OCR Text |
Show Sunday Magazine Editor, ' Salt Lake Tribune Dear Sir On behalf of the 1675 civic-proud citizens of Milford, I'd like to object to a photograph of the Milford bastile appealing in your juvenile-jail roundup of last Sunday, March 9th. The article itself did not mention Milford, but the photo of our jail was there and the statement that "Juveniles were detained'' in the building. I'm a newcomer to Milford, having been here 1 since 1945, but I can recall only one juvenile being incarcerated in our inconvenient but substantial bastile and that was a transient offender who was ' held in our jail only long enough to be arraigned and j turned over to F B I authorities. The City Dads of Milford have for quite a few years searched the law books and each year diligently dili-gently examined the budget in an effort to find some legal way of appropriating enough cash to erect a new city hall and jail. The' nearest they came to it was in 1951, but they wisely decided the children of Milford needed a modern swimming pool more than they needed a place to be confined when they strayed from the straight and narrow, so the council proposed and the taxpayers approved a substantial bond issue to complete the swimming pool. The good kids and the bad kids, alike enjoy the swimming pool, and we don't put any of 'em in our jail we place them in protective custody of their parents when it's necessary to reprimand them, and then, on only two occasions in more than six years, have the parents present them to the juvenile judge for this district when their offense is sufficiently severe to call for more than mild disciplining. "We aren't at all proud of our antiquated jail, lint we are proud of our "kids ,and we definitely do keep the two separated. Yours very truly, S. A. WILLIAMS, Publisher, Milford Xews. |