Chapter IV: Part 4

In whatever light the House of Correction is regarded, it presents the highest claims on society for its establishment. Is it to be a place into which the vicious are to be driven by the law, that they may be punished for their offence, and society saved the disgrace and danger of their presence? Society has a right to demand such a forceful withdrawal of the elements of crime from its midst. Is it to be a place of enforced refuge for the willing or unwilling victim of vice, where habits of disorder may be broken and new habits of industry and propriety established, where good counsel shall make reasonable and acceptable the moderate discipline of the place, where good example shall illustrate the lessons of good morals, and the exhibition of orderly propriety of the place be made to contrast with the squallor and misery of the resorts of vice from which the inmates have been gathered, and thus virtue enforced and resolutions of good formed, and their exercise for some time at least insured? Then it is solemnly urged that the House of Correction is called for by all that humanity can contrive and sound policy can suggest.

In this matter the Society has done its part, and is ready, when empowered, to continue its labor in the direction of amending the vicious. But whether the Society have or have not any direct relations with the House of Correction, it must feel that the interests of this great community, of humanity and of virtue, suffer by the delay in providing for its erection. If there be truth in the statements submitted with regard to the number and character of those who are habituées of the County Prison, we need no argument in favor of the House of Correction.

------------------

AUXILIARY SOCIETIES.

“To do good and to communicate” should be the object of every philanthropist, as it certainly is the aim of this Society; and it is with pleasure that we now announce that a correspondence between the President of the Society and several distinguished gentlemen in different parts of this State, warrant a hope that before long, Societies, auxiliaries to this, will be established in various counties of the Commonwealth, and the philanthropy of the good of both sexes will be called into new action and concentrated upon the great object of lessening the miseries of public prisons in their neighborhood, by suggesting improvements in the police and general administration of the establishments, and by dealing directly and affectionately with the miserable inmates of the cells or the crowded rooms.

The correspondence with those to whom the measure has been opened, shows a readiness on the part of some to begin the work; but prudential considerations have suggested a postponement of the undertaking, in some counties, till a strong and steady co-operation can be secured from those who are now absent in the service of the country, or till the state of the country will allow men of public spirit and of philanthropic principles to withdraw their attention from national matters. Certainly a postponement upon such grounds is to be preferred to a failure of efforts from a want of thorough co-operation.

It is desirable that auxiliary societies should be established, in order to call into exercise, and direct into proper channels, the spirit of philanthropy that abounds in our State, and to give object and employment to that self-denying devotion which marks the character of woman, and is found in a class of men that rarely are named with public benefactors, though they are found, when opportunities present, where humanity has its most repulsive duties and earns its highest rewards.

A correspondence between the parent Society and its auxiliaries in the interior of the State, or with independent associations laboring to the same end and with similar means, would diffuse information that would stimulate exertion and promote the great object of alleviating the miseries of prisoners. Especially would such auxiliaries often assist the agents and committees of the parent Society, by information as to the character of prisoners, and aid in procuring employment for the repentant vicious and criminal, who would strengthen their good resolution by seeking occupation where the chance of meeting old associates would be greatly diminished, and where temptations to a recurrence to former faults would not abound. It is now believed that the hopes of forming these auxiliaries will soon be realized. But there has always been found some difficulty in the first steps towards an organization. The willingness of many needs information to strengthen resolve; and especially is it found that where there is to be a concurrent action, there is great need of some representative of the views and sentiments of the parent Society, to concentrate and direct the efforts of those who, with the best motives and most earnest wishes for success, pause upon the initiatory step, from distrust as to their ability to organize and direct a society, or an apprehension that they may lack the hearty co-operation of others no less philanthropic or energetic than themselves.

We, perhaps, then shall need, at a proper time, some representative of the parent Society specially deputed to stir up the public mind in the direction of humanity in prisons, and to take advantage of the effects of his labors to unite the exertions of the good in the form of auxiliaries, that shall have their committees in every place of imprisonment, doing the work of philanthropy by alleviating the miseries of prisons and improving the moral condition of the prisoners. These auxiliaries will aid the parent Society in influencing legislation favorable to the cause of humanity, and, in proportion to their number and to the character of their members, they will be felt and their power acknowledged by the Representatives of the people, not in any attempt at dictation, but in the mild, steady presentation and advocacy of measures of amelioration that shall triumph by their inherent beauty and mercy, influencing public sentiment and purifying legislative enactments.

In a subsequent part of this Report, under the head of “Correspondence,” will be found large supplemental abstracts of British Parliamentary Reports; and it is thought that a few words explanatory of the British and Irish system might, in this part of our Report, be made useful in aid of the plan for auxiliaries. England has learned much from us in the work of Prison Discipline: we might learn something of her, (more, indeed, than we _shall_ acquire,) were our institutions more assimilated, and especially were we as geographically circumscribed as she is.

