of girls’ delinquency cases by 71 specified courts and 9 other courts during 1930— Continued
Oi
to
Girls’ delinquency cases
Child remaining under super
vision of court
Child not remaining under supervision of court
Court
Total
Referred without
commitment to—
Institu
tion
Agency
or indi
vidual
Restitu
tion,
fine, or
costs
Case held
open but
no further Disposi
disposi tion not
Other
antic reported
disposi tion
ipated
tion
C o urts
First district______
Second d is tr ic t___
Fourth district______
Sixth district.....................
C o u r t s S e r v in g A r e a s w it h
P o p u l a t io n in
25,000
1930
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
10
1
39
76
49
36
3
4
26
13
45
21
1
73
13
...... .
1
9
20
18
23
10
3
2
20
1
2
1
13
21
4
1
4
3
1
1
4
2
2
4
2
1
3
2
2
18 ................
2
L e ss T h a n
2
9
3
8
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
S e r v in g A r e a s w it h
25,000 t o
100,000 P o p u l a t i o n i n 1930—Continued.
Pennsylvania: Lycoming County _
Dis
Committed to—
Under
missed,
Probation Agency
or indi tempo
or dis
officer
vidual
rary
care
missed
af
super
super of an in ter warn
Agency
vising
vising stitution ing or ad Institu or indi
tion
justment
vidual
53
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T a b l e V a .— Color,
nativity, and parent nativity of boys dealt with in deli quency
cases disposed of by 87 specified courts 1 and 51 other courts during 1980
Boys’ delinquency cases
White boys
Court
Total
Native,
Native, foreign
or
native
Total parent
mixed
age parent
age
Total cases_____________— 45,374 37,361
C o u rts
S e r v in g
A r e a s
Boys
Col whose
Native,
color
parent For Nativ ored
was
boys not
ity
age
eign not
re
re
not re born
ported
ported
ported
15,698
15,155
1,818
765 3,925
8,006
7
1,685
756 3,911
7,555
7
w it h
100,000 o r M o r e P o p u l a t i o n
1930.......................................... 41, 735 34,173
12,879
14,942
152
1,449
402
1,642
1,110
75
1,398
385
628
466
73
984
58
536
460
1
330
309
45
1
262
517
72
463
251
2,278
225
344
65
420
151
1,486
61
323
65
377
149
700
163
20
38
2
692
1
3
180
14
450
2,862
433
2,456
228
641
145
1,598
42
19
1
161
17
37
17
406
853
437
814
421
440
266
353
150
1
19
5
1
39
16
1,736
425
1,651
342
367
98
1,236
'239
48
5
85
83
1,005
959
245
671
43
46
191
187
138
138
6,857 6,120
329
324
493
450
52
40
1,495
168
97
131
95
4,380
153
334
1
7
9
737
5
4
2
229
3
13
1
43
4
189
396
211
62
15
in
Alabama: Mobile County........
California: San Diego County..
Connecticut: Bridgeport (city).
District of Columbia.................
Georgia: Fulton County_____
Indiana:
Lake Connt.v ___ _
Marion County. _______
Vandeiburgh County........
Iowa: Polk County_________
Louisiana: Caddo Parish____
M aryland; Baltimore (city)___
Michigan:
Kent County ____
Wayne C ounty... . . . . .
Minnesota:
Hennepin County_______
Ramsey County________
New Jersey:
__
Hudson County
Mercer County_____ ____
New York:
Buffalo (city)___________
Erie County (exclusive of
Buffalo)______________
Monroe County_________
New York (city)________
Rensselaer County______
Westchester County_____
Ohio:
Franklin County________
Hamilton County_______
Mahoning County______
Montgomery County____
Oregon: Multnomah C o u nty..
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County_______
Montgomery County.........
Philadelphia (city and
county).........................
South Carolina: Greenville
County__________________
Utah: Third district.
_____
Virginia: Norfolk (city). . . .
Washington:
Pierce County.....................
Spokane County________
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County.
16
9
14
2
1
57
6
3
11
3
30
3
1
1
1
77
51
17
1,014
644
37
173
7
100
792
4
5
921
1,486
1,802
368
1,024
732
1,090
1,584
306
1,009
651
64
297
197
658
64
23
653
15
253
10
997
71
90
38
3
5
17
2
18
1
546
2
42
955
85
833
69
227
24
593
40
7
6
3
2
16
6,629
4,996
638
1,155
36
30 3,137
1,633
85
732
644
54
729
295
52
536
279
2
116
16
73
4
135
561
1,934
131
555
1,852
121
413
799
9
138
879
1
3
62
49
63
4
6
82
25,000 to 100,000 P opulation in
1930................................................. 3,295
8,007
2,638
213
133
9
14
288
181
181
C o urts
C o urts
L e ss
in
S e r v in g
S e r v in g
A r e a s
A r e a s
12 2
31
3
349
1
w it h
w it h
T han 25,000 P opulation
1930....... ....................................
344
1Inoludes all courts reporting that served areas with 100,000 or more population in 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
163
54
T
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
able
V b .— Color, nativity, and parent nativity of girls dealt with in delinquency
cases disposed of by 87 speci fied courts 1 and 43 other courts during 1980
Girls’ delinquency cases
White girls
Court
Total
Native,
Col
Native, foreign Native,
parent For N ativ ored
or
native
girls
ity
Total parent
age
eign
mixed
re born not re
age parent not
ported
ported
age
Total cases_______ ______________ 8,383
6,537
3,697
2,216
100,000 o r
1930.............. ...... 7,734
5,981
3,207
2,178
12
180
62
51
77
12
141
18
39
77
174
■ 234
9
125
17
125
76
219
9
113
17
54
43
70
327
53
120
16
161
193
80
104
60
84
19
225
21
61
8
156
13
84
18
32
842
84
87
16
3
13
255
55
21
65
15
16
537
28
57
2
7
226
367
287
186
142
202
320
103
124
118
20
19
100
9
16
1
28
12
52
5
1
2
59
9
63
62
134
601
16
238
60
36
3
168
16
192
53
95
4
278
2
i
27
7
17
28
90
469
20
76
232
12
186
15
576
520
454
38
27
73
36
36
C o u r t s S e r v in g
M o re
P o p u l a t io n in
Alabama: Mobile County______ ____
25
California: San Diego C o u n ty ____
191
Connecticut: Bridgeport (city)______
68
D istiict of Columbia____ __________
251
Geoigia: Fulton C o u n ty ...................
228
Indiana:
Lake County_________________
215
Marion County____ __________
301
Vanderburgh County...... ........... .
