Chapter II: Part 2

To the value of property sacrificed to crime, must be added the expenses of police, prosecutions and prisons, amounting to not less than twelve millions of dollars; and to these we must add a large sum for a proportion of the salaries of judges and justices, and their clerks; the maintenance of court-houses; costs of coroners’ inquests; expenses of sheriffs; costs of prosecution by public bodies, and costs paid by private prosecutors over and above the costs allowed; charges for convicts and colonies, &c.

We have a sound basis for an estimate sufficiently impressive. There is a standing army of one hundred and thirty-five thousand men and women, at war with the community, and living on plunder and vice,—yesterday, engaged in depredations upon property—to-day, rioting in reckless extravagance,—to-morrow, reduced to pinching want. Supposing each of them to spend one hundred and twenty-five dollars a year,—say two and a half dollars a week, we have a sum total of nearly seventeen millions—and this cannot be levied upon the public at less than double that sum. This would amount to but a fraction less than thirty-five millions of dollars, and, with the costs already enumerated, would swell the grand total to very nearly fifty millions, as the annual expense which the criminal classes of England and Wales entail upon the community.

It is to be regretted that we have no reliable data from which to form even a probable estimate of either the number of criminals or the cost of crime in any one of our States or cities, so far as our information extends. If there were such, even in one State or city, an inference, of more or less value, might be drawn from a comparison of population, police force, &c. We can scarcely suppose that the incentives to crime are much more numerous and powerful here than in England. It is not found that crime abounds most in seasons of depression in business or of reduction of wages or employment, but the contrary; and therefore, the facilities with which people in our country obtain a living may, perhaps, rather promote than prevent crime. That we make much less of all crime here than is made in the older countries, is very obvious; and that escape or impunity is much more common here than there, will not be denied: so that, on the whole, we may reasonably conclude that if the tax imposed on the public, as the direct consequence of crime, could be ascertained, its enormous amount would awaken an interest in the means of preventing or suppressing it, which the considerations of humanity and religion seem inadequate to excite.

ART. IV.—REFORMATION OF FEMALE DISCHARGED CONVICTS.

THE TWENTY-SEVENTH REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE BRITISH LADIES’
SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING THE REFORMATION OF FEMALE PRISONERS, 1858.

FOURTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF THE HOWARD
INSTITUTION, 1858.

FOURTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE WOMEN’S PRISON ASSOCIATION OF NEW
YORK. “THE ISAAC T. HOPPER HOME,” 191 TENTH AVENUE, 1859.

Although the number of female inmates of our Penitentiaries is comparatively small, their reformation is not less an object of interest. Certain it is, that efforts directed to them have been crowned with a remarkable degree of success, in proportion to their numbers. Prison returns show that it is much more rare for a female to return, on a second conviction, than for a male; and though a bad woman may be a much more revolting object than an equally bad man, she must be very radically and thoroughly degraded not to show more susceptibility of kind and good influences than most male prisoners show. Whether it is the world-wide fame of the late Mrs. Elizabeth Fry and the stimulus of her bright example, that has drawn unusual attention to the subject, or whether the wealth and leisure of ladies of rank and distinction, has enabled them to devote more attention and patronage to the reformation and restoration to society, of women who have fallen under the condemnation of penal law, we cannot say. But, certainly, the provision for such unhappy persons is much more liberal, systematic and extensive in the British Isles, than anything known among us.

We have before us “the twenty-seventh (1858) report of the Committee of the British Ladies’ Society for promoting the reformation of female prisoners.” With the parent institution there are connected ten county associations, besides five in Scotland, and the report embraces notices, more or less extensive, of the transactions of each of them. The central committee is subdivided into sub-committees, to each of which is assigned the care of one of the seven principal prisons of the metropolis in which female convicts are received.

There is a distinct sub-committee, consisting of ten ladies and two secretaries, known as the Patronage Committee. “It sits on every Friday, and its especial duty is to attend to those cases of discharged prisoners from metropolitan gaols which are recommended to its care by the authorities of the prisons, or by ladies who visit there. Endeavors are made to investigate the previous history of each individual; and if there be reason to believe that one is in earnest in the desire to reform, measures are taken to assist her in so doing.

“The rule of the Patronage Committee is, that the prisoner appears before them immediately on her liberation, to comply with which rule she often voluntarily stays back in the prison till Friday. She brings with her, under the charge of a warder, a certificate of health, and the written answers to a list of printed questions.”

Sometimes a little temporary out-door relief meets the necessity of the case, and occasionally an immediate return to her family is deemed advisable; but in the large majority of instances, these poor women are entirely unfit to be restored to society at large without further probation. A refuge is needed to give the opportunity of preparation for entering upon the duties of a changed course of life. “The quiet discipline of those institutions, the word of God there faithfully taught, the encouraging influence of Christian ladies there met with, have mercifully been blessed to the softening of many a hard heart, and to the healing of many a broken spirit.”

When it is believed that the penitence is sincere, and the hope of restoration decided, the individual is sent direct to the “Elizabeth Fry Refuge,” as a preliminary to other more permanent asylums, or to await the future arrangements that may appear most desirable for her. The funds of the “Elizabeth Fry Refuge” permit fifteen of these patronage cases to be kept in the house free of expense, as on the foundation; all above that number are paid for by the British Ladies’ Society, at the rate of $1.75 each, weekly.