The “Prison Reports,” physical and moral, in Great Britain, are all to the Government of the nation; and every part of every city jail seems to work with as distinct a reference to the whole system of prison regulation as the lower clerkships of a State Department do to the administration of the whole. This, it must be admitted, is easy in that country, where there is but one legislature to direct, and one government to administer and execute. It would be impossible in this country, for the National Congress to issue ordinances for the administration of _State_, county, and city prisons. To say nothing of State rights and State sovereignty, there would be insurmountable difficulties in prescribing and carrying out rules for prison discipline and dietaries for all the jails from Oregon to Maine. So that, when we read of the happy and harmonious working of the prison laws in Ireland and Great Britain, we must call to mind the proximity of each establishment to the other, and of the whole to the Government, to whose chief officers they are bound to make report, and with whose agents they are bound to co-operate. In England and Ireland the difference of longitude is so small, that, by the Sovereign’s command, it is made mid-day at the same moment in both kingdoms. In the United States, something more than human power would be required to work out that wonder, and something more than constitutional prerogative would be necessary to enforce it. We must take things as they are, and work with the means and in the space which are allowed. If we cannot expect national interference in behalf of prison discipline, we certainly may appeal to the State in which we live to exercise and dignify its sovereignty by legislation that will adapt prisons and their discipline to the use of society, and while the House is one of penal discipline, it shall be a place of moral improvement. We scarcely expect the Legislature of the State to initiate the good work. It is the duty of those who feel most anxious for its establishment, to prepare the means and present the arguments; and it is believed that no means of inducing a systematic arrangement of prison discipline throughout the State exists outside this Society. Persons abound who see and deplore the evils of the present want of system, but they lack the full information, and especially do they lack concurrent action; and it is believed that the establishment of auxiliary societies throughout the State would produce the ends proposed, viz., properly constructed prisons, the establishment and maintenance of proper discipline; and the whole co-operative and correspondent, each with the other, till the system work, with regard to the government, as perfectly in Pennsylvania as it does in Great Britain, and much more effective in the interest of humanity and virtue. We have little to change, excepting the structures of our prisons, and the consequent classification and treatment of prisoners; little to unlearn in their management; we are not wedded to any past theory. It is generally admitted, that much of what this Society condemns is wrong; the only doubt, or supposed difficulty, is how it can be remedied. That doubt and that difficulty will be removed when auxiliary Societies shall be established to correct and embody public sentiment, and when the parent Society, through its branches, shall be allowed to bring its moral action into co-operation with the physical efforts of the Commonwealth, to alleviate the miseries of public prisons.

------------------

COMPENSATION TO PRISONERS FOR OVER-WORK.

Among the inquiries instituted by the Society this year, was one that related to the earnings of convicts in the Eastern Penitentiary, which arose out of a complaint made by a United States prisoner, who had received, as he thought, less for over-work than was in reality due to him. The character of the prisoner, or the title of the court by which he was sentenced, had nothing to do with the character of the claim, or the interest which the Society felt and would manifest in his behalf. He was a prisoner, and as such, whether in the County Jail or the State Penitentiary; whether sentenced by a Police Magistrate, or by a Judge of the Court of the United States, there could be nothing in his case to alienate him from our sympathies, or deprive him of the benefit of our interference in his behalf.

A committee was instructed to present the case of the complainant to the proper authorities of the Penitentiary, and to ascertain, in the first place, on what principle the over-work of prisoners was estimated, and to make especial reference to the case of the United States prisoner, which had suggested the investigation. It need scarcely be said that these inquiries were to be made with that friendly feeling and high respect which have marked the intercourse of the Society with the authorities of the Eastern Penitentiary, and that the questions were answered with the freedom and feeling of those who have an established, well devised plan of action, and are conscious of an adherence to that plan in all its execution; and the friendly spirit of the Committee of this Society was reciprocated by those to whom the appeal was made.

As settling a question about which some doubt existed, and especially as giving information that must be valuable to many, and interesting to all, the report of the Chairman of the Committee on the Penitentiary is subjoined.

TO THE ACTING COMMITTEE, &C.

As Chairman of the Visiting Committee of the Eastern State
Penitentiary, I have been requested to make some inquiry into the
manner of determining the value of the work done by the prisoners,
and the allowance to be made to them for “over-work.” The inquiry
has been made accordingly, and the following may be given as the
result:—

In the first place, it is an important fact, that the law of the
State only directs that convicts shall be sentenced to “hard labor,”
leaving the _manner_ of executing the sentence to the Inspectors and
Wardens, or those having the immediate control of the Jails and
Penitentiaries. There is no provision for any compensation to the
prisoners for this labor; the primary, and probably the sole
purposes for which it was made a part of the sentences, being to
enforce it as a salutary part of the prison discipline, and also as
a means of compelling the prisoners to contribute something towards
the expense of their maintenance; consequently, any allowance made
to them for over-work is altogether a gratuity, which they have no
right to claim.