12
Iowa: Polk County ___________ _
147
Louisiana: Caddo P arish .....................
40
Maryland: Baltimore (city )......... ......
262
Michigan:
Kent County_______________ _
70
Wayne County____ ________
373
Minnesota:
Hennepin County_____ ______
200
Ramsey County..............................
80
New Jersey:
Hudson County........ .....................
238
Mercer County________________
24
New York:
Buffalo (city)_____ __________
89
Erie County (exclusive of Buffalo).
21
Monroe County_______________
32
New York (city)................... ......... 1, 010
Rensselaer County____________
85
Westchestei County.................. .
104
Ohio:
Franklin County_______ .
285
Hamilton County____________
586
Mahoning C o unty.___ _____
349
Montgomery County______ ____
230
Oregon: Multnomah County
148
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County..........................
173
Montgomery County........
11
Philadelphia (city and county)..
888
South Carolina: Greenville C o u n tv ..
21
Utah: T hiid district_____ _____
240
Viiginia: Norfolk (city)_________
130
Washington:
Pierce County______________
30
Spokane County_________
92
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County
485
C o urts
100,000
S e r v in g A r e a s
P o p u l a t io n in
w it h
2 5 ,0 0 0
154
268
1,864
175
154
267
1,753
3
7
1
4
11
1930...
1930...............
______________________ _
8
1
25
43
1
1
10
10
1
1
23
137
26
i
6
30
10
46
1
1
8
3
3
3
1
17
3
6
1
i
154
287
5
70
8
13
1Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 100,000 or more population in 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
151
93
15
23
16
to
C o u r t s S e r v in g A r e a s w it h L e s s T h a n
P o p u l a t io n in
25,000
202
A r e a s w it h
56
37
55
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T
able
V I.— Source of reference to court of delinquency cases disposed of by 87
specified courts1 and 51 other courts during 1980
Delinquency cases
| S o c ia l a g e n c y
388
9 19
4 ,4 4 2
7 ,2 1 4
267
37
4 9 ,4 6 9
3 0 ,9 6 3
4 ,6 15
1,8 0 3
334
864
4 ,2 2 1
6 ,4 4 5
19 7
27
A l a b a m a : M o b i l e C o u n t y ...........................................
C a l i f o r n i a : S a n D i e g o C o u n t y . . . ............ .............
C o n n e c t i c u t : B r i d g e p o r t ( c i t y ) ...................... ..
17 7
1,6 4 0
470
1,8 9 3
49
822
27
13
29
7
203
13
24
43
6
1
17
10
16 3
16
__
G e o rg ia :
1,3 3 8
7
3
18 5
77
239
74
12 9
8
5
200
307
2
8
68
39
12 6
5
74
2
7
229
30
85
F u l t o n C o u n t y ___________ ___________ _
340
1,3 7 1
690
15 7
16
46
2 13
13 4
71
16
6
4
6
13
__
Ï3
63
1 O th e r so u rce
p o rte d
1 O th e r c o u rt
2 ,7 2 4
1 S o u rce n o t re
P r o b a tio n
fic e r
5 ,3 3 8
S e r v in g
A r e a s
w it h
1 0 0 ,0 0 0 o r
P o p u l a t i o n i n 1 9 3 0 ......... ...................................
a tiv e s
S ch o o l d e p a rt
m ent
3 2 ,4 2 8
T o t a l c a s e s ............ ............. ......................................................
C o u rts
M o re
P a r e n t s o r r e l
P o lic e
5 3 ,7 5 7
C o u rt
o f
T o ta l
O th e r in d iv id
ual
Source of reference to court
1
3
2
In d ia n a :
M a r i o n C o u n t y ______________________________ .
V a n d e r b u r g h C o u n t y ________ _______ ________
Io w a :
P o l k C o u n t y ______________ _______ ___________
M a ry la n d :
B a l t i m o r e ( c i t y ) .......................................
M ic h ig a n :
K e n t C o u n t y ..................................... ............................
W a y n e C o u n t y ________ ___________ _____________
M in n e s o ta :
H e n n e p i n C o u n t y . . ..............................................
N e w Je rse y :
H u d s o n C o u n t y ................................ ..........................
N ew
477
8 18
84
6 10
291
15 7
478
63
2 14
110
2
60
17
66
1
__
1
12 8
27
7
53
254
14
1
2 ,5 4 0
18 1
2 ,0 8 1
13 1
59
14
4
520
3 ,2 3 5
358
2 ,2 8 1
27
3
__
5
59
409
3 _____
10 3
18 3
1,0 5 3
764
5
1
29
4
12
113
14 1
7
355
16
4
117
517
1, 974
449
632
3 14
609
33
91
29
1
95
15
480
71
38
1,0 9 4
1,0 2 2
' 12 1
98
12
14
44
11
2
1
7
1
29
18 1
1
20
1,18 8
2
15
2
1
16
1
2
Y o rk :
E r i e C o u n t y ( e x c l u s i v e o f B u f f a l o ) ____
N e w Y o r k ( c i t y ) ____________ ___________________
R e n s s e l a e r C o u n t y ............................................... ..
'2 1 2
170
7 ,8 6 7
4 14
597
O h io :
F r a n k l i n C o u n t y ................................................... ..
H a m i l t o n C o u n t y _____________________ _______ _
M a h o n i n g C o u n t y ............ ............. ...........................
O r e g o n : M u l t n o m a h C o u n t y ..................................
P e n n sy lv a n ia :
A l l e g h e n y C o u n t y .................................... ...............
1,2 0 6
2 ,0 7 2
4 ,3 3 7
69
2 17
595
2 ,15 1
1,4 0 0
962
598
1,17 2
8 16
16 2
1,12 8
96
321
P h i l a d e l p h i a ( c i t y a n d c o u n t y ) __________
S o u t h C a r o l i n a : G r e e n v i l l e C o u n t y _________
U t a h : T h i r d d i s t r i c t ________________________________
V i r g i n i a : N o i f o l k ( c i t y ) . ................................................
7 ,5 17
10 6
972
774
W a s h in g to n :
P i e r c e C o u n t y _______ __________ ________ ________
S p o k a n e C o u n t y .................... ..................... ................