Two hundred and sixty-four cases were disposed of by this committee between June, 1856, and June, 1858.

The report contains brief notices of the cases occurring at the several prisons, and it is quite evident that the machinery is well adapted to the purpose in view, and is eminently successful in its workings.

There can be no doubt of the softening and subduing influence exerted upon the mind of a prisoner under almost any circumstances, by the visit of an intelligent Christian friend. However kind and sympathising the attending officers may be, “the presence of some one connected with the outer world is in itself a relief from the monotony of prison life. Thus the prisoner is predisposed to listen kindly to words kindly spoken, by one who voluntarily, for a time, shares her cell, and reads the only book which reveals authoritatively the terms of acceptance on which both must rely for pardon and salvation.”

To those who are disposed to serve in the self-denying and often discouraging work of prison-visiting, it may not be amiss to suggest that the prompt attention to each new case is very important. An influence for good may be acquired, which will, perhaps, give a new direction to the conduct of the prisoner for the full time of penal servitude. The voice of kindness and sympathy heard when the offender _first_ realizes the consequences of his course, may be more efficacious than at any subsequent period.

There is a public institution, corresponding in its principal features to the houses of reception to which we have referred. It is the Government “Refuge” at Fulham. Prisoners who have conducted themselves well at Millbank and Brixton, and who are likely to profit by more individual attention than they can receive at either of those prisons, are, during the concluding period of their imprisonment, placed in the Government ‘Refuge’ at Fulham. Being selected with a view to their being placed in service, or being provided with some means of obtaining an honest livelihood after they are liberated, they are instructed in laundry and household work of every kind; and every means employed in the best Reformatories are here afforded, with the encouragement of knowing that, while they behave well, the penal character of this last stage of imprisonment is merged in the enjoyment of all the spiritual and temporal privileges which they could meet with in an asylum for the free. We are enabled to state, on the best authority, that, out of eighty cases which had left the Fulham Refuge in the month of April last, sixty were doing well.

Among the country institutions, having in view the welfare of discharged female prisoners, and not under the control of a Government or Magistrates, is a refuge at Bristol, “where the hopeful discharged female prisoner (above sixteen years of age) enters _direct_ from prison by her own free will, and under a promise to submit to the rules of the house. _She undergoes a probation of three weeks or a month in her dormitory_, during which time she is daily visited by one or more ladies, who thus obtain a moral influence before the probationer is admitted to hold free intercourse with her future companions.” Thus prepared, the inmates are afterwards trained to all sorts of household employment. Daily religious instruction is given, and the singing of psalms and hymns practised; they are also taught reading and writing, and the first elements of arithmetic and geography; knitting, also, that very useful branch of female industry, is introduced. Ten young women have been provided during the year with respectable situations, and not one of them has again been accused of dishonesty. It is mentioned as an evidence of the genuineness of reform, that a small gold brooch, found by one of the inmates, while clearing a room, was given up, and, after many inquiries for the owner, was restored to a lady who had visited the asylum; also, that a £5 note, folded very small, was found by the youngest inmate; this, also, was immediately given up, and restored to the owner, a few hours afterwards.

In the report of the Exeter Refuge allusion is made to the fact, that the introduction of the SEPARATE SYSTEM into the prison there, has reduced the number of prisoners greatly. Of 199 discharged female prisoners received, fifteen are now under care, and a good account is given of 104 who have left it. We cannot but regard such a measure of success as most encouraging. That much of this success is owing to the individual separation of the convicts cannot be doubted. Indeed, the visitors to the Falmouth Prison emphatically condemn it for the absence of that principle. “With regard to our prison I can say nothing encouraging; there is no change with regard to its arrangements. Some of those who are interested for the poor people immured within its walls, do what they can to keep the necessity of improvement before the public, and there are two who visit regularly, as they may find it convenient, but I fear they can say nothing with regard to the effect produced. We feel that we must keep in view the injunction, ‘In the morning sow thy seed,’ &c. Could solitary (separate) confinement be but partially carried out, the case would be more encouraging; and we shall be most glad to have such a prison as would allow of our making trial of it.”

And in respect to the Gloucester Prison, a lady who has visited it regularly, says: “City convicts are received by the county; but prisoners before trial, summary convictions and prostitutes all herd together in one common ward and yard by day, and one large room by night, both rooms being out of sight and hearing of the Matron. I believe that I have mentioned this often to you; but it is so great an evil, and so dangerous to the comparatively innocent, that I cannot but advert to it again.”

In the city of Utrecht a new prison, on the Cellularian or separate plan, has been erected, and a Ladies’ Committee, formed, like the one in London; and the government of Holland has expressed a wish that near every prison such a Society be established, with full permission to visit the prisoners. In Stockholm, also, is a Ladies’ Committee. “There is not a female prisoner in Stockholm who is not visited once in the week, or who has not at least the opportunity of hearing the word of God explained to her in one of the departments of the large house for penal servitude, where their attendance on Sunday is voluntary.”