In the exercise of the discretion vested in the Inspectors and
Warden of the Penitentiary, they judged that the introduction of
rewards to the prisoners for industry would have a salutary tendency
in several directions, and they therefore allotted to each of them,
a certain quantity of such kind of work as should be given him, to
be performed in a day, or a month, to pay for his keep. This is
sometimes called “the task,” and is so moderate, that with ordinary
skill and application, it can be accomplished with ease. Such a
money valuation is affixed to this work, as will admit of the
Institution obtaining from their outside customers a small advance,
to provide tools, working materials, &c. The prisoner is expected,
at the price affixed, to earn for the Institution from twenty to
twenty-five cents per day. No penalty, however, is visited on him
for a failure, unless it is the result of culpable sloathfulness or
insubordination. Every thing done beyond this allotted task, is
credited to the prisoner as “over-work,” at the same rate affixed to
the “task,” half of it for the use of the County, and the other half
for his own use, to be paid to him at the expiration of his term; or
portions of it, during his imprisonment, are applied, at his
request, to the purchase of books, or, perhaps, a carpet for the
floor of his cell, or some other little comforts beyond the prison
allowance which the authorities may permit him to be supplied with,
or remitted to his family.

Under this system, many of the convicts, on the well known and
generally acknowledged principle, that “the hope of reward sweetens
labor,” are stimulated to so apply themselves, that they not only
fully do what is claimed of them by the Penitentiary, (and which,
without this encouragement, would often fail to be performed,) but
they sometimes accumulate the very handsome sum of several hundred
dollars against their discharge. One of them recently earned $14.31
_for his own use_ in one month—equal to $171.72 per annum—and
remarked that with a full supply of materials, he would have been
able to have doubled his earnings. The system, indeed, works
admirably, and its influences are salutary in several respects. The
interests of the Institution are advanced by it, and the present
comfort of those in confinement is promoted, and the susceptibility
of their minds to the favorable action of reformatory influences is
increased by having their time occupied by what they feel to be
profitable employment. Also, without having the character of
compulsory labor, it trains them to habits of industry, and
practically convinces them of the important truth, that labor is a
thing of real value. These habits, and this conviction, will be of
great value to them when they again enter into the world, and the
money they take with them will be an important aid in starting them
afresh in the business of life.

In allotting the tasks, if any of the prisoners appear to be
disheartened under an apprehension that they are greater than they
can accomplish, and therefore think it useless to attempt it, the
Warden reduces them, and thus leads them on gradually, and the
result fully proves that a greater amount of work is actually
obtained from them under this system, than would be by the more
exacting plan.

The law and rules in these respects, as applied to United States
prisoners, having also been under discussion in our Society, special
information has been desired on that branch of the subject. It being
understood that the General Government pays for their board, doubts
have been expressed whether they are bound to labor at all; and if
they do, it has been suggested that they should receive a credit for
the _whole_ value of their work. The first branch of the question is
answered and settled by the fact, that they are sentenced to under
go imprisonment for a certain term, _in conformity with our State
Laws_—that is, “at hard labor.” Next, as to compensation, their
board being paid. It is true the United States pays for each of its
prisoners $2.50 per week, which is for board, clothing, fuel,
medical attendance, and, indeed, all his ordinary wants, and is
hardly half of the cost to the Commonwealth, of each of those in
confinement. The Penitentiary was erected by the State of
Pennsylvania, at a cost of about $600,000, _for its own use_. The
interest of this sum, and an annual appropriation made, to meet
current expenses, such as salaries of officers, &c., amount together
to about $50,000 per annum, which, as the average number in
confinement does not exceed 400, makes a yearly cost to each of, say
$125, _in addition to their board and incidentals_. It is fairly
said, that, although we may be willing to submit to the loss on our
own prisoners, it is but reasonable that we should be protected from
it, when accommodating the General Government. The result is, that
United States prisoners, as regards labor and compensation, are
treated throughout in the same manner as our own.

The same principle, as to compensation for labor, though differing
somewhat in its practical details, has been introduced into our
County Prison, with very satisfactory results. Whether it has been
adopted in our Western State Penitentiary at Pittsburgh, or not, we
are not clearly informed; and we are not aware that it is to be
found in any Jail or Penitentiary beyond the limits of our State. It
is one of the advantages of the Pennsylvania Separate System of
imprisonment that it better admits of such an arrangement, than
where the prisoners are congregated together in the workshops.

E. H. BONSALL.

_Philadelphia_, 11_th_ _Mo._ 19, 1863.

While on this subject, it is deemed advisable to present a statement of the plan for labor and extra work which is in operation at the County Prison at Moyamensing; premising, however, that the penal servitude in the County Prison is generally so much less than that in the Penitentiary, that it is found necessary in many particulars to accommodate the assignment of work to the _time_ of the prisoner sentenced, as few who come into the prisons have regular occupations, and a six months’ sentence does not allow time enough to acquire any trade sufficiently to earn money thereby.

And it may be remarked here, that the civil war which has disturbed our country for more than two years, has cut off one of the most important branches of prison labor, viz., that of cotton weaving, by which hundreds of prisoners could pay all the expense resulting from their incarceration, and often take with them, at the termination of their sentence, more money than they would have _saved_ from their earnings, had they been at large, indulging in the evil habits of occasional excessive drinking, and suffering the consequent misery of that delirium which only the inebriate can know.