16 5
653
M o n tg o m e ry
C o u n t y ________________________
50 6
268
19 1
87
116
461
18 3
10 2
13
1
1
2
4
1
79
8
36
53
8
5
72
27
28
12
577
6 ,2 5 5
68
201
2
1
456
50 8
3 18
34
51
46
2
2
1
25
31
12 3
205
273
206
445
92
5
10
11
16 2
3
17
23
209
111
52
13
1
138
4
6
25
11
478
9
556
4
46
15
10 7
3
39
12 5
11
1
35
14 6 —
11
8
22
10
201
208
2
19
31
14 0
53
55
208
698
13
71
2 ,4 19
3 ,8 7 1
1 ,2 3 5
669
887
C o u r t s S e r v in g
A r e a s w it h
L e ss T h an
2 5 , 0 0 0 P o p u l a t i o n i n 1 9 3 0 ...............................................
4 17
230
54
34
1
i Includes all courts reporting th at served areas with 100,000 or more population in 1930.
13
1
i
10 9
39
C o u rts
S e r v in g
A r e a s
w it h
2 5 ,0 0 0
to
1 0 0 , 0 0 0 P o p u l a t i o n i n 1 9 3 0 _________ _______ _______
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1,6 3 8
45
12 1
498
1 ,7 0 2
W i s c o n s i n : M i l w a u k e e C o u n t y .................... ..
48
10
28
70
4
85
2
58
21
2
1
2
3
1
20
8
61
9
3
1
1
2
1
5
6
56
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able V II.— Place of care of child pending hearing or disposition in delinquency
cases disposed of hy 87 specified courts 1 and 51 other courts during 1980
Delinquency cases
Court
Total
cases
Nodetention
care
Detention care overnight or longer in speci
fied place
Not re
ported
wheth
er de
Board
ten
ing
or Other Place tion
home Deten Other Jail
place of care care
or
tion insti police
not re was
sta
of
other hom e2 tution tion
8 care 4 ported given
family
home
Total cases_________________ 53,757 29,864
194 12,652
4,926
1,581
215
1
4,324
Courts Serving Areas with 100,000
or M ore P opulation in 1930......... 49,469 26,319
111 12,389
4,891
1,399
40
1
4,319
1
1
Alabama: Mobile County______
California: San Diego County---Connecticut: Bridgeport (city) —
District of Columbia___________
Georgia: Fulton County_______
Indiana:
Lake County______________
Marion County___________
Vanderburgh County.......... —
Iowa: Polk County........................
Louisiana: Caddo Parish----------Maryland: Baltimore (city).........
Michigan:
Kent C ounty..____________
Wayne County______ _____
Minnesota:
Hennepin County_________
Ramsey County___________
New Jersey:
Hudson County___________
Mercer County____________
New York:
Buffalo (city)........................ —
Erie County (exclusive of Buf
falo)____________________
Monroe County.......................
New York (city)......................
Rensselaer County.............. . . .
Westchester County________
Ohio:
Franklin County__________
Hamilton County__________
Mahoning County_________
Montgomery County......... —
Oregon: M ultnomah County.......
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County....... ...........
Montgomery C ounty.............
Philadelphia (city and coun-
177
1,640
470
1,893
1,338
7
4
90
389
13
1
595
17
27
367
3
275
477
394
818
82
84
363
610
190
291
2,540 2,403
2
1
191
407
3
5
4
6
217
80
5
1
130
520
3,235
334
1,431
3
2
175
1, 791
1
10
1,053
517
799
284
51
1
1,974
449
1,177
424
1
792
25
1,094
715
1
377
150
65
170
7,867 4,056
318
414
461
597
2
212
1,206
2,072
2,151
598
1,172
468
741
1,079
385
857
1,128
96
146
7,517
South Carolina: Greenville Coun
106
ty ..................................................
972
Utah: Third district___________
774
Virginia: Norfolk (city)________
Washington:
165
Pierce County.........................
653
Spokane County__________
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County... 2,419
Courts Serving Areas with 25,000
to 100,000 P opulation in 1930......... 3,871
C ourts Serving Areas with L ess
T han 25,000 P opulation in 1930...
85
1,135
421
1,526
739
1
1
499
3 1,325
792
1
140
2
140
193
164
3
1
59
105
3,807
96
100
1
8
3
4
5
31
230
4
20
2,219
1,302
13
i
9
2
26
406
843
3,216
69
14
1
2
1
7
68
661
75
75
815
412
6
10
2
21
13
5
1
1
7
2
1
4
i
2
90
5
35
276
67
130
12
312
4
1
1
3,982
1
29
16
88
109
225
1, 576
1
6
29
16
263
35
159
125
4
23
50
1
131
272
I
1
t Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 100,000 or more population in 1930.
1 Includes cases of children cared for part of the time in detention homes and part of the time elsewhere
b u t excludes cases of children also held in jails or police stations.
8
Includes a few cases of children cared for part of the time in jails or police stations and part of the time
elsewhere.
4Includes a few cases of children held in more than 1 place of care but in places other than detention
homes, jails, or police stations.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
57
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
V III.— Reason for reference to court of fam ilies represented in dependency
and neglect cases disposed of by 72 specified courts 1 and 12 other courts during
19SO
T able
Families represented in dependency and neglect cases
Reason tor reference to court
With
out ade
quate
Total care or
support
from
parent
or
guard
ian
Court
with 100,000
in 1930_____
Alabama: Mobile County----------California: San Diego County-----Connecticut: Bridgeport (city) —
District of Columbia____________
Georgia: Fulton County......... ........
Indiana:
Lake County_______________
Marion County_____________
Iowa: Polk C o u n ty ...---------------Louisiana: Caddo Parish------------Maryland: Baltimore (city) -----Michigan:
Kent County_______
Wayne County_____________
Minnesota:
Hennepin County___________
Ramsey County...... ........
New York:
Buffalo (c ity ).............................
Erie County (exclusive of Buf
falo) ..........................
Monroe County_____________
New York (city)______
Rensselaer County......... ...........
Westchester County_________
Ohio:
Franklin County____________
Hamilton County----------------Mahoning County__________
Montgomery County________
Oregon: Multnomah County------Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County...............
Montgomery County________
Philadelphia (city and county).
South Carolina: Greenville County.
Utah: T hird district........... ............
Virginia: Norfolk (city)-------------Washington:
Pierce County________ . __ . . .
Spokane County....................