The readers of our Journal are aware that in Philadelphia and New York, and perhaps in other cities of the United States, similar organizations have existed for many years. Among them is the “Howard Institution,” under the care of an Association of Women-Friends of Philadelphia, the object of which is, “the care and reformation of female prisoners, who, after a term of imprisonment, manifest a disposition to reform; or others who, on account of their evil habits, need Christian counsel, moral restraint and domestic discipline. To accomplish this, a home is provided to shelter them from evil associations; to surround them with wholesome moral and religious influences; to inculcate good principles, and habits of neatness and industry; to instruct them in domestic duties, so as to qualify them for usefulness; and after a term of probation, to obtain for them respectable situations in town or country.”

The Fourth Annual Report of the Institution (whose house of reception is 1612 Poplar Street) shows, that during the year fifty women have been admitted, and remained under care from one week to several months. The necessity of some such provision for this class of our fellow-citizens is not exaggerated. “However trivial may have been the crime of which the prisoner was convicted, (and that many are convicted of _very slight_ offences, there is no doubt); however well she may have conducted during her incarceration, the _name_ and _stigma_ of _convict_ is upon her. Often she is without home or friends, with insufficient clothing, hungry and penniless. If she _had friends_, they are alienated from her; it may have been years that she has been separated from them—they have forgotten her. _None_ will receive her into their houses. None will give her employment. What can she do? Perhaps the sparks of virtue are _not yet_ extinguished. In the solitude of her prison cell she may have formed good resolutions; there may be an earnest struggle in her soul after a better life; but she is weak. The tempter comes in; cold and hunger and neglect, drive her to despair and crime. Her desires for reformation are lost among evil associations; and she sinks deeper into the gulf of depravity and wretchedness. Who will say that humanity is doing its duty to these poor outcasts?”

The report before us affords gratifying evidence that endeavors to rescue and restore to respectability and usefulness those unhappy women are not misplaced. “In a _majority_ of cases the Institution has been a blessing to those who have been subject to its discipline.”

The Fourteenth Annual Report of the Women’s Prison Association of New York, concerns a charity hereafter to be known as “The Isaac T. Hopper Home,” and it brings to view some interesting facts, and presents strong claims to generous assistance. The institution has been for several years independent of the New York Prison Association. Its object is to ameliorate the condition of female prisoners, improve the discipline and government of prisons so far as females are concerned, and to give temporary support and encouragement to reformed female convicts. To give system and efficiency to their laudable efforts, they earnestly desired help in erecting a building adapted to that purpose, and at one time had flattering prospects of success. They had reasonable ground to believe, that with suitable accommodations, they might make the home a self-sustaining house of industry; but their expectations were not realized, and as the only alternative they purchased and put in repair the house they have long occupied.

We have often adverted to the lessons which a sound economy reads to us on the subject of caring for discharged prisoners. When it is considered what immeasurable injury a single evil-disposed person may do, and what expenses mere vagrants or petty thieves, to say nothing of forgers and counterfeiters, impose on the community, it cannot be regarded as a matter of trivial moment whether an enemy of society is transformed into a friend, and a burden into a help. Hence the managers of the Society repudiate the idea that they are beggars, and claim to be instruments of a true economy.

“The subjects of our care” (say they) “are costly dependents of the City’s Treasury. They not only are fed, clothed, and housed by the city, but their crimes waste the property of our citizens, and their misfortunes swell their taxes. Who are the inmates of our Home? A few young women may occasionally be found there—strangers in the country, wanderers from their natural homes, who, alone and friendless in this great city, have fallen, not from vicious propensities, but through sheer misfortune; and a few there are whom we have also found in your prisons, the victims of wrong suspicion and helplessness. All these, after a short novitiate, we have restored to decent life, and productive industry. But for our interposition, they must have remained, with hardly an exception, your costly pensioners. Some of our inmates are from Sing-Sing—convicts, who have been sent there for the lighter class of crimes so punishable; but by far the greater part are from the Tombs—Blackwell’s Island—persons committed for petty offences, or merely for vagrancy. These are the victims of intemperance. They are led astray at first by the social element of the Irish, by an inherited appetite, by bad company, by the thousand influences and temptations that beset the ignorant and neglected, by the brutal treatment and desertion of husbands, by wrong, disappointment, and despair. These offenders are tried in the Municipal Courts, and sent for weeks, or months, as the case may be, to Blackwell’s Island. At the end of their ‘term’ they return to the city homeless and friendless: a few hours, days, or weeks at farthest, find them again making the same circuit through commitment, trial, and ‘term’ on ‘the Island’—and all at the expense of the sober, hard-working citizen, who, if he takes time to look at the matter, will be somewhat startled to find how much he has to pay to the police, the justices, the prison officials of all degrees, from the head superintendent to the driver of the ‘Black Maria,’ and the expensive _lodging houses_ of Blackwell’s Island.” And again, “all we do, is a clear saving to the city. We do not count merely the time that our inmates are sustained at the Home, for—though they are supported by the public, by their charities, instead of their taxes, yet two thirds of those received at the Home during the last year, have been sent to places: not only has the public been relieved from their support, but they have become productive laborers. We would make no erroneous impressions. These people do not all remain steadfast. They are, for the most part, adult children, liable to go astray at any strong temptation or impulse, or to fall back under the despotism of old habits. They require to be watched and trained, kindly guided and cared for; and they do not _always_ find religious zeal, patience, skill, and tender forbearance in their employers. Still, under all their inevitable disadvantages, many of our inmates have persevered steadfastly in a good life, proving to the most sceptical, that with God’s blessing on the helping-hand, they can be saved.”