Cotton weaving, and the preparation of the yarn for the loom, which was once so important a branch of employment, has, as we have already stated, almost ceased to be carried on in this prison. The sound of the shuttle is now scarcely heard where, a few years ago, the continued rattle, in almost every cell, gave notice of profitable industry. It was the custom of the prison, at the time to which we refer, to assign to prisoners a certain fixed task, and to allow them a fair compensation for over-work, so that a good and industrious weaver generally earned for himself about twelve dollars a month. Of course, he made more for the prison. The return of peace, and the introduction of raw cotton, will, undoubtedly, revive the manufacturing in the prison, and enable many, who now have but small employment, to make their time and their punishment profitable.

The Cordwaining Department has been more active; and in that a different system of labor and compensation prevails.

Here the prisoner is charged two dollars and fifty cents ($2.50) a week for his board, to be deducted from the compensation for work actually performed.

The prices allowed for good work are as follows:

For sewed boots, 45 cents per pair.
For pegged boots, 30 cents per pair.
For rogans sewed, 35 cents per pair.
For rogans pegged, 28 cents per pair.

To those who purchase these articles, the price seems low; yet the average clear profit to each prisoner is about ten dollars a month,—a sum which, under ordinary circumstances, he would scarcely exceed, if at full liberty, with some of those habits that attend the man who is the candidate for, or the graduate of, a prison. Some prisoners considerably exceed ten dollars a month: they are usually not only faster but better workmen.

But, as many of the prisoners are without any trade, (and perhaps they owe their imprisonment in part to a neglect of some one to give to them a means of acquiring an honest living,) it follows that some time is necessarily consumed in acquiring such a skill in shoemaking as may be turned to their profit in prison, especially when the sentence is not for a long time. But many, it is believed, have made such advance in the art, under personal instructions, as to place them in a position to do some part of the work of their trade, and thus by practice to perfect themselves in a respectable occupation. Too much importance can scarcely be attached to this result, even of a short imprisonment.

Attempts have been made to introduce some kinds of labor for the benefit of prisoners who had short terms of incarceration, or who seemed destitute of abilities to acquire a trade; but these efforts have not been so successful, and, in the present absence of cotton weaving, some of the convicts remain wholly or nearly unemployed.

In the Female Department there is no regular employment by which labor is compensated in money. The tedium of the cell is relieved by ordinary female work, such as making and mending the clothes of other convicts, and providing clothes for those who seem to require some addition to their clothing, when they leave at certain seasons. There is a considerable demand upon the peculiar talents of these prisoners, and it would seem that if only half the industry (with economy and temperance) were practised out of the prison which they manifest willingly in the cell, they would have no temptation to steal, or to covet their neighbor’s goods, “nor anything that is their neighbor’s.” These females are, however, not dismissed from the prison without some consideration for their industry. They usually come in with very few clothes. They are dismissed with at least comfortable garments; and if their home is at a distance, means are supplied to reach it. In this matter, also, this Society assigns special duty to its Agent; and in many cases the poor creature who having tasted the pleasures of sound resolutions for the future, begins to feel the terrors of inability, on her departure from the prison, to escape the associations that led her there, is suddenly surprised with the gratifying information that she will be aided by the Society to leave the city, when she leaves the prison, and may abide in the cell, or in some institution or family, till she can be safely “sent _home_” at the Society’s expense.

------------------

CORRESPONDENCE.

UNITED STATES.

We have received reports of various philanthropic societies in the States of Connecticut and Massachusetts. They have mostly in view objects similar to those of this Society: that is, the alleviation of public evils, by direct action upon the minds and consciences of those by whom those evils come.

Among these are the schools in Massachusetts for alleviating the condition of girls and of boys,—separate institutions, but working admirably in the fulfillment of the designs of the founders.

The Report of the Board of Trustees of the “State Reform Schools of Connecticut” is exceedingly interesting. These last seem, in design, to correspond very much with the “House of Refuge” in this city; and it is gratifying to notice that all of them appear to be in a flourishing condition.

There is one “Report” that specially arrested our attention,—that of the “Massachusetts State Agency for Aiding Discharged Convicts.” Here seems to be a true charity, not dependent, alone, on individual efforts and contributions. It appears, by the Report, that the amount expended by the “Agency,” on account of “the government of the State,” was $1,656 32. That, of course, as the Agent says, “will meet the discharged convicts’ wants for a brief period.” If we had not extended our Report this year much beyond usual limits, we should feel disposed to copy most of the Report of this Charity into our own Annual Statement. The following, however, is too well put to be omitted:

“Society has a vital interest in a mission that induces the
night-burglar to abandon his trade and allow men to sleep in safety,
and that converts the felon’s tools into proper implements, and
brings his mind and heart into a _willing_ frame for
house-_building_ instead of _shop-lifting_ and house-_breaking_. We
approach an employer, and for _his safety_ confide to him our
knowledge of the past life and present state of the applicant, now
penitent and resolved on reform. By awaking sympathy, we open a door
to honest industry, which he enters, and is surrounded by shop
mates, ignorant of his crime, ready to fellowship him without
prejudice; so that, feeling safe from those taunts that would
otherwise assail him, and which, surely, have no healing or
strengthening power, he becomes inspired with hope, and courage to
make self-reliant effort, trusting that, with the added blessing of
Heaven, he will henceforward be an honest man.”