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County__
Physi
cally
Rea
handi
capped Other son
and in reason not
re
need of
ported
public
care
7,459
976
300
1,131
518
6
13
9,463
6,846
905
268
1,000
429
2
13
3
226
24
184
264
3
103
16
155
186
12
1
6
21
36
60
7
19
44
15
202
151
310
39
284
131
79
193
30
236
18
29
24
4
18
7
5
6
1
28
4
60
6
18
34
26
4
9
160
454
143
396
3
39
4
4
8
6
11
182
75
125
75
28
3
26
30
17
1
1
1
28
2
2
8
10
204
8
26
110
18
10
3
10
52
81
18
20
37
39
22
17
2
1
11
18
6
59
2
6
4
119
5
30
23
20
5
17
47
1
6
6
Total cases__________________ 10,403
C ourts Serving A reas
or M ore P opulation
Living
Aban Abuse under
don or cruel condi
tions
ment
or de treat injur
sertion ment ious to
morals
10
4
3
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
12
13
25
87
1,954
98
251
15
76
1,609
81
108
61
7
5
389
232
119
161
251
264
98
78
119
196
16
21
6
17
6
394
4
1,877
36
84
91
310
2
1,296
26
32
57
50
2
382
3
12
7
34
107
681
19
75
497
3
105
8
1
6
26
62
i Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 25,000 or more population in 1930.
118478°— 32------ 5
1
3
4
1
1
58
T
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
V III.— Reason for reference to court of fam ilies represented in dependency
and neglect cases disposed of by 72 specified courts and 12 other courts during
19 S 0 — Continued
able
Families represented in dependency and neglect cases
Reason for reference to court
W ith
out ade
quate
care or
Total support
from
parent
or
guard
ian
Court
C o urts
to
S e r v in g
100,000 P
A r e a s
o p u l a t io n
w it h
in
S e r v in g A r e a s w it h
P o p u l a t io n in
25,000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Physi
cally
Rea
handi
capped Other son
and in reason not
re
need of
ported
public
care
2 5 ,0 0 0
1930............
Alabama:
Baldwin County_____ ______
Chambers C o u n ty ...................
Clarke County____ _________
Colbert County..........................
Conecuh County____________
Dallas County............................
Elmore County_____________
Escambia County....... ........... .
Etowah County........ ................
Jackson County_____________
Lauderdale County_________
Lee County.................................
Macon County_____________
Marion County_____________
Perry County______________
Pike County_______________
Sumter County_____________
Illinois: Rock Island County_____
Iowa: Johnson County__________
Louisiana: Ouachita Parish.............
Minnesota: Winona County
New York:
Chemung County..... ................
Clinton County_____________
Columbia County......................
Ontario County_____________
North
Carolina:
Buncombe County...............................
North Dakota: Third judicial district (in p art)...... ...........................
Ohio:
Allen County..............................
Auglaize County___
Clark County___________
Lake C ounty. ............................
Sandusky County............. ........
Pennsylvania: Lycoming County..
Utah:
First district__________
Second district__________
Fifth district__________
Sixth district............
Virginia: Lynchburg (city ).
C o urts
T h a n
Living
Aban Abuse under
don or cruel condi
ment
tions
or de treat injur
sertion ment ious to
morals
821
16
4
13
26
3
11
1
1
5
2
96
4
13
8
17
34
6
83
20
524
14
9
23
3
10
3
2
78
2
5
7
16
30
2
63
27
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
9
1
1
1
1
i
12
4
12
2
3
i
2
1
2
12
19
3
35
26
1
1
1
5
i
2
15
3
48
24
13
1
10
3
4
1
1
3
5
36
1
4
2
2
7
7
1
2
g
2
1
6
1
1
1
2
1
15
9
27
4
40
18
19
19
15
2
23
16
8
3
2
3
1
2
2
11
1
6
4
4
1
2
3
1
1
1
119
89
8
1
1
3
76
8
60
32
7
5
1
2
13
2
3
56
14
40
9
58
81
1
4
1
1
122
1
5
i
L e ss
1930...
5
9
8
4
59
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T able I X
a .—
Manner of handling dependency and neglect cases disposed of by 72
specified courts 1 and 12 other courts during 1930
Dependency and neglect cases
Court
Total
Total cases___________________________________________________________________________
C o urts
19 30
S e r v in g
A r e a s
w it h
1 0 0 ,0 0 0 o r
M o re
P o p u l a t io n
Official
Unofficial
2 0 ,7 11
16 ,15 5
4 ,5 5 6
18 ,5 7 2
1 5 ,0 8 0
3 ,4 9 2
4
4
in
....................................................................................................................................................................
California: San Diego County_________________________ ___________
Connecticut: Bridgeport (city)— ..................................................
395
15 7
45
51
315
315
405
238
6
Georgia: Fulton County........................................-.........................
Indiana:
Lake County ............ .......................................................................
440
326
282
18 8
282
138
Iowa: Polk County...........................................................................
Louisiana: Caddo P a rish ................................................................ .....................
559
312
247
53
466
51
2
466
338
338
35
Michigan:
927
927
349
349
115
115
Minnesota:
New York:
78
70
78
70
228
Ohio:
Franklin County ............... ........................................................ ..........
Hamilton County.......................................................................
Mahoning County___________________________________
Montgomery County.................................................................
Oregon: M ultnomah County ---------------------------------------------------------------------------Pennsylvania:
Philadelphia (city and county).................................................
South Carolina: Greenville County________________________
Utah: T hird district_____________________________________
3 ,8 9 0
16 1
394
228
3 ,8 9 0
16 1
394
721
442
462
329
2 14
321
13 7
19 8
475
266
970
10
9 70
10
2 ,5 4 1
4 ,0 6 0
74
17 5
15 2
34
12 5
152
259
113
77
12 3
209
1,5 1 9
40
50
Washington:
49
16 4
Spokane C o u n ty .................. ....................... ........ ....................
1,304
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County.......................................................
(Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 25,000 or more population in 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
49
80
9 52
84
352
60
T
able
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
IX a .— Manner of handling dependency and neglect cases disposed of by 72
specified courts and 12 other courts during 1930— Continued
Dependency and neglect cases
Court
Total
C o u r t s S e r v i n g A r e a s w i t h 2 5 , 0 0 0 t o 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 P o p u l a t i o n i n
1 9 3 0 .......................................................................................................................................................................
Alabama:
Baldwin County....................................................... ................
Chambers County...................... .................. ...........................
Clarke County______________________________________
Colbert County_________________ _______ _______ ____
Conecuh County____________________________________
Dallas County__________ ______ ._________ . ______ 1.1.
Elmore County_____________________________________
Escambia County_________________________________
Etowah County____ ________ ______________ ____. . I l l '
Jackson County_____________________________________
Lauderdale County......................................... ....................
Lee County...... ........ ................. ............................ ..................
Macon County_________________ _______ ___________I.
Marion County_____________________________________
Perry County........... ............. ....................................................
