The General Assembly, at its 1964 Regular Session, House Joint Resolution 22, directed the Virginia Advisory Legislative Council to conduct a study and report on matters relating to the administration of justice in cases involving the youthful offender between the ages of eighteen and twenty-one years.

The Council appointed Charles R. Fenwick of Arlington, member of the Senate and of the Council, to serve as Chairman of a Committee to make the preliminary study and report.

The following individuals accepted the Council's invitation to serve on the Committee: J. Gordon Bennett, Auditor of Public Accounts, Richmond; Paul E. Brown, Judge, Fairfax Circuit Court, Fairfax; Miles Cary, Jr., Attorney, Richmond; Charles P. Chew, Director, Division of Parole, Richmond; Mrs. Charles H. Elmore, Bon Air, Chesterfield County; Mrs. Marion G. Galland, member of the House of Delegates, Alexandria; Anthony C. Gaudio, Chief Parole Officer, Arlington; Garnett S. Moore, member of the House of Delegates, Pulaski; W. L. Painter, Director, Department of Welfare and Institutions, Richmond; and Robert B. Spencer, Jr., Judge, County Court, Buckingham. Mrs. Galland was elected Vice-Chairman. John B. Boatwright, Jr. and Robert L. Masden served as Secretary and Recording Secretary, respectively, to the Committee.

Both Council and the Committee approached the task of implementing House Joint Resolution No. 22 realizing that public and professional concern over the mounting problem of youthful delinquency is acute and that there is wide-spread pressure on legislators and administrators to provide direction in this area.

Starting from the premise that some new or improved method must be found to deal with the correction of youthful offenders to offset the significant rise in the rate of youthful crime and recidivism (repeated crime), we feel that two ideas must underlie our efforts.

First, that these are not simply misguided children; but, rather, that they pose a serious threat to the well-being and safety of our society, which must be protected from the increasingly aggressive nature of their offenses. Second, that among these youthful offenders are many young people who, if treated realistically and effectively when they get in serious trouble, can be salvaged as productive and self-respecting citizens. We believe from our study that, although the program we recommend will entail immediate cost in several respects, in the long run the Commonwealth will save the much greater cost of a rapidly expanding young prison population as well as the cost of the crimes which these youths, left untreated, can be statistically predicted to commit. We will also be contributing significantly to the solution of the problem of youthful delinquency which plagues modern society so sorely.