Many of the Reports which we have received are from State Prisons, Penitentiaries, &c. They, of course, are interesting for the statistics they contain, and will be acceptable to those who are directly interested in, and responsible for, the condition of penal institutions. But we feel naturally more interest in the progress of improvement in the care of the prisoner, than in the cost of his maintenance. It is gratifying to find that, in all these prisons, the voice of instruction is heard, and that, in addition to stated religious exercises, there is personal visitation, and this seems to be followed up by the established preacher or “moral instructor.”

The State “Schools” in Massachusetts for rearing, instructing, and reforming girls and boys, not only in separate buildings, but in separate parts of the State, appear to be doing immense good. The reports upon the conduct of many who have graduated from the Schools, show success; and some remarks intimate also, that the failure to reform all, has excited unwelcome criticism. We do not copy the reply: it is exactly what every “visitor” of this Society feels,—it is what the managers of the House of Refuge in this city would say. The largest anticipations of the self-sacrificing philanthropist are not to be realized. The true philosopher will appreciate the benefit to the individual and to society, resulting from a single reformation.

We have received the Eighteenth Annual Report of the Executive Committee of the Prison Association of New York. It is a clear, explicit statement of the doings of the Agent and Committees of the Association, and will be read with deep interest by those who have a sympathy with the unfortunate and a desire to assist into goodness those that have done wrong. The details of proceedings by the Agent are quite similar to those set forth by Mr. MULLIN, the Agent of our Society, and show a low condition of primary justice in New York, and a wretched state of the lower stratum of society in that city. Tyranny in the small landlords, utter debasement of the moral faculties in the multiplied liquor dealers, and a determination on all hands to do the worst by others and the best (according to their own estimate of good) to themselves, distinguish the condition and conduct of those who in New York live by fleecing the shorn and miserable, and making vice of every kind subservient to their plans of personal profit.

The Report to which we now refer, contains much that is usually presented in the Annual Report of the Inspectors of the Prison. The statements, however, are interesting as showing the condition in New York of those affairs which occupy the attention of our own Society.

We notice one circumstance in the Report of the New York Society worthy of attention, viz., that the agents of that Society have used their influence with the courts to increase the severity of the sentence intended to be pronounced upon a convict. This was justified by a knowledge of the antecedents of the offender, and of the character of his mind. We are not aware that any interference exactly of that character is to be recorded of those who represent our Society; but we have occasion to believe that in one or two instances an opinion was given _against_ a re-consideration of a sentence with a view of lessening its severity; and that opinion was accepted. There was more mercy in such a course than in shortening the term of imprisonment. In one instance, at least, the beneficial results are obvious.

GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND.

After this Annual Report was prepared and accepted by the “Acting Committee” of the Society, there were received from London several volumes of Parliamentary Reports on the condition of the various prisons in England and Ireland in 1862, and also a large folio volume containing “a Report of the Select Committee of the House of Lords on the Present State of Discipline in Gaols and Houses of Correction;” together with the proceedings of the Committees, Minutes of Evidence, and an Appendix for 1863. The “Reports” to which allusion is first made, are from the Inspector General of Prisons, and they refer to the condition and operation of all the prisons in each kingdom, and are followed by special Reports from each prison, separately made by the proper officers to the Inspector General. The minuteness of these Reports is truly wonderful. Every authorized movement in each prison is set forth, the discipline and dietetics explained in all their particulars, the accommodations of the inmates, the number of beds and blankets, and all the minutiæ of their management. The exact cost of each branch of supplies is given, and the character and changes of food for each class.

We note too that in Ireland every prison is supplied with moral and religious teachers, of various denominations. Generally there are one clergyman of the Episcopal Church, one of the Presbyterian Church, and one of the Roman Catholic Church. These seem to devote their services to the moral and religious instruction of those who may, by denominational distinction, belong to their ministry, and each makes an annual report of the moral condition of his charge, and such remarks upon the condition of affairs in the prison as may be the result of his observation. He also gives the number of his visits during the year. They are all salaried officers; each receives from $150 to $200 per annum.

The details of the exact condition and number of every article supplied to the prison, show the care that is bestowed upon the stores of the prison; and the tables of the number, condition and offences of the prisoners are instructive to those who would be familiar with prison management, with its cost, and other requirements.

In every part of these Reports is found the reiterated opinion of the visiting officer, (whose experience of many years entitles his views to the greatest respect,) that no good moral results are to be expected from social confinement; nothing but the separate system can be relied on to give moral efficacy to imprisonment for crime.