Pike County_________________________________ ______
Sumter County______________________________________
Illinois: Rock Island County.................................................... ......
Iowa: Johnson County__________________ *_______________
Louisiana: Ouachita Parish____ _________ _____________
Minnesota: Winona County______________________________
New York:
Chemung County___________________ ________________
Clinton County_____________________________________
Columbia County________________ ___________ ______
Ontario County_______________________________ ______
North Carolina: Buncombe C o u n ty ................. ..........................
North Dakota: Third judicial district (in p art)............................
Ohio:
Allen County__________ _____ ___________________ ___
Auglaize County____________________________________
Clark County............................ .................................................
Lake County_______________________________________
Sandusky C o u n ty ................ ......................................... ..........
Pennsylvania: Lycoming County____________________ .
Utah:
First district_________ _______ _________ ________ _
Second district______________________________________
Fifth district______________ _________ ________________
Sixth district_________________________ ______________
Virginia: Lynchburg (city)_____________ _________________
C o u r t s S e r v i n g A r e a s w i t h L e s s T h a n 2 5 ,0 0 0 P o p u l a t i o n i n
1 9 3 0 ........................................................................................................................................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1,825
Official
Unofficial
1,000
825
4
43
6
23
77
3
37
47
6
35
93
9
37
3
4
6
4
260
5
25
25
65
107
21
154
43
93
18
153
31
26
5
107
14
158
86
65
30
107
13
158
86
42
24
60
10
60
33
42
59
60
10
59
31
17
59
1
2
25
13
11
11
1
4
5
1
7
4
8
10
4
1
314
75
12
16
6
3
4
6
40
2
5
4
4
220
3
20
21
66
107
21
1
12
67
13
1
23
6
239
T able IX
b .—
Disposition of dependency and neglect cases by 72 specified courts 1 and 12 other courts during 1930
Dependency and neglect cases
Child remaining under
supervision of court
Court
Child not remaining under supervision of court
Total
Proba
tion
officer
super
vising
20,711
4,650
1,455
1,577
5,085
2,767
2,692
512
119
646
327
876
5
Courts Serving Areas with 100,000 or M ore P opulaTION IN 1930........................................................................... 18,572
3,512
1,363
1,493
4,901
2,640
2,571
443
68
557
277
743
4
56
2
2
45
4
10
59
9
3
3
3
35
6
7
173
99
235
22
15
33
4
12
4
2
2
22
8
25
5
3
57
190
20
1
73
68
74
30
19
50
20
57
141
167
31
183
6
1
16
1
64
2
21
16
1
17
28
2
3
2
1
6
1
12
2
5
15
182
Total cases__________________________________
Indiana:
Michigan:
Minnesota:
New York:
4
395
51
315
440
32
10
18
110
2
23
4
6
20
1
68
50
1
3
9
65
61
9
5
1
85
3
1
65
1
174
2
59
338
927
10
145
24
392
72
28
190
104
18
24
349
115
1
18
164
25
11
88
7
1
1
3
1,258
15
12
169
816
139
7
3
78
70
37
9
228
1,433
3
340
3,890
1
’ 161
1
394
18
Westchester County_________________________
* Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 25,000 or more population in 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8
19
11
4
17
1
326
282
559
53
466
1
165
1
29
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Case
held
open
Dis
Referred
without
b
u t no DisposCommitted to—
Under missed,
commitment to—
tion
Agency tempo
further not
or
dis
re
Other
disposi
or indi rary care missed
ported
disposi tion anvidual
of
an
after
Agency
tion
tici-.
super
insti warning Institu Agency Individ Institu or indi
pated
vising tution
tion
ual
tion
or ad
vidual
justm ent
7
34
5
1
1
111
7
4
46
1
i_t
OS
T able IX b .— D i s p o s i t i o n o f d e p e n d e n c y a n d n e g le c t c a s e s b y 7 2 s p e c if ie d c o u r ts a n d 1 2 o th e r c o u r ts d u r in g 1 9 3 0 — Continued
to
Dependency and neglect cases
Child remaining under
supervision of court
Court
Proba Agency
tion
or indi
officer vidual
super super
vising
vising
Case
held
open Disposi
Dis
b u t no
Committed
to—
tion
Under missed,
further
re
tempo or dis
Other disposi not
ported
rary care missed
disposi tion an
after
of an
tici
Agency
tion
insti warning Institu Agency Individ Institu or indi
pated
tion
tion
ual
tution
or ad
vidual
justment
Referred without
commitment to—
C o u r t s S e r v i n o A r e a s w i t h 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 o r M o r e P o p u l a
t io n
in
10 30 — C o n tin u e d .
O h io :
F r a n k l i n C o u n t y . . . ________ ___________________ ________________
H a m i l t o n C o u n t y _______________________________________________
M o n t g o m e r y C o u n t y __________________________________________
O r e g o n : M u l t n o m a h C o u n t y ____________________________________
721
442
214
321
475
P e n n sy lv a n ia :
A l l e g h e n y C o u n t y __________________________ 1 ----------------------------
970
M a h o n i n g C o u n t y ______ ________________________________________
M o n t g o m e r y C o u n t y ....................... ..................... .. .............................
P h i l a d e l p h i a ( c i t y a n d c o u n t y ) . . ...........................................
S o u t h C a r o l i n a : G r e e n v i l l e C o u n t y ___________________________
U t a h : T h i r d d i s t r i c t __________________________________________________
V i r g i n i a : N o r f o l k ( c i t y ) _____________________________________________
W a s h in g to n :
10
4,060
74
175
152
117
2
50
4
X
9
89
76
3
12
43
18
23
1
28
375
6
3
56
136
163
37
1 0 3 0 ............. .................................................. - ..................................................
1,825
967
75
84
A la b a m a :
B a l d w i n C o u n t y . ................................................................................... .
C h a m b e r s C o u n t y ______________________________________________
47
C o u r t s S e r v in g
t io n
in
A r e a s w it h
2 5 ,0 0 0 t o
1 0 0 ,0 0 0 P o p u l a
C l a r k e C o u n t y ___________________________________________________
C o l b e r t C o u n t y .................. .....................................................................
C o n e c u h C o u n t y ________________________________________________
D a l l a s C o u n t y . --------- ------------------- -------- ------------------------------------
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
E l m o r e C o u n t y __________________________________________________
6
35
93
9
37
3
37
1
24
297
16
12
12
27
4
1
17
2
60
10
12
10
23
6
2
.