The facts are very stubborn. Here are one hundred and twenty-five women, addicted for the most part to degrading and infamous vices—living in vagrancy, dishonesty, drunkenness and prostitution; and a large proportion of them familiar with the corruption and degradation of prison life. Somebody must look after them, and none but practical, zealous, working women, who will give themselves to such a task—not for a visit or two, nor for a few days or weeks, but for months, and perhaps, for years—seeking out, watching over, encouraging and guiding those who are susceptible of improvement, if not of radical reform.

A few such are found, and the one hundred and twenty-five outcasts are gathered to “The Isaac T. Hopper Home.” There are some interesting cases among them, and they are all objects of interest; but, says one, “Do you really expect to do any permanent good to such people?” And another exclaims, “How disgusting it must be!” And a third, “How very disagreeable to go to such horrible places! How much better and wiser to drop a twenty or a fifty dollar bank note to the board of managers, or the matron, saying, You have hard materials to make up. Here is an expression of my sympathy. The friend of the friendless bless and prosper you.” But what has become of the one hundred and twenty-five inmates received during the year? Why, seventy of them were sent to service, and generally in the country. Of course they are not burdens to the public treasury while in this position, nor are they plundering houses and stores, nor provoking home brawls and street fights. This is no little saving all around. They not only cease to be burdens; they have been converted into producers; one has twenty, another fifty, and another seventy dollars reserved from earned wages. The cleansing, tidying, training, encouraging and aiding received at the Home, have fitted them for, and introduced them to, respectable and useful occupations. What sum shall we set against this as the probable amount of expense in arrests, prosecutions, sustenance, gaol fees, &c., had they been suffered to pursue their chosen way.

But some are discharged, and others leave, and ere long find their old lodgings in the Tombs or on the “Island.” Yes, that is so, but mark this! “They almost invariably appeal to us again for aid, and receive it, ☞ and _each time the period of their perseverance in good is prolonged_.” This is hopeful. It invites us to patience and faith. A single peach or pear on a favorite tree, or a single bunch of grapes on a choice vine, during the first bearing season, gives more pleasure than a peck of fruit in any subsequent year. The field which these benevolent ladies and their sisters of charity in our own city and the British metropolis, are called to cultivate, is covered with a luxurious growth of wild and poisonous plants, in every stage of growth and bearing. Their labor and skill, with the aid of the Divine husbandman, is devoted to an insertion here and there as opportunity offers, of a graft from a better stock. If it “takes,” they are encouraged to hope for fruit in due time; and though disappointments are not rare, success is frequent enough to animate and encourage them, and shall ensure them the hearty sympathy and generous aid of those whose taxes are lightened, whose property is saved from depredation, indirectly at least by their instrumentality.

The house occupied by the “Howard Institution” is perhaps as convenient as any one that is not originally designed for such a purpose; but it does not afford such opportunities of _individualizing_ the treatment as would be desirable. The New York premises are probably no better in this respect.

We cannot refrain from expressing the conviction that the more rigidly persons who have been convicted of crime can be separated one from another, until their resolutions to lead an amended life are fully confirmed and well tested, the less the danger of a relapse. We are aware of the argument sometimes used, viz.: That these principles cannot be tested till the parties are exposed to temptation. But there are temptations enough in the ordinary circumstances of life. If a young woman, discharged from the penitentiary, and received into some “Home” or “Refuge,” should be kept from all association with those who have been in like condemnation, until she is prepared for, and provided with, some place in the country, the first day in her new position would present temptations enough to test her newly acquired strength. Industry, honesty, truthfulness and sobriety are every day virtues. If they are possessed they will show themselves without urging, but while under any degree of restraint or inspection these virtues may be counterfeited. It is not needful to put them into the company of a vagrant, a thief, a liar or a drunkard to bring them out. On the contrary, our true policy is to keep them as far apart as possible, and especially when the virtues are struggling to supplant the vices.

Let our penitentiaries and county gaols provide for strict individual separation, accommodation and employment of all prisoners, of every grade, tried and untried. Let kind, judicious, intelligent friends visit them, express proper sympathy with them, and hold out encouragement to them. Upon their discharge, let there be found a place of temporary refuge where they can be comfortably provided for, relieved from the pressure of immediate temptation, exempted from any associations unfriendly to their permanent reform, and prepared by a reasonable probation for some employment. The moment this is accomplished, and some benevolent heart is opened to give the party an opportunity to retrieve a forfeited place in the confidence of the community, let it be embraced with a continuance of the watchful care which may be still needed in unforeseen emergencies.