It is noticed too, that in Great Britain and Ireland, as in this city, and, we suppose, in most of the large cities of the Union, there is a class of men and women, and especially of the latter, that seem to divide their time between the prison cells, and places of debauchery and preparation for imprisonment. In the Report for the prison in the county of the town of Drogheda, (the district containing eighteen thousand inhabitants,) there are females who are constant “recurrents;” and it is said that, out of those committed during the year 1862, one had been previously in custody ninety-two times, and the rest from twenty-eight to forty-nine times.

Separate Reports are made upon the condition of convict prisons, both in Great Britain and Ireland.

In the Report for common prisons of Great Britain, there is rather less perspicacity, and there seems less attention paid to the details of the institutions. The moral and religious instruction is ordinarily committed to a clergyman of the Established Church; but in most of the Reports it is stated that Dissenting and Catholic prisoners may have the services of clergymen of their own denomination, if they desire it. In Cardiganshire, (Wales,) it is stated, “every facility is given to protestant dissenters for seeing ministers of their several persuasions, but Roman Catholics are unknown in the prison.” Whether Catholics are not admitted, or none are sentenced to its cells, or whether the existence of such a denomination is ignored, or whether none are found in that district, it is not stated.

The county and borough jails throughout England seem not to be in the best condition to produce moral improvement.

We may remark here, that the Episcopal Church, being the established denomination in England and Wales, we find all the prisons supplied with a clergyman of that church. So far as that goes, it is laudable, and it may be added, as an additional ground for commendation, that Dissenting and Roman Catholic Clergymen are admitted, when their service is required by prisoners of their denomination. We are not willing to criticise closely, but it would seem that, as visiting clergymen are paid by the public money, and as their office is to awaken as well as to satisfy an appetite for moral and religious instruction, it is scarcely within the limits of Christian charity to make no provision to call dissenters and other prisoners to a sense of duty. And this is the more evident, from the fact that, in Ireland, where only a very small minority are of the Established Church, prisoners of that denomination are supplied with a special religious teacher, as well as those of the other two great divisions. There is, however, in some of the English prisons, a “lecturer, who instructs his hearers not only in moral, but in physical sciences.”

It is much however to know that the great truths of religion are taught in the public prisons of England, and it is more to know that there are many willing learners, who, without this means of improvement, would remain in ignorance, if not of religious truths, at least of the necessity and advantage of receiving and practising them.

The Report of the Directors of the Convict Prisons of Ireland, is interesting to those who feel desirous, in this country, to do all the good possible to convicts. The very great proportion of inhabitants of Ireland who are not of the “Established Church,” makes it necessary to give officially, religious and moral instruction by clergymen of different denominations, and hence we find that the development of the true state of the prisons, includes the Annual Reports of the Clergy of the Episcopal and the Roman Catholic Churches, and of that denomination of Dissenters which has probably the largest number in the prison, or which can most easily supply from the neighborhood, a clergyman to lead religious service. And we learn from the Reports of the different clergy, that religious service, according to the requirements of the several denominations represented by the clergymen, are held twice on every Sunday and recognized religious holiday, and that the usual instruction in doctrine and morals is also given to classes; all, of course, without interference with each other.

In many respects these Parliamentary Reports may be regarded as of more consequence to Boards of Prison Inspectors, than to the “Society for Alleviating the Miseries of Public Prisons,” as they set forth the economy of the institutions, the discipline, the means of comfort, and the character of employment, as well as the results of all these, and the exact cost; and thus they may become useful as indicative of what Boards of Inspectors should carefully shun or promptly adopt, with such modifications and adaptations as difference of circumstances renders necessary.

But, in Great Britain and Ireland, much of the labor assumed by the Philadelphia “Society for Alleviating the Miseries of Public Prisons,” is undertaken by the Government; and the closeness of the investigation of their affairs, and the fulness of the Reports, are consequent upon the interest which philanthropic individuals have awakened throughout the country, and the action which has been secured by both Houses of Parliament. The great volume of Reports of the action of “a committee of the House of Lords” is of deep interest, even in this country, as showing not merely the condition of certain great prisons, but as illustrating, especially, the effect of different systems of treatment and labor. The elevated rank of the persons who composed the commission of inquiry, shows the importance which the House of Lords attached to the subject; and the constancy of attendance, and the searching character of questions put to those under examination, show the fidelity of the distinguished noblemen to the interests submitted to their care.[2]

Footnote 2:

The select committee consisted of the Duke of Marlborough, Marquis of
Salisbury, Lord Steward, Earl of Carnarvon, (who was elected Lord
President,) Earl of Malmsebury, Earl of Romney, Earl Cathcart, Earl of
Ducie, Earl of Dudley, Viscount Eversley, Lord Wodehouse, Lord
Lyvedon, Duke of Richmond, Lord Wensleydale.

Of the five hundred and twelve folio pages of these Reports, there is not one that is without interest to every active member of this Society. There are 5,337 questions propounded by the various members of the commission, and answers rendered by those who have been in the administration of the prisons, or who had been exercising the duties of visitors, inspectors, physicians, &c., of the several prisons; and those answers present a most minute exhibit of the exact state of the prisons, and all that relates to their administration.