68
21
21
51
39
5
4
1,536
144
12
13
12
4
8
12
6
10
8
12
3
1
1
6
4
10
18
38
24
10
20
15
17
1
25
28
1
22
37
10
15
16
1
6
27
11
6
30
2
2
19
126
96
61
46
74
41
118
1
7
4
1
15
2
1
43
2
22
70
1
401
2
12
582
18
138
11
34
107
7
1,692
9
79
26
49
164
1,304
P i e r c e C o u n t y ____________________________________________________
S p o k a n e C o u n t y ........................................... ............................................
W i s c o n s i n : M i l w a u k e e C o u n t y ............ ............................. .................
127
57
11
5
261
98
38
41
67
131
g
2
2
1
3
4
3
1
5
3
1
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Total
Child not remaining under supervision of court
Courts Serving Areas with L ess T han 25,000 P opula
tion IN 1930________________________ ____ ___ ____ _
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4
6
4
260
5
25
25
66
107
21
154
43
93
18
4
5
1
231
4
12
24
66
106
21
111
16
10
6
107
14
158
86
65
30
1
42
68
14
17
60
10
60
33
42
59
7
3
1
4
6
2
13
11
11
1
4
1
5
4
314
171
i
1
1
3
13
1
5
1
2
10
1
5
2
6
36
3
3
1
1
1
7
i
5
2
1
48
35
2
i
i
5
24
1
6
2
3
4
i
3
9
15
19
2
8
1
11
2
9
1
5
ii
36
4
25
3
2
3
1
8
7
4
16
12
4
9
8
4
4
1
6
3
4
3
33
4
1
5
1
3
1
1
|
5
2
1
4
5
20
62
4
2
5
2
1
3
2
1
1
48
2
1
17
9
11
7
2
2
17
5
31
1
4
2
4
15
9
12
2
i
25
8
5
15
1
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
Escambia County...........................................
Etowah County_______________________
Jackson County_______________________
Lauderdale County____________________
Lee County______________ ____________
Macon County________________________
Marion County................................... - ........ .
Perry County_________________________
Pike County_________________________
Sumter County_______________________
Illinois: Rock Island County_______________
Iowa: Johnson County........................................
Louisiana: Ouachita Parish_______________ _
Minnesota: Winona County_____________ New York:
Chemung County_____________________
Clinton County____________ ______ ___
Columbia County........... ..............................
Ontario County______________________
N orth Carolina: Buncombe County..................
N orth Dakota: Third judicial district (in part)
Ohio:
Allen County_________________________
Auglaize County................................... ........
Clark County................ ....................... ........
Lake County__________________ ______
Sandusky C ounty.........................................
Pennsylvania: Lycoming County----------------Utah:
First district_________________________
Second district________________________
Fifth district_________________________
Sixth district_________________________
Virginia: Lynchburg (city).................................
64
T
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
able
d u r in
X . —-C o lor, n a t i v i t y , a n d p a r e n t n a tiv ity o f c h ild ren d e a lt w ith i n d e p en -
ai 9 s o egleCt C° SeS dlsPosed ° f bV SJ+ sp e c ifie d co u rts 1 a n d 5 0 oth er co u rts
Dependency and neglect cases
White children
Court
Total
Total cases.
Native
Native foreign Native
parent For Na
native
or
tivity
Total parent
mixed age not eign not re
age parent report born ported
ed
age
17,704
Col
ored
chil
dren
11,246
5,332
643
230
253
3,007
. 18,572 15,670 9,389
Alabama: Mobile County............
4
4
4
California: San Diego County.
395
367
254
Connecticut: Bridgeport (city)__
48
25
District of Columbia_________
315
126
90
Georgia: Fulton C o u n ty ..” ! ” .........
440
395
393
Indiana:
Lake County__ ______________
255
136
Marion County_____ l l l l l l l
282
236
213
Iowa: Polk County......... ....................
559
508
486
Louisiana: Caddo Parish
53
44
44
Maryland: Baltimore (city).........
466
335
168
Michigan:
Kent County________________
338
333
244
Wayne County____ . . 1 1 . I
927
782
300
Minnesota:
Hennepin County______ _____
349
339
204
Ramsey County_______ ~~
115
112
77
New York:
Buffalo (city)________________
78
78
39
Erie County (exclusive of Buffalo)
70
65
41
Monroe County______________
228
227
118
New York (city)__ 1111111111
3,890 3,426
1,454
Rensselaer County____
161
154
141
Westchester County.
394
363
128
Ohio:
................
Franklin County______________
721
542
504
Hamilton County...............
442
331
281
Mahoning County________ 111"'.
214
179
110
Montgomery County______ I I I " .
321
232
178
Oregon: M ultnomah County............I.
475
463
409
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County..........................
970
855
476
Montgomery County.....................
10
10
5
Philadelphia (city and county)__ 4,060 3,062
1,675
South Carolina: Greenville C ounty...
74
65
65
Utah: Third district_______
175
175
138
Virginia: Norfolk (city)______ " "
152
116
106
Washington:
Pierce County________________
49
47
44
Spokane County_______________
164
159
147
Wisconsin: Milwaukee County
1,304 1,237
692
C ourts Servino Areas with 25,000 to
100,000 P opulation in 1930................
1,825 1,752
1,575
C ourts Serving Areas with L ess
T han 25,000 P opulation in 1930............
314
282
282
5,229
586
225
241
2,902
83
20
8
15
2
8
1
15
1
109
19
19
5
4
5
71
46
3
67
96
2
2
131
34
377
21
64
21
24
20
145
84
35
46
4
1
10
3
39
24
104
1,840
12
209
5
18
1
12
111
3
5
1
464
7
31
27
19
44
25
29
7
26
11
29
3
354
5
1,237
25
14
1
2
2
3
3
12
4
18
179
in
36
89
12
34
30
86
998
20
10
16
1
1
9
366
2
3
132
9
38
2
5
67
103
57
5
12
73
116
36
1deludes all courts reporting that served areas with 100,000 or more population in 1930
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
28
20
i
32
65
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
T a b l e X I .— S o u rc e o f referen ce to c o u rt o f f a m il i e s re p re se n te d i n d e p e n d e n c y a n d
neglect ca ses d is p o s e d o f b y 8 4 sp e c ifie d c o u r ts 1 a n d 5 0 oth er c o u rts d u r in g 1 9 8 0
Families represented in dependency and neglect cases
Source of reference to court
Court
Total
School
Par Other
Proba
Source
Social ents or indi Police tion Other de Other not
re
court
part source ported
agency rela vidual
officer
ment
tives
Total cases___________ 10,403
3,584
3,763
1,065
798
728
42
389
31
3
C ourts Serving A reas with
100,000 or M ore P opula
tion i n 1930........................ 9,463
3,448
3,402
864
765
612
32
311
27
2
Alabama: Mobile County.