With these precautions and aids we are confident thousands of our convicts might be rescued from reckless criminality or hopeless despair, and some of the most prolific sources of crime be dried up. The government is bound, by every consideration of public policy, to aid liberally in restoring to honest and virtuous ways those who have been subjected to penal suffering, and who are disposed to amend their lives. Its functions do not begin nor end in arrests, convictions and sentences. It is to employ all practicable means of keeping people out of crime, by encouraging and sustaining schools—literary, industrial and reformatory, and bringing ALL the children and youth of the country under their influence. And when, in spite of all these wholesome provisions, men and women do betake themselves to criminal courses, and have suffered the just reward of their deeds, it is the duty of the government not to leave them, at the expiration of their sentence, to shift for themselves, but to hold out a kind hand to them, if they are inclined to better ways, and assist them to regain a creditable position among their fellow men. Society has the worst of it if they relapse into their previous associations and practices. And hence, we earnestly plead for the support and encouragement, by public and private liberality, of every sensible scheme to convert a convict into an honest man—an enemy of society into a friend and helper.

ART. V.—IRISH CONVICT PRISONS.

The intermediate system of discipline adopted in the convict prisons of Ireland, to which we have called the attention of our readers in previous numbers of this Journal, seems to gain favor. The simple principle on which it is founded is the gradual improvement of those prisoners who are susceptible of reforming influences, until they are prepared for entire freedom, and the return to and continuance in confinement of those who are obstinately bent on pursuing a criminal career. The system is so arranged as to give the convict the control, in a great measure, of his own position. If he is disposed to do well, every reasonable aid is afforded him for the purpose. If his vicious habits are so confirmed as to forbid the hope of his permanent reformation, society is protected from his hostility, by his retention, indefinitely, in prison. In the first place, the prisoner must conform to certain rules, while confined in the ordinary prison, to entitle himself to the privileges of the intermediate prisons. Any misconduct at this stage, will have the effect of postponing his admission into the intermediate prison, and thereby defer, to an equal extent, the remission of a portion of his sentence. The following table shows, at a glance, what inducement the prisoner has to co-operate with the government in his reformation:

FIXED PERIODS OF IMPRISONMENT.
SENTENCES. _In ordinary Prisons._ _Shortest term in intermediate
Prisons._
Years. Months. Years. Months.
3 years 2 2 0 4
-------------------v--------------------/
2 6
4 „ 2 10 0 5
-------------------v--------------------/
3 3
5 „ 3 6 0 6
-------------------v--------------------/
4 0
6 „ 3 9 0 9
-------------------v--------------------/
4 6
7 „ 4 0 1 3
-------------------v--------------------/
5 3
8 „ 4 8 1 4
-------------------v--------------------/
6 9
10 „ 6 0 1 6
-------------------v--------------------/
7 6
12 „ 7 3 1 9
-------------------v--------------------/
9 0
15 „ 8 0 2 0
-------------------v--------------------/
10 0

It will be seen that, by this scale, a three years’ sentence is reduced to two and a half; four years to three and a fourth; five years to four; six years to four and a half; seven years to five and a fourth; eight years to six and three-fourths; ten years to seven and a half; twelve years to nine, and fifteen years to ten.

In order to ensure the remission of any part of his sentence, the prisoner must work himself, by good behaviour, into the intermediate prison, through which he must pass to obtain his final liberty; and this liberty, when obtained, will be conditional; for the criminal who, after his discharge, consorts with bad companions, and shows that he meditates a return to criminal courses, is liable to be re-arrested and re-consigned to the prison from which he was (as it appears) prematurely discharged. Thus society is protected, on one hand, from the existence of hordes of criminally-disposed persons at large, and the discharged convict is restrained from renewed transgression by surrounding the further commission of crime with obstructions so formidable as to disband, in a great measure, the class of “habitual offenders.”

It will be observed that the remission of any part of the sentence is not a matter of _compact_ between the government and the prisoner. It is a gratuitous act, and as such, may be restrained or modified, to suit individual cases. When crimes are of so heinous a character as to forbid the extension of any such leniency, they will, of course, be specially dealt with by the government.

With a uniform constabulary system, embracing the whole country, and a uniform penal code, we might expect here a more perfect system of prison discipline than in any other country; but there is much complaint of the inequality of sentences for the same crimes, and of the too great leniency shown to “habitual offenders.” These, it is maintained, should be recognized by the law as a distinct class, as they are by the police. The practice of lengthening the sentence of an offender because of previous convictions, is regarded with favor, and its observance should be systematized and made universal. In this way “conditional pardons and registrations for the remitted term may be made the means of causing the very general incarceration of ‘habitual offenders’ in the only place suitable for them—convict prisons—with sentences of sufficient length to insure their being properly dealt with.”