In some of the prisons, we find that there is a physician employed at _seventy-five_ dollars a year, and that he visits twice a week.

So far as we have examined the Dietary of the different prisons in Great Britain and Ireland, we find some meals enriched with meat, in England, but none, as far as we discover, in Ireland. Prisoners are weighed, and their provisions augmented or improved, or diminished in quantity and quality, according as their weight increases or decreases. And the kind of labor is changed to suit their health and weight. They must require much personal supervision. Ale, wine and brandy are used in the prisons, when the prisoner is under medical treatment; and it would seem, from some Reports, that medical treatment was more frequently called for in the prisons where such indulgences are prescribed. It may be remarked here, also, that consideration is given to the previous _habits_, and pursuits of prisoners, when they enter, and the diet, with regard to meat and ale, somewhat modified by the amount which had been used before conviction.

The Committee are decided in their views of the necessity of uniformity in discipline, dress and food, in the prisons of Great Britain; and as, geographically considered, the kingdom is small, with little variety of climate or produce, such a desideratum may be easily supplied. We cannot hope for anything like an attempt at uniformity in our Federal Government; but there appears no immovable obstacle to a uniform system of prison discipline and practice in this State. But that cannot be hoped for, till there is a general knowledge of its wants. This will probably be the result of the establishment generally in this State of County Societies, auxiliary to the Philadelphia Society for Alleviating the Miseries of Public Prisons.

One spirit pervades all the Reports of the Noble Committee, and it is aroused and sustained by the answers to questions propounded by them to the Inspectors and other officers appointed to look after the economy and discipline of the prisons of all kinds throughout the kingdom, and that is _the entire necessity of the separate confinement of the convicts_, and the full belief that the same kind of treatment would be beneficial, so far as time would permit, for every class of prisoners. They distinguish between solitary and separate confinement. The former is recommended as a prison punishment,—the latter as a system of regular treatment. On this subject the Committee say, as a result of the testimony taken before them: “Where separate confinement exists, it exercises both a reformatory and deterrent effect. The committee are of opinion that the principle of separation should be made to pervade the entire system of the prison.” And while they do not admit that the adoption of the system need cause any relaxation of the rule in school or chapel, and at exercise, they intimate that the “_cellular_ instruction” (as they denominate what we have in our Report spoken of as religious and moral instruction in and at the door of the cells) should not be relaxed.

It will be understood that the attempts at separate confinement in England have, in some places, been made by an effort to accommodate the old borough and county prisons to the new system. Poor as the chance of success might appear, it is worthy of remark, that the results satisfy both the Inspectors and the Noble Committee, that it is the true system of penal and reformatory imprisonment. On that subject the Committee say they “consider that the system generally known as the separate system must now be accepted as the foundation of prison discipline, and that its rigid maintenance is a vital principle in the efficiency of county and borough jails.”

This sentiment pervades the whole Report, and is suggested and sustained by the testimony of all those who were under examination before the Committee.

It is a subject of regret that we cannot copy at length the testimony of some of the witnesses called before the Committee of the House of Lords: we however find one question, with an answer thereto, that is too direct to be omitted.

1757. Question by the _Earl of Carnarvon_.

You have given the Committee one instance, and we have heard from
another witness that the reputation of Leicester Gaol has a
deterring effect; can you give the Committee any reason why you
think it is more deterring than some other prisons?

Answer by _William Musson, Esq._, Governor of Leicester Gaol.

I think that our system of discipline is very strict; we never allow
the separate system to be broken through on any consideration; the
prisoners are in separate cells; they are exercised in separate
yards, and they have separate stalls at Chapel; and I may say that
when they are taken out to be tried in Court, they go in separate
partitions in the wagon, and are arraigned separately.

1758. _By Earl of Dudley._ Is not the separation relaxed when they
are with the schoolmaster in class?

No; they are separated then.

1759. Do they not sit at the same table?

No: they are in the Chapel in separate stalls; we use the Chapel as
a school-room.

1785. _Earl of Carnarvon._ In your opinion, the advantage of
separation outweighs any inconveniences which may result from it?

Yes; I think so.

1786. _Lord Wodehouse._ Do you ever find that prisoners when
confined for long periods in separate cells, suffer at all mentally
from the separation?

There is a great variety of minds, and it does not influence all
alike.

In another part of our Report for this year, it has been stated that much good, it is believed, has been done to individuals, by meeting the prisoners on their arrival in the van, and releasing those committed for the first time, provided that it is apparent that they have not been frequent offenders, and have not chosen the path of vice; and it is stated that by this course the self-respect of many young persons has been saved, and they have been snatched from a vicious course, which would scarcely have been avoided had they been confined with old offenders. And when the power to release did not rest with the Inspectors, the Agent was at once despatched to procure the release of the committed person; and that failing, care has been used to place the novices in separate cells, and provide them with advice, books, and some little work. On this subject we have the opinions of the Inspectors of Prisons for the North and Middle districts of England.

2156. By the _Duke of Marlborough_. You stated that you did not
think short sentences of much avail in effecting reformation upon a
prisoner; but do you not think that short punishments may be a
deterrent?