3
California: San Diego
County______________
226
Connecticut: Bridgeport
24
(city)................................
184
District of Columbia____
264
Georgia: Fulton County__
Indiana:
202
Lake County_______
161
Marion County_____
Iowa: Polk County_____
310
Louisiana: Caddo Parish..
39
M aryland:
Baltim ore
284
(city)................................
Michigan:
160
Kent County___ ____
454
Wayne County_____
Minnesota:
182
Hennepin County___
76
Ramsey County_____
New York:
30
Buffalo (c ity ).............
Erie County (exclu
26
sive of Buffalo)____
87
Monroe County_____
New York (city)____ 1,954
98
Rensselaer County__
Westchester C ounty..
251
Ohio:
389
Franklin County____
232
Hamilton County___
119
Mahoning County___
161
Montgomery County.
Oregon:
M u ltn o m ah
251
C o u n ty ....................... .
Pennsylvania:
394
Allegheny County___
4
Montgomery County.
Philadelphia
(city
and county).............. 1,877
South Carolina: Green
36
ville County__________
84
Utah: Third district_____
91
Virginia: Norfolk (city )...
Washington:
34
Pierce County______
107
Spokane County.........
Wisconsin:
Milwaukee
681
County_______ _____ _
3
46
57
63
25
2
6
24
3
21
57
18
1
51
51
1
6
40
1
41
19
7
112
1
20
22
3
1
41
35
65
1
40
44
128
28
29
17
38
4
11
46
28
5
52
4
8
1
5
2
6
23
3
36
1
1
8
5
142
62
17
56
15
34
337
76
35
27
30
7
42
2
4
1
2
1
7
178
66
7
22
22
85
992
2
6
2
1
3
133
1
596
70
21
46
20
78
246
4
2
3
103
153
53
37
147
27
23
68
47
21
12
20
24
5
16
15
58
5
14
13
68
61
71
30
9
189
2
38
1
21
9
130
300
1
72
1
18
1
2
3
9
12
1
4
1
7
1
3
4
1
1,422
40
2
3
18
2
13
25
42
10
18
5
2
10
2
10
13
2
1
2
24
14
18
11
50
2
6
5
71
252
120
96
136
821
124
318
167
29
100
C ourts Serving Areas with
L ess T han 25,000 P opula
tion in 1930...........................
119
12
43
34
4
16
........
12
11
18
29
C ourts Serving A reas with
25,000 to 100,000 P opula
tion in 1930................. ......
2
7
6
10
68
10
1 Includes all courts reporting that served areas with 100,000 or more population in 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1
4
1
66
T
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS
1930
X II .— P la c e o f ca re o f c h ild p e n d in g h e a rin g or d is p o s itio n i n d e p e n d e n c y
a n d n eglect ca ses d is p o s e d o f b y
sp e c ifie d c o u r ts 1 a n d 5 0 oth er c o u rts d u r in g
1980
able
84
Dependency and neglect cases
Detention care overnight or longer in
specified place
Court
Total
Not re
ported
whether
No
deten
deten Board
tion
tion
ing
Other Jail or Other
care
care home or Deten
police
place
of
tion
insti
other hom e2 tution station 1 care4 was
given
family
home
Total cases_________________ 20,711
13,023
904
1,975
4,400
C ourts Serving Areas with 100,000
or M ore P opulation in 1930------ 18,572
11,178
750
1,928
4,315
4
395
51
315
440
2
314
23
271
360
9
5
326
282
559
53
466
192
158
290
28
435
24
338
927
259
636
5
107
349
115
237
28
104
78
Alabama: Mobile County.............
California: San Diego County---Connecticut: Bridgeport (city) —
District of Columbia__________
Georgia: Fulton County----------Indiana:
Lake County-------------------Marion County----------------Iowa: Polk County------- ---------Louisiana: Caddo Parish----------Maryland: Baltimore (city)------Michigan:
Kent County------- ------------Wayne County___________
Minnesota:
Hennepin County..................
Ramsey County---------------New York:
Buffalo (city)..........................
Erie County (exclusive of
Buffalo)________________
Monroe County___________
New York (city)__________
Rensselaer County________ _
Westchester County______ _
Ohio:
Franklin County------ -------Hamilton County_________
Mahoning County________
Montgomery County--------Oregon: M ultnomah County.......
Pennsylvania:
Allegheny County------------Montgomery County______
Philadelphia (city and coun
ty ).........................................
South
Carolina:
Greenville
County-------- --------------------Utah: Third district__________
Virginia: Norfolk (city)________
Washington:
Pierce County____________
Spokane County......... ......... .
Wisconsin: Milwaukee C o u n ty ..
70
228
3,890
161
394
27
100
1,074
142
232
135
721
442
214
321
475
572
237
128
214
358
16
41
3
25
60
970
120
1
11
12
38
15
5
37
369
366
65
29
211
16
144
78
21
126
,806
19
7
107
3
71
77
18
26
161
12
5
22
333
512
7
10
3
4,060
3,448
74
175
152
72
113
103
14
39
10
22
49
164
1,304
35
85
813
13
74
489
3
C ourts Serving Areas with 25,000
to 100,000 P opulation in 1930____
1,825
1,577
111
C ourts Serving Areas with L ess
T han 25,000 P opulation in 1930..
314
268
43
606
2
1
2
47
1Includes all courts reporting th at served areas with 100,000 or more population in 1930.
* Includes cases of children cared for part of the time in detention homes and part of the time elsewhere
b u t excludes cases of children also held in Jails or police stations.
* Includes a few cases of children held p art of the time in jails or police stations and part of the time else
where.
4 Includes a few cases of children held in more than 1 place of care b ut in places other than detention
homes, Jails, or police stations.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
APPENDIX.— COURTS FURNISHING STATISTICAL MATERIAL
FOR 1930
Reports were received from 92 courts in 23 States and th e D istrict of Columbia
for th e entire calendar year 1930. (Cards were subm itted by 91 courts and
tables were prepared by 1 court— Philadelphia.) The names of these courts
w ith th e largest city or town in the area served by each court are as follows:
Alabama:
Largest city or town in area
Juvenile court of—
served
Baldwin C ounty_____________________________Fairhope.
Bibb C ounty------------------------------------------------- W est Blocton.
Bullock C ounty---------------------------------------------Union Springs.
Chambers C ounty___________________________ Lanett.