An important principle is involved in this probationary system. If a man deliberately commits an offence against public law, the presumption is that he will repeat it whenever the occasion and temptation are presented. The privation and suffering which the execution of his sentence imposes, may deter him from farther transgression, but the burden of proving this is on the offender. The first duty of society is to protect itself. When the period of penal restraint expires, the man is discharged, on the presumption that he will sin no more. Whatever measures we can adopt to strengthen this presumption, and to assure society that he may be safely set at liberty, are as salutary for him as for us. And there is a farther obligation, and a very imperative one, on the part of the government, and that is to _strengthen and encourage purposes of amendment_. If the liberated convict finds it difficult to procure labor where his antecedents are known, he has the option of going to countries where labor is more in demand; and the means of reaching those countries are supplied by his prison gratuity, obtained through his own industry. In many of our schemes for ameliorating the miseries of public prisons, the interests of society are too often overlooked, and the comfort and ease of a transgressor unduly sought. There is a medium. The community whose laws have been outraged, justly demands the prompt and certain imposition of the penalty. If this can be imposed in such a way as at once to express the due disapprobation of the act, and a desire that the offender may be restored (on his reformation) to his forfeited place in society, a double advantage is gained.

As more enlightened methods of dealing with the criminally-disposed prevail, we have a right to look for a more efficient and well-balanced administration of penal law, and as a consequence, a sensible diminution in the number of crimes and criminals.

=Brief Notices.=

ESCAPES AND PARDONS.—The two chief ends which are usually supposed to be answered by punishment are,—1. To reform the offender; and, 2. To deter others from the like offences. Some persons deny the legitimacy of the latter purpose, affirming that society has no right to inflict pains and penalties on me, for the benefit of my neighbors. Without attempting to settle any such nice points, we have a plain, palpable fact staring us in the face, which seems, in a large measure, to frustrate both the ends to which we have referred. That fact is—that the punishment of crime, in our country, is one of the most uncertain events with which we are conversant. If a horse-thief, contemplating the fastenings of a stable-door, should have fore-thought enough to inquire whether there is such a reasonable probability of his punishment as should deter him from his purpose, we can scarcely suppose he would come to an affirmative conclusion. The contingencies on which the result depends are very numerous and complicated. If his picture is in the rogue’s gallery; or if he is an old, well-known horse-thief, so that suspicion would naturally fasten upon him if he was within fifty miles of the _locus in quo_ at the time; or if a reward is offered for his arrest, more tempting than what he can offer for leave to run,—it may be his turn to be caught. But if he has money, or friends who understand the “intricacies” of the administration of penal law in some of our chief cities; or if he has had opportunities, in some associate prison, to learn how to dodge an officer, either before or after sentence, or to earn his liberty, even when fairly caged, either by working through bricks and mortar, or through the more porous and yielding tissue of a Governor’s sympathy,—he has little or nothing to fear. If there is no more risk than that, the State is certain to be plundered.

We hazard nothing in saying that the influence which the punishment of crime exerts, in deterring the criminally disposed from committing it, is scarcely worth a padlock. A single escape of a prisoner from gaol, or from the custody of an officer, weakens whatever deterring influence is exerted over hundreds of minds; and so likewise does a single pardon. Each one of the hundreds betakes himself to a criminal life, expecting to be the favored rogue. We sometimes think, with a sigh, of the good time past, when, under English law, the constable was the chief man in the parish, and when the parish was responsible for all robberies committed within its limits, if the thieves were not apprehended.

If we had a general, succinct return of the escapes and pardons in the United States, for a single year, it would show a degree of looseness in the administration of criminal law, and of imprudence in the exercise of executive clemency, of which the public have little conception.

From a great number of cases which go to corroborate the statement we have made, we have room for but a few, and these will serve to indicate the character of all. We give them as reported in the newspapers:

On a late Saturday night five prisoners escaped from the gaol of Cook county, Ill., at Chicago. A paltry reward of $150 was offered for their apprehension. The prisoners were supplied with tools by their friends outside. They were arrested for larceny. Three other prisoners, charged with robbery, were engaged in digging a hole through the floor, when the escape of the others caused them to be detected. The prison is in a very insecure sort of place, and had been grossly neglected by the authorities.

In Blair county, on the same Saturday night, a man, alleged to have stolen several horses, and who escaped from the person having him in charge, while on their way to Bedford recently, was re-arrested at a private house on Bobb’s Creek, on Saturday night a week. Assuming a religious guise, previous to retiring he called for a Bible, and read a chapter, and prayed with the family. When arrested he was in bed, with a six-shooter under his pillow, and every barrel charged with a bullet! and in his pockets were found several counterfeit notes and a small amount of good money. A reward of $500 had been offered for his arrest, with the horses.

Two prisoners escaped from the gaol of Clinton county, Ohio, under circumstances (says the Clinton Watchman) that would indicate a good deal of carelessness on the part of the sheriff, who had charge of the gaol. They escaped by cutting a hole through the floor of the hall around the cells, where the prisoners are permitted to stay during the day. After cutting this hole, which they did with an old case-knife, they crawled under, and finding there an old scaffold-pole, they made a battering-ram of it, and punched a stone out of the outside wall sufficiently large to permit their egress!

About a year ago, Norristown, in this vicinity, was harassed by the operations of a burglar of special daring and adroitness, who, after perpetrating a series of successful burglaries, was arrested, and imprisoned under a sentence of fifteen years. He had served about a year thus far, and on a late morning was found to have successfully broken gaol and made his escape.