No; I think that a man who is sent to prison for seven days or
twenty days or a month, becomes marked, and he is not in prison long
enough to enable him to exercise an influence for good over him.

2157. Take the case of a man who has not been accustomed to vice or
crime, and who finds himself in prison for a month for an offence
into which he has been hurried, and finds the prison to be a very
unpleasant thing, and the discipline to be very severe, and that he
is subjected to a great many things which he did not expect before
he entered the prison, do you not think that the recollection of
that month’s confinement may have a deterring effect upon that man
in future?

I think that to a man of the character which your Grace has
described, a month’s imprisonment would do more harm than good. If
that man escaped the taint of a prison, and was bound over under
certain securities, he would be more likely to turn out well than if
he had been subject to the discipline of the prison for months; it
is too short a period in itself to have any deterring effect on him.

In another part of the Report of this Committee of the House of Lords we have a statement of what is understood by separate confinement.

2662. Separate from what?

Man from man; they never see each other to know each other or to
speak to each other.

2663. By the separate system you only mean separation of prisoner
from prisoner?

Just so.

2664. Not the secluded system in which a man is shut up entirely?

No; quite the contrary.

2665. I ask the question in order that your answer may be recorded
here, for this simple reason, that a great many people have an idea
that the separate system is simply a secluding of the prisoners
entirely; whereas, the separate system is only, as you have stated
in your answer, the separation of prisoner from prisoner?

Yes; from all evil communications.

In reply to a remark by the _Earl of Dudley_, that the prisoners daily saw several officers of the prison, and occasionally others, it is said,

“Just so. The _solitary_ system does not exist in England.”

We are struck with the statement of general health in some of the
prisons in England; for example the Bristol Gaol. T. A. Garden,
Esq., Governor of that prison, in his testimony before the Committee
of the House of Lords, says: “During the time that I have been
Governor—twenty-six years—we have never lost a female prisoner; and
we do not lose more than one male prisoner in twelve months. Those
that we have lost came to us, perhaps, in the last stage of
consumption. I do not know one single case that has been taken ill
on the premises and died. The average number of prisoners is one
hundred and sixty.”

The whole of the Parliamentary Reports, as has already been stated, came to hand after the preparation of this Annual Report, and its submission to, and acceptance by, the Acting Committee of the Society; so that it was inconvenient to swell the publication by extracts from the British Report, even where matters of interest were explained at length; and to supply as far as possible the want of those extracts, digests of some of the Report and statements have been made, which, with all deference to the economy of space, must have swelled the division of the report in which they should appear much beyond what may be regarded as a fair proportion. It will be well to recollect when we read the strong testimony which the Governors and Inspectors of gaols in Great Britain bear to the superior efficacy of the system of separate confinement; that as yet in many of these gaols they are working with old edifices only partially adapted to the new system, and they are in a state of transition from the old system of physical to that of moral discipline. They see and feel the means of good which are almost within their reach, but they have to approach them slowly, respecting the established opinions of a portion of the community, while they follow as far as possible, the suggestions of the better informed. They will soon make the public sentiment by which they will be sustained in their work of tempering justice with mercy, and rendering punishment for offences the means of reforming the offender.

------------------

NOTICE OF DECEASED ACTIVE MEMBERS.

In treating of what this Society has done, we are compelled to pause and record a part of what it has been called to suffer in the loss of its active members in the past year.

REV. C. R. DEMMÉ.

We have to deplore the death of the Rev. C. R. Demmé, D. D., Pastor of the German Church in north Fourth Street, who for many years made the Eastern Penitentiary the scene of his most welcome and profitable labors. His great desire was to do good to his fellow man; and Providence that lighted up that wish in his heart, blessed him with a sound judgment, as to the choice of objects on which his gifts and acquirements would be best exercised, and the selection of time and means for his ministration. He knew how repulsive usually is the convict’s cell to those of his vocation; and he felt also how important to those who would be useful there, is a knowledge of modern languages; and especially did he resolve to devote himself to those of his own country, (Germany,) whom he could approach by many avenues which love of the “Father land” opens to the heart. And many who heard his kind monitions, lived to bless his benevolence. He was a man of steady and well regulated zeal, devoid of ostentation; practical in all his plans, and eminently useful in his labor in concurrence with this Society.

JACOB T. BUNTING.

In the month of December, Jacob T. Bunting, an old and active member of this Society, died. He was known to his acquaintances as one that had at heart the good of his fellow men; and in this Society he was recognized as a hearty co-operator in the good work of alleviating the miseries of prisons. Earnest in his efforts to discharge his duties at the cells of the prisoners; he sat in council with us, awaiting rather the judgment of others, than attempting to enforce his own opinions, yet influencing by his experience, and conciliating by his courteous deference. The Society feels and mourns the loss of such a member. Mr. Bunting was in his seventy-first year.

TOWNSEND SHARPLESS.

On Wednesday, the 30th of December, died Townsend Sharpless, one of the Vice-Presidents of this Society.