Clarke C ounty---------------------------------------------- Jackson.
Cleburne C ounty____________________________ Heflin.
Colbert C ounty--------------------------------------------- Sheffield.
Conecuh C ounty____________________________ Evergreen.
Coosa C ounty----------------------------------------------- Good W ater.
Crenshaw C ounty___________________________ Luverne.
Dallas C ounty_______________________________Selma.
Elmore C ounty--------------------------------------------- W etumpka.
Escam bia C ounty____________________________Atmore.
Etow ah C ounty--------------------------------------------- Gadsden.
F ayette C ounty------ -------------------------------------- Fayette.
Greene C ounty______________________________ Eutaw.
H enry C ounty---------------------------------------------- Abbeville.
Jackson C ounty------ --------------------------------------Bridgeport.
Lauderdale C ounty__________________________ Florence.
Lee C ounty-------------------------------------------------- Phenix City.
Macon C ounty------------------------------------------------Tuskegee.
M arion C ounty______________________________Winfield.
Mobile C ounty______________________________ Mobile.
Perry C ounty------ ----------------------------------------- Marion.
Pike C ounty________________________________ Troy.
Sum ter C ounty______________________________York.
W ashington C ounty_________________________ _______
California: Juvenile court of San Diego C ounty________ San Diego.
Connecticut: Juvenile court of the city of Bridgeport___ Bridgeport.
D istrict of Columbia: Juvenile court of the D istrict of
Colum bia--------------------------------------------------------------- W ashington.
Georgia: Fulton County juvenile co u rt________________ A tlanta.
Illinois: Juvenile court of Rock Island C ounty_________ Rock Island.
Indiana:
Juvenile court of—
Lake C ounty________________________________ Gary.
M arion C ounty--------------------------------------------- Indianapolis.
Steuben C ounty_____________________________ Angola.
Vanderburgh C ounty------------------------------------- Evansville.
Wayne C ounty----------------------------------------------Richmond.
Iowa:
D istrict court of Iowa, eighth judicial district, juvenile
division----------------------------------------------------------- Iow a City.
Polk County juvenile co u rt_______________________ Des Moines.
Louisiana:
Juvenile court of Caddo P arish___________________ Shreveport.
Juvenile court, Parish of O uachita________________ Monroe.
M aryland: Juvenile court of the city of Baltim ore______ Baltimore.
Michigan:
Juvenile court, K ent C ounty________ _____________ G rand Rapids.
Probate court, W ayne County, juvenile division____ D etroit.
M innesota:
Juvenile court of—
H ennepin C ounty___________ ________________ Minneapolis.
Ramsey C ounty-------------------------------------------- St. Paul.
W inona County juvenile court____________________ Winona.
67
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
68
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
New Jersey:
Largest city or town in are
Juvenile court of the—
served
County of H udson___________________________Jersey City.
County of M ercer___________________________ Trenton.
New York:
Children’s court of Buffalo_______________________ Buffalo.
Chemung County children’s court_________________ Elmira.
Clinton County children’s court___________________Plattsburg.
Columbia County children’s court_________________Hudson.
Erie County children’s co u rt------- ------------------------- Lackawanna.
Monroe County court, children’s division__________ Rochester.
Children’s court of the city of New Y ork---------------- New York.
O ntario County court, children’s p a r t . . ------------------ Geneva.
Children’s court of Rensselaer C ounty--------------------Troy.
W estchester County children’s court---------------------- Yonkers.
N orth Carolina: Juvenile court of Buncombe C ounty-----Asheville.
N orth D akota:
D istrict court—
T hird judicial d is tric t1_______________________ W ahpeton.
Fourth judicial d is tric t2_____________________ Bismarck.
Ohio:
Juvenile court of—
Allen C ounty________________________________Lima.
Auglaize C ounty_____________________________St. Marys.
Clark C ounty________________________ _______ Springfield.
C ourt of common pleas, division of domestic rela
tions, Franklin C ounty_________________ _— Columbus.
Common-pleas court of H am ilton County, division
of domestic relations, juvenile court, and m arital
relations______________________________________ Cincinnati.
Juvenile court of Lake C ounty____________ ____— Painesville.
Common-pleas court of M ahoning County, division
of domestic relations___________________________ Youngstown.
C ourt of common pleas, division of domestic rela
tions, M ontgomery C ounty_____________________ D ayton.
Juvenile court of Sandusky C ounty_______________ Fremont.
Oregon: C ourt of domestic relations, County of M ult
nom ah____________________________________________ Portland.
Pennsylvania:
Juvenile court of—
Allegheny C ounty___________________________ Pittsburgh.
Lycoming C ounty___________________________ Williamsport.
M ontgomery C ounty________________________ Norristown.
Municipal court of Philadelphia, juvenile division___ Philadelphia.
South Carolina: Children’s court of Greenville C o u n ty ._ Greenville.
U tah:
Juvenile court—
F irst district *_______________________________ Logan.
Second d is tric t4_________________________ ____Ogden.
T hird district *______________________________ Salt Lake City.
Fourth district *............................... ........................... Provo.
Fifth d is tric t7_______________________________ Richfield.
Sixth d is tric t8_______________________________Cedar City.
Seventh district *____________________________ Price. .
Juvenile courts, other counties 10__________________ Panguitch.
i Emmons, McIntosh, Logan, La Moure, Dickey, Sargent, Ransom, and Richland Counties.
1Burleigh, McLean, Sheridan, and Kidder Counties.
>Cache, Box Elder, and Rich Counties.
4Weber, Morgan, and Davis Counties.
* Salt Lake, Summit, Tooele, and Daggett Counties.
* Utah, Juab, and Wasatch Comities.
7Piute, Sanpete, Sevier, Garfield, and Wayne Counties.
* Millard, Beaver, Iron, and Washington Counties.
* Carbon, Emery, Duchesne, and Uintah Counties.
u Grand, Kane, and San Juan Counties.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
JUVENILE-COURT STATISTICS, 1930
' 69
Virginia:
Largest city or town in area
Juvenile and domestic-relations court of—
served
D anville------------ ------------------------------------------- Danville.
Lynchburg---------------------------------------------------- Lynchburg.
Norfolk-------------------------------------------------------- Norfolk.
_ Rockbridge C ounty--------------------------------------- Lexington.
W ashington:
Juvenile court of—
Pierce C ounty___________ ___________________ Tacoma.
Spokane C ounty--------------------------------------------Spokane.
Wisconsin: Milwaukee C ounty juvenile court__________ Milwaukee.
o
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
@FedFRASER