He got away, it is supposed, about four o’clock in the morning. His cell was in the upper story of the gaol, and had an arched roof of solid masonry, nine inches thick. When the turnkey entered the cell, it was discovered that the prisoner had cut entirely through this arch, and then through the sheet-iron roof above it, and had lowered himself by means of a cord made of the carpet-warp furnished him for working purposes. The escape was perilous in the extreme; while it is the opinion of experts that the preparations for it have been going on for a long time. Upon entering the cell the officer discovered an old shirt, which the prisoner appears to have stuffed in the hole during the daytime, while it is equally apparent that, by means of pieces of bread manipulated to the consistency of putty, and plastered into the edges of the hole, the discovery of the cheat was rendered still less probable. As a matter of course, the anxiety to recover such a prisoner, on the part of the sheriff, is very great; and a reward of a hundred dollars is offered for his capture! Due anxiety to _keep_ him when they had him would have been more creditable to the officers, and much better for the public.

On the second of December, six convicts employed in the moulding shop of the New York State Prison, at Auburn, effected their escape. The prisoners had got half a mile from the prison before pursuit was commenced, and succeeded in leaving their pursuers behind.

On the evening of December 15th, two convicts, confined in a Virginia gaol, under sentence of death, to be executed the next day, escaped from the gaol, and were fired upon by the sentinels and driven back to prison. The prisoners had mounted the gaol wall when they were discovered by the sentinel on the outside, who immediately gave the alarm and fired on them. They had sawed their manacles asunder with the blade of a Barlow knife, which they had concealed and made into a fine saw. It was ascertained, from their confession that they had been engaged in preparing for their escape during the preceding ten days. They made a hole in the wall near the window, which they concealed with paper, hiding the bricks they removed under the bed. Upon the alarm being given, they made no resistance, but surrendered as soon as they discovered, by the shot of the sentinel, that they were detected. One of them said he could have made his escape had he jumped down and throttled the sentinel.

All the inmates of Warren county (Pa.) prison, two women and two men, escaped one night recently. The women up stairs burnt the clasp out that fastened the door through a single pine board,—came down stairs and unlocked the cells in which the men were confined, by means of false keys, when the party departed in peace, taking a wagon that was waiting in the vicinity, with them.

Thirteen prisoners escaped from Munroe county gaol, at Rochester, N. Y. They seized the gaoler and wrenched the keys from him,—then thrust him into a closet with double doors, fastening them outside. The gaoler’s wife was in the office, but heard nothing of the disturbance until the whole gang were at the door, demanding an outlet, which it was in vain for her to oppose.

Two prisoners, burglars and counterfeiters, on the way to the Jackson penitentiary (Mich.), guarded by three officers, jumped from the cars while under way. They were heavily ironed, and pretended to be asleep. As they approached Grass Lake station, the sheriff, who sat in front, stepped back to look out of a window, when they rushed to the door, and their irons mysteriously parted, and one jumped one side, and the other, leaving the officers in gaping wonder.

A man, whose crime (forgery) was of such a heinous character as to induce the government of Wurtemberg to pursue him to this country, was found and arrested. After a partial examination, instead of being remanded to prison or held to responsible bail, he was allowed to remain at his own lodgings, being in the _constructive custody_ of the Deputy Marshal. This functionary, instead of producing his prisoner when wanted, stated to the commissioner that, on a preceding evening, the foreign rogue invited him to take a friendly glass, which he accepted, and soon after lost his consciousness; and the prisoner, availing himself of so favorable an opportunity, took to his heels and, before the officer recovered his wits, was beyond recapture.

So it was with one Dr. Gallaudet, not long ago, who succeeded in getting the officer drunk, and escaped from his clutches, and, finally, from the country.

These cases do not constitute a tenth part of the advertised escapes of a single quarter; and those that are never brought to public notice—who knows their number?

* * * * *

EARLY CRIME.—Few persons are aware of the extent of juvenile crime in our principal cities. A large majority of these offences are overlooked until they become so serious in their consequences to private interest as to command attention. And even then, the prosecution of the offence is generally waived if compensation is made, or if the delinquent is sent away upon a voyage, or to a distant part of the country.

We have grouped together a few items out of many scores which a single quarter furnishes, from which our readers can make their own inferences. They confirm us in the conviction long entertained, that we need a place of _punishment_ for those who are too old in iniquity to be safe inmates of Refuge or Reformatory, and too young to endure the severity of rigid penitentiary discipline—a _juvenile separate prison_.

A gang of boys, none over fourteen, were arrested, a few days since, in Cincinnati, for stealing. They were detected in the act of taking goods from store doors. They stated that they belonged to a gang of boys employed in this business by a man who gave them 75 cents for every article they would bring him, and that they used the money in visiting the theatres and in refreshments. An officer took one of them to the National Theatre, where he pointed out two more of the gang, who were taken into custody. On visiting the premises of the man whom they charged with receiving the goods, they found some of them concealed under the floor. There was also another place of deposit disclosed in another section of the city. The boys, who were all of Irish parentage, exhibited the utmost indifference and shamelessness, and the parents of two of them did not feel interest enough to attend the hearing!

