Dutch criminal codes in the 18th and 19th centuries varied in the degree to which they embodied the principles of classic criminal law. Three prominent features of Dutch criminal justice were moderateness, pragmatism, and pervasive paternalism. The most traditional feature of the Dutch Penal Code of 1886 was extremely broad judicial discretion in sentencing. After 1900, crime prevention and offender treatment became the overriding concerns of criminal justice administration. The dominant creed was that of individualized treatment, and new punishment and institutional treatment modalities were introduced. This approach was intended to identify and treat criminal psychopaths and to design rational treatment for all offender types. Upsurges of "legal moralism" brought codes of behavior incorporating moral beliefs and social lifestyles into criminal law. Dominant concerns of the modern versus classic schools of thought on criminal law focus on policy, planning, and organization. The modern school has a global approach to criminal justice administration in which lawmakers and law enforcers participate in a common social enterprise. Further, criminal law is seen as only one of several forms of social control, and legal scholarship is no longer a main source for determining the boundaries of criminal liability. Social morality, which constitutes the substance of criminal law and criminal justice administration, is therefore viewed as basically subjective and arbitrary. 29 references