The Boston papers give us an account of a similar band of boys who had clubbed together for thieving purposes, in Medford, a few miles from that city. They were discovered in an outbuilding which had not been used for some time. Various articles, such as portemonnaies, wallets, passbooks, pencils, &c., were found in their possession, and identified as having been stolen the day before. A book was found among them, containing the names of the members of the organization, about half a dozen in number, as far as recorded. Following the names was the word “Rules,” in large letters. The only rule which appears, was the following:

“1. The boys must steal as much as they can, and present it to the chief.”

The book also contained a number of passwords, and a list of the articles stolen, above enumerated, and the date. The boys belonging to this young thieves’ association are from ten to fourteen years of age.

At Cleveland, Ohio, a party of juvenile vagrants, some twelve in number, recently organized themselves into a society for the purpose of robbery, dock-thieving, &c. They took possession of a large cave in the side-hill on the west side of the river. They chose their captain and were progressing very smoothly when the officer pounced upon them. They were all sleeping in bunks, with the exception of the guard, who took to his heels on the approach of the officer. Two or three others made their escape. The following boys, the oldest of whom is not over fourteen, were arrested:—John Fitzgerald, Thomas Doland, Michael Dunn, William Mulcoge, Patrick M‘Donald, William Donald, William Shay and James Mahon. Their names are given as indicative of a nativity not otherwise to be particularly specified.

One of the boys is only six years old. He said his parents, in a fit of drunkenness, kicked him out of doors. The other boys said that they had no home or friends. They could only live by stealing, and on advice of one of their number, who had read Mike Martin and other yellow covered books of that sort, a band of robbers was formed, and the cave taken possession of. The boys were sent to the State Reform Farm, there to remain until discharged by law. [Of this school we have given a full account in a former number, and would be glad to hear of its more recent success.]

Not long since, in New York, a policeman, about 11 o’clock at night, was surprised to find the front door of a jewelry store, in Broadway, unlocked, and on entering he found a boy named Joseph Bascom, seventeen years of age, employed by the firm, tied down upon a bed and gagged. After being released, the boy said that about ten o’clock, shortly after the store was closed, he heard a rap at the door, and supposing that one of the clerks had returned for something, opened it, when three men rushed in, one of whom threw a large sheet over his face, while the other two grasped him by the throat, and after gagging him, took him to the bed and fastened him there, his head all the time being covered. After this he heard them open the safe, and in a short time they left. The officer doubted this plausible story, and subjected him to a severe cross-questioning, which resulted in Bascom confessing that the whole affair was contrived by himself and another lad named Primrose! They obtained an impression of the safe key, and selected the time when the holiday stock was in store for the commission of the robbery. Bascom admitted his accomplice after the store was closed, and then laid down upon the bed and was gagged and tied by him. Their plan was a success, and $15,000 worth of goods were taken from the safe. The police were soon on the track of Primrose, whom they followed to the establishment of a well known receiver of stolen goods named Schwartzwelder, who, with Primrose, was arrested. On searching the place all the stolen goods were recovered.

Ought a criminal of this stamp to be sent to a reformatory school? Is he to be regarded as no more depraved and desperate than a truant, or an insubordinate child? If _he_ is sent there, should _they_ be?

* * * * *

COMPROMISING WITH ROGUES—In a former number of this Journal, we entered somewhat at large into the mischievous consequences of concealing or winking at, or compromising deliberate, overt, criminal acts. A clerk in a store abuses his master’s confidence, by abstracting money from letters or purloining letters containing remittances—he being entrusted with the duties of mail clerk. The fraud has been practiced for weeks, and the adroitness with which it was perpetrated and the ingenuity displayed in concealing the disposition of the funds, evinces a singularly depraved disposition. The father or friends interpose, and a public prosecution is avoided. The young scape-grace is sent from the country, and having unusual shrewdness and audacity, succeeds in winning confidence. He writes home and tells of his good fortune, and hope is excited that his ways are reformed; but soon a bolder and deeper game of villainy is played, and the scene again changes, but with the same result. At last, however, he is brought to the bar of public justice, and now a revelation is made of the successive steps in his downward path. Each of the delinquencies has its witnesses and victims; but silence has been volunteered, or purchased, or imposed, and so the reckless career has been encouraged. This is not a fictitious case and it may serve to introduce an illustration of this misconceived leniency which has lately been made public. A man of glib tongue and imposing appearance, professes to be a physician. He takes up his residence in one of our suburban districts, and, in process of time, is guilty of gross malpractice. To avoid an exposure of his ignorance and cruelty, he pays the injured parties $1200 and removes to another part of the country. There he defrauds a bank of $1,000, but the evidence is not absolutely conclusive, and upon his refunding the amount the bank forbears to prosecute. By-and-by he is arrested for a felonious assault on a female patient, (the wife of a college student who wishes to conceal the fact of his marriage,) and so the offence is hushed up. Next he marries the widow of a man who had died suddenly while he was in professional attendance upon him, swindles her out of her property and then abandons her. He now turns his attention particularly to the practice of procuring abortions. Three young women, who, to hide their shame, put themselves under his care, died at his house during one summer, and not many weeks apart. And not long ago, he was convicted of manslaughter, in causing the death of a young woman who had resorted to him for the same inhuman purpose, and of this he was convicted and sentenced for it.